posted 11-20-2011 12:09 PM               

I'll start it off...

• STS-1
  
• STS-31
  
• STS-61
  
• STS-93
  
• STS-135

posted 11-20-2011 04:17 PM               

The latter had a plan devised to rescue/repair SYNCOM IV-3, tools invented, flight plan written, and mission training all within 4 months. That would NEVER happen in the present day.

posted 11-20-2011 10:19 PM               

• STS-7: Sally Ride 1st American Female
  
• STS-8: Guy Bluford 1st African American
  
• STS-41G: 1st to carry two female astronauts
  
• STS-61A: 8 person crew
  
• STS-63: Eileen Collins 1st Female Shuttle Pilot

posted 11-21-2011 08:32 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mjanovec:
I never got too excited about some of the "firsts" that were more media events than true spaceflight accomplishments.

---

Thirty years from now, will most folks remember who Eileen Collins was? Probably not.

As with most survey type questions like this, you are going to get the whole gammut of opinions on the issue. While there were the firsts and the high profile missions, there were an equal if not greater number of "forgotten" flights which one would be hard pressed to name.

The entire program itself was historic for fielding the first reusable, winged, payload carrying piloted vehicle. This capability likely will not be matched for decades to come.

posted 11-21-2011 09:18 AM               

STS-61 changed all that in one mission. The success of STS-61 was followed very soon by the "Pillars of Creation" images and others that captured the public's imagination. Hubble went from being perceived as disastrous failure to the representation of the best that NASA had to offer, reconnecting people at a spiritual level to their universe.

Also remember how hard people lobbied to have the final Hubble repair mission flown by Shuttle, even given the mission's risks. The PR campaign basically overwhelmed the overly cautious NASA administration and pressured them to approved the final repair flight.

posted 11-21-2011 09:47 AM               

STS-26 because it was the Return to Flight mission. If that one had not been successful, who knows if the shuttle flights would have continued.

posted 11-21-2011 08:34 PM               

I don't think you can summarize what the shuttle was capable of in just five missions, although I would definitely say (in no particular order) the Hubble servicing missions, the shuttle-Mir missions, STS-88 and the assembly of the International Space Station, STS-41C, STS-51A, and other satellite repair/retrieval missions, and also the Spacelab missions.

posted 11-21-2011 09:11 PM               

I remember a few missions that seemed to take hold of space program in terms of media (in different ways) - STS-80 and STS-83, missions where the technical challenges of spaceflight were brought to life and reminded the public "this isn't easy work."

posted 11-21-2011 11:10 PM               

I still remember gathering with my elementary school class to watch the landing, and the feeling that we were seeing the future on TV. It didn't quite work out that way, for myriad reasons we're all familiar with, but it was still revolutionary.

Other than that, my own preference for one mission as the apex of the program would be STS-61, for all the reasons already explored here. There was so much at stake...the mission felt like a referendum on the Shuttle program, on NASA's brain trust, even on human spaceflight itself. The pressure on the crew, the mission planners, and on the ground support teams must have been crushing... and they delivered an unmitigated triumph.

posted 11-22-2011 06:59 AM               

• STS-51A: Real Buck Rogers! I'll add STS-51I to this as well, both amazing satellite rescues.

• STS-120: Did not start out that way, but EVA-4 (and its success) made this the most important mission in the Shuttle-ISS program.

• STS-71: Atlantis demonstrates that a shuttle can do what she was designed to do, dock with a space station.

• STS-125: As a book-end to STS-61, kept Hubble operational.

posted 11-22-2011 05:55 PM               

1. STS-1
   
2. STS-2
   
3. STS-41B
   
4. STS-61
   
5. STS-135

posted 11-23-2011 11:24 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrSpace86:
STS-95 doesn't seem to get much love in here!

---

Don't get us wrong! We all loved seeing Glenn get to fly again for many reasons. He is a hero to most everyone on this site, and at the time his flight was heralded by space analysts and even justified by space scientists.

In particular, I remember a noted space policy expert stating that it was "a just reward for an American who has led an exemplary life." I also remember listening to the emotional voice of Scott Carpenter on live TV saying, "A most unusual thing has happened to that man," as Discovery headed for orbit.

Certainly the public relations coup NASA was looking for at the time, and a sentimental favorite for all of us, but in the overall scheme of things, I think Glenn's second flight did more for his own legacy than for the shuttle's.

That was one launch I'm sorry I didn't get to see in person.

But if the scientific reasoning behind his flight were real, we would have seen many more older subjects fly in the years since, and that has not happened. There were politics involved too, but I wouldn't want to think that anyone with power were in a position to reward loyalty with such a publicly risky venture.

After supposedly being sidelined by Kennedy for being "too valuable" to lose on another spaceflight, did Glenn deserve the chance? Absolutely. Was the purpose of his flight justified in the long run? Only time will tell as the history of the shuttle program is written.

posted 11-23-2011 11:56 PM               

In Riding Rockets, Mike Mullane recalled his correspondence with another then-current astronaut acquaintance regarding Glenn's flight: "...most NASA folks will tell you that the whole thing [flying Glenn] is a dumb idea, but not too dumb to actually do. In other words, NASA believes chances are it will turn out OK, and why not suck up some needed PR." (Mullane's quote.)

posted 11-24-2011 09:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ilbasso:
From a NASA PR success (and survival) standpoint, STS-61 has to be the winner. After the Hubble deployment and discovery of its flawed optics, NASA was a laughingstock or worse. Remember the movie "Naked Gun 2-1/2"? Hubble was portrayed alongside the Titanic, Hindenburg, and Edsel. There was serious talk of gutting NASA's budget because a string of high-profile and highly-expensive failures. In a relatively short period, we'd had the Challenger disaster, the Galileo probe with its undeployed antenna, and then the "massively expensive white elephant" Hubble.

---

There was a glimmer of positive news with STS-49's repair of Intelsat VI - but STS-61 really caught their attention. The pre-flight articles have a tone of real skepticism of the mission's objectives being met. But they were, and as noted, NASA really rebounded.

posted 11-24-2011 10:14 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by GoesTo11:
I assume you mean leveraging his position as a United States Senator in charge of NASA's purse strings. Right?

---

Honestly, does anyone care if he lobbied his way onto the last seat for that mission? Was anything lost or any damage done by allowing John Glenn to have a ride along? Please don't insult John Glenn by saying he was blackmailing NASA for a flight. Do you honestly believe had he not been given a seat, he would have cut funding for NASA? The senator is one of the most incredible men this country has produced, he's spent his life serving the public.

Personally, I thought it was about time NASA started using its PR muscle and get the public and media involved in the shuttle missions. NASA's lack of self promotion, lack of using the media to educate the great unwashed about their mission, allowed NASA's importance and contributions to all facets of space, aviation, technology & science to fade from the public's collective memory.

NASA really missed the boat by not promoting itself by flying high visibility people like journalists, artists, TMZ or other famous people who are used to speaking to the public in a way they can understand. In today's myopic, self absorbed, 5 second attention span TV fast edit images, you better know how to get your point across by any means necessary.

He, I would have made Paris Hilton a mission commander if it would have kept the funding for Constellation/Orion or even a few more shuttle missions. At least the NASA channel would have ratings higher than .000001 for the year.

posted 11-24-2011 02:20 PM               

On International Spaceflight Day or April 12, 1981 the space shuttle Columbia launched into space with John Young and Robert Crippen on a test flight. After three more test flights the shuttle was deemed operational the following year.

In 1983, the nation's first woman in space, Sally Ride and the first African-American astronaut Guion Bluford were launched on successive flights of Challenger. Discovery and Atlantis were soon added to the fleet.

In 1986, Challenger and her crew of seven including the first schoolteacher in space, Christa McAuliffe were lost in a launch accident. Launches resumed two years later with Discovery.

In total, 135 missions were launched to deploy and service numerous government, commercial, and scientific payloads such as an attached Spacelab. Crews of Discovery deployed the Hubble Space Telescope in 1990 and serviced the ailing satellite in 1993. Meanwhile, Endeavour was added to the fleet in 1992.

In the latter half of the 1990s, Atlantis flew nine missions to the post-Soviet Russian Federation's Mir space station in a new cooperation that laid groundwork for future programs. In 2003 Columbia with her crew of seven were lost during reentry.

In the program's final decade the International Space Station was assembled on orbit with Russia, Japan, Canada, and the European Space Agency as partners. In July 2011 Atlantis flew the final mission of the Shuttle program.

posted 11-25-2011 01:13 AM               

For Mir, the station was already in orbit and had to be adapted with new equipment to allow for the docking. While administrators didn't seem to want the rendezvous only mission flown, I am glad Gibson stuck to his guns as he knew it was a relative unknown to even approach Mir that close with a vehicle not necessarily designed for proximity flight operations (as in the past, shuttle would get close to an object and grab it with an RMS as opposed to doing one continuous motion to dock with it).

The work on those two flights and one previous one (to test the plus R-bar approach method) laid the groundwork for the docking operations we saw all through the Mir program and the ISS. Each time, the shuttle, which is the size of a DC-9 jet liner, had to back in and do a pinpoint docking more precise than an 18 wheeler backing up to a loading dock AND do it without most of the thruster quads firing so as not to contaminate the station with hypergolic fuel exhaust particulates.

posted 11-25-2011 01:19 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spacepsycho:
Do you honestly believe had he not been given a seat, he would have cut funding for NASA? The senator is one of the most incredible men this country has produced, he's spent his life serving the public.

---

No, actually I don't believe that. I do believe that Glenn's junket was the most notable example of NASA's gutlessness when it comes to politicians' demands...to say nothing of a politician who also happened to be a NASA icon.

My earlier post was perhaps snarkier than necessary, but I stand by my point: Glenn's Shuttle flight was a gimmick, the sort of thing that Challenger should have put paid to permanently, and even if you believe that Glenn "earned" his trip as a "reward" for his "lifetime of public service," that doesn't make it any less so.

I actually agree with your broad point: NASA's dismal post-Apollo efforts at promoting itself have been endlessly frustrating for so many of us space geeks; it often has seemed to me that the engineers, administrators, and bureaucrats who form the bulk of the Agency regard such things as beneath them. Though it's also fair to ask, given the Shuttle program's publicly stated mission of making spaceflight "routine," and given the short-attention-span, sound-bite nature of modern public discourse, just how much traction even the most well-conceived and executed promotional campaign could have gained NASA within the popular consciousness.

Anyway, it was not my intention, by any means, to insult John Glenn, whom I also regard as an admirable, honorable figure despite my reflexive suspicion of "lifetime public servants" in general. If I had his clout, I can't say I wouldn't have done the same thing.

posted 11-26-2011 06:33 AM               

• STS-88: First U.S. flight to begin ISS construction
  
• STS-134: Last U.S. flight that completed ISS construction

posted 11-26-2011 07:11 PM               

• STS-1 first flight.
  
• STS-2 first reuse of a spacecraft.
  
• STS-3 first grappling by RMS
  
• STS-4 Test flight program completed.
  
• STS-7 First American women in space and a great operational mission including grapple and release by RMS.
  
• STS-51F First Abort to Orbit flight and the mission was still extended an extra day in space.
  
• STS-32 LDEF grapple and homecoming.
  
• STS-43 A very good text-book flight and a great TDRS deployment.
  
• STS-63 First Woman pilot and first rendezvous with Mir.
  
• STS-74 First Docking Module to the Mir.
  
• STS-88 First ISS Assebly flight.
  
• STS-121 Second Return to Flight test flight with good EVA techniques on TPS repair.
  
• STS-132 First of the last flights of Atlantis and another docking module to the ISS by the shuttle.

posted 11-26-2011 09:45 PM            

My vote goes to STS-1 for the simplistic reason that it was an enormous "first" and a proof of so many concepts.

But looking at past manned programs, the most "historic" mission was not always the first.

I rate MA-6 (Glenn's flight) as the most historic Mercury flight, yet it was the 3rd. I rate GT-6A/GT VII as the most historic Gemini mission because it proved such a huge milestone on the way to the Moon, and these were the 4th/5th launches. I rate Apollo 11 as the most historic Apollo because... well, its obvious, and it was the 5th launch.

posted 11-27-2011 05:08 AM               

• STS-1
  
• STS-2
  
• STS-26
  
• STS-114
  
• STS-135