STS-135: The Last Launch of the Shuttle
 

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/

Godspeed. :salute:

According to the news I just heard, it may be delayed due to weather conditions. I think if it doesn't go off today the next possible launch date is the 16th. :hmmm:

Looking at about T-55 at the moment, so far so good. :hmmm:

Live countdown clock here: http://countdown.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/countdown/cdt/

EDIT: The REMOVE BEFORE FLIGHT tag has been removed. T-25. Looks good to go so far.

T-9 and off hold
:up:

Edit T-2

Noooo, hold again at -31 seconds

It's off

Or not...
http://i53.tinypic.com/2886ttj.jpg

Yeah, I think the circuit indicating the Fuel tank cap (Gaseous Vent Arm) had swung clear of the shuttle didn't fire properly so it had to be checked visually through a camera.

Either way, a good launch, good work to all those involved. :salute:

I think he meant "It's off" as in "It's taken off"

Recently, the Shuttle turned into a two-edged sword, in my perception. I grew up with its announcement and then first missions launched, when I was a schoolboy. It was exciting, fascinating, it had magic. But this article:

http://www.welt.de/wissenschaft/welt...le-Traums.html

taught me that it was anything but magioc, but was a royal economic disaster that did not held the promises for cost reduction that it's defenders promised, also it was not as trend-forming as claimed, it was a pürogram poorly managed and technical maintencnes was overly complictaed due to it having allowed to turn into an overly complicated machine.

My heart is pro shuttle, but my mind, if this article points out correct facts, necessarily must be asking qhy it has not been buried many years earlier. They quote a US poll on the most appreciated acchievements of American space program in that article, and to my surprise the Shuttle just made fourth place (I expected it on two, behind the moon landing).

It was terribly expensive, it hgelped to turn NASA fiancnes into what they are now, and it did not deliver to all the promsies that were made. Also, it consumed too many of NASA's resources for too long - resources whose lacking investement into non-Shuttle issues NASA is feeling now. Let'S face it - it is high time that the shuttle gets buried.It seems it already stayed far too long.

But the heart is bleeding, yes, I admit that. But more important are the questions: What now, Nasa? and How to pay for it?

I'm currently reading "Limit", the latest blockbuster thriller by German author Frank Schätzing, the guy behind "Der Schwarm" (a book I have read four times in three years). There they have build the spacelift into geostationary orbit, and private companies have left states and nations (and especially NASA) behind with their ambitious space programs, running much , more efficient because they bypass the bureaucratic hurdles and political inefficiency. Like often with Schätzing, whose later books are a mixture of fact-oriented science report, science fiction and thrill, I think that he probably forsees things correctly in this regard.

Nice to read, btw, it is pulling you through those 1300 pages of "Limit" like nothing. Recommended for German readers if you seek for some entertaining reading. Schätzing really knows how to do it. But if it will become as thrilling as "Der Schwarm", remains to be seen...

I did mean it's lifted off. But it also separated lovely.

http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/9946/image2zjn.jpg

That was fantastic images from that camera, the curvature of Earth appearing, the blue and white swirls getting faster and faster, the plasma appearing just before separation... :yep:

Sad to see the last launch.

Good night and good luck.

That's the end of America as the #1 space power.

:down:

I understand we now will use Russian rockets to get materials into space.

As I heard...

Quote:

Mark Uhran: So we’re at a major point in transition with the International Space Station Program. With the ramping down of the space shuttle, we are changing our approach to transportation. Fortunately, we have, through this international partnership, very reliable vehicles, the Russian Soyuz and the Russian Progress, we’ve also recently demonstrated in Europe and in Japan, cargo vehicles that can rendezvous with the space station. And then finally, in the United States have contracted with private organizations to demonstrate new cargo transportation vehicle over the next 12 to 24 months. We’re confident that those demonstrations will occur roughly on schedule and that we will be able to transition from the shuttle era where we were basically using the equipment an 18-wheeler truck to move large pieces of the space station, large elements like laboratories and solar arrays up to orbit, but for the next 10 years, we’re not going to need the equivalent of an 18-wheeler, we’re going to need the equivalent of a pick-up truck. And that’s what these international vehicles are and what these commercial vehicles are that we expect to demonstrate here in the next several months. These last two flights are essentially propositioning the final spares that we need to make sure that the vehicle will operate safely until commercial transportation systems become available. We have an extremely capable platform and our view is that we can turn that to productive uses over the next decade.

Mind you, the Russians aren't exactly in hot shape either (the whole program is still built around a rocket design that's almost 60 years old) and replacements for the Soyuz keep stalling. Other players still need time to catch up. So it's not too late for the US to get its act together, but it'll really need a swift kick in the butt to get re-started on the right track.

But I don't think anyone interested in serious exploration gives much credence to private space enterprises that the US seems to be erroneously counting on to save it now. NASA was always the envy of other space agencies, and it is indeed a shame to see it come to this.

Good launch though, hoping for safe rest-of-journey here!

I understand that do to the high cost the Russians charge us that there is a private company that is using some of the old launch pads(they are using a different launch method so they are just using the pads) around the cape if they get the contract they will be launching most of our material up while or people go up from Baikonur.

NASA got kind of screwed over budget wise here lately hopefully this will only be a short term problem.

I do not fully agree with CCIP feelings though a private company does not have to deal with governmental restraints that NASA does by contracting out over the next several years they can do much more than they can with current budgets therefore I don't see private companies getting involved as such a bad thing private industry can advance technology as effectively as any government can sometimes more so.

The problem with a private company operating a space program is return on investment. If the profits are not large enough and soon enough, it's not worth doing it.

What NASA needs is a space exploration program. Not a space exploitation program like they've been doing. Let private companies handle launching satellites and supply ISS. Let private companies take over running ISS if they can handle it. Put NASA back on track for going places we haven't been, and doing things that haven't been done.

A very good distinction to make. :yeah: