Comments on: Great Space Shuttle Pictures

By: mr stephen page

mr stephen page — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 22:39:46 +0000

iam deaf man i use wach nasa tv on my commper i was thik is hard way find out if i mind understanding that if space shullte retire or return that is up to nasa thik if you want make biger gants space shullte new like 747 space on this one call jombo biger shuttle more power full rocket push harder in speed up space if you want put more asrount more people on space station that up to nasa get idea future or new x-13 future that up to u.s goverment and nasa officer idea

By: Oleg

Oleg — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 13:35:20 +0000

HI,
Great site!!!
But…no HD fotos…
Please add HiRes fotos!!!
Thank you
Oleg

By: Ed Mahoney

Ed Mahoney — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 18:13:18 +0000

O.K. how's this for a retired shuttle. Attach it to the 747 and fly it around the country and sell tickets to fly aboard a real live spacecraft just like the astronauts.

By: Gus Glover

Gus Glover — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 22:11:57 +0000

The fifth picture shows a shock wave from condensation of the water vapor in the atmosphere. This can take place at speeds well below the supersonic range, and is dependent upon ambient temperature, air pressure, and relative humidity.

Still a cool picture, though.

By: Mike

Mike — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 02:55:57 +0000

The shuttle vapor cone photo is actually not related to breaking the sound barrier (or sonic boom). It's actually the Prandtl-Glauert condensation effect. Prandtl-Glauert condensation clouds can also occur at lower speeds, and are not really a visible manifestation of some kind of a sound barrier being broken.

http://www.wilk4.com/misc/soundbreak.htm

Truly great photos, however.

By: ArmyOfAardvarks

ArmyOfAardvarks — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:00:52 +0000

Those planes look like they're having sex.

By: Gyward P. Calayag

Gyward P. Calayag — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 03:50:25 +0000

a k a _Dawner_former nasa astronaut_ nasa 1988 89

By: Yael Dragwyla

Yael Dragwyla — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:00:42 +0000

Silverthread — using a shuttle as an orbital museum for space tourists is a WONDERFUL idea! Even better, a "wing" could be added on in the form of the Hubble space telescope, so that people could examine it close up, and see where those glorious Hubble Heritage photos came from. Eventually it could become part of an orbital space hotel complex, where tourists could debark, have luxury accommodations, and tour the sights, such as one of the shuttles, Hubble, etc. After all that investment, it would be criminal to burn it all up in the atmosphere, you know?

By: Frank Glover

Frank Glover — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:21:51 +0000

If by 'United States space exploration' you mean continued manned flight to the Moon and elsewhere, there is no reason to believe that it would be signifigantly different, had the shuttle never been developed.

Remember (not old enoug to? I am.), Apollo was terminated with the hardware to do three more Lunar missions already built and paid for, (One of those Saturn 5s launched Skylab, the other two became lawn ornaments. I've been to the one at JSC.)

In that environment in 1972, you would NOT have gotten support for any other signifigant maned program, and whatever you did get would still be only Earth orbital. Maybe, maybe not with a small space station of some kind. Even the shuttle we got, wasn't the shuttle NASA really wanted. But as today, the agency can only work with the budget and policy its given.

Yes, I believe we should be doing better by now, but I blame the national will at the time (and since), not the hardware we created instead. Nowhere is it written that we could not have done both. Indeed, I do NOT believe we can have sustainable human deep-space exploration WITHOUT also having regular access to LEO on some sort of RLV.

And in truth, we still don't have that.

By: ladi

ladi — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:02:12 +0000

They have some really interesting space pictures at this wallpaper site. http://www.caedes.net/Zephir.cgi?lib=Caedes::Gallery&gallery=space

This is my favorite this month:
http://www.caedes.net/Zephir.cgi?lib=Caedes::Infopage&image=philcUK-1182716371.jpg

By: Steven

Steven — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:16:45 +0000

Cool images,

But I do hope that NASA destroy these, and we shall not be reminded that the United States space exploration ground to halt for 30 years, unless of course you want to display them in a musem and label them High Atltuide Flyers used for 30 years instead of really going to space.

By: USSDRAKE

USSDRAKE — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 04:16:59 +0000

NASA could give me a shuttle. Ide love to turn it into a house and live in it. How cool would that be. Would be easy for the pizza boy to find my house

By: Silver Thread

Silver Thread — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 03:44:19 +0000

I would LOVE to see one Stationed at the Museum of Flight near Boeing Field in Seattle.

What would be freaking Cool is to place one in Orbit around the planet as a Museum Destination for Space Tourists. How cool to TOUR the Space Shuttle IN SPACE!

By: john

john — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 01:17:00 +0000

I think all surviving shuttles should be kept, one in a museum like the Smithsonian in Washington DC, one at Houston and One at Cape Canaveral. Any better Suggestions? Good Luck and Good Management.

By: csulok

csulok — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 22:25:28 +0000

Are there any pictures of a Space Shuttle docked to the ISS where the shuttle is fully (or very close to fully) visible and some parts of the ISS are also visible (like the docking module or something)?

I have only found 1 but i'd love to get a few more for posters and stuff
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-118/html/iss015e22575.html

By: Maxwell

Maxwell — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:54:05 +0000

The space shuttles are very photogenic, and I think that is what I will miss most about them. It was the first spaceship that actually looked like a spaceship.
The systems that will have the range and power to allow more exploration are simply ugly. The unfortunate fact being that beautiful appearances come with steep engineering costs.

I do wonder tho if the fly-return booster idea was ever feasible. Then maybe private industry can build a shuttle in the near future that would fulfill the original promises of cheap* and regular** spaceflight.

*Cheap meaning actually affordable to the common man.
**Regular meaning daily or weekly trips.

By: Wolter

Wolter — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:51:43 +0000

I think the sonic boom photo is courtesy of NASA
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/detail.cfm?mediaid=4720

(ok it's from oktober 2000 but still.. )