Will Discovery Take The Heat?

[Borret]

I am just curios to know, after all the media hype, what people believe is going to be the outcome of tonights deorbit and re-entry. What have the journo's convinced us will happen? Will NASA be cracking beers of joy or beers of comiseration this evening?

Borret

 

[Airgead]

I am just curios to know, after all the media hype, what people believe is going to be the outcome of tonights deorbit and re-entry. What have the journo's convinced us will happen? Will NASA be cracking beers of joy or beers of comiseration this evening?

Borret

[post="70598"][/post]​

OK.. As a complete space nut I'll give you my take on the whole thing -

Liftoff -
Some large pieces of foam shed from the tank that managed to miss the orbiter. They got lucky.

Top of the tank hit a buzzard at liftoff. Again they got lucky the only damage was to the buzzard.

No impacts recorded on the RCC wing leading edges. Fallin ice knocks a 1 inch hole in a tile near the forward landing gear door. The shuttle has survived re-entry with larger holes than that. It is common for mocrometioroids to knock 10 or 20 holes in the insulation during a mission. the shuttle is designed to handle it.

Media frenzy starts.

On Orbit -
New procedures used to look for serious damage. Media (most of whom wouldn't have a clue what is going on) start to report serious damage.

Hi res photos show up 2 issues -

2 space fillers are projecting just above the surface of the tiles. This is like caulk that is used to fill gaps between the tiles. Essentially they have a thin strip of something like silicone sticking out. The issus is that this may cause turbulant airflow during re-entry and cause higher than normal down-stream heating on the aft end. Gap fillers have come out before and have not caused a problem but NASA is (understandably) being ultra paramoid so out they come during a spacewalk

Media reports shuttle in serious trouble.

Hires photos show a slight tear in a thermal blanket. Not part of the thermal protection system use din re-entry but may break lose and damage the aft of the shuttle. Even a hyper paranoid NASA says no problem.

Media reports shuttle almost certainly doomed.

Based on what they know now, it will be a normal re-entry. Note I said normal, not risk free. Hitting the atmosphere at mach 22 is never risk free but unless there is an accident on the way down or there is something they don't know about yet, it will be OK.

The media will be disappointed.

Further shuttle flights are grounded until they work out why the external tank (which has been re-designed to not shed foam) shed foam.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled drinking.

Cheers
Dave

 

[RobW]

Great answer Dave. The expertise on this list never ceases to amaze me.

 

[Borret]

Nice Rundown Dave.

I reckon it will go fine but I still reckon there would be a heap of 5c / 50c action going on now with just an hour or so to go till the de-orbit burn. Must be a freaky experience in anyones books..... But what a rush too.

Borret

 

[warrenlw63]

Fear not Borretus-burnt-toacrispus.

I'll be monitoring their re-entry temps with the trusty sundial. :huh:

Warren -

 

[Airgead]

Nice Rundown Dave.

I reckon it will go fine but I still reckon there would be a heap of 5c / 50c action going on now with just an hour or so to go till the de-orbit burn. Must be a freaky experience in anyones books..... But what a rush too.

Borret

[post="70653"][/post]​

I've flown a couple of shuttle missions on one of the most realistic simulators available to the general public (Orbiter - its free). Even in a simulation running on my notebook its freaky. It must be a real brown trousers experience if you are actually there.

Still only an hour and a bit to go now.

Cheers
Dave

 

[Borret]

Fear not Borretus-burnt-toacrispus.

I'll be monitoring their re-entry temps with the trusty sundial. :huh:

Warren -

[post="70655"][/post]​

Dr I'llstickmysundialanywhereI-warren-t..us

I said re-entry, not rear-entry.. :unsure:

Anyway, not long now.

Borret

 

[Borret]

Fear not Borretus-burnt-toacrispus.

I'll be monitoring their re-entry temps with the trusty sundial. :huh:

Warren -

[post="70655"][/post]​

Dr I'llstickmysundialanywhereI-warren-t..us

I said re-entry, not rear-entry.. :unsure:

Anyway, not long now.

Borret

[post="70675"][/post]​

Hmm, we are in a holding pattern. another 90min lap of the earth. If only international travel was like that.

 

[Doc]

Hasn't it been put back 90 minutes until 8:22pm AEST ?
SMH

Beers,
Doc

 

[sosman]

After flying 3 missions myself, I reckon it will go just fine.

And isn't it just cool when someone actually does some rocket surgery.

 

[Borret]

Sos, is that Semi-retired Outer Space..man

Or watda?

Borret

 

[Borret]

or is that just 3 brews on the NASA burner. They'll want them all back now guys, they need em to biuld some rockets

Borret

 

[Borret]

It appears it's no go till tommorrow. back to 1c /2c now
Borret

 

[barfridge]

99% of this is hype, and fantastic publicity for NASA. By playing up the dangers involved, it revives some of the excitment of space travel, something that has been sorely lacking in the past 20 years or so.

 

[homebrewworld.com]

Ok so re: 'the delay',
The bloody thing can fly to outer-space, but it cant land through a bit of cloud eh' <_<
I know a 2 bob twin prop that can do that!

 

[Fingerlickin_B]

By playing up the dangers involved, it revives some of the excitment of space travel, something that has been sorely lacking in the past 20 years or so.

[post="70731"][/post]​

I remember staying up to watch one of the early (possibly the first) NASA space shuttle launches when I was a little kid...no more or less boring to me now as it was back then...

As intriguing as the whole flying-into-space phenomenon is, the reality is that when most people on the ground watch it on TV the excitement is well and truly lost

PZ.

 

[PostModern]

Don't forget to watch it live on NASA TV.

 

[deebee]

Technology ALWAYS wins out!!

(I read somewhere that NASA spent US$millions in the 1960s developing a pen that worked in zero gravity. The Russians used pencils.)

 

[warrenlw63]

I said re-entry, not rear-entry.. :unsure:

Anyway, not long now.

Borret

[post="70675"][/post]​

:lol: :blink: :wacko:

Warrenus-bynomeans-greek-egus

Can you hear me major Tom?

 

[Borret]

Ok so re: 'the delay',
The bloody thing can fly to outer-space, but it cant land through a bit of cloud eh' <_<
I know a 2 bob twin prop that can do that!

[post="70736"][/post]​

OK- so lob the wings off your twin prop so that you have about a 1/4 of the original aspect ratio and then land it dead stick in the dark through cloud. h34r:

Bearing in mind that this thing has a stalling speed that is higher than a skydiver at terminal velocity and there is no fuel on board for a standard power-on landing I think that the words of a famous animation character come to mind....

'That's not flying Woody,
That's falling with style!'

I would want all other things in my favour if it were me...

Borret