STS-120 Press Kit Released

[cabbage]

Judging by the launch coverage I've seen, a typical BBC online story (to take an example of the mainstream) will describe the major payload and will possibly name the crew (I'd be surprised if they didn't mention the ESA involvement and thus Paolo Nespoli). They might even summarise the main EVA activities and would expect Nasa's use of it's own abbreviations to be correct!

In general, the Nasa press kit (like press kits from other organisations doing technical things) would normally be considered an authoritative reference in the absence of controversy or a serious dissenting source. Given the cost and high profile of a shuttle flight, it ought to be possible to get it right.

Some in the media will go the extra mile to verify and expand on the kit, but most won't. A press kit full of errors just sets the media up to deliver poor reports and doesn't get you friends in the media when they ask stupid questions at your press conference on account of stupid mistakes in your press kit!

[SimonShuttle]

The BBC don't care, they are too busy saying "Nasa" when it's "NASA"! They only use the AP reports anyway.

[dsmillman]

I would like to point out that the STS-120 NASA TV schedule normally at:

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/mission_schedule.html

has not been released yet.  Does anyone know why?

[cabbage]

SimonShuttle> Without getting too offtopic about the way the BBC reports are produced - as a lot of people read these reports (whatever you think of the BBC) wouldn't you rather that the content was accurate? If NASA are issuing press kits with serious mistakes in, a large number of news outlets will repeat them, or run agency reports which repeat them.

Depending on your view of the media they are either overworked, not interested in space or just plain lazy. In the big picture, a space story may not be seen as important enough to merit spending a lot of time making sense of conflicting information - it's sad but generally if you want the media to run with a story then spoon-feeding it is the soundest policy. There are enthusiasts in the media, but it's safest not to rely on that.

As far as NASA vs Nasa, I think it's a general BBC online style choice - organisations which are usually pronounced as a word have an initial capital only (Nasa, Nato, Esa, Nacro, Umist) and all-caps is reserved for organisations whose abbreviated names are spelt out as letters(CBI, BBC, ITV, CNN, MIT).

[azreddog]

With the launch date only four days away, is the release of the Flight Plan and other Flight Data File products expected soon?

[Chandonn]

azreddog - 19/10/2007  10:41 AM

With the launch date only four days away, is the release of the Flight Plan and other Flight Data File products expected soon?

This may not be as detailed as you're asking for, but it is a pretty good day-by-day overview:

http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/120/120flightplan.html

[Martin FL]

azreddog - 19/10/2007  9:41 AM

With the launch date only four days away, is the release of the Flight Plan and other Flight Data File products expected soon?

There's about 45 of the FDF pdfs, including Flight Plan etc. for STS-120, on L2 for what it's worth. Something like 500megs worth at the last count.

[jmjawors]

tesheiner - 17/10/2007  5:54 AM  On page 54, as part of EVA-1, is described the operation to install a Payload and Data Grapple Fixture on the node. :laugh:

I'm watching the NASA interview with Scott Parazynski.  For what it's worth, he consistently refers to it as "Payload and Data Grapple Fixture."

Maybe "PDGF" is another "RPM." 

[ChrisC]

dsmillman - 19/10/2007  8:07 AM

I would like to point out that the STS-120 NASA TV schedule normally at:

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/mission_schedule.html

has not been released yet.  Does anyone know why?

It's up now.