BLOG
Goodbye Shuttle Discovery – STS 133 Final Flight
by Robert Freeland II
Yesterday my wife and I took our twin boys (age 5) to see the launch of Space Shuttle Discovery on mission STS-133. This is the last mission of Space Shuttle Discovery, and the remaining two Shuttles only have one mission each before they too are retired. Despite having lived here in Tampa for over a decade, my wife and I had never attended a launch — and STS-133 offered a convenient launch window at 4:50pm — so we figured it was high time. The drive across the state from Tampa to Titusville normally takes about 2 hours. We picked the Boys up from school at 11:00pm and stopped an hour later in Orlando for lunch. That left us about 3 1/2 hours to drive the short remaining distance from Orlando to Titusville and find a good viewing location. It turns out that this was only just barely enough time, because traffic was absolutely unbelievable. It was stop-and-go, with an average speed of about 5 mph the entire way from Orlando to Titusville. We were fortunate to arrive at the shore by 4:30pm, giving us just 20 minutes to park and find a spot to watch the launch. The crowds were astonishing: there were throngs of people occupying every single spot that might provide a view of the launch. Given that it had taken my family 5 1/2 hours to reach that point, it’s rather remarkable that we got there in time. Nevertheless, we found a perfect spot at the east end of Highway 50, not 5 feet from the edge of the bay, looking straight out at the launch pad. There really is no closer viewing location without tickets purchased months in advance. It was slightly hazy, but the sky was clear. We could easily see the assembly hanger across the water, though all we could see on the actual launch pad was the metal frame gantry. As the countdown reached zero, we saw a huge plume of smoke erupt from the launch pad, and then we saw the bright torch of fire from the rocket engines. We never could see the Shuttle itself, and the rocket was hundreds (thousands?) of feet into the air before we heard any sound — the familiar rumble of the Shuttle engines as seen on TV, but distant and muffled. The Shuttle climbed for just over 2 minutes on a huge plume of smoke, and then the solid rocket boosters were dropped (barely visible specs appearing behind the Shuttle), and the smoke largely vanished. The three liquid-fuel main engines apparently don’t generate anywhere near as much smoke as the solid rocket boosters. Discovery was still visible as a small bright spot in the sky as it continued to climb, but shortly afterward we lost sight of it altogether, leaving just the plume of smoke drifting slowly southward. Ten minutes later, the throngs of people were all moving back toward their cars. By 5:15pm, we were back in our car too, but we were going nowhere. We thought the traffic was bad coming into to Titusville, but that traffic was spread out over several hours. On the return, everyone was trying to leave at once, resulting in complete gridlock. It took us almost an hour to travel maybe 1000 feet from our parking spot. We finally made it out to the main road leading from Titusville back toward Orlando, but it was again bumper-to-bumper, just crawling along. My boys were reaching the end of their patience with all the driving, and they begged to stop, but there was literally nowhere to go. Eventually they both fell asleep. By 9:00pm, we made it onto the bypass toll road around Orlando, and traffic returned to normal. We made one brief stop to stretch our legs, and returned home at 10:30pm. We had been in the car for most of the last 12 hours. By comparison, we could have driven to Washington, DC from here in that same span of time. Upon reflection on the day’s experience, I was struck by two conflicting impressions. On the one hand, it was awesome to see an actual Shuttle launch, knowing all the engineering, planning, manpower, material, money, etc. that goes into making that a reality. But on the other hand, it was remarkable just how tiny and insignificant the Shuttle and the launch actually appear. Heck, I’ve launched model rockets that looked about the same (though closer, obviously). I couldn’t help but think that mankind with its little surface-launched chemical rockets is still at a laughably primitive level with its space flight. In a way, this helped bring me some closure with respect to the Space Shuttle program. Yes, this has been a wildly successful program, but the technology is really [i]way[/i] past its prime, and it’s time to move on to something more appropriate to the 21st century. In particular, we need a far more efficient way to get cargo and people into space if we ever hope to build anything significant off-planet. Our little chemical rockets — even the biggest ones — just aren’t going to cut it.
Wow totally agree with your post, primitive indeed. I read an article this morning on using iPad’s in aviation. It took so long for approval. Then wondering when i watched an episode of Stargate Atlantis Season 2 think it was broadcast in 2003 or 04 not sure and saw how they used these thick tablet computers to run around and do analyses. I think the tech is around its just not used effectivly. Ipads are amazing and i think of what it can mean for scientist on a spaceship or on a moon base. Its capable of running very complex apps. Just amazing to tap in anywhere on the main computer using a tablet PC with a iPad interface. Pardon my grammar and spelling. Thanks
Grate what your doing but wouldent they be scared of the noise?
Afraid I disagree with your assessment that the Shuttle programme has been “wildly successful”. It’s kept going for 30 years, but has failed to achieve its goal of “routinizing” access to space (the word used in Nixon’s speech announcing the programme). Yes, we do need a far more efficient way to go — and the Shuttle was supposed to be it! If it had been successful, it would have led to a improved Shuttle Mk 2 and growing launch rates, instead of which for the time being we’re going back to capsules launched on ballistic missiles, without even the minimal reusability / recyclability of the Shuttle. The plan for the Orion spaceship was even to regress to the point where returning astronauts (who have landed on a runway for 30 years) would once again be dumped in the ocean and the Navy sent out to rescue them!
Stephen
Oxford, UK
I was there at 9am at Gemini Memorial, there were people there since 6am. Including two lovely Scottish girls. I had a lot of fun though and shot the launch on my Droid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt7MuQd6lio
Hi Stephen,
I think it’s easy to grow impatient with the pace of mankind’s progress in space exploration — and we can all certainly point to examples of extraordinary waste and inefficiency — but I’ll stand by my statement about the success of the Space Shuttle program. Space travel is certainly far more routine now than it was 30 years ago, when the entire nation waited by the TV to witness every launch.
On your blog site, you draw an interesting parallel between America’s space program and China’s exploration of the world in 1421. While it’s true that much of the output of China’s expedition was lost (and even deliberately destroyed), maps from that expedition found their way into European hands and ultimately paved the way for the subsequent globalization of travel and trade. In fact, there is even some evidence that China’s state-sponsored expedition resulted in direct colonization of America prior to the European colonizations with which we’re more familiar. By analogy, it may be that these early, inefficient, state-sponsored efforts are a necessary precursor to the private exploration that will ultimately follow.
- Robert
Hi, Robert. Yes, I agree that progress is inefficient and that the pattern seems to be government exploration followed later by commercial enterprise. And I too was impressed by Gavin Menzies’ charting of the great Chinese expedition of 1421! The parallel is of course a favourite among space advocates; I first encountered it in John S. Lewis’s book “Mining the Sky”.
Stephen
The great expedition of Zheng He of the 1420′s certainly reached Africa, but that the fleet reached the coast of South America is pretty absurd. Menzies goes on to same “evidence” as a lot of the amateur armchair “historians”: Bimini Road was made by the Chinese, not Ancient Astronauts or Atlanteans! All Chinese scholars scoffed at the idea, and anyone who knows a bit about the history of Imperial China know that General Zheng He did mount a great fleet, not to explore exactly, but to “bring the heathen under tax of the Heavenly Emperor.” They went as far as they thought feasible, and came back. It was a major undertaking, but not very profitable in the short term, as it took several years, and cost a lot. The returns weren’t that great. The wealthiest empire at the time hardly needed to tax some poor coastal lands. The fleet never left the sight of land, and turned back long before the tip of south Africa.
The distances involved in traveling between stars is so great that a plan to fertilize human eggs with sperm after arrival in a habitable system seems logical. This is definitely a challenge for the robotics and Information Technology industry! We already have advanced computer based training systems. Think of the possibilities! Virtually parenting a child in a solar system “far far away”!
Hi, Richard. Your plan sounds like a good one, except that if people are still doing that, they will be along for the ride. In the first place, if we have colonised space in the Solar System, then almost all other systems will be habitable thru use of their asteroidal material. Again, the interior of a large starship will resemble the accommodation used by large numbers of people in the Solar System — and we’ll be discussing this further at Kelvin’s worldship meeting later this year. Plus the lifespans of our post-human descendants, heavily augmented by technology as they will be, will presumably be much longer than ours. So I don’t think the fact that the journey will take decades to centuries will prevent our descendants from being on board.