-
#140
by
jmjawors
on 28 Feb, 2007 00:38
-
Speedracer - 27/2/2007 7:30 PM
Soooo I guess we should all hail Hale's hail handling? :laugh:
Nice. :cool:
As has been said, delays suck. But at least they're going to do the right thing to ensure a safe flight. No "go-fever" with these guys!
-
#141
by
Chris Bergin
on 28 Feb, 2007 00:41
-
jmjawors - 28/2/2007 1:38 AM
Speedracer - 27/2/2007 7:30 PM
Soooo I guess we should all hail Hale's hail handling? :laugh:
Nice. :cool:
As has been said, delays suck. But at least they're going to do the right thing to ensure a safe flight. No "go-fever" with these guys!
Interesting point there.
We all know NASA is continuing to be *safer*, and very open to any concerns raised from any area of the agency and contractors (you really see this with the "dissenting opinions" on PRCB presentations), but there was never a chance this would anything but rollback, to be honest.
Remember, they rolled back ET-100, with 700 areas of damage. ET-124 has 7000+ areas of damage.
-
#142
by
jmjawors
on 28 Feb, 2007 00:47
-
Absolutely. But I see a difference between this rollback and that one (besides the number of dings). Remember that Mike Leinbach said that at one point they had tried to solve the hail damage at the pad back then. This is a real demonstration of 'lessons-learned,' as that proved to not only be ineffective but dangerous.
So recognition that this is a problem worthy of 100% scrutiny, and not just an inconvenience, is a positive thing.
-
#143
by
dwmzmm
on 28 Feb, 2007 01:10
-
Almurray1958 - 27/2/2007 3:32 PM
Basically a chine is a change in angle between hull sections (boat building). In the case of the orbiter, a chine is the change of angle in the wing sections (steep to shallow). Substrate is "the stuff beneath" the outer surface coating (coating is built-up over the substrate).
So the translation would be : "The hail seems to have damaged the outer surface but not penetrated to the inner core material near the location where the angle of the wing changes."
The results of the detailed inspection may render this discussion mute.
Hope this helps.<<<
Look at any pics of the Lockheed Blackbirds (SR-71, YF-12A); they have perfect examples of chines...
-
#144
by
Seattle Dave
on 28 Feb, 2007 02:23
-
Chris Bergin - 27/2/2007 3:09 PM
Appreciate it.
The way we run this media site is to have the open/free area better than anyone else, with L2 even better than that 
"Even better" doesn't do it justice. You may as well be sat in Wayne Hale's office and answering the phone for him on L2. :cool:
-
#145
by
Super George
on 28 Feb, 2007 02:49
-
Sad news, but if they can turn it into an April attempt, it won't be a massive blow.
-
#146
by
edkyle99
on 28 Feb, 2007 03:55
-
Shuttle Man - 27/2/2007 11:35 AM
rdale - 27/2/2007 10:41 AM
C5C6 - 27/2/2007 11:24 AM
how come hail protection was never considered when building the service structure?
This size of hail is _VERY_ rare in Florida...
Absolutely. This was not expected.
This is the second time that a shuttle has been hail-damaged on the pad, as I understand it. Shouldn't it be expected by now? Will NASA learn a lesson from this that can be applied to Ares I ground processing?
- Ed Kyle
-
#147
by
rdale
on 28 Feb, 2007 04:43
-
What sort of lesson? Even under the cover of RSS, this was an extreme enough storm that the shuttle itself took some dings. So you'd have to seal it off basically to prevent any damage from a major storm, but by sealing it off you can't access it. Not sure there is a workaround...
-
#148
by
edkyle99
on 28 Feb, 2007 04:56
-
rdale - 27/2/2007 11:43 PM
What sort of lesson? Even under the cover of RSS, this was an extreme enough storm that the shuttle itself took some dings. So you'd have to seal it off basically to prevent any damage from a major storm, but by sealing it off you can't access it. Not sure there is a workaround...
Well, the first lesson might be that an RSS-type partial enclosure, combined with several weeks of pad exposure, isn't good enough. Perhaps a complete enclosure is needed, at least for the upper stage and Orion spacecraft, in concert with a processing plan that keeps the vehicle off of the pad until just before launch to minimize its exposure to the elements.
- Ed Kyle
-
#149
by
Jim
on 28 Feb, 2007 05:22
-
texas_space - 27/2/2007 7:14 PM
Delays stink 
Have incidents like these delayed flights with other, more conventional rockets (e.g. Saturns, Deltas, Atlases)? Would we have to worry as much if this had been an Orion or Ares-V stack on the pad?
There would be some concern but ELV's don't care about ice falling or debris
-
#150
by
Jim
on 28 Feb, 2007 05:25
-
edkyle99 - 28/2/2007 12:56 AM
Well, the first lesson might be that an RSS-type partial enclosure, combined with several weeks of pad exposure, isn't good enough. Perhaps a complete enclosure is needed, at least for the upper stage and Orion spacecraft, in concert with a processing plan that keeps the vehicle off of the pad until just before launch to minimize its exposure to the elements.
- Ed Kyle
The plan is to be on the pad less than a week. The "other" plan is only the shuttle has to worry about this, not ELV's
-
#151
by
punkboi
on 28 Feb, 2007 07:00
-
So what of the S3/S4 truss? Will it be brought back to the SSPF to have its batteries replaced/recharged? Or left inside the payload room at the RSS?
-
#152
by
paulhbell07
on 28 Feb, 2007 08:19
-
If this or another problem pushes the launch schedule further back would the shuttle still retire in 2010 or could they go to 2011.
Or is there enough time for delays like this to finish the ISS in 2010.
Just found the answer on L2. Thanks.
-
#153
by
John44
on 28 Feb, 2007 08:29
-
-
#154
by
Concorde
on 28 Feb, 2007 08:52
-
Jumping the gun a little but if we're talking late April/early May would this be a day or night launch ?
-
#155
by
ysl007
on 28 Feb, 2007 11:15
-
I'm living in Singapore so not really sure about the weather in florida though is this a first time a Space Shuttle has got damaged by a Hailstorm or some very bad weather alike ?
-
#156
by
alan w
on 28 Feb, 2007 11:30
-
Concorde - 28/2/2007 3:52 AM
Jumping the gun a little but if we're talking late April/early May would this be a day or night launch ?
Yeah does any one know, as i need to replan my attempt to catch it at KSC, although i dont know if my pocket can stretch to 2 Florida holidays in one year especially when the next attempt could get scrubbed aswell
trying to plan a foreign visit to watch theses things is hard not to mention expensive!!
-
#157
by
shuttlefan
on 28 Feb, 2007 12:33
-
ysl007 - 28/2/2007 6:15 AM
I'm living in Singapore so not really sure about the weather in florida though is this a first time a Space Shuttle has got damaged by a Hailstorm or some very bad weather alike ?
No. Before STS-96 in May 1999, the tank got damaged by a hailstorm. Not quite as bad as this one though. They also rolled back to the VAB on STS-96 to fix the damage but the launch was only delayed a week because they didn't have other traffic at the ISS to work around. Also in summer 1995, Discovery's tank got damaged by woodpeckers, yes you read correctly, WOODPECKERS! They also rolled back to the VAB to fix that damage. Before the launch of STS-4, way back in 1982, they got hit by a hailstorm the day before launch and had to replace several tiles on the pad.
-
#158
by
C5C6
on 28 Feb, 2007 12:47
-
any video of the hailstorm?
-
#159
by
KSC
on 28 Feb, 2007 13:23
-
Hail damage is nothing new to ATALNTIS. Back in 1990 the STS-38/ATLANTIS stack suffered minor hail damage. During rollback (for technical problems), the vehicle parked outside the VAB about a day while COLUMBIA/STS-35 stack was transferred to the pad for launch.
trying to plan a foreign visit to watch theses things is hard not to mention expensive!!