Sounds like NASA needs a couple of really large trim tabs.Space ping
ping
Major redesign required here.
Is it the UN space treaty that holds us back?
I’m not sure if they were testing some J-2 variant at Stennis this past week, but it was definitely making my house shake. A little unusual in that you typically hear the engine testing, but you don’t feel it.
If anyone can figure this out it is NASA.
I hope the last few decades of budget cuts and inattention from the public have not reduced the brain power of one of our most capable agencies.
i’m no space geek but if they could send one up no worries in the 60s why not now?
Now is the time to find these problems.
In the engineering stage.
Shocker.
A crack in the dilithium crystals?
Sounds like NASA needs a couple of really large trim tabs.I a so old that I know they used to something called a Slide Ruler and then actually build the thing.
And it worked!
Put men on the moon six times and can’t make a vehicle to get us there again? Lends credence to the original hoax.
Of course the simulator had been under development for many years prior to the shuttle's first launch. During that development it was noticed that the "motion base" simulator would experience significant vibrations during the roll maneuver that was part of lift off.
It was presumed that the source of the vibration was an elusive software bug. After many months of fruitless debugging NASA finally took the (rare) step of putting a cash bounty out on the squashing of this particular bug.
Nevertheless, no bug was ever found and launch day approached. When the launch finally did take place, and the roll maneuver was executed for the first time, the astronauts were astonished to experience the very same vibration.
For us nerds that was a pretty neat story.
LESSON LEARNED: Pay attention to your simulatons.
Pogo Problem?
“We are confronted with insurmountable opportunities”
or
“We have met the enemy, and he is us”?
The problem is those solid rocket boosters. They were already controversial as part of the shuttle launch system, one of the original corner-cutting schemes. They are more powerful than liquid fuel rockets, but harder to control and cannot be shut off mid flight. The Challenger disaster showed how unreliable they can be. The Saturn V first stage worked just fine during the 60’s and 70’s, was in fact very reliable and efficient. NASA has probably invested too much in solid rocket fuel tech to just drop them now.
Scrap the manned programs and send out robots.
They could do 100X the exploration at a tenth the cost.
We should be drilling Jupiters moon’s, more landings on Titan, not flying around in cirles in low-earth orbit tin cans anyway.
Really, there’s nothing in this system worth walking around on right now, and dat’s da name of dat tune.
Athough terraforming Mars for eventual habitation in another 200 years or so has it’s charms....so get chopping there too.
“Engineers are concerned that the new rocket meant to replace the space shuttle and send astronauts on their way to the moon could shake violently during the first few minutes of flight, possibly destroying the entire vehicle.”
This is a result of using solid fuel boosters. Why are is NASA using them rather than safer, less expensive, and less polluting liquid fueled boosters? Those seemed to work fine in the Apollo project.
Fortunately, private enterprise may yet come to the rescue, in the form of the SPACEX Falcon 9 project and its kerosene fueled liquid engines.
Truly sad....
Quick, import some Germans!