Talk:STS-400

Next Flight

I added "last mission if flown" line. I think it makes a point about the mission and dangers of the shuttle fleet. I won't revert it again - Whats everyones take? --zrulli 20:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just leave it blank for now. Arguing either way is only speculative, so surely it would be best to just say nothing. --GW_Simulations^{User Page | Talk} 21:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Okay. I will add "Unknown" to the next mission. Nat682 (talk) 15:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image

I realize it is a bit late, but I just want to thank GW for the amazingly excellent explanatory image he made. We discussed this many months ago, and I just think that his end result was absolutely spectacular, and completely understandable for even those with no understanding of how missions or EVAs work. Great job! Ariel♥Gold 19:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you for your feedback. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to say, but ist out odf date. Theres only Altmans xxl-suit going up un 400 with all of them probably ending up on 400. (Source: Todays Pres Conference)--Hendrikharry (talk) 23:56, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crew

I have not found any evidence regarding the Crew. Could anybody give it to me or refer to a briefing? Thanks --Hendrikharry (talk) 23:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the crew and assignments. I work at JSC and have contact with the crew. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.207.71.127 (talk) 19:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The information provided was incorrect. First, LON flights have always been comprised of a subset of crew for mission that is after the current mission, due to the fact that the crew is actively training for a mission and would be the most prepared. Also, no verifiable sources could be found to corroborate any plan of STS-123 crew being involved. However, there are multiple sources that confirm the crew is a subset of STS-126, the mission which follows STS-125. The mission specialists would be decided if it comes to it, but commander and pilots are the same. I have added the sourcing for this, and changed the information accordingly. Just saying "I work at JSC" is not verifiable nor is it something that can be used to source an encyclopedia. Unless statements can be backed up with sources, it is best to leave things like crew list as "TBD" until NASA officially confirms it. Ariel♥Gold 13:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revert, reading helps... http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/shuttlemissions/hst_sm4/overview.html thirdlast multisentence paragraph. --Hendrikharry (talk) 17:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the crew photo in the infobox as it's now out of date if the main text is correct, ie that a subset of STS-126 crew will be used. Does anyone have an updated crew picture? Niki2006 (talk) 12:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Launch/Landing

For some reason there was a launch, landing date as well as a mission duration. I have removed these dates/times and put TBD as there is no set time line for when they will launch if needed, or how long the mission will be. It is my understanding it will be 7 days but that may have changed or could have been misunderstood. If someone has info about a specific time or mission duration please add it but please cite your sources.--Steve (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I checked this one again and found a duration of 7 days in the thirdlast paragraph as well as a launch time of STS-125 launch + 7 Days in the fifth, wich I guess is a No Later Than Time. So with a little bit of math you have the launch date on October 15 and landing on October 22. Thougt that article might be a bit old, I think that there are no changes on this times and specific dates are probably released on the Sebtember 8/9 Briefings. --Hendrikharry (talk) 13:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok that is good info. A little shakey since it is coming from NasaSpaceFlight. Maybe adding a NET to the begining of the launch landing date, might be useful as a note for those who may not know.--Steve (talk) 02:19, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NET ni this case is wrong. Oct 15 is a no later than time so the correct shortform would be NLT--Hendrikharry (talk) 00:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I will change it to NLT. I wasn't thinking.--Navy blue84 (talk) 19:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollout

It's on the pad, which I suppose deserves mention considering it's the first (and hopefully last) time a rescue mission even has to get that far. Not sure about the rights issues in terms of the photo in Irene's post there, but would be interesting to have it here in the article, no? 91.33.196.29 (talk) 08:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MCC Personnel

With regards to the addition of a table listing MCC personnel, please review the solution that was done for STS-122 about a year ago. MCC personnel are not integral to the mission, especially the PAO or CAPCOM, they are irrelevant to the encyclopedia article on the shuttle mission. That is to say, if the personnel changes, it does not at all impact the mission or its timeline, thus, they are not given their own section. Instead, we add a link to the page that lists them for those people who are curious, in External links section. When the missions begin (or in this case, if), those MCC personnel who are relevant, such as the Flight Director, are given mention in the article's prose. Hope this clears up why it is not included as a table. :) Ariel♥Gold 00:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

STS-4xx

For consistency with STS-3xx should this article move to STS-4xx? (sdsds - talk) 01:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is only one mission that has been redesignated. I would suggest moving to STS-401. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 06:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved it to STS-401, and updated the article to reflect the new title. Nat682 (talk)

I haven't seen any more or less official source for the renunbering. If somebody could help me out with that?--Hendrikharry (talk) 22:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The designation has been changed back to STS-400, so I moved the page back. --G W… 22:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comprehensibility Problems

The section dealing with the mechanics of transferring astronauts has major problems with readability, with the dodgiest sentence reading "They would also transfer a big size and, after she'd repress, McArthur's EMU back to Atlantis." I will fix this tomorrow, but before I do, I'll wait to see if somebody who knows more about the subject than I do can fix things - I don't want to remove any content that might be useful... Davidelit (talk) 16:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that. There are reasons why I usually work on DE-WP. --Hendrikharry (talk) 21:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes to plans & rollout

See here: [1] Colds7ream (talk) 13:22, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Crew

According to this at Nasaspaceflight (look at the bottom of the article): [2] the crew is not the flight deck crew of STS-123 anymore, but a subset of STS-126: CDR: Christopher Ferguson, PLT: Eric A. Boe, MSs: Stephen G. Bowen and Robert S. Kimbrough. Reliable or not? -MBK₀₀₄ 04:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When will STS-400 be stood down?

Is there any official time during the STS-125 mission when STS-400 will be stood down as it is no longer needed? I would assume it would be stood down when it's no longer capable of performing a rescue, but at what point would this be? Entry Interface maybe? Niki2006 (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no set time yet for it to be stood down. It will be determined when the late inspection is done and heat shield is cleared for re-entry. Which will be late flight day 10. Once it is stood down roll over to pad 39A for her mission on STS-127 will be May 28. Also the crew will be going into quarantine sometime today, I imagine after supper (that per Wayne Hail on NASA TV).--Navy blue84 (talk) 18:29, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As per www.nasaspaceflight.com the stand-down time is actually in two phases -- day 10, no-go decision puts the launch countdown on 24-hr hold (sort of), but STS-400 remains in Launch On Need status. Finally, with completion of STS-125 de-orbit burn, STS-400 will be stood down. /// From UkiRha —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.207.116.98 (talk) 06:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: as per www.nasaspaceflight.com, STS-400 is stood down and the shuttle is released for STS-127. Even though Atlantis is still in orbit, there's no way a rescue could have been executed even if it were needed -- as of Friday, May 22. /// From UkiRha —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.248.34.192 (talk) 10:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Space shuttles Atlantis (STS-125) and Endeavour (STS-400) on launch pads.jpg to appear as POTD

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Space shuttles Atlantis (STS-125) and Endeavour (STS-400) on launch pads.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 1, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-12-01. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:03, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

Space Shuttle Atlantis (foreground) sits on Launch Pad A and Endeavour on Launch Pad B at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida in 2008. Endeavour stood by at pad B in case a rescue mission was necessary during Atlantis' mission to repair NASA's Hubble Space Telescope. At the left of each shuttle are the open rotating service structures, with the payload changeout rooms visible. These structures provided weather protection and access to the shuttle.Photo: NASA/Troy Cryder

Archive – More featured pictures...