Atlantis lifts off - STS-129

[Doctor_K]

Successful space shuttle launch just a few minutes ago, taking a bunch of spare parts to the ISS.

It's kind of a shame that this has become less and less publicized and more 'routine.'  This stuff never ceases to fascinate and enthrall me.  Kudos to NASA on another successful liftoff.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/space/11/16/space.atlantis.launch/index.html

[77danj7]

I watched it from outside work...it truly is amazing seeing them lift off and then disappear!

[Lunican]

Saw Atlantis go up from downtown. Perfect view

[danno]

We went to the roof of our building here in Southpoint.   Always gives me goosebumps.

[sandyshoes]

Doctor K, I couldn't agree more - it is a miracle.  I'm sad to have heard on the cable news channel where I watched the launch that there will be only 6 or 7 more launches, then our space program is over and, as the commentator said "we'll be hitching rides with the Russian space program".  Why is it over?  Why are the owners of a Rolls-Royce gonna hitch a ride in a Pinto, metaphorically speaking...

[Doctor_K]

Sandy--  Great questions.  A closer analogy would be saying why would the owners of a 1972 car, with all its foibles, want to trade up to something a little more current?

I love the Shuttle program.  I literally grew up on it and with it.  The Shuttle Program is over because it's not sexy anymore.  Success is routine, and it's lost the interest of most of the general public.  Further, the Shuttle Program was never as successful as it was hoped to become, in several different areas of economics.

And, as great as it is and has been, we're still stuck going around the cosmic block, as it were, when we've had the technology to go to the moon and possibly beyond for the last several years/decades.

George Bush in 2005 (I think?) said that Americans need to go back to the moon.  The Shuttle was never designed to go any further out than Hubble (which is farther out than the ISS) - essentially, Low Earth Orbit.  The Shuttles can't and won't get us there.

The Orion and Ares rockets will.  That's where the last President said we needed to go, so that is where we'll be going.  The base technology is pushing 40 years old.  Some would argue that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  Others would argue that better technology is out there, and we should be taking advantage of it.  Truly the seeds for a great debate.

Why drive a Ford Fairmont when you can buy a Ford Fusion pretty economically?

[Ernest Street]

Doctor K said it well. It's all about economics. The amount of the payload dictates who will launch it.
We have the Delta(Air Force) and the Atlas (Army..and usually launched secretly..Hmm)
The new Ariane 5 and all our new USA Launch contractors can launch a reasonable payload much cheaper now.
It is certainly worthy of a seperate thread that I will try to get going soon for those interested.
the space shuttle was always designed as a Low earth Orbit "Pickup Truck"
It has served it's designed purpose with minimal collateral damage.(R.I.P those that chose to take the ride)
The new Ares was designed with old tried and true designs ..updated to be a really flexible multi task Payload lifter.
It can be fully loaded with propellent (Moon) or lightly Loaded as was the test rocket.
Off the record, That should be quite a G-force "E-Ticket" ride on one of the shuttle solid boosters...certainly more of a kick than the legendary hot rod Gemini..with it's instantly lighting Hypergolic fuels.  They said when you heard the Turbo pumps "Whoop" to life.... that candle lit and was gone. The Ares should be even faster to mach.
a little factoid: The Igniter for the solid booster is 4"x 5' long.

[sandyshoes]

Ok, I see the logic, and agree - it is a pretty old vehicle we're sending up there.  However, all I can think of is the most recent repairs on the space station where we had to send crews up to repair the air conditioning and then the "plumbing"...I thought those were reportedly systems designed by the Russians - and the commentator yesterday said, as I quoted, that we would be hitching a ride with them from now on.  (Hence the Pinto comment).  Glad to know there are new programs out there and we are moving forward, and not actually ending space exploration. 

[Jason]

We're still going to be putting astronauts in space, we'll just be using a different vehicle.  And the only reason we'll have to team up with Russia is because our vehicles are still being perfected and aren't scheduled to be ready until 2013 or 2015.

There is a lot of talk out there about secretive and experimental "shuttle" type vehicles being produced but they will likely still be used in the same manner, astro-taxi.  The rockets are what will be getting us further out and getting the largest payloads into space.


Oh, and anyone who hasn't seen a Shuttle launch up close you absolutely HAVE to make a point to head to the Cape in the comming year before it is too late.

[David]

We're still going to be putting astronauts in space, we'll just be using a different vehicle.  And the only reason we'll have to team up with Russia is because our vehicles are still being perfected and aren't scheduled to be ready until 2013 or 2015.

There is a lot of talk out there about secretive and experimental "shuttle" type vehicles being produced but they will likely still be used in the same manner, astro-taxi.  The rockets are what will be getting us further out and getting the largest payloads into space.


Oh, and anyone who hasn't seen a Shuttle launch up close you absolutely HAVE to make a point to head to the Cape in the comming year before it is too late.

I've been trying to catch the shuttle launches at the cape for the past year now, but the numerous delays have made planning a trip down there around work pretty hard though. My window of opportunity to watch nasa's window of opportunity to launch haven't been synching up so well. Can we get a prime time launch here? hahah

[BridgeTroll]

Glad to know there are new programs out there and we are moving forward, and not actually ending space exploration. 

There ARE programs it is likely that is as far as it will get.  The Obama administration looks to end the Ares and Orion programs.  We will probaly leave lunar exploration to the Chinese...

[BridgeTroll]

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2009-09-26/news/0909250226_1_constellation-program-nasa-space-program

NASA under fire
GAO: Ares rife with problems
By Robert Block and Mark K. Matthews, Sentinel Staff Writers|September 26, 2009

CAPE CANAVERAL -- Just as supporters are pressing hard on Capitol Hill to resist efforts to kill NASA's Ares I rocket and Orion capsule, the investigative arm of Congress released a report saying that NASA has not made a convincing financial case -- or even set a firm price -- for the space shuttle's replacement.

"While the agency has already obligated more than $10 billion in contracts, at this point NASA does not know how much Ares I and Orion will ultimately cost, and will not know until technical and design challenges have been addressed," says a 31-page Government Accountability Office report released Friday.

And though NASA has said that the development costs of the rocket and capsule will total $35 billion, the GAO estimates they will end up costing as much as $49 billion of the total $97 billion for the Constellation back-to-the-moon program.

The report follows the recently released summary findings of a presidential panel that suggested NASA scrap the Ares I if it wants to continue using the International Space Station and still have a viable human space program, declaring that there is not enough money to do both.

The panel said NASA needed at least $3 billion a year more, on top of its $18 billion budget, to finance a manned space program. Even then, it said, the agency would be better off using commercial rockets rather than Ares I to get to the space station.

President Barack Obama will decide on America's space-exploration strategy after he receives the final report of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee next week.

In a three-page response, NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver told the GAO that the agency agrees that it needs to develop a better "business case" for the program. But she also seemed to hold out the possibility the program could be killed.

"The agency is working toward closing knowledge gaps about the Constellation program requirements, technologies, funding, schedule and other resources," she wrote, "so that it can be positioned to succeed when decisions are made to commit to significant, long-term investments" in the program.

Some members of Congress, especially on the House Science and Technology Committee, are urging the White House to stay the Constellation course.

Both U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., who chairs the House Science and Technology Committee, and his space-subcommittee chair, Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., said the GAO report underscored NASA's need for money.

[Ernest Street]

I am now 0 for 3 on scrubbed shuttle launches,but have seen a Delta launch on one of my past birthdays...a good show from one of the Jetties.

[Doctor_K]

Glad to know there are new programs out there and we are moving forward, and not actually ending space exploration. 

There ARE programs it is likely that is as far as it will get.  The Obama administration looks to end the Ares and Orion programs.  We will probaly leave lunar exploration to the Chinese...

Yeah, we should have thought about that before we blew 3 trillion on wars in the middle east with borrowed chinese money, while deregulating the banks and allowing all of our industry to be moved to cheaper labor areas out of country.

Seems like a little thought or paying attention to what every economist at the time was saying would have saved a lot of pain.

But we didnt, and will be paying the price of George W. Bush's massive, blistering dose of the stupid for generations.

Hopefully once we pay off all that debt incurred for the right of Goldman Sachs executives to get multi million dollar bonuses, we will still have the one thing that America did that will live throughout all of history intact:  Our Space Program.

But hey!  At least we got that Bin Laden fellow!

Yay bringing politics into the thread!!  Thanks to the Clinton administration for deregulation and granting the ability for 'predatory lenders' to extend mortgages to people who had no reason to be getting them, all in the name of 'equality' and 'fairness.'  Barney Frank needs to share in those kudos too, as the poster child and one of the authors of that fine piece of legislation.

Thanks also to the Clinton administration for getting NAFTA signed, which was a great tool to remove manufacturing jobs from the country.

George W sucked.  Absolutely.  Don't blame just him.  He ain't the only one at fault here.

Pulling back to the topic, it was awfully short-sighted of the W administration to want to pull the plug on a satisfactory launch system (the Shuttle program) long before any viable alternatives were ready to come online. 

Probably could've stretched the service lifetime of at least Atlantis and Endeavour (the two newer orbiters of the three) out, at least closer to the 2015 go-live Ares/Orion date, to minimize the space program's downtime.

I don't buy the argument that the Obama adminsitration is looking to pare down the space program because of economics.  The $787 billion bailout is a great example of how much the current administration cares about economics.  About as much as the last administration, I'll grant you; which is not at all.  Point is, economics is a convenient excuse and a fake one.

[Captain Zissou]

I don't buy the argument that the Obama adminsitration is looking to pare down the space program because of economics.  The $787 billion bailout is a great example of how much the current administration cares about economics.

That's exactly what I was thinking.  $50B to get to the moon seems well worth it to me.