Space Shuttle Anecdotes
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
If you want to read about the reality of riding the Shuttle, I highly recommend Mike Mullane's autobiography.
Popping in to say thanks for recommending this book.I bought a copy when I saw this post.I finished the book last night,what a cracking read,up there with carrying the fire.Very emotive writing towards the end when he describes looking down on the earth on his last mission whilst looking back over his life.
Eric Mc said:
T
On the subject of Shuttle videos, I have one on VHS which I taped from BBC back in 1987 or so called "Riding the Stack" it was part of the Horizon series so would also have been shown in the US under the "Nova" banner. It was made in the aftermath of the Challenger accident and in that gap period when the Shuttle was grounded. It was the first documentary where people involved in the project, including Shuttle crew members, were honest about their reservations concerning the whole concept.
Another video I have is an episode of BBC's Panorama called "The Dream that Fell Out of the Sky" which was shown a few months after the Challenger accident. Interestingly, it was presented and voiced over by Robert Harris, who is now a best selling novelist.
Despite looking many times, neither of these programmes have made it onto You Tube or BBC iPlayer or any other streaming service - which is really unfortunate as they are both excellent.
Any way you can share those somewhere for us?On the subject of Shuttle videos, I have one on VHS which I taped from BBC back in 1987 or so called "Riding the Stack" it was part of the Horizon series so would also have been shown in the US under the "Nova" banner. It was made in the aftermath of the Challenger accident and in that gap period when the Shuttle was grounded. It was the first documentary where people involved in the project, including Shuttle crew members, were honest about their reservations concerning the whole concept.
Another video I have is an episode of BBC's Panorama called "The Dream that Fell Out of the Sky" which was shown a few months after the Challenger accident. Interestingly, it was presented and voiced over by Robert Harris, who is now a best selling novelist.
Despite looking many times, neither of these programmes have made it onto You Tube or BBC iPlayer or any other streaming service - which is really unfortunate as they are both excellent.
I'm not sure it's fair to say the Shuttle set back progress. When you read "Into the Black" or the thoughts of the astronauts at the time, they felt like it was opening up a whole new vista.
Even today, you look at a Dragon capsule and it's pretty cramped, disposable (*) and a relatively rough ride - fair amount of g-force. Compare that with the Shuttle which had a huge crew cabin by comparison and while pretty gentle on ascent the descent was literally like an aircraft to the point where Mike Mullane mentioned standing up in the cockpit during re-entry to look out the window. The re-use of the Shuttle may have been a bit more "rebuild" than desired but I really doubt we'll see any Dragon capsules doing 25 missions.
The thing that always makes me laugh is when they do infographics of spacecraft to scale and the Shuttle is always drawn across the back or to the side, because it was so huge by comparison with the throwaway capsules.
I can see that in the early 80s it must have felt like it was a gigantic step forward. 7 person crews instead of 3, with a huge cargo bay instead of, er, no cargo bay.
The issue was that there was nowhere for it to go - no space station to service and no Mars or even Moon missions for it to ship parts to.
It's worth remembering that the ISS couldn't have been built without the Shuttle. If there had been political will, the Shuttle could have equally been used to construct a Mars spacecraft in-orbit, perhaps even an Aldrin cycler. Something which would have been harder with Apollo-era capsules (lack of room for a large crew so harder to swap in and out crews; need to co-ordinate the launch of parts with crew to assemble them; no way to bring back parts or samples; no workshop space)
It's quite possible that disposable rockets could have been cheaper, but I'm not convinced that humans would have gone further than LEO even without Shuttle spending.
(*) I know they "refurbish" them, but that's a bit Trigger's Broom
Even today, you look at a Dragon capsule and it's pretty cramped, disposable (*) and a relatively rough ride - fair amount of g-force. Compare that with the Shuttle which had a huge crew cabin by comparison and while pretty gentle on ascent the descent was literally like an aircraft to the point where Mike Mullane mentioned standing up in the cockpit during re-entry to look out the window. The re-use of the Shuttle may have been a bit more "rebuild" than desired but I really doubt we'll see any Dragon capsules doing 25 missions.
The thing that always makes me laugh is when they do infographics of spacecraft to scale and the Shuttle is always drawn across the back or to the side, because it was so huge by comparison with the throwaway capsules.
I can see that in the early 80s it must have felt like it was a gigantic step forward. 7 person crews instead of 3, with a huge cargo bay instead of, er, no cargo bay.
The issue was that there was nowhere for it to go - no space station to service and no Mars or even Moon missions for it to ship parts to.
It's worth remembering that the ISS couldn't have been built without the Shuttle. If there had been political will, the Shuttle could have equally been used to construct a Mars spacecraft in-orbit, perhaps even an Aldrin cycler. Something which would have been harder with Apollo-era capsules (lack of room for a large crew so harder to swap in and out crews; need to co-ordinate the launch of parts with crew to assemble them; no way to bring back parts or samples; no workshop space)
It's quite possible that disposable rockets could have been cheaper, but I'm not convinced that humans would have gone further than LEO even without Shuttle spending.
(*) I know they "refurbish" them, but that's a bit Trigger's Broom
First hand;
As a kid, about 10, I met a friend of my Uncle, this was in Boston Mass, at some family gathering.
He was very quiet but when he realised I liked aeroplanes he lit up & we talked for ages, he answered all my idiot questions with patience & facts.
My Uncle came over after he left & he said that this guy was one of the lead designers of the heat proof tiles on the Shuttle, he had originally worked for North American, Aviation, my Uncle knew him from school.
A humble & smart guy, who I later found out had struggled for work.
Apparently he was an engineer with no interest in management or leadership, but when he applied for jobs his NASA credentials spooked employers from hiring someone smarter than them. I think he taught at MIT in the end.
As a kid, about 10, I met a friend of my Uncle, this was in Boston Mass, at some family gathering.
He was very quiet but when he realised I liked aeroplanes he lit up & we talked for ages, he answered all my idiot questions with patience & facts.
My Uncle came over after he left & he said that this guy was one of the lead designers of the heat proof tiles on the Shuttle, he had originally worked for North American, Aviation, my Uncle knew him from school.
A humble & smart guy, who I later found out had struggled for work.
Apparently he was an engineer with no interest in management or leadership, but when he applied for jobs his NASA credentials spooked employers from hiring someone smarter than them. I think he taught at MIT in the end.
Flooble said:
I'm not sure it's fair to say the Shuttle set back progress. When you read "Into the Black" or the thoughts of the astronauts at the time, they felt like it was opening up a whole new vista.
Even today, you look at a Dragon capsule and it's pretty cramped, disposable (*) and a relatively rough ride - fair amount of g-force. Compare that with the Shuttle which had a huge crew cabin by comparison and while pretty gentle on ascent the descent was literally like an aircraft to the point where Mike Mullane mentioned standing up in the cockpit during re-entry to look out the window. The re-use of the Shuttle may have been a bit more "rebuild" than desired but I really doubt we'll see any Dragon capsules doing 25 missions.
The thing that always makes me laugh is when they do infographics of spacecraft to scale and the Shuttle is always drawn across the back or to the side, because it was so huge by comparison with the throwaway capsules.
I can see that in the early 80s it must have felt like it was a gigantic step forward. 7 person crews instead of 3, with a huge cargo bay instead of, er, no cargo bay.
The issue was that there was nowhere for it to go - no space station to service and no Mars or even Moon missions for it to ship parts to.
It's worth remembering that the ISS couldn't have been built without the Shuttle. If there had been political will, the Shuttle could have equally been used to construct a Mars spacecraft in-orbit, perhaps even an Aldrin cycler. Something which would have been harder with Apollo-era capsules (lack of room for a large crew so harder to swap in and out crews; need to co-ordinate the launch of parts with crew to assemble them; no way to bring back parts or samples; no workshop space)
It's quite possible that disposable rockets could have been cheaper, but I'm not convinced that humans would have gone further than LEO even without Shuttle spending.
(*) I know they "refurbish" them, but that's a bit Trigger's Broom
Cheers for that,”into the black” another book I wasn’t aware of and now just ordered.Even today, you look at a Dragon capsule and it's pretty cramped, disposable (*) and a relatively rough ride - fair amount of g-force. Compare that with the Shuttle which had a huge crew cabin by comparison and while pretty gentle on ascent the descent was literally like an aircraft to the point where Mike Mullane mentioned standing up in the cockpit during re-entry to look out the window. The re-use of the Shuttle may have been a bit more "rebuild" than desired but I really doubt we'll see any Dragon capsules doing 25 missions.
The thing that always makes me laugh is when they do infographics of spacecraft to scale and the Shuttle is always drawn across the back or to the side, because it was so huge by comparison with the throwaway capsules.
I can see that in the early 80s it must have felt like it was a gigantic step forward. 7 person crews instead of 3, with a huge cargo bay instead of, er, no cargo bay.
The issue was that there was nowhere for it to go - no space station to service and no Mars or even Moon missions for it to ship parts to.
It's worth remembering that the ISS couldn't have been built without the Shuttle. If there had been political will, the Shuttle could have equally been used to construct a Mars spacecraft in-orbit, perhaps even an Aldrin cycler. Something which would have been harder with Apollo-era capsules (lack of room for a large crew so harder to swap in and out crews; need to co-ordinate the launch of parts with crew to assemble them; no way to bring back parts or samples; no workshop space)
It's quite possible that disposable rockets could have been cheaper, but I'm not convinced that humans would have gone further than LEO even without Shuttle spending.
(*) I know they "refurbish" them, but that's a bit Trigger's Broom
Flooble said:
I'm not sure it's fair to say the Shuttle set back progress. When you read "Into the Black" or the thoughts of the astronauts at the time, they felt like it was opening up a whole new vista.
Even today, you look at a Dragon capsule and it's pretty cramped, disposable (*) and a relatively rough ride - fair amount of g-force. Compare that with the Shuttle which had a huge crew cabin by comparison and while pretty gentle on ascent the descent was literally like an aircraft to the point where Mike Mullane mentioned standing up in the cockpit during re-entry to look out the window. The re-use of the Shuttle may have been a bit more "rebuild" than desired but I really doubt we'll see any Dragon capsules doing 25 missions.
The thing that always makes me laugh is when they do infographics of spacecraft to scale and the Shuttle is always drawn across the back or to the side, because it was so huge by comparison with the throwaway capsules.
I can see that in the early 80s it must have felt like it was a gigantic step forward. 7 person crews instead of 3, with a huge cargo bay instead of, er, no cargo bay.
The issue was that there was nowhere for it to go - no space station to service and no Mars or even Moon missions for it to ship parts to.
It's worth remembering that the ISS couldn't have been built without the Shuttle. If there had been political will, the Shuttle could have equally been used to construct a Mars spacecraft in-orbit, perhaps even an Aldrin cycler. Something which would have been harder with Apollo-era capsules (lack of room for a large crew so harder to swap in and out crews; need to co-ordinate the launch of parts with crew to assemble them; no way to bring back parts or samples; no workshop space)
It's quite possible that disposable rockets could have been cheaper, but I'm not convinced that humans would have gone further than LEO even without Shuttle spending.
(*) I know they "refurbish" them, but that's a bit Trigger's Broom
I think it’s totally fair.Even today, you look at a Dragon capsule and it's pretty cramped, disposable (*) and a relatively rough ride - fair amount of g-force. Compare that with the Shuttle which had a huge crew cabin by comparison and while pretty gentle on ascent the descent was literally like an aircraft to the point where Mike Mullane mentioned standing up in the cockpit during re-entry to look out the window. The re-use of the Shuttle may have been a bit more "rebuild" than desired but I really doubt we'll see any Dragon capsules doing 25 missions.
The thing that always makes me laugh is when they do infographics of spacecraft to scale and the Shuttle is always drawn across the back or to the side, because it was so huge by comparison with the throwaway capsules.
I can see that in the early 80s it must have felt like it was a gigantic step forward. 7 person crews instead of 3, with a huge cargo bay instead of, er, no cargo bay.
The issue was that there was nowhere for it to go - no space station to service and no Mars or even Moon missions for it to ship parts to.
It's worth remembering that the ISS couldn't have been built without the Shuttle. If there had been political will, the Shuttle could have equally been used to construct a Mars spacecraft in-orbit, perhaps even an Aldrin cycler. Something which would have been harder with Apollo-era capsules (lack of room for a large crew so harder to swap in and out crews; need to co-ordinate the launch of parts with crew to assemble them; no way to bring back parts or samples; no workshop space)
It's quite possible that disposable rockets could have been cheaper, but I'm not convinced that humans would have gone further than LEO even without Shuttle spending.
(*) I know they "refurbish" them, but that's a bit Trigger's Broom
It’s true that the ISS we have today couldn’t have been built without the Shuttle (or the Proton and Soyuz rockets also used in its construction).
But imagine what could have been achieved if, say, instead of ploughing money into the Shuttle programme, similar funding had been allocated to upgrading and improving the Saturn V. It was able to launch a complete Skylab space station in one go. Ten Saturn V launched could have launched an ISS much, much bigger than what we have today.
I'm afraid to say I'm one of those people who just never gets a buzz from seeing so called amazing things.
I've been privileged to see a few wonders of the modern world, both manmade and natural, usually a bit disappointing.
However I was lucky enough to be on Coco beach to see a launch, 132 Atlantis, the only thing to have ever completely and utterly blown me away, the atmosphere on the beach was fantastic, seeing it before hearing it, the noise was just immense felt it as much as hearing it, watching it appear over the horizon, rockets detaching, the cheering and applause, just awesome. 10/10.
I've been privileged to see a few wonders of the modern world, both manmade and natural, usually a bit disappointing.
However I was lucky enough to be on Coco beach to see a launch, 132 Atlantis, the only thing to have ever completely and utterly blown me away, the atmosphere on the beach was fantastic, seeing it before hearing it, the noise was just immense felt it as much as hearing it, watching it appear over the horizon, rockets detaching, the cheering and applause, just awesome. 10/10.
My parents one accidentally fed pizza to some of the launch crew for STS-7. Dad had an experiment onboard (SPAS-01) and was there as the mission representative/specialist from ESA. They arrived in the evening a few days before the flight, tired and hungry and went to the nearest pizza place. Being hungry they ordered 2 large pizzas………..
Being 2 normal european humans, they are slightly less that half of one and too the rest back to the hotel and then on to the cape the next day where it was demolished by the launch crew before they ran through the mission briefing.
Yeah I know, cool starry bra and all they but it does involve the shuttle a bit
Being 2 normal european humans, they are slightly less that half of one and too the rest back to the hotel and then on to the cape the next day where it was demolished by the launch crew before they ran through the mission briefing.
Yeah I know, cool starry bra and all they but it does involve the shuttle a bit
Eric, have you seen these recent interviews with Hoot Gibson?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nk7qSvOaLo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1cQtJ9iCtw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nk7qSvOaLo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1cQtJ9iCtw
Like others, I've been lucky enough to see two launches. The first I saw from the hotel in Disney, very early hours in the dark, 50'ish miles away. But it literally lit the whole sky with the afterburners, pretty stunning.
Then, years later I took the family and saw STS120 launch from Kennedy Space center. IIRC the viewing area was around 3 miles from the launch pad?
I have to say, it is still to this day, probably the most impressive, technological/ human built thing, I've ever seen. It was impressive to see, but also the sound and sound waves made you feel it taking off and climbing towards space. It was pretty emotional tbh.
I still have the sts120 yellow car park ticket as one of my 'prize' possessions.
Then, years later I took the family and saw STS120 launch from Kennedy Space center. IIRC the viewing area was around 3 miles from the launch pad?
I have to say, it is still to this day, probably the most impressive, technological/ human built thing, I've ever seen. It was impressive to see, but also the sound and sound waves made you feel it taking off and climbing towards space. It was pretty emotional tbh.
I still have the sts120 yellow car park ticket as one of my 'prize' possessions.
nordboy said:
Like others, I've been lucky enough to see two launches. The first I saw from the hotel in Disney, very early hours in the dark, 50'ish miles away. But it literally lit the whole sky with the afterburners, pretty stunning.
Then, years later I took the family and saw STS120 launch from Kennedy Space center. IIRC the viewing area was around 3 miles from the launch pad?
I have to say, it is still to this day, probably the most impressive, technological/ human built thing, I've ever seen. It was impressive to see, but also the sound and sound waves made you feel it taking off and climbing towards space. It was pretty emotional tbh.
I still have the sts120 yellow car park ticket as one of my 'prize' possessions.
Lucky you - although the Shuttle didn't have "afterburners". Then, years later I took the family and saw STS120 launch from Kennedy Space center. IIRC the viewing area was around 3 miles from the launch pad?
I have to say, it is still to this day, probably the most impressive, technological/ human built thing, I've ever seen. It was impressive to see, but also the sound and sound waves made you feel it taking off and climbing towards space. It was pretty emotional tbh.
I still have the sts120 yellow car park ticket as one of my 'prize' possessions.
It had sod-off rocket engines which, in total, gave around 7.5 million pounds of thrust. As a comparison, Concorde, with full afterburners, produced about 150,000 lbs of thrust.
Eric Mc said:
Lucky you - although the Shuttle didn't have "afterburners".
It had sod-off rocket engines which, in total, gave around 7.5 million pounds of thrust. As a comparison, Concorde, with full afterburners, produced about 150,000 lbs of thrust.
Ok, big fIt had sod-off rocket engines which, in total, gave around 7.5 million pounds of thrust. As a comparison, Concorde, with full afterburners, produced about 150,000 lbs of thrust.
k off rockets that looked like afterburners 
nordboy said:
Ok, big fk off rockets that looked like afterburners
Afterburners are a form of rocket I suppose in that they work by squirting neat fuel into the already very hot jet exhaust, giving you an additional rocket type boost.k off rockets that looked like afterburners But jet engines are very different to full on liquid fueled and/or solid fueled rockets.
I was never fortunate enough to see a Shuttle launch in the flesh, only on TV.
However, holiday in LA in September and went to see the Shuttle Endeavour they have on display in the California Science Center.
We managed to be the first into the hanger that it's in and with no one else there (other than a couple of staff) I wandered around absolutely mesmerised. It was definitely one of the highlights
Over the bank holiday weekend - decided to go through my parents paperwork/photo albums that I saved when we cleared their house.
Found pamphlets/postcards from our 1981 holiday/Cape Canaveral/Kennedy Space Centre etc - plus a picture of me stood next to the Saturn V Rocket stages (when it was outside) and the mahoosive crawler etc.
Found pamphlets/postcards from our 1981 holiday/Cape Canaveral/Kennedy Space Centre etc - plus a picture of me stood next to the Saturn V Rocket stages (when it was outside) and the mahoosive crawler etc.
Whilst I have never seen any sort of rocket launch in the flesh, my views were only done online but was still cool to watch. Near the end of the program, I remember sitting at home watching the launch on the internet and then about 20 mins later going outside and seeing the ISS overhead, with the shuttle in hot pursuit and the external tank following closely behind 
Seeing a launch was the first thing I ticked off my list of life. As I was finishing up school and then university the end of the program was looming. Luckily I got a job quickly enough that allowed me to scrape enough money together to get out there for what was at the time to be the penultimate launch. I paid what was then a small fortune to get as close as you could to the pad and jumped on a plane, half expecting to turn up and find the tickets were all some kind of con, but luckily at the visitor centre we were all herded onto a bus and taken off to some sticky corner of the swamp that is Cape Canaveral. I think we had a small hold but otherwise miraculously the countdown went all to plan.
I knew it would be loud but I hadn't expected how it was loud. It wasn't the ear splitting roar I was waiting for, well the first seconds were, but it quickly morphed into to the snap, crackle and pop anybody who has seen it will recognise. Then there was the rumble. It was a strange, all encompassing vibration through the ground, your body, everything around you. Ive never experienced it before or since, no concert comes close. Every car alarm for miles around was blaring.
Anyway, a genuine highlight of my life and once Artemis gets going I will be taking my own son to see that.
I knew it would be loud but I hadn't expected how it was loud. It wasn't the ear splitting roar I was waiting for, well the first seconds were, but it quickly morphed into to the snap, crackle and pop anybody who has seen it will recognise. Then there was the rumble. It was a strange, all encompassing vibration through the ground, your body, everything around you. Ive never experienced it before or since, no concert comes close. Every car alarm for miles around was blaring.
Anyway, a genuine highlight of my life and once Artemis gets going I will be taking my own son to see that.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff