NASA grounds shuttle fleet

[gldstwmn]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/07/27/space.shuttle/index.html

debris during launch draws concern

Wednesday, July 27, 2005; Posted: 6:45 p.m. EDT (22:45 GMT)


KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Florida (CNN) -- There will be no more shuttle launches until NASA engineers determine the effect of debris that fell from the shuttle Discovery during blastoff Tuesday, said Bill Parsons, space shuttle program manager.

"We are treating it very seriously," he told reporters. "Are we losing sleep over it? Not yet."

He added, "We will continue to do the evaluation."

Discovery is due to return to Kennedy Space Center in Florida on August 7.

The date of the next planned mission had not been set.

Earlier Wednesday NASA lead flight director Paul Hill said that, based on engineers' "first-blush" analysis of falling debris, there was "no significant problem" with the orbiting shuttle.

Hill spoke to reporters after astronauts, using a robotic arm equipped with a camera and laser, spent "one hell of a day" poring over every inch of Discovery, looking for surface damage.

Although the mission had been scheduled to search for damage, concern about the issue was heightened after videotape from an array of cameras trained on Discovery during Tuesday's liftoff showed a piece of debris falling away from the underside of the orbiter.

NASA officials said the debris could have broken off from a tile near a door covering the nose landing gear. Space shuttles have shed tile during previous missions without consequences.

But falling debris from the shuttle Columbia during its ascent was blamed for damage to the craft that led to its destruction and the deaths of all seven crew members upon its re-entry into Earth's atmosphere in February 2003.

The subsequent grounding of the shuttle fleet and the investigation into the disaster prompted NASA to make safety-related activities a priority for this first post-Columbia mission.

Appearing at a news conference at Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, Hill said that NASA engineers' "first blush, when they looked at this, was it wasn't going to be a significant problem." But, he added, engineers have seen "some things" in video from the launch that cause "some concern."

"This has been one hell of a day," Hill said, referring to Discovery's seven-member crew's operation of the 50-foot robotic arm and its 50-foot boom extension. "The crew has had three crew members fully employed, doing nothing but this all day long. And when any of the rest of them had a spare moment, they were also there helping to look out the windows and look at camera views."

NASA was analyzing data from video and from the robotic arm, the launch and elsewhere to decide what steps -- if any -- to take next.

"We should start seeing the jury coming in on those decisions by the end of the crew's day tomorrow," Hill said. "My guess is we're not going to have a problem."

At a Tuesday news conference, NASA flight operations manager John Shannon predicted that the space agency would have enough information by Sunday to decide whether any repairs are needed and, if so, whether such repairs would be possible.

Shannon said the initial estimate of the debris showed it was about 1.5 inches long. He said it might be the tile covering rather than the tile itself.

Footage of Discovery's launch also showed a piece of debris falling from the external fuel tank at the time it separated from the orbiter, Shannon said. However, it did not strike the orbiter, he said.

Footage also showed that the external fuel tank's nose cone hit a bird about 2.5 seconds after liftoff -- when Discovery was probably traveling too slowly to sustain any damage, he said.

Hill said it has not been lost on controllers that this is the first mission after the Columbia disaster.

"We have seven folks living on this space shuttle and counting on us to do the right thing and keep them safe and not to get all giddy and high-fiving each other," he said.

"There's a certain amount of almost shock that we really are here, we really are doing these things that so many folks ... thought that we couldn't do."

As the orbiter approaches the international space station for a scheduled Thursday 7:18 a.m. ET docking, the station's crew will photograph Discovery to look further for any damage.

Shuttle crew members plan to test repair techniques during three scheduled space walks by astronauts Steve Robinson and Soichi Noguchi of Japan. During their space walks, Robinson and Noguchi also plan to service the space station.

As part of the safety changes instituted after Columbia, NASA developed contingency plans for astronauts to try to repair damaged shuttles so they can return to Earth. In the event a spacecraft cannot be repaired, plans call for the crew to take refuge in the space station until a rescue mission can be launched.

[skcin]

I saw this earlier. Scary. Wasn't it parts falling off the last shuttle what caused it to burn up on re-entry? :(

[strandinthewind]

A friend of mine is an engineer for NASA and said that the shuttle often sustaons minor damage during any take off. Thus, that could account for debris. The last shuttle sustained significant damage of the heat retardant tiles, which is what doomed it. It reamins to be seen if the same thing has happened here. I pray for their safety though.

[DrummerDeanna]

I just saw that article too :distress:

Crazy. I do hope that this shuttle gets back safely.

[Mokona]

I think it's time they start thinking about seriously retiring this program. These orbiters are all pretty old and have gone above and beyond what was initially expected of them. How many more safe launches can they expect to have? It's always been risky, but it seems even more so now.

I'm really worried about the astronauts and am just hoping they'll all come back safe and sound. NASA's employees are some of the smartest people on earth, but I think bureaucracy gets in the way of them making good decisions sometimes. :distress:

[skcin]

So, at the risk of starting yet another heated argument, um, why the hell are we still spending gazillions of dollars to keep going up into space? I kind of agree with those remote satellite things to take pics of things really far away to keep exploring, but isn't manned space flight kind of "been there, done that?" Are they going to the moon again? If so, for what? If not, then what are they doing?

I just think that money could be better spent on other things.

[ryan8472]

What fleet? I thought they only had one or two left to begin with? :shrug: :laugh:

[Mokona]

No, the initial fleet of shuttles consisted of Columbia, Challenger, Discovery and Atlantis. The last two and Columbia (before the accident) were joined by Endeavour, which rolled off the assembly line in '92. Why they don't use the newest of the shuttles is beyond me.

As for continuing to go up, I will always hope they at least send satellites up there so we can keep exploring and discovering new things about the galaxy, but I'm not sure about manned missions anymore, at least for now. There have been a lot of benefits that came from the space programs, but they need to reconsider if all of this is really worth it right now. One scrubbed launch costs over $600K, which can buy a lot of food and medication for people here on Earth.

[gldstwmn]

I saw this earlier. Scary. Wasn't it parts falling off the last shuttle what caused it to burn up on re-entry? :(

Yes. :nod:

[gldstwmn]

I think it's time they start thinking about seriously retiring this program. These orbiters are all pretty old and have gone above and beyond what was initially expected of them. How many more safe launches can they expect to have? It's always been risky, but it seems even more so now.



I think this was one of the last missions with the existing shuttles.

[gldstwmn]

So, at the risk of starting yet another heated argument, um, why the hell are we still spending gazillions of dollars to keep going up into space?

Because Chimpy wants to go to Mars. :lol:
Honestly, I have no idea. I think some of it had to do with keeping the Hubble telescope and space station operational.

[GardenStateGirlie]

So, at the risk of starting yet another heated argument, um, why the hell are we still spending gazillions of dollars to keep going up into space? I kind of agree with those remote satellite things to take pics of things really far away to keep exploring, but isn't manned space flight kind of "been there, done that?" Are they going to the moon again? If so, for what? If not, then what are they doing?

I just think that money could be better spent on other things.

This mission was to get supplies to the International Space Station and to take back with them, things taking up room on the Space Station that are no longer needed. Currently, an American and a Russian are on the Space Station and have been there for several months. I believe they return to Earth later this year.
Timeline of Mission (http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/crew/event_timeline.html)

[Mokona]

They were talking before about keeping the program running until 2010, and then retiring the fleet. :shrug: They had better think again about that idea.

[skcin]

^ Well what the f*ck are they doing up there? :laugh:

[GardenStateGirlie]

They were talking before about keeping the program running until 2010, and then retiring the fleet. :shrug: They had better think again about that idea.

Considering all of the brain power at NASA, i'm surprised they haven't come up with newer technology to impliment as far as protecting the space shuttle from burning up on re-entry, etc. If they can find a way to keep cameras on the fuel tanks as the shuttle ascents from Earth's atmosphere, then surely they can come up with something for the actual shuttle itself where there won't be nearly as much debris loss.

[GardenStateGirlie]

^ Well what the f*ck are they doing up there? :laugh:

There are many experiments and tests that are done while onboard the Space Station as well as while the space shuttle is in orbit. As much as I think money could better be spent elsewhere, I can then argue with the fact that I sat at the DMV for an hour yesterday while a bunch of overpaid, underworked state government assholes did absolutely nothing. I can also argue the fact that it's a waste of government money to send out zillions of forms per year. I have a friend that works for the IRS and designs the tax forms. If he ****s up a form, it costs the government a few million dollars. Imagine where all of that money could be better spent. "Out of a $2.4 trillion budget, less than 0.8% is spent on the entire space program." Hardly breaking the bank, IMO.

I think there is and has been much learned from experimentation health and science wise that we can then utilize here on Earth. If you want to take a look at all of the advancements in technology that have been improved on and invented courtesy of the space program, this is a site to take a look at.

http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html

[estranged4life]

have yet another interesting item to discuss with my sister Lesa, Whose husband Scott knows a few people on this shuttle (He works on the F-22's at Edwards and knows a bunch of NASA folk).

Hope everything turns out to be alright for 'em...

[Mokona]

I agree about the government workers. There are many who work very hard and deserve their benefits and pay, but then there's the goof-offs who just milk the system and basically can't be fired. My uncle works for the government and has told the family some stories. :rolleyes:

As for why NASA hasn't come up with better technology, they seem like they've been in a rut for 20+ years with this shuttle and have been victims of their own decisions at times. They were warned by a couple of Morton Thiokol's engineers back in '86 about the danger the cold presented to Challenger's SRB's O-rings, yet they chose not to heed that advice. They also knew these orbiters were aging and weren't going to continue to hold up that well to repeated launches, yet ignored some of their own engineers' warnings.

I think it's like any government organization - the people with the most promise are probably stuck in the middle somewhere and have to go through layers of management to get an idea across, while the big ego suits are running the show. Money is a factor too - there have been a lot of cutbacks in spending for the space program.

[GardenStateGirlie]

I agree about the government workers. There are many who work very hard and deserve their benefits and pay, but then there's the goof-offs who just milk the system and basically can't be fired. My uncle works for the goverment and has told the family some stories. :rolleyes:

As for why NASA hasn't come up with better technology, they seem like they've been in a rut for 20+ years with this shuttle and have been victims of their own decisions at times. They were warned by a couple of Morton Thiokol's engineers back in '86 about the danger the cold presented to Challenger's SRB's O-rings, yet they chose not to heed that advice. They also knew these orbiters were aging and weren't going to continue to hold up that well to repeated launches, yet ignored some of their own engineers' warnings.

I think it's like any government organization - the people with the most promise are probably stuck in the middle somewhere and have to go through layers of management to get an idea across, while the big ego suits are running the show. Money is a factor too - there have been a lot of cutbacks in spending for the space program.

After the Columbia accident and after NASA came under fire, wasn't it then brought under new leadership? It seems like there's a whole new regime so-to-speak. No doubt, after what happened to Columbia, if they want a space program of any sort to be in existance, they'll wise up and become much more conscious of design flaws which is what I think we're seeing here. Honestly, they could retire the fleet all together and make money off of the parts if not use them for something else.

[Mokona]

This article sheds some light on NASA's personnel and some of their challenges:

http://p134.news.scd.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20050711/ca_pr_on_sc/shuttle_rusty_nasa

They don't make flight directors like Gene Kranz and Chris Kraft anymore either. Guys like those were one in a million flight directors and Kranz was instrumental in bringing Apollo 13's astronauts back home. NASA needs people like those with great minds, piloting ability and good decision-making skills.

[greatdarkwing]

There are many experiments and tests that are done while onboard the Space Station as well as while the space shuttle is in orbit. As much as I think money could better be spent elsewhere, I can then argue with the fact that I sat at the DMV for an hour yesterday while a bunch of overpaid, underworked state government assholes did absolutely nothing. I can also argue the fact that it's a waste of government money to send out zillions of forms per year. I have a friend that works for the IRS and designs the tax forms. If he ****s up a form, it costs the government a few million dollars. Imagine where all of that money could be better spent. "Out of a $2.4 trillion budget, less than 0.8% is spent on the entire space program." Hardly breaking the bank, IMO.

I think there is and has been much learned from experimentation health and science wise that we can then utilize here on Earth. If you want to take a look at all of the advancements in technology that have been improved on and invented courtesy of the space program, this is a site to take a look at.

http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html

:shocked: YOU ARE SOOO HOT! :woohoo: :thumbsup:

[GardenStateGirlie]

This article sheds some light on NASA's personnel and some of their challenges:

http://p134.news.scd.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20050711/ca_pr_on_sc/shuttle_rusty_nasa

They don't make flight directors like Gene Kranz and Chris Kraft anymore either. Guys like those were one in a million and both were to be credited with bringing Apollo 13 down safely. NASA needs people like those with great minds, piloting ability and good decision-making skills.

Thanks for the read. I've had a look at all of the profiles for the astronauts and I think their background is pretty amazing. Let's hope they all do come home safely with their prior knowledge and the training they've received.

[greatdarkwing]

Thanks for the read. I've had a look at all of the profiles for the astronauts and I think their background is pretty amazing. Let's hope they all do come home safely with their prior knowledge and the training they've received.

Agreed. I hope all goes well for them. I loved how they were woken up this morning with "I Got You Babe."

[GardenStateGirlie]

Images Used For Shuttle Briefing (http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/multimedia/post_mmt_briefing_072705.html)

You can see exactly which section has lost tile. I mean, they literally have each piece of tile accounted for and down to a fine science.

[Mokona]

Thanks for that link, GSG. They certainly do have it down to a tee, don't they? It looks like the shuttle crew is in good hands with these engineers. I don't remember Columbia's problem being so thoroughly dissected.

BTW, I love having someone to chat with about all of this! My family usually tunes me out after awhile. :laugh:

[GardenStateGirlie]

Thanks for that link, GSG. They certainly do have it down to a tee, don't they? It looks like the shuttle crew is in good hands with these engineers. I don't remember Columbia's problem being so thoroughly dissected.

BTW, I love having someone to chat with about all of this! My family usually tunes me out after awhile. :laugh:

Well, like I said, to prevent any further blows to the agency, it was either make the effort and sink all you have into the prevention of another disaster or they can kiss the program goodbye. I don't think there was any other alternative for them.

Oh, me too! I was schooling Greg (DeadliestPoison) on escape velocity earlier. He thinks i'm an uber nerd now. I love it :laugh:

[skcin]

Some of the most frequently asked questions about the U.S. space program are "Why go into space when we have so many problems here on Earth?" and "What does the space program do for me?"

I like how the first line on the site Marissa directed me to directly almost quoted me. :laugh:

[bikerchic]

^ Well what the f*ck are they doing up there? :laugh:
Because you are the "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA", King of the world, nuff said :D

[GardenStateGirlie]

I like how the first line on the site Marissa directed me to directly almost quoted me. :laugh:

:laugh: Well, I mean, it's a relevant question that's obviously asked a lot. I remember in 8th grade, we had to decide whether or not we were for or against space exploration. I suppose I learned a lot from research because ever since then, i've been all about it :nod:

[GardenStateGirlie]

NASA Pessimistic About Solving Debris Woes (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050728/ap_on_sc/space_shuttle)

SPACE CENTER, Houston - NASA may never be able to prevent threatening chunks of insulation foam from breaking off the shuttle's fuel tank during launch, the agency's chief said Thursday, a day after future flights were ordered grounded because of the problem during Discovery's liftoff.

"We are trying to get it down to the level that cannot damage the orbiter," NASA administrator Michael Griffin told NBC's "Today."

"We will never be able to get the amount of debris shed by the tank down to zero," he said.

With Discovery in orbit, NASA grounded all future flights because a large chunk of foam had broken off the external fuel tank in a hauntingly similar fashion to Columbia's doomed mission. This time, NASA believes the foam missed the spacecraft, although it's being closely inspected.

"Everything that we see at this point says that the orbiter is in fact a clean bird," Griffin told ABC's "Good Morning America" on Thursday shortly after the shuttle did a somersault maneuver to allow the crew on the international space station to photograph the shuttle's belly for signs of damage. Discovery later docked at station to deliver long-awaited supplies.

Griffin stressed in a statement late Wednesday that the current mission was a test flight and "among the things we are testing are the integrity of the foam insulation and the performance of new camera equipment installed to detect problems."

"The cameras worked well. The foam did not," he said.

The loss of such a large chunk of debris, a vexing problem NASA thought had been fixed, shattered the euphoria from Tuesday's shuttle launch, the first in 2 1/2 years. The redesign of the fuel tank was the focal point of the space agency's $1 billion-plus effort to make the 20-year-old space shuttles safer to fly following the 2003 Columbia tragedy.

The grounding also adds to the burden on the space station, which has been relying solely on Russia's much smaller spacecraft for crew and cargo deliveries.

House Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., said NASA is handling the situation "exactly right."

"It doesn't appear that the mission is in jeopardy. Nothing is in jeopardy except the schedule. But I don't want to underestimate the seriousness of it in terms of the future," Boehlert said.

The three remaining shuttles are due to retire in 2010, and a new spacecraft is in the works. President Bush has a lofty plan for NASA to return astronauts to the moon by 2020 and eventually to Mars. It's unclear how the latest grounding might affect public sentiment for the space program.

The piece of foam flew off Discovery's redesigned tank just two minutes after what initially looked like a perfect liftoff, right after the booster rockets peeled away. But in less than an hour NASA had spotted images of a mysterious object whirling away from the tank.

Mission managers did not realize what the object was — or how much havoc it would cause — until Wednesday after reviewing video and images taken by just a few of the 100-plus cameras in place to watch for such dangers.

Shuttle program manager Bill Parsons offered no excuses, saying, "You have to admit when you're wrong. We were wrong."

Engineers believe the irregularly sized piece of foam that came off was 24 to 33 inches long, 10 to 14 inches wide, and between 2 and 8 inches thick — only somewhat smaller than the 1.67-pound chunk that smashed into Columbia's left wing during liftoff. The plate-sized hole let in superheated gases that caused the shuttle to break up on its return to Earth on Feb. 1, 2003.

On Discovery, the foam broke away from a different part of the tank than the piece that mortally wounded Columbia.

Atlantis — whose own fuel tank is now suspect — was supposed to lift off in September, but that mission is now on indefinite hold. Parsons refused to speculate when a shuttle might fly again, but did not rule out the possibility that Discovery's current mission may be the only one for 2005.

Parsons said it was unlikely Atlantis would be needed for a rescue mission, in the event Discovery could not return safely to Earth and its astronauts had to move into the space station. Discovery, fortunately, appears to be in good shape for re-entry, he said.

Wednesday's inspection of Discovery's wings and nose using a new 100-foot, laser-tipped crane turned up nothing alarming, but analysis was ongoing, Hale said.

In addition to the big chunk of foam, several smaller pieces broke off, including at least one from an area of the fuel tank that had been modified after Columbia. Thermal tile was also damaged on Discovery's belly soon after liftoff; one tile lost a 1 1/2-inch piece right next to the set of doors for the nose landing gear, a particularly vulnerable spot.

Deputy shuttle manager Wayne Hale said none of the tile damage looked serious and likely would not require repairs in orbit.

Imagery experts and engineers expect to know by Thursday afternoon whether the gouge left by the missing piece of tile — or anything else — needs another look. The astronauts' inspection boom could determine precisely how deep the damage is, and they will probably pull it back out Friday.

[gldstwmn]

Because you are the "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA", King of the world, nuff said :D

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: I love Canadians. :)

[skcin]

NASA Pessimistic About Solving Debris Woes (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050728/ap_on_sc/space_shuttle)

SPACE CENTER, Houston - NASA may never be able to prevent threatening chunks of insulation foam from breaking off the shuttle's fuel tank during launch, the agency's chief said Thursday, a day after future flights were ordered grounded because of the problem during Discovery's liftoff.

"We are trying to get it down to the level that cannot damage the orbiter," NASA administrator Michael Griffin told NBC's "Today."

"We will never be able to get the amount of debris shed by the tank down to zero," he said.



HELLO?!?! Why not? You're NASA, for God's sake! If not you, then who?




BTW,Marissa - was it you who loves the movie Spacecamp? I really need to watch that cool-as-hell flick again. I'm serious.

[strandinthewind]

HELLO?!?! Why not? You're NASA, for God's sake! If not you, then who?

....

That was what I was saying earlier that my friend said - it must only shed a significant amount.

[GardenStateGirlie]

HELLO?!?! Why not? You're NASA, for God's sake! If not you, then who?




BTW,Marissa - was it you who loves the movie Spacecamp? I really need to watch that cool-as-hell flick again. I'm serious.

I thought the same thing when I read that.

Word. That's totally me :laugh: I haven't seen it in a looong time but I totally need to find it and watch it again -- it's been too long.

[Mokona]

I think even NASA's beyond saving this thing now. They need to put the shuttles in the Smithsonian and start working on more advanced satellites to send to the planets and maybe even someday, if the budget cutbacks aren't too severe, work on creating the space plane I've heard about.

Anyhow, this is too funny:

BTW,Marissa - was it you who loves the movie Spacecamp? I really need to watch that cool-as-hell flick again. I'm serious. I have this movie on DVD and have watched it about 10 times in the last week - LOL. My husband laughs at me because it's incredibly unrealistic, but I like it anyway! :lol: "I'm sorry, Katherine's not in right now, but if you'd like to leave your name and number at the tone, she'd be glad to get back to you." One of the best lines!

[GardenStateGirlie]

I think even NASA's beyond saving this thing now. They need to put the shuttles in the Smithsonian and start working on more advanced satellites to send to the planets and maybe even someday, if the budget cutbacks aren't too severe, work on creating the space plane I've heard about.

Anyhow, this is too funny:

I have this movie on DVD and have watched it about 10 times in the last week - LOL. My husband laughs at me because it's incredibly unrealistic, but I like it anyway! :lol: "I'm sorry, Katherine's not in right now, but if you'd like to leave your name and number at the tone, she'd be glad to get back to you." One of the best lines!

Even if they were to create a space plane, they'd still have to face the issue of shielding the shuttle. Whether that's looking towards other materials to shield it or other means to keep the foam from falling off, they're going to have the same problem.

"Russia could send up to three Soyuz rockets to the ISS between now and February if an evacuation of the ISS crew becomes necessary due to problems with Discovery, Russian officials said."

What's so different about their technology than ours? It seems they don't have nearly as many problems when it comes to shielding their rockets (which i'm sure have much of the same parts as a shuttle).

Oh, and although incredibly unrealistic, I just like the whole premise behind Space Camp. It was one of my favorite childhood films.

[Mokona]

Hmm, I learned quite a bit by Googling the difference between Apollo's heat shield technology and the shuttle's. It seems Apollo had a huge budget back in the day and had non-reusable capsules with ablative heat shields, which vaporized upon re-entry. (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/834596/posts) The shuttle was designed to be a cheaper (because of budget cutbacks), reusable spacecraft that could transport a lot of cargo. Soyuz uses similar technology to Apollo's and isn't reusable, which is why they don't have as many heat shield problems and haven't lost a crew since 1971. But according to this article, Russia is currently cash-strapped, which makes sense:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6124756/

One of the ideas behind the space plane program is a possible use of similar Apollo capsule technology, but this article explains that the program's image would be changed since it would be like the president driving a Volkswagon instead of a limo:

http://www.space.com/spacenews/archive03/orbitalarch_031703.html

One of the biggest concerns is money, and people don't know if the American public would be open to spending billions on creating a new program. Back in the days of Apollo, Americans were excited about going to the moon and there was a lot more support for exploring space than there is today. So that is one reason why the shuttle program continues to be used instead of focusing on a new creation.

After reading all of this, I have no idea what the answer is and how we'll even be able to create a new program. I can see why Americans don't want to pour billions into space anymore when there are so many problems down here. But then again, Bush has plans for us to return to the moon and even on to Mars. I know there's been talk of privatization of the space program and maybe that's the answer? :shrug:

[GODDESS6]

i am just scared for them period, the astronauts~ it was my senior yr & they had us watching challenger in '86 when it exploded~ then when this last shuttle endeavor was the name right?, disintegrated in 2003, we had just gotten our new computer, & i remember the sales manager, going to this site & showing us where you could listen to some of the last transmissions back to earth~ it was sad & astonishing~ NASA keeps acting like whatever damage the shuttle has suffered is no big deal, at least that is what i get from the news reports here~ i pray that they have a very safe return :thumbsup: ~ may god bless them!!! :thumbsup: ~

[GardenStateGirlie]

So much for this grounding of the fleet....

Another Shuttle Could Launch Soon (http://news.yahoo.com/fc/science/space_shuttle)

SPACE CENTER, Houston - NASA Chief Michael Griffin said Friday he hasn't given up on launching another space shuttle later this year, despite suspending flights until the space agency can stop foam insulation from snapping off and threatening the spacecraft. He said he has set up a "tiger team" to try to solve the problem as quickly as possible. "We don't expect this to be a long drawn-out affair," he said by telephone from Washington in a briefing with reporters in Houston.