Does anyone else find it interesting that the Space Shuttle is so fragile

[Poiuyt]

that nothing can bump into it and a little piece of protruding plastic could cause disaster? How in the world can that thing survive the trip through earth's atmosphere at 2000mph? What happens if it comes in contact with some space dust?

They should just send my old Toyota up there. That can take anything.

[Goldmund]

1. It's much faster than 2000 mph

:)

[Moochy]

8. 10,500 miles faster

Closer to Mach 18.3 (about 12500 mph)

The tiles are key for heat dispersal, since the tiles have gaps they dont transfer heat as a solid surface would.

I always thought it would be better to enter the atmosphere more slowly if possible.

[Goldmund]

10. It would be better, yes

But hardly possible. Orbital speed is close to 7 km/s, so you'd have to use engines (and lots of fuel) to slow that down. Then, the upper athmosphere is too thin for any kind of parachutes, so you'd again have to use engines to slow down the fall.

In other words, you'd have to bring along tons of fuel.

[Moochy]

12. No,Thats why we need to drill on the Moon and Mars!! :)

I wonder if they will be doing anything to keep the speed down on reentry this time, like s-manuvers or something. Apparently the ascent into the lowest earth orbit possible for the shuttle, and the astronauts said it was the smoothest ascent they'd ever felt.

The space elevator stuff seems so cool, there would be no issues with heat dispersal on a mach-18 molten reentry vehicle and the ride would be a nice leisurely day or so up or down. Get cracking material science folks.. the material for the the space elevator is the only remaining hurdle, oh yeah and the gazillion dollar price tag. :)

[tridim]

17. What about coming in at a more shallow angle?

Or using Burt Ruttan's wing solution? There are other ways to slow down besides thrust.

[Goldmund]

18. Shallow meaning closer to the tangent of Earth's curve?

Well, then you'll have a much longer descent at high, almost-orbital velocities.

As far as Burt Ruttan's wing -- I don't know anything about it... Do you have a link? Thanks in advance. :)

[tridim]

20. I'm talking about the pivoting wing he used on Spaceship One.

I'm just saying that the shuttle's high-alpha, bottom first re-entry solution isn't the only solution, and I'm sure it's not the best since it was developed about 30 years ago. At the very least there are much better (read stronger and lighter) heat shields that they could use today. It's just a matter of funding and foresight, neither of which are available because of BushCo's massive deficits and primitive minds.

[Goldmund]

22. Ah, I dig

You're most probably completely correct. But then again, the whole Shuttle program is an archaic relic.

[Splatter Phoenix]

2. I find it interesting...

That when it didn't go up the rocket scientists scratched their heads and said "let's...um...wiggle some wires. Yeah."

I'd REALLY trust my life to those guys.

[Democracy White]

3. The smartest scientists in the world...

and they can't figure out how to make the shuttle better? WTF? How much are we paying these guys?

Dee

[tridim]

7. The tiles are 1960's technology

I don't think it's the fault of the engineers, but the bureaucrats who don't want to fund a new shuttle. I'm guessing that replacing the entire bottom half of the current shuttle wouldn't work, as the entire vehicle is designed around the fragile tiles.

[billyskank]

24. The shuttle wasn't originally supposed to be so big

As I understand it, NASA originally wanted a reusable vehicle that was much smaller, and would be correspondingly easier to shield from the heat of reentry. They would be able to use a one-piece shield rather than these tiles which have always been prone to breaking off. I understand they were forced to make a big vehicle by the military, who presumably wanted to be able to launch big weapons into space...

[Democracy White]

30. And Bush doesn't care about space...

I really hope that sometime in the future there will be money granted to them that will help advance space exploration.

Dee

[slackmaster]

4. Your old Toyota wouldn't hold up well on reentry

:nuke:

[MindPilot]

5. they should have covered it with the most durable material known to man

wallpaper.

I know. I just finished removing some.

[texanwitch]

19. I was thinking duct tape, I just removed a lot of it off a back window on

my house, that is strong stuff.

[Shell Beau]

6. It is odd, but I am sure they have their reasons.

They know a hell of a lot more than I do.

[MyUncle]

9. All flying vehicles are very fragile and light.

If you get a chance to go up close to a small plane or even a fighter jet, it is amazing how they are constructed. If you really want to be scared, watch how much the wings of commercial aircraft move about in takeoff, flight and landing.

[tridim]

11. My plane weighs about 4 pounds fully flight ready

:)

I have others that weight as little as 10 ounces.

[sjr5740]

14. My brother in Law is also a RC plane hobbyist

He just won his first competition with his plane. He won a $50 gift certificate to his hobby shop so he can buy more planes... lol

SJR

[tridim]

16. $50 would last me about 1 minute

The hobby is incredibly expensive.. Mostly due to nickle and dime items. I often go to the hobby shop for one small item and end up spending $150 because there's always a new must-have upgrade to buy.

[sjr5740]

21. Your right

He spends alot on his planes. and the fuel is like $20/gallon which lasts only a few flights.

[Moochy]

13. Russian Shuttle

Check out the Soviet Space Shuttle.

http://pargoo.customer.netspace.net.au/buran.html

[KG]

15. time to stop risking human lives on endevours that robots can do just

as well and for half the price.

[Mutley]

23. I hope they never stop sending humans into space.

I would pay to go into space if I were smart enough (and rich enough).

[ChickMagic]

25. Where's your sense of adventure?

I'd go without hesitation.

[ovidsen]

26. Robots can't do what humans can.

And maybe they never will.

Case in point: Spirit and Opportunity, the Mars unmanned explorers. Without a doubt, they are incredible machines, but they can only travel about 120 feet/day, can't handle bumps or potholes, and have very limited testing tool kits.

Even if travelling in space and walking on another world wouldn't be a thrill for most people (including me), there are other compelling arguments for using people in space. There is no doubt that humans on the scene could function far better and gather much more knowledge than machines. Definitely worth the price.

[leftofthedial]

27. it was a flawed repuke system

designed to meet repuke objectives for space and prevent real space exploration and human-friendly use of space

[Felix Mala]

28. The end of manned space flight, one more thing Bush isn't responsible

for.

[Crazy Guggenheim]

29. Let's work this out.

Say that piece plastic weighed 1 lb. The velocity of the shuttle was 700 mph when it happened.

So the Kinetic Energy is 1/2 mv2 = in metric
.5 (.444) (1134)2 = 285739.4232 Joules of energy.

As a comparison say a nut hit your car at 70 mph and the object was 10 grams.

.5 (.01) (113.4)2 = 6429.78

Thus! The energy absorbed by the Shuttle is 44.44 times what your Toyota would be!