 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Shuttle / August 2005Columbia in pre-107 manifest
Looking at http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.shuttle/msg/56e607f77f9cd313 (thanks to Andrew above for that link) in a manifest that went into 2008, we see Columbia was to have flown STS-118 and STS-121, the latter in April 2004. The last mission listed is STS-136 in January 2008. Why is it that Columbia was not scheduled for a mission for almost four years, with not another one in sight? Was she going to have more maintenance just after the last one? And one that was to take almost four years? That just seems strange to me. > Looking at > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.shuttle/msg/56e607f77f9cd313 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > have more maintenance just after the last one? And one that was to > take almost four years? That just seems strange to me. Columbia was about three tons heavier than the other three orbiters, and so was not very useful for ISS assembly/logistics work. It was quite a stretch just getting STS-118 light enough for Columbia to fly it. After that, all that was left on the manifest other than ISS flights was one HST servicing mission and a now-cancelled HST retrieval mission.  SignatureJRF Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail, check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and think one step ahead of IBM. > Columbia was about three tons heavier than the other three orbiters, and so > was not very useful for ISS assembly/logistics work. It was quite a stretch > just getting STS-118 light enough for Columbia to fly it. After that, all > that was left on the manifest other than ISS flights was one HST servicing > mission and a now-cancelled HST retrieval mission. Was Columbia planned for anything else beyond that? Did NASA hope to use it for flights to just re-supply ISS when station construction was completed? Or is it likely Columbia would have been retired after the HST retrieval flight? -A.L. >> Columbia was about three tons heavier than the other three orbiters, >> and so was not very useful for ISS assembly/logistics work. It was [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Or is it likely Columbia would have been retired after the HST > retrieval flight? I never saw any Columbia flights in the long-term manifests after ISS assembly complete. I don't think NASA intended to use it for ISS resupply since the same manifests showed the other three orbiters doing resupply missions long afterwards. There was nothing that explicitly said Columbia would be retired, but I always assumed that would be the case. SignatureJRF Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail, check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and think one step ahead of IBM. > [...] After that, all that was left on the manifest other than ISS > flights was one HST servicing mission and a now-cancelled HST > retrieval mission. What was the base cost of HST and assuming manned missions will no longer be used for HST servicing, wouldn't it be cheaper to start building expendable HST's and straping them to Titans ? SignatureDoing AIX support was the most monty-pythonesque activity available at the time. Eagerly awaiting my thin chocolat mint. >> [...] After that, all that was left on the manifest other than ISS >> flights was one HST servicing mission and a now-cancelled HST [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > longer be used for HST servicing, wouldn't it be cheaper to start > building expendable HST's and straping them to Titans ? I'm not sure what the original HST cost. I don't think it's relevant since a replacement built with the same technology should be cheaper, both because we've gotten over the technology humps with the first one, and because many spare parts for HST already exist on the ground which could be incorporated into a replacement. Johns Hopkins proposed an HST replacement called the Hubble Origins Probe (HOP), which they estimate will cost about $1 billion, including launch by an Atlas 551. There's no longer such a thing as a Titan, once the last one lifts off. SignatureJRF Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail, check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and think one step ahead of IBM. >>> [...] After that, all that was left on the manifest other than ISS >>> flights was one HST servicing mission and a now-cancelled HST [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > There's no longer such a thing as a Titan, once the last one lifts off. Just some thoughts ... I recall over a billion dollars, in then-year dollars, early '90s, but that's from memory. I have some clippings around somewhere ... Also, the thing that will make a replacement cheaper is that all of the systems engineering and ground test equipment and procedures are developed. Systems engineering is expensive and the cost of ground equipment and procedures are often neglected by back of the envelope calculations; the flight segment gets most of the attention. Lastly, the technology in HST, at least from the electronics standpoint, is old. For equipment that was not updated over the years, there might be some serious obsolescence issues to deal with and either parts made on dedicated runs or reengineering. I know the original instruments were launched with 1802 microprocessors and 1 kbit memory chips ... Signaturerk, Just an OldEngineer "These are highly complicated pieces of equipment almost as complicated as living organisms. In some cases, they've been designed by other computers. We don't know exactly how they work." -- Scientist in Michael Crichton's 1973 movie, Westworld |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.