×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Space Shuttle Endeavour Heads To Space Station

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the still-no-light-speed-engine dept.

NASA 79

RobGoldsmith writes "The STS-127 crew began its journey to the International Space Station at 6:03 p.m. EDT Wednesday when space shuttle Endeavour lifted off from Kennedy Space Center, Fla. The shuttle crew will complete construction of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's Kibo laboratory and deliver a new crew member, astronaut Tim Kopra, to the orbital outpost."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

79 comments

the only thing that concerns me (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28715361)

chinga tu madre

Space news (5, Interesting)

blackjackshellac (849713) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715375)

In other news, 40 years ago, in 30 minutes Apollo 11 lifted off for the first moon walk. I remember it like it was yesterday ... okay, maybe a month ago.

Re:Space news (3, Funny)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715583)

No. In other news, 40 years ago, NASA staged the Apollo 11 liftoff as part of a big effort to fool the Ruskies, and then secreted Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong to a sound stage to film the moon landing. Get it right!

Re:Space news (1)

JustOK (667959) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715995)

The moon landings were REAL. It's the moon that is fake. They went to change the batteries.

Re:Space news (3, Informative)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716621)

The other day, I saw some scientist on TV saying that during mission Apollo 11, they installed mirrors on the moon and that he is still using them today by shooting LASER beams at them from the Earth in order to gather data from the reflection (moon distance etc. )

Now some Slashdot reader must have a powerful enough LASER beam around in order to shoot at the moon. Could this good Samaritan please test if those mirrors are really there and report back to us so we can close this case ?

Thanks in advance ;-))

The scientist said that none of the conspiracy theorists ever went to see him so he could show them the beam reflecting on those mirrors. I am wondering how many people are aware of those mirrors on the moon...

Re:Space news (1)

ShadowBlasko (597519) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716991)

The other day, I saw some scientist on TV saying that during mission Apollo 11, they installed mirrors on the moon and that he is still using them today by shooting LASER beams at them from the Earth in order to gather data from the reflection (moon distance etc. )

Now some Slashdot reader must have a powerful enough LASER beam around in order to shoot at the moon. Could this good Samaritan please test if those mirrors are really there and report back to us so we can close this case ?

Thanks in advance ;-))

The scientist said that none of the conspiracy theorists ever went to see him so he could show them the beam reflecting on those mirrors. I am wondering how many people are aware of those mirrors on the moon...

Every child who grew up watching Mr Wizard.

Re:Space news (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28717547)

Mythbusters found a laser big enough to do this. Video clip here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orvMZn8L1f0

Re:Space news (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 4 years ago | (#28717575)

Don't count on debunking the conspiracy theories quite so easily. All you would prove is that there is something there which reflects the light back at the Earth. Now, that is almost definitely an artificial, human made something (though conspiracy theorists might even argue that) but it certainly doesn't prove that we landed people there.

The best proof is, arguably, the fact that the Russians never disputed it. They had the tracking necissary to see the ship heading out, the recievers necissary to recieve the transmissions coming back, and the motivation to destroy the US's reputation; but not once did the Russian government ever dispute the facts of the moon landing.

Re:Space news (3, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#28718331)

The best proof is, arguably, the fact that the Russians never disputed it. They had the tracking necissary to see the ship heading out, the recievers necissary to recieve the transmissions coming back, and the motivation to destroy the US's reputation; but not once did the Russian government ever dispute the facts of the moon landing.

Nah, that's just proves they were in on the conspiracy. I bet they had a hand in helping the Jews stage 9/11 and the US Navy shoot down TWA Flight 800 too.

Re:Space news (1)

MrKaos (858439) | more than 4 years ago | (#28717721)

Now some Slashdot reader must have a powerful enough LASER beam around in order to shoot at the moon. Could this good Samaritan please test if those mirrors are really there and report back to us so we can close this case ?

Even though I know it won't be enough, Mythbusters shined a laser at the moon [youtube.com] . Of course any committed moon hoaxer will say 'hey you just faked the computer output' to that I would say

aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re:Space news (1)

jc42 (318812) | more than 4 years ago | (#28723485)

Even though I know it won't be enough, Mythbusters shined a laser at the moon. Of course any committed moon hoaxer will say 'hey you just faked the computer output' to that I would say

aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, I wouldn't. I'd prefer to point out that, as with most scientific and/or engineering data, you don't have to depend on some remote authority to verify this. Lasers are for sale lots of places, and it's quite within the capabilities of a "backyard scientist" to set up and perform their own test of the claim. The positions of the reflectors on the moon are published, and google can find them for you. You can design your own experiment to test the existence of the reflectors, and publish your results.

Of course, for a debunker's results to be accepted, you would have to publish a detailed description of your experimental setup, to convince other skeptics that you haven't faked your tests or biased them to produce failure. But that's a routine part os the scientific process.

There's actually nothing wrong with skepticism in scientific circles. It's fairly common, and generally approved. But the skeptics are expected to follow the generally accepted methods, including making their results reproducible by others. The reason the "moon hoax" crowd isn't generally respected is that they haven't done a good job of this.

Very often, the best approach to dealing with assorted skeptics is to just treat their claims seriously. This involves asking them for details of the work they've done to reach their conclusion, and reporting what happens when you attempt to duplicate their work. This is why, for example, the "cold fusion" reports were treated as pseudo-science. It would have been marvelous if they had been corect. But people did seriously attempt to replicate the results, and found that they couldn't.

lasers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28718229)

Now some Slashdot reader must have a powerful enough LASER beam around in order to shoot at the moon.

Get it right: it's frikkin' "lasers".

Re:lasers (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 4 years ago | (#28738565)

Actually, it used to be L.A.S.E.R. for "Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation".

Thanks for the update ! ;-))

It's is still good to know where the now word "laser" comes from I would assume...

Re:Space news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28718589)

Have you ever tried to get a shark to focus on one spot long enough to bounce the beam back? Sheesh, kids these days.....

Re:Space news (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 4 years ago | (#28719231)

The problem is, the crackpots believe the "bounce back" from the moon to be faked via whatever instrument is indicating a signal is being received.

Crackpots are crackpots. You can't rationalize with the irrational. You can't fix stupid.

Re:Space news (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#28720769)

The problem is, the crackpots believe the "bounce back" from the moon to be faked via whatever instrument is indicating a signal is being received.

Ah, see, and I thought the crackpot rebuttle would be that obviously we could send unmanned probes to the moon, and one could have easily dropped a mirror there which then The Man claims was put there by a human.

I guess you're right, my attempt to imagine what a rational moon conspiracy theorist would think was doomed to failure in the first place.

Re:Space news (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#28718363)

and then secreted Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong to a sound stage to film the moon landing

Was OJ Simpson involved or did that only come later [wikipedia.org] ? ;)

Re:Space news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28721485)

Only a moron, person with no education, and lack of respect for anyone or anything would even consider such a bunch of horse droppings to be fact.

Re:Space news (1)

fprintf (82740) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716061)

I learned a tremendous amount by watching "In the shadow of the moon" as posted on YouTube. Despite walking on the moon, for real, these astronauts are really down to earth about it, many times really funny too. Perhaps it is due to 40 years of dealing with publicity and telling their stories. In any event, I highly recommend this documentary. It is 90 or 100 minutes in 10 minute segments and well worth it. (I'd post the link, but cannot get to YouTube from work. Google search only brings up the trailer, but a youtube search will bring it right up)

Re:Space news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28726201)

I learned a tremendous amount by watching "In the shadow of the moon" as posted on YouTube. Despite walking on the moon, for real, these astronauts are really down to earth about it, many times really funny too. Perhaps it is due to 40 years of dealing with publicity and telling their stories. In any event, I highly recommend this documentary. It is 90 or 100 minutes in 10 minute segments and well worth it. (I'd post the link, but cannot get to YouTube from work. Google search only brings up the trailer, but a youtube search will bring it right up)

For those who are interested, said YouTube search yields a playlist [youtube.com] of all ten parts.

Re:Space news (3, Informative)

roundisfunny (958531) | more than 4 years ago | (#28717279)

In case you care, the JFK Library is sponsoring a real-time online reenactment of the Apollo 11 mission - complete with actual radio transmissions. http://wechoosethemoon.org/ [wechoosethemoon.org] The URL is based on Kennedy's speech about how we choose the moon, not because it's easy, but because it's hard - or something like that.

Canadian footprint (5, Interesting)

AikonMGB (1013995) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715503)

Incidentally, this is the first time in history that there will be two Canadian astronauts working aboard the ISS simultaneously.

Aikon-

p.s. Better work quick if they've only got 'til 2016 =P

Re:Canadian footprint (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28719121)

So you're saying that it's pretty much inevitable - We're going to witness the first hockey fight in space?

Foam fell off and struck the shuttle (4, Informative)

Mondrames (242558) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715549)

This article [msn.com] says about 9 pieces fell off of the fuel tank and struck the shuttle.

Re:Foam fell off and struck the shuttle (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715815)

Yes, that is one of the reasons they are decommissioning the shuttle fleet and designing new launch vehicles where the crew module is above the tanks.

Re:Foam fell off and struck the shuttle (1)

JuzzFunky (796384) | more than 4 years ago | (#28725271)

In the article linked to above [msn.com] it says:

In case of irreparable damage, the astronauts could move into the space station for two to three months and await rescue by another shuttle

If they're decommissioning the shuttle fleet, why not leave it up there and use it to extend the space station?

Rocketships to the MOOOON!! (1)

doulos05 (945501) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716321)

Each one is dedicated to finishing the space station -- now 81 percent complete -- and hauling up supplies and big spare parts that are too big to fly on any other rocketship.

Apparently the author of your linked MSN article has been reading a bit too much 1950's Sci Fi lately.

Re:Foam fell off and struck the shuttle (1)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716817)

This article [msn.com] says about 9 pieces fell off of the fuel tank and struck the shuttle.

It's not a bug. It's an undocumented feature.

Re:Foam fell off and struck the shuttle (1)

old_skul (566766) | more than 4 years ago | (#28719755)

Here's an idea I don't know if anyone's thought of yet:

Put the foam on the INSIDE of the ET.

Re:Foam fell off and struck the shuttle (1)

beirutbob (1002743) | more than 4 years ago | (#28729807)

I just picture foam falling off inside the tank and clogging up the engine in mid flight. I can just see the shuttle taking off and 30 seconds into flight the primary booster sputtering and shutting down. Of course the foam would probably disintegrate when it came into contact with the fuel, but the mixture of foam and fuel could add that extra chemical boost to get a few extra horse power out of the engines. Did I mention that I am not a rocket scientist? I know its hard to believe... these things just pop in my head.

More ECO friendly Foam fell off and struck the... (1)

elkto (558121) | more than 4 years ago | (#28720693)

When are they going to abandon this new Eco friendly foam and go back to the stuff that did not blow holes into the ship?!?!?!

NASA was granted a waiver by the EPA on the old foam but continued its implementation of this new foam.

It has now been found to be a mistake.....STOP ALREADY.... Go back to the old stuff.

Re:Foam fell off and struck the shuttle (1)

beirutbob (1002743) | more than 4 years ago | (#28729603)

I always wondered why they didn't skin or wrap something over the foam. I would think a thin wrap of Mylar or some other lightweight yet strong film could be used, of course I am not a rocket scientist. Heck, just wrap the sucker in Saran wrap or duct tape. Even better, just have Trojan make a booster sized condom.

Seriously..., "Kibo"? (4, Funny)

Jawn98685 (687784) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715567)

So I am to understand that a large part of this mission is to put "Kibo" in orbit...
James Parry must be doubled over with laughter right about now.

Re:Seriously..., "Kibo"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28715831)

Apparently "kibo" roughly translates to (a) structure.
Boring and unimaginative name, I know.

Re:Seriously..., "Kibo"? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28716311)

No. Get it right.

'kibou' (ãã¼ã) or åOEæoe, is something along the lines of 'hope', or 'aspiration'.

Please, please, please... (1, Troll)

OneSmartFellow (716217) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715693)

... DO NOT POST a "God Speed" message.

This is one colloquialism that deserves to die.

Re:Please, please, please... (1)

ezzzD55J (697465) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715763)

what's so bad about it?

Re:Please, please, please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28718593)

what's so bad about it?

It's Christian. It's use is a heinous crime against the species.

or something

Re:Please, please, please... (1)

OneSmartFellow (716217) | more than 4 years ago | (#28720491)

It's some kind of weird corruption of "may god grant you prosperity", and doesn't actually convey the common usage of "good luck, I hope you make it home", even though it's used that way now.

Besides it sounds insincere, and schmaltzy.

Re:Please, please, please... (4, Interesting)

timster (32400) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716239)

"Godspeed" is a GREAT word, with a near-optimum combination of tone, rhythm, and history to convey the notion of hope for a successful journey. As an atheist, you will pry "Godspeed" out of my cold, dead, not-going-to-Heaven hands, along with "god dammit", Christmas and Bach.

Re:Please, please, please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28717589)

Godspeed on your performance of Bach's Christmas cantata, goddammit!

Re:Please, please, please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28719123)

Ah, social autism...

And this is news? (-1, Flamebait)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715765)

I do not agree that the Space Shuttle's heading to the space station qualifies to be on Slashdot's front page and here's why:

This news is so much like yesterday...move on.

We've had decades of shuttle launches, that this is now routine.

When Russians send their Soyuz craft to space, there's hardly any mention of it in the Russian or American media. To the Russians, it's second nature similar to taking a flight. It should be the same for us when it comes to the Shuttle.

What have we gotten from all the experiments done in space since the sixties anyway? Do these expenses justify the cost?

Why not cover "real news" like How the smartphone rivals are building their communities, [techradar.com] referring to Android and iPhone platforms?

Re:And this is news? (4, Insightful)

mccalli (323026) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715851)

Why not cover "real news" like How the smartphone rivals are building their communities, [techradar.com] referring to Android and iPhone platforms?

You know, I like my iPhone. It's nice. But compared to reporting on mankind's efforts in space I really don't think we're talking about the same level of importance...

Cheers,
Ian

no research, no results (was Re:And this is news?) (4, Insightful)

WillAdams (45638) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715887)

The irony of your wondering ``What have we gotten from all the experiments done in space since the sixties anyway? Do these expenses justify the cost?'' and then posting a story about smart (cell) phones has pegged my bogometer, actually bending the needle.

Here's a clue --- all interesting smartphone capabilities are intricately tied into satellites --- which are the result of space exploration and experimentation.

William

Re:no research, no results (was Re:And this is new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28717683)

Wrong. The transistor was all about communications and making reliable repeaters for undersea cables WAY before the space age. The space age came about from extensions of WWII technology. You've got the cause and effect totally backwards, pegging MY bogometer.
Who cares about a few high achievers flying in a badly designed firecracker? Doing the same shit decade after decade? Can you link to a signle scientific paper from all these space missions? Can you show me a single invention you use that came from the space race? No, none, because the technologies existed BEFORE so you could use them for the space race, not the other way around.

Re:no research, no results (was Re:And this is new (1)

WillAdams (45638) | more than 4 years ago | (#28720851)

Here:

http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/en/kids/spinoffs2.shtml [nasa.gov]

or here:

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

Also, how does the GPS in a smartphone work w/o a satellite?

William

Re:no research, no results (was Re:And this is new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28724967)

What do GPS satellites have to do with manned space exploration? Nothing, that's what. GPS can be traced back to LORAN, a WWII-era technology, and various systems like Transit (see Connections series for a demo). None of these have the slightest thing to do with the Shuttle, either.
Face it, for the amount of money we've pumped into manned space exploration, we get nothing in return. Your links are not scientific papers. It's easy to say NASA developped this and that, clearly I get the feeling papers on the growth of wheat germ in free-fall would be laughable at best.
Look, I just don't understand the knee-jerk worship of the Shuttle and space exploration. A slight interest in the history of technology will show that the Space Race innovated nothing; space exploration relied on advances in all fields in order to happen. The fields were mostly advanced because of telecom, war or super nerds. The manned space stuff came after, not before.
Satellites were already working before the first American went into orbit, so there's that too.
Look, I just don't get the fuss over the Shuttle launches. There's no science, no discoveries, just the same rehashed pseudo-science for decades, an expensive roller coaster ride for overachievers. Big deal.
And as for smartphines with GPS, if that's all that came out of decades worth of space "science" and billions of dollars, I'd say that's a terrible return. Sure, if people were getting lost all the time, maybe it was worth it. But the say I see it, smartphones are toys.
PS: You can easily figure out your location by triangulating known locations of cell towers. See? Another example of something that can be easily solved by mundane technologies but no, you want GPS satellites launched by Shuttle so you can find your way to WalMart because you can't be arsed to look at a paper map? Ridiculous.

Re:And this is news? (1)

Trent Hawkins (1093109) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715905)

difference is that Russian spacecrafts hardy explode for no reason any more. The Shuttle however has a good chance of doing that, so it's sort of a "everyone claps after a shaky plane landing" deal.

Re:And this is news? (1, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#28715991)

The real news is, that that piece of shit called the "space shuttle" got to orbit at all, without breaking into its parts and killing everybody.
(You people convinced me that the space shuttle is this crappy, so you can call yourselves trolls if you disagree. ^^ Apparently it is discontinued for a reason, and is way below the usual reliability standards.)

Re:And this is news? (1)

pnewhook (788591) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716047)

I do not agree that the Space Shuttle's heading to the space station qualifies to be on Slashdot's front page and here's why: This news is so much like yesterday...move on. We've had decades of shuttle launches, that this is now routine.

Ok, then the following topics should also not be slashdot news as they have also happened so many times before it is routine

- any announcement of a new operating system - this has been happening every few years since the 1980s

- any announcement of a new coding language - same reason as for operating system

- any announcement of a new phone/ipod/crackberry/whatever. This also happens too frequently to care about anymore

- any virus attack. This happens all the time and will happen again

- any news story related to infringement of personal freedoms. People who think they are being spied upon will always think that no matter what happens. Most other people dont care.

Your cooperation is appreciated. Thank you.

Re:And this is news? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716085)

You mean you rather want to see yet another article of the two dwarfs of the cell phone industry having a mud fight to death with each other, while Nokia and some east-Asian companies laugh at them?

This is not comedy wrestling, sir! ^^

Re:And this is news? (5, Insightful)

bmo (77928) | more than 4 years ago | (#28716093)

> We've had decades of shuttle launches, that this is now routine.

It stopped being routine when Challenger blew up. It became even less "routine" when Columbia disintegrated.

Oh well, I guess people risking their lives (there's a current story that large pieces of foam struck the shuttle on launch) isn't news, but rather some uninspiring BS about phone "communities" is.

I know, I have been trolled, but this made me rage.

--
BMO

Re:And this is news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28716787)

Unless it wasn't a troll, and that guy actually believes "phone communities" being more important "news"...

Re:And this is news? (4, Informative)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 4 years ago | (#28718137)

I work in the space industry and, honestly, it feels like an extremely isolated community. Aside from my coworkers and other companies' workers cheering on various satellite launches and successful space walks, it seems like nobody else gives a damn about what I consider to be one of the most exciting scientific endeavors in the history of this planet.

This is, however, why I love slashdot. I come on here one morning on a low-gumption thursday and find a tart complaining about the importance of smart phone communities only to see him doubly rebuked for being such a short-sighted self-obsessed fiend. Thanks to you and the others that have put that tool in his place for continuing to remind a young up and coming space-industry worker bee just how much intelligent people really do care about this realm of progress.

Cheers.

Re:And this is news? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 4 years ago | (#28718743)

I know, I have been trolled, but this made me rage.

Why? Driving to work is routine. Yet people die every day doing it. Routine doesn't make it risk-free. It has happened enough that there is a lack of interest. That's what the statement means, and based on people's reaction, it was a correct statement. So the question becomes, why do you rage at someone making such a statement? Why are you so personally offended that others don't share your priorities?

Re:And this is news? (1)

toolie (22684) | more than 4 years ago | (#28719287)

I know, I have been trolled, but this made me rage.

Why? Driving to work is routine. Yet people die every day doing it. Routine doesn't make it risk-free. It has happened enough that there is a lack of interest. That's what the statement means, and based on people's reaction, it was a correct statement. So the question becomes, why do you rage at someone making such a statement? Why are you so personally offended that others don't share your priorities?

I'd guess it has less to do with sharing priorities than it does with some pretentious ass stating that virtual communities built around silly-assed devices is in any way newsworthy.

Re:And this is news? (2, Insightful)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 4 years ago | (#28717505)

"We've had decades of shuttle launches, that this is now routine."

Call it routine all you want. Watching something the size of a building lift off to space has always, is, and will continue to be an impressive technical achievement for the foreseeable future.

The shuttle is an expensive, impractical, fragile, dangerous, whatever vehicle, but it is still a remarkable machine. It may not be the best solution to place stuff in LEO, or not even a very good one, but it's beautiful and inspiring and that counts.

As for putting stuff in LEO, well... 40 years ago, we ventured into the vast ocean of space, swam a little until the island we see close to the beach and came back with wonderful stories. Since then, we have restricted ourselves to our shores, learning how to do stuff, how not to do stuff and dreaming of our future voyages. It will be a very sad day the one when we give up exploring beyond the confines of our beautiful planet.

Robots can't tell stories and none can say how it felt to watch the Earth from afar.

Re:And this is news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28717699)

My teenage sons were able to watch the liftoff yesterday as they are spending some time with their grandparents in Florida. They both thought it was
well worth the wait and are anxious to show me pictures and video they took when they get home. With any luck, this opportunity will keep their up interest in science and space through high school, and they now have something to remember from the primitive days of the space program (primitive, assuming we ever develop true interplanetary capabilities in their lifetimes).

Re:And this is news? (1)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 4 years ago | (#28722317)

Nothing compares to the sensation of being there. You can *feel* the immense power required to lift that huge piece of machinery up to space.

I saw it once as a kid. I will never forget. I won't say that made me an engineer, as I joke this is an innate condition, but it certainly helped.

Pretty cool to see. (3, Informative)

popoutman (189497) | more than 4 years ago | (#28717729)

At about 11.22 local time here in Ireland, I got to see the Shuttle pass overhead just after the EFT seperation. Seeing both objects at 1700mph and a nice low altitude of 60 miles meant that the speed across the sky was really fast, and that the brightness of the shuttle was on the high side of magitude -5 or so. The orange of the EFT was clearly seen also.
The icing on the cake was seeing the ISS as well about 20 minutes later at about the same real speed but much slower across the sky given its distance.
I'm looking forwards to seeing the Shuttle play catch-up over the next few nights!

Re:Pretty cool to see. (1)

caluml (551744) | more than 4 years ago | (#28720853)

n2y0.com [n2yo.com] will help you work out when you can see it, both with the naked eye, and with a radio receiver. 143.625MHz is the ISS downlink. issfanclub.com [issfanclub.com] has more of the frequencies used. Break out that scanner, and listen to them talking.

Yuo Fail It`? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28719757)

are about 7000/5 Driven out by the

YUO FAIL IT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28721297)

Recruitment, but it just 0wnz.', maagot, vomit, shit geeting together to
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...