launch on need - two shuttles on launch pads at the same time

Part of the planning for this last Hubble servicing mission is to have
another shuttle on the pad when Discovery launches, in case Discovery
is damaged. Has a shuttle ever launched while another is waiting on the
other launch pad?

I mean, other than in Armageddon.

Yes, many times - the first was STS-61C launching from Pad A while
STS-51L was awaiting launch on Pad B.
Here's a pic. of STS-31 Discovery launching (w/Hubble) while in the
foreground you see the STS-35 launch vehicle.
http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/ima...-31-Launch.jpg
The pads are a mile or so apart and were built w/that in mind, meaning
they know no damage can result.
However, the upcoming flight will be the last to use Pad B. So it's
really a moot point - all remaining launches after this one will be off
Pad A, so I think what they mean is, that if Discovery got into trouble
on STS-125, another vehicle (Endeavour??, since it's next up for
-119?) would be processed quickly and moved to the pad and launched as
soon as practicable.. the Hubble crew would have to power down and take
it easy for a few weeks before a rescue vehicle could get there.
Even if both pads were available for use though, I doubt the scenario
would be much different since w/only 3 vehicles to use and a tight
schedule, they can only get them ready so fast...



boman wrote:
Part of the planning for this last Hubble servicing mission is to have
another shuttle on the pad when Discovery launches, in case Discovery
is damaged. Has a shuttle ever launched while another is waiting on the
other launch pad?

I mean, other than in Armageddon.

Cool, thanks John.

Why are they retiring pad B?
wrote in message
oups.com...
Yes, many times - the first was STS-61C launching from Pad A while
STS-51L was awaiting launch on Pad B.
Here's a pic. of STS-31 Discovery launching (w/Hubble) while in the
foreground you see the STS-35 launch vehicle.
http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/ima...-31-Launch.jpg
The pads are a mile or so apart and were built w/that in mind, meaning
they know no damage can result.
However, the upcoming flight will be the last to use Pad B. So it's
really a moot point - all remaining launches after this one will be off
Pad A, so I think what they mean is, that if Discovery got into trouble
on STS-125, another vehicle (Endeavour??, since it's next up for
-119?) would be processed quickly and moved to the pad and launched as
soon as practicable.. the Hubble crew would have to power down and take
it easy for a few weeks before a rescue vehicle could get there.
Even if both pads were available for use though, I doubt the scenario
would be much different since w/only 3 vehicles to use and a tight
schedule, they can only get them ready so fast...



boman wrote:
Part of the planning for this last Hubble servicing mission is to have
another shuttle on the pad when Discovery launches, in case Discovery
is damaged. Has a shuttle ever launched while another is waiting on the
other launch pad?

I mean, other than in Armageddon.

"Jim" wrote in news:93a2h.19014$TV3.2353
@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:

Why are they retiring pad B?

It's not being retired; it's being handed over from the Space Shuttle
Program to the Constellation program for conversion to its Ares
configuration. That may be delayed to allow the HST LON rescue mission to
be stacked on pad B while the HST servicing mission launches from pad A.


--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

On 1 Nov 2006 08:32:58 -0800, "boman" wrote:

Part of the planning for this last Hubble servicing mission is to have
another shuttle on the pad when Discovery launches, in case Discovery
is damaged. Has a shuttle ever launched while another is waiting on the
other launch pad?

I mean, other than in Armageddon.

Yes, most recently, STS-105 Discovery on Pad 39A a week before STS-104
Atlantis launched from Pad B in July 2001.

Brian

What was the launch were some TV news crew hired a helicopter for an aerial
TV view (from outside the danger area), and the camera crew was focused on
the shuttle on the pad, until a roar from behind them scared the bejeesuz
out,
as the OTHER shuttle lifted off -- looking very much closer to them (not
really,
but they panicked!)...

On 2006-11-01, wrote:
Yes, many times - the first was STS-61C launching from Pad A while
STS-51L was awaiting launch on Pad B.
Here's a pic. of STS-31 Discovery launching (w/Hubble) while in the
foreground you see the STS-35 launch vehicle.
http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/ima...-31-Launch.jpg

Thats a nice one. I had http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/lores/S90-37625.jpg
(same two missions) as a desktop background some years ago, but with
it only being 640x480, it doesnt scale up well to today's 1600x1200.

I never did find any pictures of the other times that both pads occupied,
other than for STS-31 and STS-35, despite trowling through nix.nasa.gov,
and images.google.com.

So I'm hoping if both pads are occupied at the same time, they take the
oppurtunity to take some higher res shots than the 640x480.


Iain

(PS, FTR, it Columbia in the Foreground, Discovery in the background)

wrote:

However, the upcoming flight will be the last to use Pad B. So it's
really a moot point - all remaining launches after this one will be off
Pad A, so I think what they mean is, that if Discovery got into trouble
on STS-125, another vehicle (Endeavour??, since it's next up for
-119?) would be processed quickly and moved to the pad and launched as
soon as practicable.. the Hubble crew would have to power down and take
it easy for a few weeks before a rescue vehicle could get there.
Even if both pads were available for use though, I doubt the scenario
would be much different since w/only 3 vehicles to use and a tight
schedule, they can only get them ready so fast...

I thought I read the Hubble mission is now going to delay the
transformation of Pad B. With the shuttle not having the ISS for safe
haven, they're going to have to rely on their own resources to survive,
and I think that's only 23 days. Would they have time to roll out the
rescue shuttle and launch in time? What if something happens that
delays the shuttle from rolling out...like mechanical failures in both
crawlers (rare, I know...but who knows). Wouldn't they need the rescue
shuttle on the pad already?

I'm guessing if Columbia was still in service, she would be flying this
mission because of the extended mission package. But, that would mean
there wouldn't have been a 107 disaster, and the STS-300s would be moot.

On 2006-11-02, wrote:

I'm guessing if Columbia was still in service, she would be flying this
mission because of the extended mission package. But, that would mean
there wouldn't have been a 107 disaster, and the STS-300s would be moot.

I suspect that if Columbia and/or her crew had made it home despite the
hole in the RCC, and she was still flight capable, then the LON and other
RTF requirements would still be there.


Iain