Author Topic: Extension decision no closer after “one heck of a year” for shuttle  (Read 31886 times)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32379
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11065
  • Likes Given: 329
But saying that Apollo 1 tragedy (not a frivolous test, but one that was necessary to improve safety on a dangerous mission with a new vehicle) was caused by negligence, seems to me exhaggerated and perhaps outright wrong.

It wasn't a one time only test.  The 16psia (higher than sea level) 100% O2 atmosphere would have occurred during during the actual countdown, the dry Countdown Demonstration test and during other integrated tests for every mission.

This was just like the O rings and foam, the wrong acceptance of a risk.  There was a fix (see below).  The project was "too cheap and   lazy" to pay and  do the work to reduce the risk.
« Last Edit: 12/22/2009 07:56 PM by Jim »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32379
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11065
  • Likes Given: 329

What would you have done had you been the decision maker? Forgone the test? Done at low pressure O2 and reduce leak test reliability? Blocked the program deeming it too unsafe? (and being grilled, it goes without saying)

There were other means or times to accomplish the test.

a.  The over pressure of the cabin was not required to be done at that particular day, it would still have been repeated a few more times.  It is a standard day of launch test to verify cabin integrity.

B The test did not require 100% O2. It could have been done like it eventually was at 40% N2 and 60% O2.  The crew's suit circuits were kept at 100% O2 to prevent the bends while the cabin bled down to 5 psia during ascent
« Last Edit: 12/22/2009 07:51 PM by Jim »

Offline stockman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6916
  • Southern Ontario - Canada
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
While this is a valuable and good discussion - is it not way off the topic of this forum? Moderators - should this be moved to a separate discussion thread??
One Percent for Space!!!

Offline Andy USA

  • Lead Moderator
  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 981
  • Los Angeles, California
  • Liked: 129
  • Likes Given: 125
I'd rather keep this thread, and insist it remains on topic or posts will be deleted (especially heavily uninformed ones).

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3948
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 381
  • Likes Given: 154
Ok, so returning to topic here:
Question: If the shuttle program is not extended beyond 2010 but the COTS program is given extra funding who will "take up the slack and fill the gap?"
Also: How likely (at this point) is the scenerio with an extension to 2012? (keep in mind the the DIRECT HLV looks more likely now than it did a while back)
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7126
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 646
  • Likes Given: 759
Question: If the shuttle program is not extended beyond 2010 but the COTS program is given extra funding who will "take up the slack and fill the gap?"

Purely IMHO, I'd say that the first commercial crewed spacecraft would start appearing around 2013/14, with crewed test flights early in 2015.  I doubt that any of them would be operational (to NASA's standards, anyway) before Q4, 2015.

Quote
Also: How likely (at this point) is the scenerio with an extension to 2012? (keep in mind the the DIRECT HLV looks more likely now than it did a while back)

The longer Obama holds off on a public announcement, the less likely it becomes.
« Last Edit: 12/24/2009 09:57 AM by Ben the Space Brit »
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Tags: