NASA decides not to repair shuttle

I don't understand this:

NASA decides not to risk space walk to repair shuttle shield:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/Aperture/20070817/ap_on_sc/space_shuttle;_ylt=AjDSsYee8vYdPJqImzWCjG2s0NUE

1. NASA has made several judgement errors, and according to recent independent parties, they are still in denial of accepting proper checks and balances, where they are in prior mode not too far from where they were, mentally, on the last shuttle disaster [sorry,know that report exists, heard if from the guy in charge during an interview few months ago].

2. They invent a fix, and decide not to use it.

3. Their best science and judgement [not in above link] says, the most that would happen, is severe aluminum warp to the frame which would require "extensive and costly repairs" [latter from a new on TV this morning].

4. They have another teacher on board: um, bad press anyone if it goes wrong?

Now here's the deal with me: why not fix it even with the danger presented in a space walk as they state?

If it increases their chances of survival, or lessens the costly repair of a major shuttle on its last legs [shuttles due to go out of business in a short few launches], then why for a 3" x 1" gash in the shield would you risk life/property. With NASA's track record lately, wouldn't one believe they should error on the side of caution.

Baffles me.

 

I have a sinking feeling about the outcome of this decision...

 

the linked page doesnt work

but im with you - surely its better to risk one or two in a space walk as opposed to the whole crew with the gash in the shield ???

 

I did from the beginning. When the news made the big hoopla about this lady being the teacher who lost out to McCaullah (Challenger), I got uneasy hearing about it. Then I saw the size of the damage.

Let us pray for their safe return, and NASA ending this downward spiral their on.

 

We had just better hope they are lucky. One thing that does occur is that maybe they are suspicious that a "repair" via spacewalk might in fact make that section MORE vulnerable if the repair somehow went wrong.

There is also the risk of the spacewalk itself; apparantly nobody has ever done one out to the underside of the shuttle.

And, believe it or not, I read an article about trouble again with the O-rings a week or two back.

 

The needs of the many,,,, outweigh, the needs of one.
(They need to fix it.)
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Space walks aren't easy. You just don't open the door and venture out whenever you want. They're risky.

Secondly even if they do their repair, the likelihood of it helping is minor compared to the risk of a long spacewalk. I forget how long the repair would take but they don't see the need to dangle a person out into space for this.

More than one person in one building agrees.

The shuttle is more than safe as far as North American experts are concerned, no one has to worry about the shuttle during the trip home.

 

It's ok guys. Lets repair the middle east instead.... ..... ..... ..... cricket

 

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts118/070817fd10/

this may be a more interesting link to the one [I DIDN'T test correctly...sorry]

in that they WILL do a Sat, 18 Aug 2007, but NOT for the tiles.....?!?!

here is what they will NOT and WILL do saturday

"..
Saturday's spacewalk by Canadian astronaut Dave Williams and station crew member Clay Anderson is devoted to a variety of get-ahead tasks that will help pave the way for future space station assembly missions. The excursion originally was planned for today, but it was delayed 24 hours to give flight controllers time to assess whether a heat shield repair job was needed to fill in two damaged tiles on the belly of the shuttle.

Late Thursday, mission managers decided test data and analysis proved Endeavour could safely return to Earth as is. A tile repair spacewalk was ruled out and the astronauts were told to press ahead with the station assembly EVA instead.

.."

 

Actually, they have performed this task in 2005:

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/050730_sts114_eva1.html

some of the excerts
=" ..
posted: 30 July 2005
12:51 p.m. ET


This story was updated at 4:28 p.m. EDT.

HOUSTON - Two astronauts are safely back inside the Discovery orbiter after a successful Saturday morning spacewalk where they tested new shuttle repair techniques and repaired faulty hardware on the outside of the International Space Station (ISS).

Despite a one-hour delay at the start, STS-114 astronauts Soichi Noguchi and Stephen Robinson strolled through almost seven hours of activities that ranged from the much-anticipated test of shuttle heat shield repair techniques to a graceful ride on the space station's robotic arm. The crew even had time to get a jump on the two remaining spacewalks for their flight during their six hours and 50 minutes outside Discovery.

"You guys did an awesome job and it's been a real treat," said astronaut Michael Massimino, capcom for NASA's ISS mission control here at Johnson Space Center (JSC). "We look forward to doing it a couple more times."
.."

Apparently, not as much fun the first time around?

 

I understand your segway, however, this 'might' cost more for not doing a fix [divert funds/limited resources].....which makes the entire middle east 'fix' [not in my lifetime or children's probably] closer.

 

With all eyes on NASA I would be surprised if they didn't use proper assessment tools in their decision not to repair the tiles in space. As risky as a space walk is, I don't recall anyone being "lost" doing one. Further, if the astronauts thought there was a high risk re-entry, I doubt they wouldn't do the walk and vote on their own.

All I know is, if NASA gets this wrong........ it's not going to be pretty.

 

And that one line sums up the whole story

 

So, they tested 1 out of 3 methods of repair. I'm guessing NASA has no faith in their repair methods, probably some bandaid solutions developed just so they can get flying again.

Tsk,tsk,tsk....more pollution in space.

 

It's location is towards the rear, away from the leading edges that will bear the brunt of the re-entry....they don't expect structural burn thru.....

Rolling the dice with seven people's lives.

They all knew the risks, as well........

Let's all join hands, and pray..........

 

Why do you think they're "rolling the dice"? Do you think it's a 50/50 chance of disaster?

Seriously I don't see what all the hub bub is about. That part of the shuttle shouldn't have any problem with coming back with that type of blemish.

Now if a window was cracked or a tile from the bottom of the nose was missing that would be serious and in no way could they return safely with that kind of damage left unattended.

 

correct: However, on the news this morn. as mentioned, they say there 'might' be substantial, costly damage to the aluminium frame, causing a rebuild IF the heat penetrates that portion.

All I'm saying is a [possible] savings of lives and money especially on an old craft, or when bad PR in this case and current national events, should have them error on the side of caution. BUT like we all want to believe [although they've made these mistakes before] we hope their best judgement is correct....AND [shall I say it] on the block again. <Starting to have doubts on NASA>

 

Endeavour isn't actually that old. It's the most recent shuttle, built to replace the Challenger. I believe it cost around $3.5 billion USD all up.

The aluminium frame beneath the tiles is very susceptible to heat and can warp and lose it's strength easily, when exposed to plasma streams of several thousand degrees...

This time it seems like the damage is next to one of the rear landing gear bay doors, which is not a peak heating location (wing leading edges, nose).

 

There's a lot of factors that play into the decisions. One of the biggy's is just keeping the program going with minimal bad PR. It was obviously determined that an in space fix and associated risks don't outweigh just leaving it and dealing with it later. NASA's politics probably outweigh sensibilities when it comes to an outdated space program.

 

There are a lot of very smart people at NASA. I know they have been beaten up pretty relentlessly in the media the last bunch of years, but they are overall very sharp people who care about what they are doing. I would be pretty comfortable saying that the problem has been analyzed to the Nth degree. I would also be pretty confident that the decision was the most sensible one to make. Its easy to sit on the sidelines and say "they should fix it!" but what if the analyses show a .01% chance of a fatality during a spacewalk, and if the tile is not repaired there is a 99% chance that the shuttle will be fine, and a .999% chance of structural damage. Well, anyone say leave it as is, right?

I am sure it will be OK during re-entry.

The biggest problem we have with our space program is that the shuttle is NOT a cheaper alternative to disposable rockets. We are tied to it's old technology whereas if we used disposables, we can upgrade them to the latest/greatest as we go. It will be very interesting to see how things change when they get the new space vehicle.

 

I also think there are very smart people at NASA. I daresay a rocket scientist or two.

Their problem is the upper layers, and all the political BS. There were people worried on both the Challenger and Columbia missions that there could be problems, but never reached, or was ignored by the mucky-mucks.

 

when you really think about it, NASA's record has been very good. For the amount of time they have been strapping people to flying bombs and shooting them into space their losses have been minimal. 2 shuttles lost in a period of 30 years is pretty damn good. They had one incident during the Apollo missions which killed all on board on the launch pad and the Apollo 13 incident which returned safely.

The thing that gets me though, is why after all these years are they having problems with ice damaging the shuttle on take off. Are they using a different mix of fuel in the external tank or is this something that has always occurred and just recently have taken noticed of it because of all the new cameras they have focused around the shuttles launch pad?

 

Okay the whole program needs to be scrapped, and a new design brought in. The Shuttle is what, almost 30 years old? They need to put it on display at the Smithsonian, and design a new spacecraft if they intend to continue going o space.

That's my .02 cents worth.

 

How old are the thousands of planes in the sky? Less than ten years? When it comes to aircraft, age can climb without increasing risk of failure.

 

I'm not worried about it. The area of the damage isn't bad and the shuttle was built in like 1993 or something and has the fewest number of flights of them all (I know the tiles are replaced every time, though). A spacewalk under the shuttle is risky and it can delay the rest of the future launches to complete the ISS. I don't think the odds of them burning up like Columbia is the same.