http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html

Due to lauch at 8am EST.  I don't know if that time includes their summer 
time or not.  It makes it 12pm-1pm our time.  This flight has dummy crew 
compartments and escape tower.

Launching from the same pad as Apollo 13.  60% chance of being rained off so 
far.


TWP

TWP wrote:

> Still, it'd be nice to see someone land on the Moon
> again before I drop off my perch.

I expect you will. The Chinese and India are said to be interested in going 
there, and they can probably afford it.

-- 
Facts are sacred ... but comment is free

Second attempt to launch now due 13:08 GMT.

"TWP"  wrote in message 
news:pradndOJJqyXqXXXnZ2dnUVZ8gSdnZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
> Second attempt to launch now due 13:08 GMT.

Now due at 15:08 GMT

I thought they'd screwed it up when it started to tumble!

The bottom part is supposed to, but it looked like the top part had gone.

Still 10 years away from the Moon.  You know, I think they could do better. 
I think they should set themselves the goal, before this decade is out, to 
land a man on the Moon and return him safely to Earth.

That doesn't give them long, so they'd better get to it.


TWimPatient

TWP wrote:

> I thought they'd screwed it up when it started to tumble!
> 
> The bottom part is supposed to, but it looked like the top part had gone.
> 
> Still 10 years away from the Moon.  You know, I think they could do
> better. I think they should set themselves the goal, before this decade is
> out, to land a man on the Moon and return him safely to Earth.
> 
> That doesn't give them long, so they'd better get to it.
> 
> 
> TWimPatient

Don't they know that it's not November 5th yet?

-- 
Facts are sacred ... but comment is free

"TWP"  wrote ...

> They can't launch yet because there's a piece of string stuck on the 
> escape tower!  It was supposed to come off when they pulled it and it 
> didn't!
>
> How hard can this be?  It's not rocket science!

That separation didn't go as expected, a booster rocket parachute failed on 
descent and the bootser now has a 'sodding great dent in it', while NASA 
can't tell why or when because cameras turned off before the events occured 
leaving engineers to scratch their heads and postulate over what went 
seriously wrong with what they specifically set out to test, suggests NASA 
may no longer know how to do 'rocket science'.

It could perhaps have only been more of a failure had the boosters sunk 
somewhere in the ocean and NASA had to admit they couldn't find them.

The boosters are being towed back to shore where the damage will be 
inspected. No doubt to a great deal of tutting and phewing; 'Can't look at 
it until next month, mate, and it's going to cost you. That's a big welding 
job. You say you don't know how it happened, and you don't have insurance' ?

Per ardua ad as -- Whoooa; didn't you see that Soup Dragon !?!?!

"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
news:OpFGm.16$Ym4.13@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>
> "TWP"  wrote ...
>
>> They can't launch yet because there's a piece of string stuck on the 
>> escape tower!  It was supposed to come off when they pulled it and it 
>> didn't!
>>
>> How hard can this be?  It's not rocket science!
>
> That separation didn't go as expected, a booster rocket parachute failed 
> on descent and the bootser now has a 'sodding great dent in it', while 
> NASA can't tell why or when because cameras turned off before the events 
> occured leaving engineers to scratch their heads and postulate over what 
> went seriously wrong with what they specifically set out to test, suggests 
> NASA may no longer know how to do 'rocket science'.
>
> It could perhaps have only been more of a failure had the boosters sunk 
> somewhere in the ocean and NASA had to admit they couldn't find them.
>
> The boosters are being towed back to shore where the damage will be 
> inspected. No doubt to a great deal of tutting and phewing; 'Can't look at 
> it until next month, mate, and it's going to cost you. That's a big 
> welding job. You say you don't know how it happened, and you don't have 
> insurance' ?
>
> Per ardua ad as -- Whoooa; didn't you see that Soup Dragon !?!?!
>

Hmmm....  I would expect it to be more likely to be Iron Chicken damage....

I love the logic that there's no problem because the booster wasn't meant to 
fly again....  Remind me again - how do they return Command Modules back to 
Earth after re-entry?...   I'm pretty sure it involves parachutes!  They 
shouldn't be failing at all.  Certainly not so badly that there's damage.



It's not the first time...  This is for the manned component, not the 
booster:

http://gizmodo.com/5039573/nasa-tests-orion-parachute-result-spectacular-failure

http://my.opera.com/LoreleiLeeLong/blog/2008/09/03/orion-parachute-failure



Here's an entry on Wikipedia they might like to read...

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

"On his second flight, Soyuz 1, he was killed during a return, when the 
spacecraft crashed owing to multiple failures, including the parachute.
Just before impact, Soviet premier Alexey Kosygin told Komarov his country 
was proud of him. An American National Security Agency listening post in 
Istanbul noted Komarov's reply was inaudible, though persistent rumours 
stated that Komarov died cursing the spacecraft designers and flight 
controllers"

Now wouldn't THAT be embarrasing for NASA!....  To have their astronauts die 
while yelling what a bunch of dickheads they all are all the way to the 
ground! :-)   It would set the space prgramme back years!



TWP

> http://gizmodo.com/5039573/nasa-tests-orion-parachute-result-spectacular-failure
>

I suppose it's OK if they're just going to send up Wile E Coyote.

TWP

"TWP"  wrote ...

> I love the logic that there's no problem because the booster wasn't meant 
> to fly again....

I thought the boosters were meant to be re-usable, so it would be 
disingenuous of NASA to say that even if this particular set wasn't to be 
used again.


> Remind me again - how do they return Command Modules back to Earth after 
> re-entry?...   I'm pretty sure it involves parachutes!  They shouldn't be 
> failing at all.  Certainly not so badly that there's damage.

That seems to have been the fate of Beagle 2. Parachutes failed during 
testing and there wasn't time to re-test before the payload had to be loaded 
onto the rocket. I was consequently not surprised when it appears to have 
ploughed straight into Mars. Radio comms had not been exhaustively tested so 
it wasn't surprising we heard nothing from Beagle 2 if it wasn't smashed to 
bits.

There seems to be a certain cavalier attitude all round to space missions 
these days.

"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
news:0KhHm.573$Ym4.33@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>

> There seems to be a certain cavalier attitude all round to space missions 
> these days.
>

Have a look at the CEV module parachute test link I posted!

It really is like something from Warner Brothers! :-)


TWP

"TWP"  wrote ...

> "The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
> news:0KhHm.573$Ym4.33@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>
>
>> There seems to be a certain cavalier attitude all round to space missions 
>> these days.
>>
>
> Have a look at the CEV module parachute test link I posted!
>
> It really is like something from Warner Brothers! :-)

"Ouch"

I like the way that once the capsule has embedded itself into the ground, 
the parachute opens and gently floats to the ground.

I've visions of a test pilot emerging form the dust cloud and waving - "it's 
okay, he's okay, he's alive folks, halelujah, whoo-hoo" - only to have a 
grand piano crash on top of him ;-)

"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
news:THkHm.651$Ym4.55@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>
> "TWP"  wrote ...
>
>> "The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
>> news:0KhHm.573$Ym4.33@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>>
>>
>>> There seems to be a certain cavalier attitude all round to space 
>>> missions these days.
>>>
>>
>> Have a look at the CEV module parachute test link I posted!
>>
>> It really is like something from Warner Brothers! :-)
>
> "Ouch"
>
> I like the way that once the capsule has embedded itself into the ground, 
> the parachute opens and gently floats to the ground.
>
> I've visions of a test pilot emerging form the dust cloud and waving - 
> "it's okay, he's okay, he's alive folks, halelujah, whoo-hoo" - only to 
> have a grand piano crash on top of him ;-)
>

Wile E Coyote!

I think it needs fins, like on a bomb (actually, controllable fins might be 
nice).  It's got no flight control surfaces to force an orientation that's 
the 'right way up'.  Once it starts spinning the parachute cords just taffle 
up.


TWP