Talk:Space Shuttle Atlantis/Archive 1

bear boy
I hate to be a bear, but we don't need multiple references in the article to the decomissioning of the Atlantis. When I put in the information about it, I incorporated it into the final paragraph of the initial information section which gives an overview of the history of the Atlantis. We don't need a special section on it, as the information is a part of the anticipated history of the orbiter itself. Can we please come to a conclusion on how to address this instead of simply putting redundant mentions of the same fact in multiple slots in the article? Father Rob Lyons 20:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I read it twice, but it seems I read over it, If I would have seen it, I wouldn't have put it in there Mach10 07:25, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Picture blocking text?
Is it just me or is one of the pictures obstructing the text? --GW_Simulations 19:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

white area below flights
There is a big block of white space below the Flights area, i don't know how to get rid of it, but it has something to do with the photo on the right (when you remove the photo the space is removed and the text goes back to normal).

yet the code looks fine... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.67.139.123 (talk • contribs).


 * I don't get any whitespace looking using Firefox at 1024x768... SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Distance etc.
According to the history, the following paragraph:

Space Shuttle Atlantis has completed 26 flights, spent 220.40-days in space, completed 3,468 orbits, and flown 89,908,732 miles in total, as of February 2003. She is currently on her 27th flight, in orbit on mission STS-115.

Was replaced by:

Space Shuttle Atlantis has completed 27 flights, spent 220.40-days in space, completed 3,468 orbits, and flown 89,908,732 miles in total, as of September 2006.

Does anyone have details of the last flight, to update the rest of the figures? Amanita 14:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Statistics for Atlantis
Supporting what user Amanita have mentioned, the details of Atlantis must be updated. Also these details must be updated in other Wikipedia shuttle pages. For example, there is another page that provides a summary of Atlantis statistics. Can some one update it using OFFICIAL NASA statistics? For the time spend in space, it is better to add like [X days Y minutes and Z seconds], rather than X.XX days. Also lift-offs and landings can be divided into daytime and night time. 130.194.5.129 05:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

name
It's the Atlantis space shuttle. The other way around isn't idiomatic English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauldanon (talk • contribs)
 * It is important for Wikipedia to conform to usage in reliable, verifiable sources. NASA press releases, for example. Which consistently say things like, "The space shuttle Atlantis and its seven-member crew lifted off Friday from NASA's Kennedy Space Center at 7:38 p.m. EDT...." (sdsds - talk) 03:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not getting how it isn't normal English; we say "the battleship Iowa" not "the Iowa battleship", to pick an analogy. Shimgray | talk | 19:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of "switched back and forth" ...
The lead to this article appears to be carrying on a debate with itself. Can a subject matter expert edit it down to what the current plans for Atlantis are?--NapoliRoma (talk) 16:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Burst then Leak?
How does a pressurised vessel burst and then 'leak'?


 * Technically bursting would be the initial rupture of the vessel wall... the leaking would happen very rapidly thereafter as the contents escape from the rupture. Leak before Burst is a design concept that would prevent the potentially damaging energy release of the burst... somewhat like a relief valve. Burst before Leak is more a reversal of the concept name indicating that it just dosen't work and dosen't make sense to have it designed that way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.33.121.4 (talk) 13:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Size matters!!!!
Why the tcker is there no mention of its dimensions? If it is the largest spacecraft ever this data is very important but no fqueen page in google tells us... Undead Herle King (talk) 09:27, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Recent revision of In Film section debate
Recently, there has been a discussion regarding the removal of an In Film section that was previously located towards the end of the article. This section cited the inclusion of Atlantis in the films Deep Impact and Armageddon (1998 film). It has been argued that this section detracts from the article due to it's percieved irrelevance, However I feel that it merits inclusion because of the specific involvement of the subject matter. The information is included under the Space shuttles in fiction link, however the article seems to almost be a dumping ground for pop culture and the information on Atlantis could easily be missed among other references. Please post your thoughts on the matter. JonasAngelis (talk) 15:50, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * "seems to almost be a dumping ground for pop culture" is precisely why there are limits on pop-culture sections in articles. Everyone who adds an item believes their entry "merits inclusion" for some reason or another. As such, there has to be an objective standard, and that is generally done through reliable sources which assert notability. In rare occasions, sources are not needed, such as the film Top Gun's use of the F-14 Tomcat. Otherwise, reliable sources are needed to prove the item is notable to the subject matter. Another way to prove notability is when there is some sort of connection between the subject and the entry. If NASA indeed gave permission for the movie Deep Impact to use the name and images, that might be enough to make the entry notable, assuming reliable sources can be found to back up the claim, and that there were some sort of extraordinary measures taken, such as using the actual shuttle in the film. However, the use of this shuttle in Armegeddon doesn't seem to rise to the level of notability at all, as it cold have been any shuttle that was destroyed. To be honest, neither one seems notable at this point.


 * As for the Space shuttles in fiction article, it needs to use these same standards. If it doesn't, it should be aggressively trimmed till it does. If that doesn't work, then it's a good candidate for targeting by the AFD wonks. - BillCJ (talk) 16:27, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * This is the section in question:
 * "- ==In film==
 * NASA permitted the name and images of Atlantis to be used in the film Deep Impact, in which shuttle Atlantis carried a crew to the spaceship Messiah. It is also featured in the Bruce Willis film Armageddon. Atlantis is in orbit during the movie's opening sequence and is destroyed by a meteor shower, ultimately leading to the discovery of a massive asteroid on a collision course with Earth."
 * It needs a reference. Jonas can you search on google and google news and see if there is media coverage? If there is, that would demonstrate notability and support the argument for inclusion. Including some mention of this aspect of the shuttle would also be nice as a way to provide a link to the other article in case readers are interested in that aspect and want to follow-up. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:03, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It needs a reference. Jonas can you search on google and google news and see if there is media coverage? If there is, that would demonstrate notability and support the argument for inclusion. Including some mention of this aspect of the shuttle would also be nice as a way to provide a link to the other article in case readers are interested in that aspect and want to follow-up. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:03, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

vandalism
Just removed some vandalism. Need to protect the page? New to wiki editing, sry =] Estelgur (talk) 22:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Atlantis is to fly mission STS-132
The article shows Atlantis flying mission STS-131. Maybe it was at one time, but now that mission is assigned to Discovery. Atlantis is scheduled to fly STS-132 . --Lenard Lindstrom (talk) 22:56, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, then fix it! SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Statistics for Atlantis
I tried to add up the number of orbits for Atlantis and it came different from the currently stated number in this page. Please, can some one provide the correct number of days and number of orbits for Atlantis and update them on all relevant pages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.132.3.6 (talk) 09:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Aging
Back in June 2007, user:ColdCase added a section on aging of the composite pressure vessels on Atlantis based on a |Space.com article. At the time, he mentioned that this may be a problem on Discovery, maybe not on Endeavor, but there was no information in the article to suggest this. By now, someone must know for sure. I added a citation needed tag. Also did a bit of editing to remove some time-sensitive material. Khakiandmauve (talk) 19:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Composite overwrapped pressure vessels
There is a new article on NASAspaceflight.com which mentions that Atlantis' pressure vessels were subsequently replaced. See. In article's words "In all, an investigation of the COPVs during the Return to Flight time period resulted in two COPVs on Atlantis being deemed “high risk.” Those two COPVs were subsequently replaced (OV-104 MPS tank S/N 006 and 007).". Hence what Wikipedia mentions under problems section must be edited to correctly state the facts 152.226.7.202 (talk) 00:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Tethered Satellite System
Just a quick note referring to why I moved which part was hyperlinked. Just as much as it may not be good practise to link acronyms, neither is it to have three links directly after another appearing as one link. That and Tethered Satellite System directs to a redirect, there's no actual page anyway. I don't mind keeping the full name hyperlinked but if so the box would need rewording to separate the hyperlinked terms which is what I was trying to achieve. And while on that point the wording isn't specific in that that this was the first TSS mission, TSS-1. ChiZeroOne (talk) 17:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I fixed it up. Hopefully that is acceptable. It doesn't really matter if its a redirect, as long as it goes to the proper page, and not a disambig page.-- Navy Blue84  17:34, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Much better, thanks. ChiZeroOne (talk) 17:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Copyvio of this article on craigslist
While on craigslist browsing their "best of" category tonight, I found this post. It is almost a verbatim copy of much of this article and makes no mention of Wikipedia, the GFDL, or CC-BY-SA. Contact information can be found here under section 5, roughly 20% of the way down the page. I wasn't sure what to do, so I decided to just post it here and let those who have worked on this article handle it. 99.139.146.60 (talk) 00:16, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Trips to the Moon and back
User:202.173.146.220 changed the number of trips to the Moon and back to half of the 505 claimed in the collectSpace reference, and was reverted by User:Bjmullan, who says, "lets stick to what the reference says". The problem is, the reference's math is wrong. CollectSpace gives Atlantis's "odometer" reading at 120,650,907 miles. Given that the semi-major axis of the Moon's orbit is ~239,000 miles (from Moon, and ignoring the relatively small radii of the Earth and the Moon), that's equal to ~505 one way trips, or ~253 round trips. Per WP:NOR, I think we can correct this. The question becomes, which units do we trust in the CollectSpace reference - the miles, or the round trips. I suppose it's possible that they got the round trips number and worked backwards to the miles, but given the precision of the miles versus the round trips, I don't believe that's the case. But so we're not locked into what I believe, I suggest we cite another source for one or the other.

The Christian Science Monitor says that Atlantis traveled 120,650,907 miles in space, and while I'm not convinced that doesn't include a few miles below whatever threshold for space you choose to use during launch and reentry, I think it's accurate enough. I'm going to change the value to something like "more than 250 trips to the Moon and back" and include the CSM reference. Khakiandmauve (talk) 15:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * On actually writing the text, it occurred to me that a round trip from the Earth to the Moon is not made in a straight line. It's misleading, just as it would be to talk about the distance of Columbus's trip to the new world in terms of the chordal distance through the interior of the Earth between Portugal and the Bahamas, or even the great circle arc length.  So I went with a simple, one way, "distance from the Earth to the Moon". Khakiandmauve (talk) 16:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)