Talk:List of space shuttle missions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Featured list star List of space shuttle missions is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, feel free to contribute.


Contents

[edit] Complete list

I am new to editing Wikipedia, so forgive me if I'm going about this wrong, but if Enterprise is included in the list, Pathfinder should also most definitely be included. It, too, has never flown (never meant to), but it is a full Space Shuttle. I leave this editing to those who know what they're doing. ;)

It's only a simulator, isn't it? Enterprise is at least a functional shuttle, no? —Nightstallion (?) 13:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Because this is a list of space shuttle missions, pathfinder can't be included because it never did anything but logistic ground tests. The inclusion of Enterprise looks to be only the free flight tests. These are clearly differentiated from the actual shuttle missions. So, the unstated rule is that a shuttle had to have free flight. It could be argued, though, that ALL the approach and landing tests should count, even if it Enterprise was mated to the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Note that I DO NOT agree with this idea, but since we don't have a stated inclusion criteria, the argument could be made. Cjosefy 15:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Content-free Space Shuttle pages

  • All pages like STS-61-B, STS-61-C, STS-55, STS-56 etc which incorporate the Space Shuttle mission template but have no actual content whatsoever. Evercat 14:17, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment: It helps people add content, but it is misleading because those with no information appear as blue links and not red. But, in fact, if the template was not ready, I would never add the crew list for STS-55, as I did just now. Optim 14:32, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • This is the exact equivalent of species articles consisting solely of an empty taxobox, which I trust would never be allowed. Evercat 14:36, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment: Im responsible for putting these templates up, and the idea is to help people like Optim out. I believe they add value because the provide a starting poiint for people and they will standardize the look of Space shuttle missions, which helps overall comprehension as well as improving look and feel. I do not believe that they detract from the ability to add information to the Wiki any more than stub pages do. The template provides a link to summaries of space shuttle missions that are in the public domain, so that content can be easily and quickly added, or if somone is just searching for information they can find it Theon 14:37, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
      • Delete. If there only was an ever so short stub text in addition to the blank template, it would be ok, and I recommend all who wish to ease the adding of additional content to put in atleast two sentences as a starter. — Sverdrup (talk) 14:52, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
        • Changed to keep, as I it trust all of them will fill up at least to stubs now. I don't like vfd being a place to bring sub-stubs into attention to be fixed though. — Sverdrup (talk) 20:31, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, unless filled with contents soon - just filling the table and list the crew would be enough to keep them. andy
      • I agree that even minimal content would probably be enough. Evercat 14:44, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
        • I can agree with the minimal content decision, but how much is enough? would just a list of crew be enough?Theon 14:56, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
          • I am adding crew lists. I hope it's enough to make people understand why we need the templates. If there was no template, I would never make those contributions. Optim 15:06, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)~
    • Keep as stub or merge and redirect. Anthony DiPierro 14:45, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
      • Ugh. Absolutely do not merge. The current situation is better than a merge. Evercat 14:48, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
      • Agreed w/ Evercat Theon 14:57, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
      • No! do not merge! Optim 15:06, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Just a matter of adding basic content (crew etc) - basically copy & paste from NASA's pages - to make stubs of them. Fredrik 15:02, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. They are useful. However, somebody should go to List of space shuttle missions and mark the pages with no content with a star (*). Optim 15:06, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Creating a useful framework for information is just as valuable, and the results worth keeping, as information itself. In any event, there is implied information (ie. "STS-61-C" was a Space Shuttle Mission") that is equivalent to a stub. I suppose Theon could add this sentence or something similar if it makes deletionists happy, but I don't really see what it adds. Jgm 15:03, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Alright. I myself will try to add some details to most some of these pages, either today or tomorrow. Evercat 16:53, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - will try to complete all the mission patches - Texture 17:30, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - Decumanus 20:58, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - Rlandmann 23:48, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep; they're being added to. Give Theon a little time and maybe lend a hand... - Seth Ilys 23:01, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Ordering

It would be nice to be able to find somewhere an explanation of why missions are not in numerical order. For example, STS-107 (Columbia accident) was preceded by STS-113 and will be succeeded by STS-114. Jdavidb 19:12, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

When a Space Shuttle mission is first planned, it is assigned an STS number (example STS-113). During planning and training for that mission, it may fall behind. Another mission may prove to be more critical and may get moved up in the launch order. The missions keep their original STS numbers, but may end up being launched out of sequence. Error 404 17:05, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Added a number for the order of American shuttle flights, even though it is a simple numerical count (except for Buran) because this assists the reader in finding his or her way around the table; and because it is a pain to try to stare at the table and count to find out which was the 108th shuttle flight (or whatever). It also helps show the contrast between actual order and planning order. -- RandomCritic.

Good work. it looks good. Mlm42 03:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reusable spacecraft

Should this article really be 'List of reusable spacecraft missions' and include SpaceShipOne, et. al.? Also, the only thing left to be done for this list (IMHO) is to complete the Notes field on the remainder of the entries. -Joseph (Talk) 19:32, 2004 Oct 13 (UTC)

Prospective entries:
Date Mission Name Agency Vehicle Launch Site Landing Site Note
June 21, 2004 SS1 15P MAV SpaceShipOne Mojave Mojave First commercial manned spaceflight
September 29, 2004 SS1 16P MAV SpaceShipOne Mojave Mojave X-Prize flight #1
October 4, 2004 SS1 17P MAV SpaceShipOne Mojave Mojave X-Prize flight #2

-Joseph (Talk) 19:52, 2004 Oct 13 (UTC)

I'd say no to including SpaceShipOne cause it is a "space plane" not a "space shuttle", otherwise you'd have to include other ones like the X-planes or even some of the high flying SR-71s. MBisanz

[edit] Landing sites

Are the landing site listings all correct? Weren't at least one or two missions diverted to White Sands? --Matt McIrvin 21:39, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Possibly. There is certainly cleanup work to do. However, this is data that wasn't there before, at all. -Joseph (Talk) 21:47, 2004 Oct 13 (UTC)

Somebody fixed STS-3... I went through looking for later missions that landed at Edwards. Think I got them all, but I could have missed one or two. --Matt McIrvin 22:35, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Country flags

I don't see much of a point in including these flags.. especially since they're all american except one.. sure maybe some day one would hope to have more countries (but also it seems efforts are becoming more and more international); so i'm considering removing the entire Agency column. Mlm42 23:32, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Also the Launch site column is pretty pointless.. How about something like Landing Date, or Duration? I changed the format of the table slightly to make it fit on my screen better, too. Mlm42 23:43, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

You might make an argument against the Agency column, but I think the launch site part can be useful. There is definitely variance there. Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 15:22:18, 2005-08-11 (UTC)
yes but just because there's variance doesn't mean we should make it seem so important that it gets it's own column.. it's my understanding that the two main launch sites are basically right next to each other anyway.. i don't know much about space shuttles, but it seems to me that that column, and the agency column could be replaced with something much most interesting and important. Mlm42 19:31, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] STS-300

i noticed the STS-300 article, shouldn't that be included on the list, or only when it is actually called upon? Boneyard 12:34, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, it's mentioned in the first section of the article.. whether or not it should actually be on the list may be up for debate, since we're including future missions anyway.. it is kind of a special case, though. Mlm42 03:05, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

So.... then... where is the list of shuttle missions?

[edit] Future Missions

on http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com there is a mission manifest thats new. If anyone can verify it as being true, i'll update this page to show it. Tom walker 03:05, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dates of future missions

Isn't it bad to show dates for future missions seeing asa how they NEVER launch on the dates planned! It is misleading, and we all know it. Maybe we should put future or planned or unsure in that date box instead to be less ambiguous. → J@red talk+ ubx  23:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I can't agree with you. I want to know the dates of the future shuttle missions. What's wrong with that? I think, it's interesting to see the scheduled launch dates. And if every future mission is so successful like STS-121, I see no problems for the further flights. -- STS-Chris 18:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Order number

I think the order number on the chart is not helpful. It is not strict and, as certain flights are moved up and done out-of-order from their original schedule it is confusing. We have gaps to attempt to track the STS numbers early in the list and later there is an offset. We should either be strict or not have it at all. -- 75.24.105.208 20:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 16 or 18

The list has 18 future missions while Mike Griffin has indicated many times, including after STS-121 flight, that there are only 16 missions left, 15 to assemble the ISS and 1 to the Hubble. It seems to me therefore that the list includes two non-existing missions. Which ones ? 193.56.37.1 14:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi! STS-131 and 133 are Contingency Logistic Flights. These missions will take place only if it is necessary. So the last scheduled missions are STS-130 and 132. -- STS-Chris 17:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cancelled/not flown missions

It might be interesting to have a section on cancelled/not flown missions. I know there were a number of missions placed on the manifest and later cancelled (some even with patches already made, etc.). Also, this would take care of the STS-3xx missions that don't get flown. We shouldn't lose the fact that these missions were on the manifest and in the planning stages, but not needed. Cjosefy 13:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Cancelled Shuttle missions --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 23:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of Template:STS

I removed Template:STS from the bottom of this page. This page is already a list of all space shuttle missions, so I think there isn't much added by having what amounts to another list of the same missions placed at the bottom of the page. It's basically having the same information twice on the page, which is especially bad when that information involves 100+ missions. Cjosefy 14:26, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dates

Are the dates provided in UTC or local (Eastern). That makes a difference for STS-116 for instance. Hektor 09:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/s/Talk%7EList_of_space_shuttle_missions_1277.html"