cool article, interesting quote

True, but then they don't get to test prototypes. The Shuttle flew to orbit, with a full crew, on its very first powered flight.

John

Yes indeed - impressive. And the degree of risk-taking and success during the Mercury/Gemini/Apollo missions was staggering. (Apollo 13 oxygen tank heater kaboom notwithstanding.)

Yeah, stuff does break, but it makes my heart wanna swell up with pride and admiration when I think of the human resoursefulness that got them back safe.

Thanks, Rich

Surely all the invidual pieces had been tested many times over? Either with as much of a mock-up of "the rest of the system" as could be provided or at least simulations thereof?

It wasn't a full crew. STS-1 flew with a crew of two. ...and had ejection seats, though little good they'd do.

Simulation reality, as anyone who's ever used Spice will tell you. The first time power was applied real people went for a ride. I believe that was a first.

message

of

during

tank

I have different emotions when I think of the management bullheadedness that brought down Challenger and Columbia.

Normally yes in did (those are tested) ... but with 100s of assumptions. But how abt those devices and there s/w (pacemakers and car) which were on earth (in front of system designers ) and lot of chances to have tested. (even in integrated case rather than individual). I think wht one more thing required is long vision. Does any one have error per million operations ? I think s/w engg have (many times) higher rate than those people.

I think so - although the Apollo 8 mission takes my vote for the most breathtakingly daring. It was the first manned flight of the Saturn V booster, IIRC. It was the first manned orbit of the moon - indeed the first to leave Earth orbit at all. Prior to that, the Apollo CSM had had one manned test (Apollo 7), using the Saturn IB booster. All in all, the list of firsts was HUGE - and scary. I spent the entire mission glued to the TV - and while I'm as far from religious as it's possible to be, I was very moved by the Genesis reading from lunar orbit on Xmas Eve.

More details at:

Steve

Mine too. And I'm glad you said human rather than USAnian ;).

NASA back then was a totally different animal to now, or even during the shuttle era. That "can-do" spirit... While plenty of people have criticised the expenditure, the actual costs pale into insignificance compared to e.g. Iraq. And that sense of spirit and adventure was just *magic*... Inspiring stuff.

Steve

Yeah, but one of the marks of a good engineer is when the Real Hardware behaves effectively identically to the simulations!

That is incredible; I have a great deal of respect for the folks who are willing to sign up for such a ride.

Obviously English is not your first language. Combined with the total lack of context (i.e. quotations) in your articles, this makes communication very precarious. You should realize that google is not usenet, in fact it is only a poor benighted and foul interface to the real usenet system. There is no reason whatsoever to assume your readers can or will ever see any other articles, thus you should always quote sufficient context to ensure your article can stand on its own. For the means of doing this on the evil google interface, see my sig. below, and PLEASE READ the referenced URLs.

Better yet, get yourself a real newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and enjoy a proper interface. You should also avoid silly and confusing abbreviations, such as abt, s/w, wht, engg etc.

Tt's the good engineer that knows what "effectively" is.

Sure, but I suspect there are thousands who would sign up in a heartbeat.

The first shuttle flight was not without its software problems. The de-orbit burn time was calculated on a hand calculator. There is also the (in)famous processor sync up issues during the count down.

It was not fatally flawed but significantly flawed

w..

John Lark> True, but then they don't get to test prototypes. The Shuttle flew to

dollar

Could almost consider setting up a motel on the moon with that kind of traffic.

Jon

In article , John Larkin writes

That is not true. All the components were tested. Many systems were fully tested... or as tested as they can be without actually doing the flight.

In article , Joel Kolstad writes

Yes. They do a hell of a lot of testing.

They don't make one and fly it. Remember Apollo 13 when that went bang they had a complete identical system on the ground to try out things to suggest to the A13 crew.

There are several sets things made and some are destruction tested.

In article , Keith writes

Though everything had been tested first. The first powered flight (as opposed to ground tests of the engines) did not have a full crew it was a TEST flight. Much like the test flight of any aircraft.

Also the shuttle has been air tested for landings anyway. It went up on the back of a 747.

At some point there has to be a test flight with all the parts (that have been fully tested) assembled. that flight (with a test crew) did indeed go into orbit. That was a prototype test.

Much like the first Russian manned flight, Mercury, Gemini Saturn etc

IIRC this was a hardware problem. In any case, it's again proof that simulation reality. "But the simulator said..."

One of the programmers in the Space Shuttle OnBoard Software group said he just about died when it happened. ;-)