What a beautiful landing

Really clear pictures on the NASA t.v. feed. Looked like a nice day
out at KSC. I like it when the camera pans back on NASA t.v. just
before the shuttle reaches the threshold of the runway, and it looks
like the shuttle is coming in like a ton of bricks. Boy ... they
really flare that thing at the last second.


Chris

CCBlack wrote:
Really clear pictures on the NASA t.v. feed. Looked like a nice day
out at KSC. I like it when the camera pans back on NASA t.v. just
before the shuttle reaches the threshold of the runway, and it looks
like the shuttle is coming in like a ton of bricks. Boy ... they
really flare that thing at the last second.

Yeah, the descent rate really is alarming to watch, isn't it?
The lifting bodies used to come in like that also.
CNN Headline News had interesting video taken through the heads-up
display in the Shuttle cockpit as it descended for landing.
This whole flight seemed to go without a hitch from end-to-end.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:
Yeah, the descent rate really is alarming to watch, isn't it?
The lifting bodies used to come in like that also.
CNN Headline News had interesting video taken through the heads-up
display in the Shuttle cockpit as it descended for landing.
This whole flight seemed to go without a hitch from end-to-end.

Yeah I've seen some M2-F2 footage ... and the gear pop out at the last
second before touching down at Edwards. Really amazing stuff.

I've been telling myself for a while now ... despite all the failures
of the Shuttle program ... as the end of the program nears ... boy
they really are good at it.

Chris

CCBlack wrote:
Yeah I've seen some M2-F2 footage ... and the gear pop out at the last
second before touching down at Edwards. *Really amazing stuff.


Like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBXI8...eature=related

Man ! That is so cool looking. I always thought the M2-F2 was the
neatest looking one of the batch.

Chris

CCBlack wrote:
CCBlack wrote:
Yeah I've seen some M2-F2 footage ... and the gear pop out at the last
second before touching down at Edwards. Really amazing stuff.


Like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBXI8...eature=related

Man ! That is so cool looking. I always thought the M2-F2 was the
neatest looking one of the batch.

I liked the HL-10, but apparently it was the worst flying of the
original ones, to the point of being dangerous.
The X-24B was one wild looking machine, and apparently pretty easy to
fly and land also (the X-24A looked like a potato with fins on it).
In the PDF of "The Hypersonic Revolution" they have a graph showing the
hypersonic lift-to-drag of the Shuttle and a aerospace plane based on
the X-24B/FDL-7 design, and the FDL-7 could fly rings around the Shuttle
regarding cross range after reentry.
It was the predictability of the lifting body's landing performance that
allowed the auxiliary jet engines to be deleted from the Shuttle design,
greatly upping cargo weight and making the orbiter a lot simpler to design.

Pat

CCBlack wrote:

I've been telling myself for a while now ... despite all the failures
of the Shuttle program ... as the end of the program nears ... boy
they really are good at it.

Yeah, it only took them 20+ years to iron out the little glitches. ;-)

Pat

Pat Flannery writes:

CCBlack wrote:

I've been telling myself for a while now ... despite all the failures
of the Shuttle program ... as the end of the program nears ... boy
they really are good at it.

Yeah, it only took them 20+ years to iron out the little glitches. ;-)


But never mind that. Time to throw that all out and start another 20+
year curve from scratch.

Dave

On Nov 28, 1:20�am, Pat Flannery wrote:
CCBlack wrote:

I've been telling myself for a while now ... despite all the failures
of the Shuttle program ... as the end of the program nears ... boy
they really are good at it.

Yeah, it only took them 20+ years to iron out the little glitches. ;-)

Pat

no doubt there are other gotchas waiting to kill another vehicle and
crew.

mike griffin stated publically a large percentage chance of lost
vehicle and crew if the program continues. what was it 80% or some
such?

On Nov 28, 10:15*am, " wrote:

no doubt there are other gotchas waiting to kill another vehicle and
crew.

No doubt that Bob Haller is going to post more asinine comments like
this.

The comment is a applicable to any vehicle

On Nov 28, 11:55�am, Me wrote:
On Nov 28, 10:15�am, " wrote:

no doubt there are other gotchas waiting to kill another vehicle and
crew.

No doubt that Bob Haller is going to post more asinine comments like
this.

The comment is a applicable to any vehicle

YEAH BUT in the case of the shuttle its 40 years old.

do tell how many reusable vehicles are still in use after 40 years?

many of the parts are well past their rated lifetimes NASA shops on e
bay for ground support spares, the vehicle has killed twice, both with
known issues nasa managers dismissed as no big problem...

so mike griffin stated theres a 80% of shuttle killing again.

this from nasas own data.

do you think he was lying?