Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Space Shuttle Launch Delayed 12

Posted by michael from the FOD dept.
matth writes "Iwon.com has a story about how NASA postponed the launch of space shuttle Discovery on a construction mission to the International Space Station Tuesday when engineers found a stray piece of hardware left behind by ground crews that could have damaged the spacecraft after liftoff."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Space Shuttle Launch Delayed More

Space Shuttle Launch Delayed

Comments Filter:

  • I guess it goes to show that space travel is still at a really experimental stage. I'm suprised that as we enter the fifth decade of launching people into space, a loose 10cm pin on a structure the size of a tower block can still delay a whole space flight.

    How long will it be before we can send up flights on a regular basis (say once a week) without this sort of delay?

    It seems amazing that after all this time the space launching system is still this fragile...

  • What many people don't realize is that the structural integrity of the space shuttle is pretty weak. Guess how many g's the shuttle can take. About 3.5, and during a launch it pushes it up to 3g. That's not a whole lot of room for error. The article stated that as the pin fell it would either strike the external tank (the big orange thing) or the engine covering. Unfortunately it doesn't give any more detail than that, but let's analizye past experiences.

    When asked what caused the explosion of the Challenger, about 99 out of 100 would say: o-ring. Well, the o-ring certainly contributed, but really didn't actually cause the failure. The o-ring allowed exhaust gas was able to escape from the solid-rocket-booster and sever one of the support struts. This support then puntured the external tank. This fuel was then ignited by the SRB's (the big white things). This is the part where the external tank exploded. Most would say the shuttle exploded as well. However, the shuttle was merely broken into several chunks and tumbled to the ocean. As we can see if the external tank were punctured it could lead to critical failure.

    Case two would have the pin hit the engine covering. This is a bit vague, but it could mean either the OMS/RCS engines or the main engines. The OMS/RCS engines are what the shuttle uses to manuever in space and de-orbit. If the pin were to strike the main engine coverings, it could puncture one of cooling lines. If memory serves correct this happened no to long ago. While on the ground, the leak appeared small. In the aforementioned case the shuttle nearly ran out of fuel. Big deal you say, so what, the engines quit a little early. Well, you're right, it is a big deal as it results in one big boom. If the shuttle were to run out of fuel, or hydrogen in this case the engines would explode.

    It's not really that amazing that space vehicles are this fragile. The less structuraly sound they are the less they weigh. This means less thrust or more payload. It turns out to be a pretty good trade-off, but sometimes you lose and get setback by seemingly minor details.

    Wigs

  • Getting the costs of the delay deducted from your pay? OWCH!
    Hi honey, my pay check is 2 Million!
    Oh... there's a little minus sign....
  • From a news clip:

    Dave King, NASA's shuttle processing manager at Kennedy, said the pin is a common tool used on the launch pad by technicians to temporarily lock handrails and portable access platforms into place. Workers are required to keep a log of their hand tool use, leaving a record that safety personnel will audit.
  • Considering the fact that we haven't changed our technology for over 20 years (Shuttle Orbiter) it isn't that suprising.

    I remember reading that the expected rate of critical mission failures (ie. firework displays - like Challenger) was one in 300, and recently in a post on a similar topic someone who is currently working in the field mentioned a 2% failure rate. This is an accountable loss! Even if everything is taken care of NASA still expects this number of failures.

    If you launched every week, you would be facing a disaster at least every six years. Not to mention the cost associated with launching these orbiters.

    Since the space shuttle is such a complex system (probably the most complex engineering feat mankind has ever undertaken) it is only expected that NASA will hesitate to launch whenever anything isn't perfect. Who know's, if that pin chips off some insulation, you might have another Challenger - remember it was only a faulty o-ring that caused that tradgedy.

    In the end I wouldn't expected manned spaceflight to become any more frequent until we have a new orbiter, as long as we stick with the space shuttle we're dragging our feet.

  • ...on how much that piece of crap left behind by some careless worker will cost the American people?
  • The new launch time is today 7:17 EDT (23:17 GMT). They already have removed the pin (had to drain the oxygen and hydrogen before they could remove it). The full detailed story [spaceflightnow.com].
  • at least the reason isn't that an engineer realized "oh shit, i measured everything in feet!"
    --------------
  • $600,000 according to cnn :(
  • So some guy left a pin on a strut.

    It only takes a little prick to fsck things up.

    Seriously though, 8 ounces is heavy for a pin.

    Anyone know what it was meant for?

  • At least it's not an o-ring.

    H*rus [zwienenberg.com]
  • Spaceflight Now has a picture [spaceflightnow.com] of where the pin was lodged on the shuttle. It's pretty hard to see. An inspection team found it using binoculars.

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Close