Posted on 04/28/2005 6:57:38 PM PDT by anymouse
NASA plans to delay the launch of space shuttle Discovery, the first shuttle set to fly since the 2003 Columbia accident, from May until July, an official familiar with NASA's timetable said on Thursday.
The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the decision was made by NASA's new administrator, Michael Griffin, and would be formally announced on Friday.
The U.S. space agency on Thursday temporarily halted preparations for Discovery's launch while managers debated nagging concerns that debris could damage the spacecraft during liftoff.
Shuttle program managers met at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida to talk about the likelihood of ice formations on the shuttle's fuel tank and the possible effects if they broke off during the ship's climb and hit the orbiter.
A piece of insulating foam from the tank hit the shuttle Columbia during its launch in January 2003, damaging the orbiter's wing, which broke apart as the shuttle attempted to return through the atmosphere for landing. Seven astronauts died.
NASA grounded its remaining three shuttles for extensive refurbishments, particularly to the massive external fuel tank, which holds the fuel consumed during the shuttle's 8-1/2-minute climb into orbit.
In addition to revamping how the tank's insulating foam is applied, as well as replacing some areas of suspect foam, NASA engineers have been analyzing the threat of ice formations and the possibility that they could break off, as the foam on Columbia's tank did, and damage the ship.
NASA has targeted May 22 as a launch date for the first shuttle's return to flight. The next possible launch window is from July 13 to 31.
Because of new safety rules implemented after the Columbia accident, NASA has only limited opportunities to launch Discovery.
The new rules, for example, restrict the U.S. space agency from launching at night. In addition, the release of the external fuel tank as the shuttle reaches orbit must take place when there is enough light for clear photography.
space ping
What would be the political reason to delay the launch?
It's actually a combination of the two.
My belief is there isn't a poltical reason in this instance.
"Kicking the can down the road" or delaying making tough decisions has been a popular sport in Washington since its founding. Risk avoidance is paramount for politicians. The longer they can stall the less heat they think they will get for making a "wrong call."
The problem is that while Washington stalls, thousands of NASA civil servants and contractors are "working" and collecting paychecks, regardless of whether or not the shuttle is flying (also remember that space station operations continue, requiring 24/7/365 support.)
Delay = cost overruns.
The really bad problem is that even though it is Congress that holds up the shuttle launch, thus causing NASA to spend more while showing less results, Congress will beat NASA up during budget hearings for not showing better results. A classic lose-lose scenario. A game that Congress has played, whenever they can get away with it.
This is why space needs to be opened up to private industry, where decision makers are motivated to take calculated risks in order to reap associated rewards.
"What would be the political reason to delay the launch?"
Because the space shuttle is not safe. It's a junker. We need to develop a launch system like the Russians and stop the space shuttle program altogether.
Amen brother! From the Wright Brothers to landing on the moon spanned a little over 60 years. 30 years after the last moon landing, we're playing with gliders that so far have killed 14 people. What a waste of money NASA is.
And notice how the Federal regulators are throwing up barriers of red tape to slow the development of Spaceship Two and other private space ventures. Gotta maintain that national monopoly, don'tcha know.
What was the hurry, anyway?
Too bad all the blueprints for the old Saturn V Apollo heavy launchers were destroyed. More government in action for you.
The Shuttle was designed to be all things to all people, so to speak. It's overly complex, which from an engineering standpoint means that they're just begging for trouble.
I used to be a big supporter of getting the shuttle to fly again ASAP because I was afraid a long grounding would end the US manned space program, but as we have stumbled forward in an environment that is so risk averse that we spend endless billions trying to make safe that which cannot be made absolutely safe, I now think we need an entirely new approach.
Not true. They exist on microfilm at MSFC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.