Get your own Space Shuttle Orbiter

[Morpheus]

Something I found when I'm looking for the shuttle schematic :

Space Shuttle Orbiter

I wonder if NASA ever had this kind of idea......

[HoveringCheesecake]

Even if I did have that kind of money... hell no. The shuttle is terribly obsolete at this point. NASA has to go on evilBay just to get the floppy disks for it. Pathetic.

[Totoro242]

Well, you need a space suit to go with that shuttle:

http://www.countdowncreations.com/walk_aro...spacesuit_3.htm

[Macross73]

Even if you could afford it where do you put it.

its not like you can prop one up in the backyard

and tell the wife its just a model LOL.

[sketchley]

Go with the Russian suit. It's bound to be cheaper (and you'll spend less time in the airlock adjusting to the lower pressure - mind you, as the Russian suit runs at a higher pressure, some tasks using the hands will be a bit more labourous.

[HoveringCheesecake]

In my eyes, the Russians only made ONE huge mistake throughout their entire manned space program: the N-1 rocket. Don't even get me started...

[KingNor]

Even if I did have that kind of money... hell no. The shuttle is terribly obsolete at this point. NASA has to go on evilBay just to get the floppy disks for it. Pathetic.

Don't blame NASA for these things. They're on such a rediculously tight budget they probably had to sell their floppy discs to afford fuel.

Our space and science programs are so under funded it's not even funny.

[sketchley]

Isn't it because the computer is something that came out of the late '70's, and nothing since has the shielding or strength to still be operational in orbit, after the rough ride to orbit, and passing through the Van Allen (Radiation) Belts? It's not their fault that their computer supplier(s) opted to manufacture less robust products.

Edited January 15, 2007 by sketchley

[Gunbuster]

Don't blame NASA for these things. They're on such a rediculously tight budget they probably had to sell their floppy discs to afford fuel.

Our space and science programs are so under funded it's not even funny.

Didn't they spent billions of dollars on making a pen that could write upside down? While the russians just used a pencil to do that. ;;

[Phyrox]

Didn't they spent billions of dollars on making a pen that could write upside down? While the russians just used a pencil to do that. ;;

Actually no, they didn't. It's just an amusing anecdote/joke. But it isn't actually true. If my memory serves, both the Americans and the Russians use pens in space. And neither spent billions in development.

[HoveringCheesecake]

Isn't it because the computer is something that came out of the late '70's, and nothing since has the shielding or strength to still be operational in orbit, after the rough ride to orbit, and passing through the Van Allen (Radiation) Belts? It's not their fault that their computer supplier(s) opted to manufacture less robust products.

I don't think that the shuttle passes through the Van Allen belts. Those are further out. The shuttle stays relatively close.

The inner belt extends from 700-10000 km above the Earth's surface. The shuttle orbits (from what I've read) at distances that are all below 700 km.

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

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/AndresMok.shtml

The lack of newer equipment is a result of poor funding like KingNor said. It's kind of sad that the shuttles are being retired. And that two of them are gone. Each had its own character. Hopefully I can tour one in a museum someday.

Edited January 15, 2007 by meh_cd

[Steve68]

I like how it says they borrowed one from Boeing. Oh that's rich. Boeing didn't make the orbiters, Rockwell did. Boeing never manufactured an orbiter. Right now a joint venture company called United Space Alliance formed in the 1990's maintains the orbiters at Kennedy Space Center for NASA. USA is a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin (Boeing bought Rockwell's Aerospace program in 1996).

Columbia is NOT STS-1. STS-1 was the first orbital flight of Columbia which was OV-102.

Almost every single statement on that page is wrong.

[sketchley]

OK, change what I said so that it means 'passes through solar radiation like that present in the Van Allen Belts and not ordinarily present at sea level on Earth.' The point that I want to make is that modern computers are less robust than the dinosaur that they have on the shuttle, and are (or at least were) impractible for the missions the shuttle takes.

[HoveringCheesecake]

OK, change what I said so that it means 'passes through solar radiation like that present in the Van Allen Belts and not ordinarily present at sea level on Earth.' The point that I want to make is that modern computers are less robust than the dinosaur that they have on the shuttle, and are (or at least were) impractible for the missions the shuttle takes.

Errr, do you have any proof to that or is that just a huge assumption???

[JB0]

Actually no, they didn't. It's just an amusing anecdote/joke. But it isn't actually true. If my memory serves, both the Americans and the Russians use pens in space. And neither spent billions in development.

Indeed.

The full story is NASA was using pencils, and having trouble with broken leads floating around where they could get breathed in or short out equipment. That and they burned real well in the full-oxygen atmospheres of early space missions, which became a serious concern after the Apollo 1 accident.

Pen company Fisher developed the space pen on their own initiative and sold the finished products to NASA. And the USSR.

[jenius]

I'm not sure I'm buying this "new computers are too fragile" thing. The USA is a capitalist society, if you're willing to spend enough money someone will build whatever you want. Now, NASA being too poor to upgrade I can see. No one being capable of building a rugged computer is another thing. The marketing alone might be enough for some companies to jump all over the opportunity but I would suspect that integrating today's computers into yesterday's technology would be costly and inefficient at this point in the product's life cycle.

[sketchley]

Please read the wikipedia article you cited more carefully. Though it doesn't directly state the shuttle, it does state conditions that are directly applicable to it - both electronic, and the potential altitude of the Van Allen Belts.

In addtion, there are a couple of other conditions to be aware of - the existing hardware, and its user interface in the shuttle, it's use of HAL/S, and financial restrictions by the prime fund provider of NASA. All of which combined against upgrading to another computer system, especially when the original computer system required a large part of the research that went into the original building of the shuttles.

EDIT: Jenius, you beat me to it. You hit on the two main points: budgeting and compatibility. I agree that there is the capability to build rugged computers, but there is a limited market for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_rad...on_space_travel

Edited January 16, 2007 by sketchley

[HoveringCheesecake]

Please read the wikipedia article you cited more carefully. Though it doesn't directly state the shuttle, it does state conditions that are directly applicable to it - both electronic, and the potential altitude of the Van Allen Belts.

How do you mean? The shuttle orbits below the lowest Van Allen belt.

EDIT: The article contradicts itself. It says "The Earth's atmosphere limits the belts' particles to regions above 200-1000 km." It then goes on to say "The inner Van Allen Belt extends from an altitude of 700–10 000 km (0.1 to 1.5 Earth radii) above the Earths surface."

Unless I'm completely missing something... there must be a different belt of radiation below the inner Van Allen belt?

Edited January 16, 2007 by meh_cd

[sketchley]

The Earth's atmosphere limits the belts' particles to regions above 200-1000 km,[3] while the belts do not extend past 7 Earth radii RE.[3] The belts are confined to an area which extends about 65°[3] from the celestial equator.

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

I'm guessing the potential versus the average altitude. Solar flares/winds etc. do have an effect somehow.

[Batou]

$2900000000.56 each? Why the extra $ 0.56?

Did anyone else add one to the shopping cart? I love the "secure order form" that allows me to charge this thing to my Visa.

[Mr March]

I love the e-mail response. Classic

[Chewie]

Don't blame NASA for these things. They're on such a rediculously tight budget they probably had to sell their floppy discs to afford fuel.

Our space and science programs are so under funded it's not even funny.

But we can sure blow stuff up real good.

[KingNor]

this van allen belt stuff is kinda rediculous. yeah there are belts, but from what i understand its the kind of radiation that you ban block with basicly tinfoil. it's not a big deal.

and no, modern computers are definately not to fragial to survive trips into space. all of our gps satalites and communications satalites are not built out of 1970's hardware to make it into space.

www.badastronomy.com

Edited January 17, 2007 by KingNor

[HoveringCheesecake]

Here's my theory.

There are aliens. The US government, select parts of it, knows about them. The aliens know about us. Anyone who has gone into space through NASA has probably seen them. The shuttles have stayed in service so no one spooks out the aliens and have them open fire on any other kind of craft coming from Earth.

Who knows, maybe Fred Haise flipped off some aliens and they shot up Apollo 13 so it had to limp home. Maybe someone thought Christa McAuliffe (now that's a name from the past) wouldn't be reliable enough to keep a secret and they torched that shuttle on liftoff. I'm pretty sure, when it comes to the space program, that the American public isn't getting the whole story. And why should they? The masses are weak, stupid and unreliable.

I think it helps to consider that people in power now, in the military and civilian government started out their careers in the Cold War era. Lots of paranoia. Lots of fear. Lots of sweaty hands when a new looking plane or tank showed up in photographs. I don't buy that there is less money for space exploration because America needs more money for healthcare. I just think someone figured out that sometimes you open Pandora's Box and you find something you didn't expect and realize it's time to put that box in the attic where you don't have to think about it.

There are several reports of Reagan making references to extra-terrestrials. Once was in one of his speeches (state of the union? I can't remember) and apparently... and I say apparently... after watching ET he said "no one realizes just how true to life this movie is".

Of course it could all just be a load of crap.

[KingNor]

Of course it could all just be a load of crap.

this is the first step in the right direction in the last two posts.