A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Shuttle ET crack



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old November 7th 10, 02:42 PM posted to sci.space.history
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,516
Default Shuttle ET crack

On Nov 7, 9:17*am, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 11/6/2010 9:37 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:



STS-135 would be a four person crew: Ferguson, Hurley, Magnus, and
Walheim. It will take over a year to get everyone home on Soyuz.


A four-person crew is unnecessarily large for carrying supplies to the
ISS on a added flight; with the existing ISS crew of six, and only two
crew necessary to fly the Shuttle, that still gives you eight people
total to offload the cargo from it in a presumed added flight.

Pat


yeah way too big, 2 are all thats needed. but it really doesnt matter,
that add on flight isnt going to fly

a airliner launched vehicle to release altidude is far better

all the support jobs can be in houston and KSC where the airlier takes
off from. with release over the equator for maximum weight capacity.

but none of this matters either. republicans have promised to slash
fed spending. Heck ISS might be on the chopping block
  #22  
Old November 7th 10, 02:46 PM posted to sci.space.history
Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)[_1171_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Shuttle ET crack

Pat Flannery wrote:
On 11/6/2010 9:37 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:


STS-135 would be a four person crew: Ferguson, Hurley, Magnus, and
Walheim. It will take over a year to get everyone home on Soyuz.


A four-person crew is unnecessarily large for carrying supplies to the
ISS on a added flight; with the existing ISS crew of six, and only two
crew necessary to fly the Shuttle, that still gives you eight people
total to offload the cargo from it in a presumed added flight.


Actually they pretty much need 3 crew now to do all the checklists and the
like.

Probably safer with going with at least that number than changing procedures
at this point.

As for the 4th, again the extra hands probably outweigh the risks.



Pat


--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.


  #23  
Old November 7th 10, 02:55 PM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Shuttle ET crack

On 11/6/2010 7:22 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:

Pat


Speaking of Bangladesh, a friend who used to fly for Trans America says
that the very mention of Bangladesh makes his skin crawl. He says the
best way to see bangladesh is from 30Kft -- preferably higher.


The place is inherently doomed for its populace, like Haiti.
You look at its history and you think "Isn't there some way we can get
the whole population out of there to someplace better? I mean, they
certainly didn't deserve this for the bad luck of having been born there."

Pat
  #24  
Old November 7th 10, 03:07 PM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Shuttle ET crack

On 11/6/2010 8:25 PM, Peter Stickney wrote:

Uhm, Pat, loot at the stats of where the highest rainfall is.
Any tropical location with a coastline will have the same weather
that Florida gets.


Rain is one thing; the Amazon basin gets rained on like you wouldn't
believe - but major thunderstorms with their high winds, hail, and
severe lightning are another thing entirely.

Pat

  #25  
Old November 7th 10, 03:17 PM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Shuttle ET crack

On 11/6/2010 9:37 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:


STS-135 would be a four person crew: Ferguson, Hurley, Magnus, and
Walheim. It will take over a year to get everyone home on Soyuz.


A four-person crew is unnecessarily large for carrying supplies to the
ISS on a added flight; with the existing ISS crew of six, and only two
crew necessary to fly the Shuttle, that still gives you eight people
total to offload the cargo from it in a presumed added flight.

Pat
  #26  
Old November 7th 10, 03:34 PM posted to sci.space.history
[email protected][_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 157
Default Shuttle ET crack

On Nov 6, 7:42*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:

Many years back, I read the area around the Cape has more thunderstorms
on average per year than any other place in the US.


US: http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/lightning_map.htm

Global: http://geology.com/articles/lightning-map.shtml
  #27  
Old November 7th 10, 06:37 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brian Thorn[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,266
Default Shuttle ET crack

On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 06:17:39 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote:


STS-135 would be a four person crew: Ferguson, Hurley, Magnus, and
Walheim. It will take over a year to get everyone home on Soyuz.


A four-person crew is unnecessarily large for carrying supplies to the
ISS on a added flight; with the existing ISS crew of six, and only two
crew necessary to fly the Shuttle, that still gives you eight people
total to offload the cargo from it in a presumed added flight.


Jorge on many times has said four is the minimum crew needed for
rendezvous flights.

Minor note: Atlantis does not have SSPTS, so there will be less time
to offload the MPLM.

Brian
  #28  
Old November 8th 10, 04:14 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Shuttle ET crack

On 11/6/2010 9:41 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:


The GUCP (Ground Umbilical Carrier Plate) that leaked is part of the
External Tank/Launch Pad interface. The External Tank is brand new
each mission. The launch pad side was redesigned last year after
smaller leaks. All launch pads have GUCPs or something similar.


Last time this happened it was due to a misalignment on the ET
attachment plate for the GUCP during manufacture.

Pat

  #29  
Old November 8th 10, 04:37 AM posted to sci.space.history
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,516
Default Shuttle ET crack

On Nov 7, 11:26*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 11/7/2010 9:37 AM, Brian Thorn wrote:

Jorge on many times has said four is the minimum crew needed for
rendezvous flights.


Minor note: Atlantis does not have SSPTS, so there will be less time
to offload the MPLM.


If that's the case, and Atlantis gets stuck up there, it's going to be a
pain in the rear to get them all back; that's two Soyuz flights mininum,
and can the ISS life support system handle ten crew without resorting to
the oxygen candles?

Pat


a better question........ does soyuz have the extra production
capacity to quickly produce 2 or more extra vehicles?

i wonder too about what would happen if soyuz were suddenly
unavailable for some reason?

like finding the vehicles at station cant reenter?
  #30  
Old November 8th 10, 05:09 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Shuttle ET crack

On 11/7/2010 5:46 AM, Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
On 11/6/2010 9:37 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:


STS-135 would be a four person crew: Ferguson, Hurley, Magnus, and
Walheim. It will take over a year to get everyone home on Soyuz.


A four-person crew is unnecessarily large for carrying supplies to the
ISS on a added flight; with the existing ISS crew of six, and only two
crew necessary to fly the Shuttle, that still gives you eight people
total to offload the cargo from it in a presumed added flight.


Actually they pretty much need 3 crew now to do all the checklists and the
like.


You can get a two-person crew back via one Soyuz with a Russian pilot as
the third crewmember. When you hit three, you either need two Soyuz
flights, or someone is going to have to learn how to operate a Soyuz (or
just get stuck on the station as a cosmonaut takes the other two
home...and the Russians will send NASA a big bill if that happens, and
have a ball playing up the fact that the crappy Shuttle needed the
little reliable Soyuz to save its crew's ass).
One thing that hasn't been discussed yet is the scenario where the
Shuttle makes it into orbit, but is damaged enough that it can't reach
the ISS for some reason. Then they would need a rescue Shuttle to go to
it and rescue the crew, and that wouldn't be available on a presumed
added last mission.
It's probably better to get out of this whole little Shuttle experiment
with only 14 people dead and 40% of the orbiters lost.

Pat

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
crack towards prayer survives out Norbert H. Zinter, A.S.C. Amateur Astronomy 0 August 16th 07 09:42 AM
crack found in foam John H. Space Shuttle 38 July 11th 06 03:39 PM
about insulating foam crack Raffaele Castagno Space Shuttle 6 August 5th 05 09:37 PM
Crack (lens not drug) Dave UK Astronomy 11 October 11th 03 12:00 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.