OT: Shuttle Breaks Up During Re-Entry

Shyrka · #1 February 3rd, 2003, 02:26 AM

All newspapers in Spain show the disaster in its 1st page. How sad. Not only for the U.S., but for all the world

DavidG · #2 February 3rd, 2003, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David Gervais:
I really don't think that this time arround it will suffer much of a delay, this time there is the space station, and I know that the astronaughts up there will not be abandonned. They will need supplies and can't stay up there for two years waiting for replacements!

However the shuttle is not necessary to bring them home. They have a Soyuz (sp?) to do that. I also heard a theory they may launch one shuttle just to bring them home if they feel it is safer that the Soyuz

oleg · #3 February 2nd, 2003, 04:56 PM

ISS program will probably continue. Yesterday Russia sent a supply ship as it was planned. The major problem is how to procced with ISS construction. It would need 25 shuttle launches just to finish it. What will happen now - nobody knows.

AS of SA · #4 February 2nd, 2003, 07:12 PM

I hope they keep the ISS going. I know the shuttle can keep it going, I suppose the old Russian rockets can also send up parts. I read the Saturn V Rockets could have deployed the whole ISS in one shot. It would have required some redesign since it doesn't need to go to the moon, but it has the "Umpfh!" factor to do it.

Personally I blame the rampant tax cutting and I hope China's space program triggers the next space race.

Humanity needs to be out there, in the stars.

DavidG · #5 February 2nd, 2003, 07:23 PM

Anyone been to ebay lately? It is really nauseating how many Columbia items have been posted in the Last two days.

Arkcon · #6 February 2nd, 2003, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidG:
However the shuttle is not necessary to bring them home. They have a Soyuz (sp?) to do that. I also heard a theory they may launch one shuttle just to bring them home if they feel it is safer that the Soyuz

The way I heard it the Soyuz is a ballistic escape pod. Get in, fire it off, and hope you hit where you aimed. The shuttle was always considerd preferable.

Several yrs ago a soyuz landed flawlessly, with a crew of dead cosmonauts -- oxygen leak. Personally, I'd rather go in a hydrazine explosion than suffocated on re-entry. Assuming a sane person can presume to make an informed opinion on a decision like that.

At least a couple of sci-fi scenarios involve global mega corporations taking over the ISS when it's determined too expensive for governments to afford. That's silly, but maybe NASA needs to think small for a little while. Russia sure could use some time to pad it's CD's.

DavidG · #7 February 2nd, 2003, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Arkcon:
Several yrs ago a soyuz landed flawlessly, with a crew of dead cosmonauts -- oxygen leak.

Wasn't that like 30 years ago? And the only failure of Soyuz on reentry? I don't know near enough about the space program to know which is safer. Only that a shuttle launch is not required.