Shuttle fleet at risk in Cape Canaveral

[PhotonBoy]

Just read this on boingboing.net http://www.boingboing.net/2004/09/02/nasa_prepares_for_hu.html

"Nearly half a million Floridians were ordered to leave their homes today. Kennedy Space Center employees were sent home leaving the Space Shuttle Orbiters to fend for themselves... Frances threatens but where will she land? Various models predict different scenarios. The folks on Space.com's message board are keeping watch. "Shuttle_guy" sez "We are securing the facility and the Shuttle Orbiters for the storm. For everything up to a category IV hurricane we have a "ride out" crew on the base during the storm to do what they can safely do to protect the Flight hardware. However for category IV and V the hardware is on it's own. No one will be on the KSC property for this storm which is expected to remain a strong Cat. IV." According to "najaB" all three orbiters are in the Orbiter Processing Facility (OPF) which is the least protected of KSC facilities. Most ominously "najaB" reports that "...in the original plan, the Orbiters weren't supposed to be in the OPF during a storm - they're supposed to be transferred over to ride out the storm in the [40-year-old Vehicle Assembly Building]. I guess nobody ever thought that all the Orbiters would be immovable in the OPF at the same time that KSC would be staring down the barrel of a Cat 4 storm..."

As of this writing NOAA is predicting Frances will hit south of the Kennedy Space Center with her counter-clockwise punch hitting the space port the hardest. Or perhaps she is targeting Disneyworld? In any case, prayers to all the people in the way..."

 

[PlayboyJoeShmoe]

All Florida needs is another big hit right now.

Prayers for all!

And let's toss in a prayer for the shuttles eh?

 

[Lebkuecher]

My parents are with the American Red Cross working in Florida and they tell me that parts of Florida are a huge mess now; this one looks to be a lot worst. Should the worst happen it might not be a bad idea for the CPF to run some kind of fund raiser to help out? Just a thought.

 

[Zelandeth]

My hopes go out to all the people at risk here, keeping my claws crossed for the shuttles as well.

Have to just wait and see what happens I guess.

 

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
PhotonBoy said:
the Orbiters weren't supposed to be in the OPF during a storm - they're supposed to be transferred over to ride out the storm in the [40-year-old Vehicle Assembly Building].

[/ QUOTE ]

Can they even fit all three orbiters in the VAB?

 

[PhotonBoy]

I've seen the VAB from afar, but I have no idea what the interior's like. I'm betting that 3 working shuttles could be parked there temporarily, but I think all may be partly disassembled during the current investigation and rebuild efforts.

Someone may have some 'splainin to do why there wasn't a contingency plan in the event of a hurricane. It would be a *MAJOR* $$$ loss if all 3 shuttles were significantly damaged. It might even mean the demise of the ISS.

 

[flashlight_widow]

I read this morning that Cape Canaveral has been completely evacuated for the first time.

[ QUOTE ]
PhotonBoy said:
I've seen the VAB from afar, but I have no idea what the interior's like. I'm betting that 3 working shuttles could be parked there temporarily, but I think all may be partly disassembled during the current investigation and rebuild efforts.

Someone may have some 'splainin to do why there wasn't a contingency plan in the event of a hurricane. It would be a *MAJOR* $$$ loss if all 3 shuttles were significantly damaged. It might even mean the demise of the ISS.

[/ QUOTE ]

What he said. I've seen the building from a distance and I think it's probably large enough to hold 3. And yes, someone may certainly have some 'splainin to do about why there wasn't a better contingency plan!

 

[6pOriginal]

I just don't understand why they don't fly them out to somewhere else like Edwards AFB or something, rather than risking them there.

 

[ledlurker]

I have worked in the VAB several times.

It was designed to process and assemble 4 full Saturn 5's at one time!

Only 2 of the bays are currently equipped to hold the Shuttle stacks. But there is plenty of room to park the orbiters on the open floor. The problem is the moving which takes 2 days. If the Orbiters are in the OPF that means some of them are opened up to be upgraded/worked on. That means it takes time to button them up.

As far as flying them somewhere else. I think NASA has only 1 747 that has the proper reinforcement and equipment to allow a Orbiter to be carried. Even if they had three it still takes time to button everything up and place it on a 747. And the final hurdle is you only have so many people that can work effectively on them one at a time.

The OPF is tougher than you might think but the VAB was DESIGNED with large hurrican in mind. You can fly a airplane into one end, perform a full loop and fly out the other end. Hell, I remember seeing clouds forming near the roof one day.

 

[Sub_Umbra]

[ QUOTE ]

...Someone may have some 'splainin to do why there wasn't a contingency plan in the event of a hurricane. It would be a *MAJOR* $$$ loss if all 3 shuttles were significantly damaged. It might even mean the demise of the ISS.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate to rain on the parade but there WAS a plan for protecting the shuttles from hurricanes. The bill of goods that the taxpayers were sold was for a fleet of reliable shuttles -- I think that they called them 'space buses' -- that could be readied for flight very quickly compared to the hulks we were saddled with. In short, they were designed to go into orbit when threatened by a hurricane. Look at the original projected flight schedules compared to what we ended up with. If they had worked as advertized it's doubtful that there would ever HAVE TO BE more than one on the ground during a storm -- and that one would fit into the aforementioned building. The fact that Congress has continued to fund them all of these years -- at the expense of any real space program -- is another story.

They have been a hazard in flight for 20 years and now they are a hazard on the ground, too. It would be in the best interests of all who are in favor of space exploration if these dinosaurs with one foot in the tar pit were all wiped out in one felled swoop.

If you are in favor of space exploration -- let go of the shuttle.

 

[ledlurker]

the original spec was for a 2 week turn around between launches. But the government was unwilling to pay the money to guarantee that spec. So some shaved specs here and there along with poor choices like using solid rocket boosters instead of liquid ones can add up over time. Granted there was a lot of overestimation in the expectations. One of the assumptions was there would be techs working 24/7 on the shuttle.

If you want a good overview of the trade-off comparison for technical and money decisions then go to the NASA home page and get your free copy of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) report.

From a operational standpoint the Shuttle would have been better off with an all liquid fuel design. The solid fuel system was choosen because it had a much less expensive development cost, but the more expensive operational cost was completely ignored by congress.

Congress has said that there will be no significant money spent to develop a new system while the shuttle fleet is still operational.

This was the same mindset that allowed Skylab to fall out of orbit. So NASA was forced to let it die in order to get funding for a new Station.

 

[Sub_Umbra]

And your point is?

 

[idleprocess]

I came across something that astounded me several months ago - each shuttle launch costs in the neighborhood of $1 billion, much of which goes to aerospace contractors.

NASA has been trying to kill the shuttle for years, but their contractors (and their respective legislators) won't let them do it.

 

[Sub_Umbra]

That is why we would be better off if they were all wiped out by a storm. While Congress may never stop funding the Shuttle, even they couldn't stomach the outcry if they tried to fund re-building them.

They would be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the present.

 

[ledlurker]

The point is this:

Would you rather pay 1000 people that are highly trained with good work ethics a $100,000 grand a year for five years or pay 1500 people $50,000 grand a year for 30 years. For each $ spent by NASA only about 10% goes to actuall build the hardware. The rest is for the overhead like salaries, buildings, maintainence, Intranet and etc. Congress always cuts the money which forces the work to be stretched out over more time which cost more money in the end. When all they had to do for the Space Station is say here you get a guaranteed amount of money for only 5 years. If you fail, tough poop. NASA had almost 33% of the critical subsystems for the Station designed and built. Then congress came along and said "you will build the Station with the Russians or the program will be killed". So hardware designed for the parameter of a 28 degree inclination orbit had to be either redesigned or retested or the specification waivered in order for the hardware to work in a 56 degree inclination orbit. Every single payload had to be redesigned to be lighter and thus more flights to assemble. The Russians can not launch much less than 56 degrees. So yes we are lucky that the Russians are now involved to keep the existing Station from falling from the sky, but without them we would have already been done with the Station with more reliable hardware that could operate longer without human intervention.

Congress is unwilling to shell out an extra 2 to 4 billion a year to come up with a safer program with better hardware. Most of the shuttle tech is going on 35 years old with 8086 or 8088 processors making the critical decisions.


Idle, I agree that 1 Billion is way to much, but that included the cost of somebody like me who represented the astronauts at Bench Reviews for all of the hardware and tools stored in the middeck and on down to the janitor that mops the floors and empties the trashcans. Typical budget was 8 billion a year to perform 7 to 8 flights. To have no flights since last Feb has saved no money. It still cost money to keep the lights on and the labs operational. Just like your house if you leave for 1 week the fridge still consumes power even though the door never gets opened. The rest of NASA's 15 billion a year budget goes for non human involved space explorations and other atmospheric research.

 

[Empath]

It looks like the shuttle hanger received significant damage

 

[PhotonBoy]

From the same article: 'The shuttle program's tile manufacturing facility, however, suffered "extensive water damage" throughout and could be a "huge problem," Kennedy said. NASA managers are looking for options, and could move the work to a facility in Palmdale, Calif.

Inspectors have not yet had a look at launch pads, he said.

Kennedy said it is too early to figure how the damage might affect the shuttle program's plans to return to flight for the first time since Columbia's fatal accident on February 1, 2003, but more would be known after a 500-person team currently on site finishes its work....'

 

[idleprocess]

I'm not arguing that the shuttle program has been a complete waste. Better methods can be devised for reusable launch vehicles (and were - I hear that several unmanned reusable concepts were floated before the shuttle design).

If there's going to continue to be manned spaceflight, perhaps capsules are the way to go, or go with winged vehicles that get their first 100,000' from a conventional aircraft. I remember hearing about some promising results from experimental superguns for launching small satelites.

It's pointless to argue about whether the shuttle ever should have been built. It's a reality, and the one method of getting astronauts into orbit for now. However, there should be some serious evaluation done on its future and replacement(s).

 

[jtice]

Heres some good info I rounded up after the Columbia disaster.
Most of it involves that, but there are some good general Shuttle facts there, like budgets etc.
Hope you injoy...

http://www.jtice.com/downloads/columbia_shuttle.doc

 

[Sub_Umbra]

ledlurker,

I think that the Shuttle was finally upgraded from 8088s a couple years ago but the point is very well taken. That is mind boggling.

I still think that the SS would be a basket case no matter how fully it was funded. It was built before the revolution in materials design that has very positively impacted almost every other facet of our lives.

No matter what Congress did or didn't do, we have the SS and we are stuck with it. Really stuck. IMO, no matter what Congress does at this point the SS will still have two fatal flaws:

1.) It can't be fixed in the real world. It will cost more and more to operate each year and it will fly less and less for what we must skim from every other project to achieve these diminishing returns.

2.) Here's the real creepy part. Conceptually, both the SS and the ISS were wrong headed from the get-go. The SS, by supporting the ISS, was supposed to be a stepping stone to the further manned exploration of space. Looking back at the ISS in the 90s, many would say that the whole project turned into a checkbook diplomacy scheme aimed at lining the pockets of the kleptocrats in the Kremlin. This is so important to them that the ISS is open for tourism. Looking back it is easy to see the ISS as little more than a giant money laundering mechanism.

Manned space exploration requires an intimate knowledge about two things which the SS and the ISS do not even begin to address: a total recycling system and artificial gravity.

At it's simplest, artificial gravity may be created by attaching the station to a booster(s) with a tether and spinning them. There are other schemes which are more elaborate. The ISS will never give us any practical experience in this regard.

As for a recycling system, the SS and ISS will never address anything beyond the recycling of urine. That goal is just not good enough if you ever want to take space travel seriously. The SS and the ISS are far more like camping in space than serious research.

The big complication:

To make matters much worse, the SS has taken on a mission, just one mission, which will make it very nearly impossible for Congress to sunset gracefully. The SS now re-fuels the KH-12s. (The first of the Keyhole series to be re-fuelable.) The SS has become mission critical to the KH-12 program. This mission has become both more important and more politically charged than at any time since the end of the Cold War. This enhanced strategic view of the KH-12s will only continue into the foreseeable future. The gov and the press can wax rhapsodic about the wonderful benefits of the SS/ISS, but in fact there are many on the hill who pump up the importance of the ISS as justification for the SS simply because they don't want to put the KH-12s in jeopardy. Nor do I. The KH-12s are already in jeopardy by having to rely on the flaky SS.

On the positive side, if all of the Shuttles were wiped out in a storm, necessity would dictate that a better alternative would be 'in the pipe' to re-fuel the KH-12s in a timely manner. We would also be free to develop other spacecraft that would be more reliable and cheaper to build and operate.

Of course, it would all still be controlled by the crippled hand of Congress, but that's the only game in town.