NASA Updates Shuttle Target Launch Dates
|
|
Thread rating:  |
baalke@earthlink.net - 16 Apr 2007 23:38 GMT April 15, 2007
Katherine Trinidad Headquarters, Washington 202-358-3749
Kyle Herring Johnson Space Center, Houston 281-483-5111
RELEASE: 07-89
NASA UPDATES SHUTTLE TARGET LAUNCH DATES
HOUSTON - During a meeting Monday at NASA's Johnson Space Center, agency officials revised the target launch dates for space shuttle flights during the next 12 months. The space shuttle and International Space Station programs agreed to the changes during a meeting to evaluate options following the STS-117 mission's delay, which was caused by hail damage to the external fuel tank.
Flights beyond April 2008 have not been assessed. Both shuttle and station program officials will continue to consider options for the remainder of the shuttle flights and those target launch dates are subject to change.
Upcoming shuttle missions: -STS-117 targeted for no earlier than June 8, 2007, on Atlantis -STS-118 targeted for no earlier than Aug. 9, 2007, on Endeavour -STS-120 targeted for no earlier than Oct. 20, 2007, on Discovery instead of Atlantis -STS-122 targeted for no earlier than Dec. 6, 2007, on Atlantis instead of Discovery -STS-123 targeted for no earlier than Feb. 14, 2008, on Endeavour -STS-124 targeted for no earlier than April 24, 2008, on Discovery instead of Atlantis
The shuttles for STS-120, 122 and 124 were exchanged to best meet the demands of the missions and to have the least amount of impact on the flight schedule.
The shuttle launch manifest is available online at:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/iss_manifest.html For details on upcoming shuttle missions and their crews, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/shuttle
-end-
Craig Fink - 17 Apr 2007 01:44 GMT > -STS-117 targeted for no earlier than June 8, 2007, on Atlantis > -STS-118 targeted for no earlier than Aug. 9, 2007, on Endeavour [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > -STS-124 targeted for no earlier than April 24, 2008, on Discovery > instead of Atlantis <pulls napkin out of the drawer>
Six in the next year, that's 12 reasonably sized tanks to start a LEO Futures Market with. Twelve different products in the LEO Futures Market started in the next year, or so. That is over .1 megakilograms of storage facilities, all for free <What was it Reagan sai...>, not including product.
<puts napkin back in drawer, thinks, "I'm going to need a bigger napkin">
Derek Lyons - 17 Apr 2007 03:49 GMT >Six in the next year, that's 12 reasonably sized tanks to start a LEO >Futures Market with. Twelve different products in the LEO Futures Market >started in the next year, or so. That is over .1 megakilograms of storage >facilities, all for free <What was it Reagan sai...>, not including >product. Sure in some imaginary world where we have shuttle flights carrying essentially nothing to orbit, thus freeing their payload capacity for ferrying the ET into orbit.
We don't live in such a world.
><puts napkin back in drawer, thinks, "I'm going to need a bigger napkin"> No, you need to adjust your dosages.
D.
 Signature Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Craig Fink - 17 Apr 2007 13:01 GMT Ah, you've figured me out. How exciting for you. Thanks for the advice.
Reference, Transmittal Memo #??????, written by Craig E. Fink, from McDonnell Douglas, to NASA JSC Library, dated shortly after Ronald Reagan, who on behalf of the United States Government and NASA, made the offer** of free External Tanks to anyone. If you care to go look up the references. (**certain rules may apply, offer void where prohibited)
It's not a question of _if_ the External Tank can be taken to orbit for free, but _how_ _high_ the External Tank can be taken, performance wise. As the Space Station comes down into a lower Orbit, it approaches this altitude from above. If it comes down enough, it crosses this altitude. The MEMO addressed the technical aspects (GN&C, performance) of taking the External Tank to Orbit. I'm sure there are other aspects of the NASA study, but performance wasn't and isn't the issue. In addition, there are other things that were not addressed in this MEMO that could reasonably be done to further raise the altitude of break even point. In other words, take the _BIG_ payload and the _Externel Tank_ to the Space Station.
I haven't met an ET before, but looking forward to the day. I'm an Earthling, what planet are you from?
<pulls napkin back out, thinks, "Maybe I should have used an envelope, some people don't seem to understand the "design by napkin" technique. Humm, reaches for nearest envelope with a clean back.>
LEO Futures Market commodity #1 or 12, LOX, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_oxygen ...Density, 1.141 kg/L
LEO Futures Market storage facility allocation, 1 large tank. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_external_tank ...Volume, 1,497,440 liters
LEO Futures Market initial LOX market size, ...Lots (units) of LOX available for storage and trading, 1,700,000 one kilogram.
LEO Futures Market estimated potential value of LOX market (at full capacity) ...at $50,000 per kilogram, yields $85,000,000,000 market in LEO for LOX with the first. <Hummm, that's a lot of zeros, better make an adjustment> ... $5,000 per kilogram, yield $8.5 Billion potential market.
Six external tanks would yield a potential LEO Futures Market greater than $50 Billion dollars with the first location in LEO. Seems to have a lot of potential, I wonder who might need 1.7 million kilograms of LOX on a regular basis?
I guess NASA needs to think _BIG_ instead of _small_ in their plans to explore the Moon and Mars.
 Signature Craig Fink Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @ WeBeGood@GMail.Com --
>>Six in the next year, that's 12 reasonably sized tanks to start a LEO >>Futures Market with. Twelve different products in the LEO Futures Market [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > D.
|
|
|