If ever there was a story I thought as a kid I'd never be reading, it's this one:
Four astronauts launching on NASA's final shuttle flight July 8 have booked a relatively short, 12-day round trip to the International Space Station.
But if Atlantis is damaged so severely that it becomes unsafe for re-entry, the crew's visit could get a lot longer, with at least one of them unlikely to get home again until next May.
"We don't have the luxury of having another shuttle that can come up and get us," Atlantis mission specialist Rex Walheim said.
Since Columbia and seven astronauts were lost during atmospheric re-entry in 2003, when heat shield damage went undetected, NASA always has had a second shuttle ready for a rescue mission.
But this time, there's no backup. Atlantis is outfitted with NASA's last shuttle external tank and solid rocket boosters.
So NASA developed an alternate plan: The crew would stay on the station and make staggered returns on Russian Soyuz spacecraft. To accomplish that, NASA would forgo the launch of U.S. astronauts to the station to free up seats on the Russian ships.
Then one or two at a time, the Atlantis astronauts would fly back on already scheduled Soyuz crew rotation missions. A Soyuz can carry three people.
"It's a well thought out but lengthy process," Atlantis mission commander Chris Ferguson said.
Well thought out? Seriously?
I don't think so.
Ceding preeminence is never well thought out. Unless it's intentional.
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Scandals, Sign Of The Times, Space
Comments (7)
Too pathetic for comment. T... (Below threshold)1. Posted by recovered liberal democrat | June 26, 2011 10:29 AM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Too pathetic for comment. The stupidity of it all speaks for itself.
1. Posted by recovered liberal democrat | June 26, 2011 10:29 AM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on June 26, 2011 10:29
2. Posted by Chico | June 26, 2011 10:53 AM | Score: -15 (19 votes cast)
If Russian space craft are more cost-effective, sounds like an efficient market solution.
Rick, we know you're working in the aerospace industry - you're always shilling for more space spending, like the huge pork bill you were boosting last month.
Typical - against federal spending, unless it's going into their pocket.
2. Posted by Chico | June 26, 2011 10:53 AM |
Score: -15 (19 votes cast)
Posted on June 26, 2011 10:53
3. Posted by jim m | June 26, 2011 11:05 AM | Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
Let's face it. NASA is no longer competent to run a space program. PC enviro efforts lead directly to the Columbia disaster (the insulation on the fuel tank wasn't green enough).
NASA is today dominated by AGW loons and run by a director on a mission to boost muslim self esteem.
The sooner we develop a private space industry the sooner we will be able to actually do something useful in space.
3. Posted by jim m | June 26, 2011 11:05 AM |
Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
Posted on June 26, 2011 11:05
4. Posted by Captain Ned | June 26, 2011 11:18 AM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Elon Musk's SpaceX could have a fully-habitable and man-rated Dragon reentry vehicle docked to the station within 6 months if given the go. Dragon holds up to 7 people.
4. Posted by Captain Ned | June 26, 2011 11:18 AM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on June 26, 2011 11:18
5. Posted by Jeff Blogworthy | June 26, 2011 1:39 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Wow. Now Obama's got NASA bowing to other nations too.
5. Posted by Jeff Blogworthy | June 26, 2011 1:39 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on June 26, 2011 13:39
6. Posted by Sep14 | June 26, 2011 6:14 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
@ #2
Too pathetic for comment. The stupidity of it all speaks for itself.
6. Posted by Sep14 | June 26, 2011 6:14 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on June 26, 2011 18:14
7. Posted by Jeff | June 27, 2011 10:54 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Its a one way ticket to paradise ...
7. Posted by Jeff | June 27, 2011 10:54 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 27, 2011 10:54