NASA Watch: Today is docking day at the station..Shuttle Discovery is closing

[ddeclue]

About 2 orbits (180 minutes) out from arrival they are about 1140 miles apart and closing at about 520 miles per orbit. Once they arrive they'll have to do the TPS (thermal protection system or "tile") inspection manuever where they flip the shuttle around so that the ISS (space station crew) can take pictures and then they have to do the docking and pressurization etc. before they can open the door.

If you have NASA TV (carried by some cable companies and by DirecTV) and find the space program interesting, today is a good day to watch. You can also stream it at www.nasa.gov

:patriot:

Doug D.

[Lost in CT]

1. I better hafvfe Nasa tv I noticed that around channel 720 I have HD barbie television...

800+ channels and honestly I watch 10 of them...

[ddeclue]

2. Instead of "Malibu" barbie they need to have ISS barbie,,

so few women go into science, mathematics and engineering!

:)

[BobRossi]

3. More wasted tax dollars.

There is no need for taxpayer funded manned space programs.

[ddeclue]

4. Thanks for the unexplained assertion which is in fact WRONG.

:P

Actually "wasting" tax dollars is saving companies like AIG and building football and baseball and basketball stadiums for billionaire sports team owners.

Meaningful scientific research is done on ISS that can't be done by unmanned satellites.

Doug D.

[Spinzonner]

5. A point to ponder

If even a fraction of the money spent on the manned space program had been invested in Robotics research and development, where would that technology be today and what capabilities would it have that would minimize the claim that such things can only be done by man ?

[ddeclue]

6. Look, I'm an aerospace engineer and a software engineer

and rule number one of computers even after 60 years is:

Computers are STUPID. At BEST the only do exactly what you told them to do.

NO robotics is NOT the answer for any number of reasons - the software is STILL not anywhere near as flexible a solution as people with BRAINS are.

Sorry...

Doug D.

[Spinzonner]

7. You just ignored the point

Where would that technology be with the kind of investment made in the manned space program.

And don't wave your credentials at me. I'm also a software developer.

[ddeclue]

8. It would STILL NOT be able to replace human beings..

if you really are a software developer you would know that...

I write software for hardware control..(i.e. things like robotics)..

You are just a NASA basher who thinks that the money ought to be spent on social programs when in fact what you are offering is a false dichotomy. The money spent on manned space has pushed technology much farther than unmanned space which requires much simpler and less sophisticated technology (but which also accomplishes far less).

Manned space has paid for itself many times over in terms of improvements in quality of life. Instead of complaining about NASA's budget (a mere 15 billion dollars) why don't you complain about bailing out a bunch of Wall St. leeches instead who are being bailed out to the tune of 50+ years of NASA's budget under TARP?

[Spinzonner]

12. We are not replacing them

We would be substituting for them

And how dare you question whether I am "really" a software developer. I've also written my share of firmware.

I'm no NASA basher. I support the space program but not every ill-conceived, misbegotten project like the fragile, shockingly risky engineered Space Shuttle.

And you still haven't addressed what could have been accomplished in robotics with the money wasted on the shuttle program. Whivh would have had it's own beneficial byproducts.

[ddeclue]

14. I dare to question your credibility because you talk like a typical luddite NASA basher.

Space exploration, like any true exploration and discovery is inherently "risky" - you can't avoid risk and truly explore the unknown and discover something new.

And YES I HAVE addressed what can and cannot be accomplished by robotics. Computers are NO match for the human brain and we DO have a space program which already does this - it's called deep space. When we send deep space probes out they are by necessity robots but the technology involved is really not all that impressive because it doesn't have to be so. Requiring humans to be on the mission pushes the technology much farther along than leaving them out.

Douglas J. De Clue
Bachelor of Aerospace Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Class of '89

[Johonny]

22. I can't help but smile

Your brain works great. In your head on Earth. In space it doesn't work so well. Your brain can guide a robot though acting as a tool from millions of miles away. Our tools will be exploring space for us. Our robots have been vastly out pacing man spaced missions not recently, since the very beginning of space exploration. It's not some miss guided secret its the very fact of Aerospace engineering that most people in the business not connected to NASA manned space missions understand. Open up recent issue of science and count the number of science articles generated by our unmanned missions compared to our manned missions. It's not even close. Our tools have been getting better since the dawn or mankind. Mankind itself hasn't change very much in 200,000 years. Our tools will be exploring outer space. The dead lift weight(he resources to keep humans alive) clearly limits missions more than they have "advanced" them or pushed technology along. I don't see the point of arguing this history of the US space program pretty much clearly demonstrates the other poster is correct. Unmanned space missions have accomplished vastly more than manned missions at a fraction of the cost for the last 40+ years. There is no reason to believe this trend will not continue.

[Johonny]

11. point to ponder

we are already heading to Pluto, orbiting Saturn and driving around Mars. Meanwhile people are sitting around in their same low Earth orbit that they were in the 1960s.

[ddeclue]

15. Hey give us 150 billion dollars instead of giving 750 billion to AIG et.al

and we'll take you to Mars - probably for less than that even. The only reason we haven't been able to do more is that since Apollo, NASA has been budget starved. It is also the reasons that compromises were made to the Shuttle's design - you can't short change NASA and then blame it for not being able to get more done on no money. That's awfully hypocritical and self serving.

Doug D.

[alfredo]

20. We used to call that a double bind.

[Johonny]

21. the only reason we haven't done more is

there isn't very much for humans to do in space. We have a great space program, it's just that NASA sold America that science can only be done by humans or some how it's less of an accomplishment. There is nothing a human can do on Mars that a robotic space craft can't, but lots of things a robotic space craft can do a human couldn't possibly do. Our machines will explore the solar system.

[alfredo]

17. Such technologies will be developed. I'd rather we did it than somebody else.

[Johonny]

9. how else will we know if ants can sort tiny screws in space?

[ddeclue]

13. Ants sorting tiny screws?

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/science/experiments/Expedition.html

Sorry but where again are the ants sorting tiny screws?

And where did they get tiny screwdrivers?

There has been a lot of good basic research in human physiology in microgravity which can't be done on earth, and a lot of good alloy, combustion, and protein research in microgravity which would be very difficult to do purely using robotics.

Doug D.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. You use robots.

[renate]

10. thank you for the link!

I took it a few steps further to get directly to the TV channel: http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/

It's fun to watch in real time--thank you!

(P.S. After reading the comments above... I'd suggest that not only does the space program advance science, it contributes to our understanding of our place in the Universe. To me, it's like investing in the arts as well as in science.)

[ddeclue]

16. The most important picture ever taken from space was taken by a HUMAN BEING

who understood and appreciated its trancendental nature - December 24th, 1968 Apollo 8.

A robot could never grasp the human significance of this picture or be motivated to take it spontaneously:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. I disagree.

These shots were taken by a Japanese probe just recently.