APOD: Atlantis Reflection (2011 Jul 09)

[NoelC]

I assume you're thinking about a return to more traditional rocketry, then?

I'm not sure what that means. If you mean substantially single-use rockets, typically designed for non-human payloads, than yes. I don't know that I'd use the term "traditional" for this; certainly, what we launch today are not your father's rockets!

Yes, I meant a system based on non-reusable orbital vehicles, such as preceded the Shuttle. No, not the same technology, but apparently the same philosophy: Humongously expensive throwaway rockets, instead of ridiculously expensive maintenance of reusable vehicles.

Yes, we all know it's pretty darned hard indeed to get to space... But somewhere in the back of my mind I thought that even if the reusable Space Shuttle wasn't a wild success, there would be a reusable successor that would be much better (cheaper) at it - based on what we learned from this system. Let us not forget there have been private folks who have flown a reusable vehicle into space and landed it for mere millions of dollars including development!

Instead we apparently have... No plans. Mediocrity - something getting all the more common for the here and now.

-Noel

[Chris Peterson]

Yes, I meant a system based on non-reusable orbital vehicles, such as preceded the Shuttle. No, not the same technology, but apparently the same philosophy: Humongously expensive throwaway rockets, instead of ridiculously expensive maintenance of reusable vehicles.

The thing is, those throwaway rockets aren't very expensive at all. Launches with them typically run a few tens of millions of dollars.

Yes, we all know it's pretty darned hard indeed to get to space... But somewhere in the back of my mind I thought that even if the reusable Space Shuttle wasn't a wild success, there would be a reusable successor that would be much better (cheaper) at it - based on what we learned from this system.

AFAIK, people at NASA are still working on that problem. Unfortunately, 30 years of the shuttle really consumed most of the resources that could have gone towards that development.

Let us not forget there have been private folks who have flown a reusable vehicle into space and landed it for mere millions of dollars including development!

No, realistically, that hasn't happened. Yeah, they got over 100km, which is "space" by an arbitrary definition. But the technology is useless for anything other than carrying rich passengers to "space". You can't compare a suborbital system (which is just a glorified airplane) to something that can put a man or other payload in orbit.

[neufer]

[img3="Alan Shepard's sub-orbital Freedom 7 Mercury-Redstone was
a single stage" 66,000 lb, liquid-fueled (ethyl alcohol) rocket.

John Glenn's orbital Friendship 7 Mercury-Atlas was
a "1.5 stage" 260,000 lb, liquid-fueled (LOX & RP-1) rocket."]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... rofile.jpg[/img3]

Let us not forget there have been private folks who have flown a reusable vehicle into space and landed it for mere millions of dollars including development!

No, realistically, that hasn't happened. Yeah, they got over 100km, which is "space" by an arbitrary definition. But the technology is useless for anything other than carrying rich passengers to "space". You can't compare a suborbital system (which is just a glorified airplane) to something that can put a man or other payload in orbit.

[Beyond]

Gee, they're all number 7.

[neufer]

Gee, they're all number 7.

Code: Select all

    Alan Bartlett Shepard Jr., USN, (1923–1998)    MR-3 (Freedom 7), Apollo 14

    Virgil Ivan (Gus) Grissom, USAF, (1926–1967)    MR-4 (Liberty Bell 7), Gemini 3, Apollo 1

    John Herschel Glenn Jr., USMC, (born 1921)    MA-6 (Friendship 7), STS-95

    Malcolm Scott Carpenter, USN, (born 1925)    MA-7 (Aurora 7)

    Walter Marty (Wally) Schirra Jr., USN, (1923–2007)    MA-8 (Sigma 7), Gemini 6A, Apollo 7

    Leroy Gordon Cooper Jr., USAF, (1927–2004)    MA-9 (Faith 7), Gemini 5

    Donald Kent (Deke) Slayton, USAF, (1924–1993)    Apollo-Soyuz Test Project 

Photo of the Project Mercury memorial located at the entrance to the road leading to Launch Complex 14 at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, May 2007. The time capsule is located underneath the concrete slab.

---

<<Mercury Seven was the group of seven Mercury astronauts selected by NASA on April 9, 1959. They are also referred to as the Original Seven and Astronaut Group 1. This was the only astronaut group with members that flew on all classes of NASA manned orbital spacecraft of the 20th century: Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and ending with John Glenn's flight on the STS-95 Space Shuttle mission. As of 2011, John Glenn and Scott Carpenter are the only surviving members of the Mercury Seven. Their official spokesman from 1959-1963 was USAF Lt. Col. John "Shorty" Powers, who as a result became known in the press as the "eighth astronaut".

After an advertisement among military test pilots drew more than 500 applications, NASA searched military personnel records in January 1959 and identified 110 pilots who qualified. Sixty-nine candidates were brought to Washington, DC, in two groups; the candidates' interest was so great, despite the extensive physical and mental exams from January to March, that the agency did not summon the last group. The tests included spending hours on treadmills and tilt tables, submerging their feet in ice water, three doses of castor oil, and five enemas. Six candidates were rejected as too tall for the planned spacecraft. Another 33 failed or dropped out during the first phase of exams. Four more refused to take part in the second round of tests, which eliminated eight more candidates, leaving 18.

From the 18, the first seven NASA astronauts were chosen, each a "superb physical specimen" with a genius-level IQ, and the ability to function well both as part of a team and solo. Despite the extensive medical evaluation, two of the seven (Shepard and Slayton) were soon grounded for undiagnosed medical conditions and sat out the entirety of Project Gemini and most of the Apollo program (and Mercury as well, in Slayton's case) supervising the active astronauts.>>

[NoelC]

Gee, they're all number 7.

Well clearly 13 doesn't work!

-Noel

[Beyond]

Well....how about 42

[neufer]

Gee, they're all number 7.

Well clearly 13 doesn't work!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_13

Apollo 13 (launched on April 11, 1970 at 13:13 CST)
was the 7th manned mission in the American Apollo space program.

The landing had to be aborted after an oxygen tank exploded (April 13, 21:07:53 CST).

[NoelC]

I have it on pretty good authority that NASA avoids the number 13 now quite actively.

Jim Lovell, June 22, 2011

-Noel

[rstevenson]

I have it on pretty good authority that NASA avoids the number 13 now quite actively.

Seriously?

When an organization based on science and engineering decides to modify its behaviour to suit superstition, what hope remains?

Rob

[neufer]

I have it on pretty good authority that NASA avoids the number 13 now quite actively.

Seriously?

When an organization based on science and engineering decides to modify its behaviour to suit superstition, what hope remains?

That organization doesn't need extra criticism from its superstitious funding source...us.

In any event, it is a good rejoinder (whether or not it is true) for a common question that Lovell no doubt gets a lot.