| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 381.1 | | VINO::DZIEDZIC | | Wed Dec 30 1987 08:12 | 9 |
| Noise I heard on various news programs yesterday and this morning
imply a fairly significant push-back in the planned June 1988
launch date of Discovery due to the SRB nozzle problem. NASA is
supposed to officially announce the impact sometime this week.
As much as the news pains me, I had to think yesterday of the
astronauts-in-waiting, some of which have been waiting YEARS
for a planned flight; if it hurts us, think of how THEY feel.
|
| 381.2 | you can fix it now or you can fix it later... | BOEHM::DENSMORE | get to the verbs | Wed Dec 30 1987 08:12 | 5 |
| Gee, if they had only been making progressive design improvements
over the past 6 years instead of doing it once. But that costs
money I guess.
:-( Mike :-(
|
| 381.3 | question | FRSBEE::STOLOS | | Wed Dec 30 1987 12:15 | 2 |
| last news item i heard was that they weren't sure if it was a design
fault or a defective part. any news on this?
|
| 381.4 | | VINO::DZIEDZIC | | Wed Dec 30 1987 13:01 | 7 |
| According to the KSC public affairs people, the fault was a
portion of a retaining ring which holds the nozzle insulation
in place had broken off. This part was "improved" during the
SRB redesign, although not "redesigned" itself. Whether or
not the part was defective won't be known until they perform
some sophisiticated analysis on the metal of the ring.
|
| 381.5 | Progress is being made | ECADSR::KINZELMAN | Paul Kinzelman | Wed Dec 30 1987 15:29 | 1 |
| Hey, at least they didn't cover it up.
|
| 381.6 | phone numbers to get info | RDCV01::JCONNELL | | Wed Dec 30 1987 19:43 | 4 |
| In case anyone wants to keep up on current events the NASA public
affairs office broadcast news service recording number is
(305)867-2525.if you want to talk to a human being the public affairs
office number is (305)867-2468.
|
| 381.7 | Outer Boot Retaining Ring | DECWIN::FISHER | Burns Fisher 381-1466, ZKO3-4/W23 | Wed Dec 30 1987 22:10 | 13 |
| The report I heard said that the failing part was an "outer boot
retaining ring". The explanation was that the boot is a flexible
substance which covers the gimbal area of the nozzle much like the
rubber boot at the bottom of most stick shifts. The ring was what
holds the boot at one end. The claim is that some large fraction
of the ring is missing, and some of it was found inside the motor
(why was it not blown out? Does this mean it only failed after
BECO?)
This is much different from what folks have said here about the nozzle
delaminating etc. Can anyone reconcile this?
Burns
|
| 381.8 | all the news that fits | MONSTR::HUGHES | Greetings and hallucinations! | Thu Dec 31 1987 10:21 | 17 |
| Again, this is from CNN as was the original item.
They are saying that the piece that came away was part of an external
protective cover on the SRB nozzle, not part of the nozzle lining
delaminating as was originally implied.
Apparently this test involved gimballing the nozzle to full deflection
(not normally required in flight) which had not been done on previous
tests.
NASA are saying the delay may b as much as 3 months.
I forget what I was watching, but some talking head last night said
something about not wanting to launch too close to the elections
(are they worried about ratings?)??
gary
|
| 381.9 | | VINO::DZIEDZIC | | Thu Dec 31 1987 11:19 | 10 |
| The topic of delaying the launch until AFTER the 1988 elections
has been mentioned numerous times in print. The theory is that
the "ruling party" doesn't want any bad publicity which another
shuttle accident (or even extensive delays) might cause. Last
night on CNN Dick Truly kind of hem-hawed around the question,
saying his goal was to launch when ready, but many political
theorists suggest Reagan may delay the launch for political,
and not technical, reasons.
|
| 381.10 | | STAR::BANKS | In Search of Mediocrity | Thu Dec 31 1987 13:59 | 4 |
| It's somewhat ironic that one of the hands on the stake driven through
the heart of NASA is worried about looking bad afterward.
(Still stewing over the latest round of NASA budget slashing)
|
| 381.11 | | MONSTR::HUGHES | Greetings and hallucinations! | Tue Jan 05 1988 11:54 | 8 |
| CNN had something this morning about the test failure being caused
by a nozzle design flaw and that the most optimistic launch date
would be August (I didn't hear all of the details).
The was also mention of a report that claims that the prevailing
attitude at NASA is once again schedule first, safety second.
gary
|
| 381.12 | How TASS told the Story | IMBACQ::BIRO | | Wed Jan 06 1988 11:32 | 31 |
| I thougt it was interesting to see how TASS handled the news
about the Discovery launching postponement. The following is
a HF radio reception of TASS, sorry for the errors but this
link is not the best
.+DISCOVERY+ LAUNCHING POSTPONED.
5/1 TASS 10
WASHINGTON JANUARY 5 TASS - THE LAUNCHING OF THE REUSABLE
SPACESHIP +DISCOVERY+, PLANNED FOR JUNE, WN WILL BE POSTPONED
FOR 6-10 WEEKS. THIS WAS ANNOUNCED HERE ON MONDAY BY THE
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA).
SARA KEEGAN, A NASA REPRESENTATIVE, HAS SAID IN WASHINTON
MTYAT +DISCOVARY+ SPACESHIP WOULD MOST PROGATR BE LAUNCHED OR I MIBHF
&7 T. THE DELAY HAS BEEN CAUSED BY A FAILURE IN TESTING
A MODERNIZED DESIGN OF THE SOLID PROPELLANT BOOSTER DM-9 LAST
MONTH. THE INSPECTION OF THE NEW DESIGN OF THE BOOSTER NOZZL
NOVHING GASKET REVEALED THAT PART OF IT HAD BEEN TORN OFF.
THE NASA IS NOW CONSIDERING A POSSIBILITY OF USING ANOTHER
MODERNIZED EARLIER TESTED DM-8 BOOSTER MODEL9
ITEM ENDS +++
I assume the section that was garbled said something like
the launch had been postponed to the middle of August.
john
|