COLUMBIA:-
Physical Characteristics The Space Shuttle was the most complex space vehicle design of its time. It was comprised of four main components: the External Tank (ET); three Space Shuttle Main Engines; two Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs); and the Orbiter vehicle. It was the first side-mounted space system dictated by the need to have a large winged vehicle for cross-range capability for re-entry into Earth’s atmosphere and the ability to land a heavyweight payload. These four components provided the shuttle with the ability to accomplish a diverse set of missions over its flight history. The Orbiter’s heavy cargo/payload carrying capability, along with the crew habitability and flexibility to operate in space, made this vehicle unique. Because of its lift capability and due-East inclination, the shuttle was able to launch a multitude of satellites, Spacelab modules, science platforms, interplanetary probes, Department of Defense payloads, and components/modules for the assembly of the International Space Station (ISS). The shuttle lift capability or payload decreased with increased operational altitude or orbit inclination because more fuel was required to reach the higher altitude or inclination. Shuttle lift capability was also limited by total vehicle landing weight— different limits for different cases (nominal or abort landing). An abort landing was required if a system failure
during ascent caused the shuttle not to have enough energy to reach orbit or was a hazard to crew or mission. Abort landing sites were located around the world, with the prime abort landing sites being Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida, Dryden Flight Research Center on the Edwards Air Force Base in California, and Europe. The entire shuttle vehicle, fully loaded, weighed about 2 million kg (4.4 million pounds) and required a combined thrust of about 35 million newtons (7.8 million pounds-force) to reach orbital altitude. Thrust was provided by the boosters for the first 2 minutes and the main engines for the approximately 8 minutes and 30 seconds ascent required for the vehicle to reach orbital speed at the requisite altitude range of 185 to about 590 km (100 to 320 nautical miles). Once in orbit, the Orbital Maneuvering System engines and Reaction Control System thrusters were used to perform all orbital operations, Orbiter maneuvers, and deorbit. Re-entry required orbital velocity decelerations of about 330 km/hr (204 mph) depending on orbital altitude, which caused the Orbiter to slow and fall back to Earth. The Orbiter Thermal Protection System, which covered the entire vehicle, provided the protection needed to survive the extreme high temperatures experienced during re-entry. Primarily friction between the Orbiter and the Earth’s atmosphere generated temperatures ranging from 927°C (1,700°F) to 1,600°C (3,000°F). The highest temperatures experienced were on the wing leading edge and nose cone. The time it took the Orbiter to start its descent from orbital velocity of about 28,160 km/hr (17,500 mph) to a landing speed of about 346 km/hr (215 mph) was 1 hour and 5 minutes. During re-entry, the Orbiter was essentially a glider. It did not have any propulsion capability, except for the Reaction Control System thrusters required for roll control to adjust its trajectory early during re-entry. Management of the Orbiter energy from its orbital speed was critical to allow the Orbiter to reach its desired runway target. The Orbiter’s limited cross-range capability of about 1,480 km (800 nautical miles) made management of the energy during final phases of re-entry close to the ground—otherwise called terminal area energy management—critical for a safe landing. The Orbiter performed as a glider during re-entry, thus its mass properties had to be well understood to ensure that the Flight Control System could control the vehicle and reach the required landing site with the right amount of energy for landing. One of the critical components of its aerodynamic flight was to ensure that the Orbiter center of gravity was correctly calculated and entered into the Orbiter flight design process. Because of the tight center of gravity constraints, the cargo bay payloads were placed in the necessary cargo bay location to protect the down weight and center of gravity of the Orbiter for landing. Considering the Orbiter’s size, the center of gravity box was only 91 cm (36 in.) long, 5 cm (2 in.) wide, and 5 cm (2 in.) high. External Tank The ET was 46.8 m (153.6 ft) in length with a diameter of 8.4 m (27.6 ft), which made it the largest component of the shuttle. The ET contained two internal tanks—one for the storage of liquid hydrogen 72% during first stage to preclude having the vehicle exceed structural limits during high dynamic pressure as well as close to main engine shutdown to preclude the vehicle from exceeding 3 gravitational force (3g) limits. The only manual main engine control capability available to the crew was the manual throttle control, which allowed the crew to decrease engine performance from 104.5% to a level of 72% if required for vehicle control. The main engines had the capability to gimbal about 10.5 degrees up and down and 8.5 degrees to either side to change the thrust direction required for changes in trajectory parameters.
 ORBITER The Orbiter was the primary component of the shuttle; it carried the crew members and mission cargo/payload hardware to orbit. The Orbiter was about 37.1 m (122 ft) long with a wingspan of about 23.8 m (78 ft). The cargo/payload carrying capacity was limited by the 18.3-m- (60-ft)-long by 4.6-m- (15-ft)- wide payload bay. The cargo/payload weighed up to 29,000 kg (65,000 pounds), depending on the desired orbital inclination. The Orbiter payload bay doors, which were constructed of graphite epoxy composite material, were 18.3 m (60 ft) in length and 4.5 m (15 ft) in diameter and rotated through an angle of 175 degrees. A set of radiator panels, affixed to each door, dissipated heat from the crew cabin avionic systems. The first vehicle, Columbia, was the heaviest Orbiter fabricated due to the installation of additional test instrumentation required to gather data on vehicle performance. As each Orbiter was fabricated, the test instrumentation was deleted and system changes implemented, resulting in each subsequent vehicle being built lighter. The Orbiter crew cabin consisted of the flight deck and the middeck andand the other for the storage of liquid oxygen. The hydrogen tank, which was the bigger of the two internal tanks, held 102,737 kg (226,497 pounds) of hydrogen. The oxygen tank, located at the top of the ET, held 619,160 kg (1,365,010 pounds) of oxygen. Both tanks provided the fuel to the main engines required to provide the thrust for the vehicle to achieve a safe orbit. During powered flight and ascent to orbit, the ET provided about 180,000 L/min (47,000 gal/min) of hydrogen and about 67,000 L/min (18,000 gal/min) of oxygen to all three Space Shuttle Main Engines with a 6-to-1 mixture ratio of liquid hydrogen to liquid oxygen. Solid Rocket Boosters The two SRBs provided the main thrust to lift the shuttle off the launch pad. Each booster provided about 14.7 meganewtons (3,300,000 pounds-force) of thrust at launch, and they were only ignited once the three main engines reached the required 104.5% thrust level for launch. Once the SRBs were ignited, they provided about 72% of the thrust required of the entire shuttle at liftoff and through the first stage, which ended at SRB separation. The SRB thrust vector control system enabled the nozzles to rotate, allowing the entire shuttle to maneuver to the required ascent trajectory during first stage. Two minutes after launch, the spent SRBs were jettisoned, having taken the vehicle to an altitude of about 45 km (28 miles). Not only were the boosters reusable, they were also the largest solid propellant motors in use then. Each measured about 45.4 m (149 ft) long and about 3.6 m (12 ft) in diameter.



SPACE SHUTTLE MAIN ENGINES After SRB separation, the main engines provided the majority of thrust required for the shuttle to reach orbital velocity. Each main engine weighed about 3,200 kg (7,000 pounds). With a total length of 4.3 m (14 ft), each engine, operating at the 104.5% power level, provided a thrust level of about 1.75 meganewtons (394,000 pounds-force) at sea level and about 2.2 meganewtons (492,000 pounds-force) at vacuum throughout the entire 8 minutes and 30 seconds of powered flight. The engine nozzle by itself was 2.9 m (9.4 ft) long with a nozzle exit diameter of 2.4 m (7.8 ft). Due to the high heat generated by the engine thrust, each engine contained 1,082 tubes throughout its entire diameter, allowing circulation of liquid hydrogen to cool the nozzle during powered flight. The main engines were a complex piece of machinery comprised of high- and low-pressure fuel and oxidizer pumps, engine controllers, valves, etc. The engines were under constant control by the main engine controllers. These consisted of an electronics package mounted on each engine to control engine operation under strict and critical performance parameters. The engines ran at 104.5% performance for much of the entire operation, except when they were throttled down to about could be configured for a maximum crew size of seven astronauts, including their required equipment to accomplish the mission objectives. The flight deck contained the Orbiter cockpit and aft station where all the vehicle and systems controls were located. The crew used six windows in the forward cockpit, two windows overhead, and two windows looking aft for orbit operations and viewing. The middeck was mostly the crew accommodations area, and it housed all the crew equipment required to live and work in space. The middeck also contained the three avionic bays where the Orbiter electronic boxes were installed. Due to their limited power generation capability, the Orbiter fuel cells consumables (power generation cryogenics) provided mission duration capability on the order of about 12 to 14 days, dependent on vehicle configuration. In 2006, NASA put into place the Station-to-Shuttle Power Transfer System, which allowed the ISS to provide power to the Orbiter vehicle, thereby allowing the Orbiter to have a total mission duration of about 16 days. The Orbiter configuration (amount of propellant loaded in the forward and aft propellant tanks, payload mounting hardware in the payload bay, loading of cryogenic tanks required for power generation, crew size, etc.) was adjusted and optimized throughout the pre-mission process. Because of its payload size and robotic arm capability, the Orbiter could be configured to perform as a platform for different cargo/payload hardware configurations. In the total 132 Space Shuttle missions (as of October 2010) over a period of 29 years, the Orbiter deployed a multitude of satellites for Earth observation and telecommunications; interplanetary probes such as Galileo/Jupiter spacecraft and Magellan/Venus Radar Mapper; and great observatories that included the Hubble Space Telescope, Compton Gamma Ray Observatory, and Chandra X-ray Observatory. The Orbiter even functioned as a science platform/laboratory; e.g., Spacelab, Astronomy Ultraviolet Telescope, US Microgravity Laboratory, US Microgravity Payload, etc. Aside from the experiments and satellite deployments the shuttle performed, its most important accomplishment was the delivery and assembly of the ISS.
SPACE SHUTTLE REUSABILITY All components of the Space Shuttle vehicle, except for the ET, were designed to be reusable flight after flight. The ET, once jettisoned from the Orbiter, fell to Earth where atmospheric heating caused the tank to break up over the ocean. The SRBs, once jettisoned from the tank, parachuted back to the ocean where they were recovered by special ships and brought back to KSC. With their solid propellant spent, the boosters were de-stacked and shipped back to aerospace and defense company Thiokol in Utah for refurbishment and reuse. The SRBs were thoroughly inspected after every mission to ensure that the components were not damaged and could be refurbished for another flight. Any damage found was either repaired or the component was discarded. The Orbiter was the only fully reusable component of the shuttle system. Each Orbiter was designed and certified for 100 space missions and required about 5 months, once it landed, to service the different systems and configure the payload bay to support requirements for its next mission. NASA replaced the components only when they sustained a system failure and could not be repaired. Even though certified for 100 missions, Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavour completed 39, 32, and 25 missions, respectively, by October 2010. Challenger flew 10 missions and Columbia flew 28 missions before their loss on January 28, 1986, and February 1, 2003, respectively
AUTOMATION, AUTONOMY, AND REDUNDANCY 
The Space Shuttle was the first space vehicle to use the fly-by-wire computerized digital flight control system. Except for manual switch throws for system power-up and certain valve actuations, control of the Orbiter systems was through the general purpose computers installed in the forward avionics bay in the middeck. Each Orbiter had five hardwareidentical general purpose computers; four functioned as the primary means to control the Orbiter systems, and one was used as a backup should a software anomaly or problem cause the loss of the four primary computers. During ascent and re-entry—the critical phases of flight—four general purpose computers were used to control the spacecraft. The primary software, called the Primary Avionics Software System, was divided into two major systems: system software, responsible for computer operation, synchronization, and management of input and output operations; and applications software, which performed the actual duties required to fly the vehicle and operate the vehicle systems. Even though simple in their architecture compared to today’s computers, the general purpose computers had a complex redundancy management scheme in which all four primary computers were tightly coupled together and processed the same information at the same time. This tight coupling was achieved through synchronization steps and cross-check results of their processes about 440 times per second. The original International Business Machines computers had only about 424 kilobytes of memory each. The central processing unit could process about 400,000 instructions per second and did not have a hard disk drive capability. These computers were replaced in April 1991 (first flight was STS-37) with an upgraded model that had about 2.5 times the memory capacity and three times the processor speed. To protect against corrupt software, the general purpose computers had a backup computer that operated with a completely different code independent of the Primary Avionics Software System. This fifth computer, called the Backup Flight System, operated in the background, processing the same critical ascent/re-entry functions in case the four general purpose computers failed or were corrupted by problems with their software. The Backup Flight System could be engaged at any moment only by manual crew command, and it also performed oversight and management of Orbiter noncritical functions. For the first 132 flights of the Space Shuttle Program, the Backup Flight System computer was never engaged and, therefore, was not used for Orbiter control. The overall avionics system architecture that used the general purpose computer redundancy was developed with a redundancy requirement for fail-operational/fail-safe capability. These redundancy schemes allowed for the loss of redundancy in the avionics systems and still allowed continuation of the mission or safe landing of the Orbiter. All re-entry critical avionics functions, such as general purpose computers, aero surface actuators, rate gyro assemblies, accelerometer assemblies, air data transducer assemblies, etc., were designed with four levels of redundancy. This meant that each of these functions was controlled by four avionic boxes that performed the same specific function. The loss of the first box allowed for safe continuation of the mission. The loss of the second box still allowed the function to work properly with only two remaining boxes, which subsequently allowed for safe re-entry and landing of the Orbiter. Other critical functions were designed with only triple redundancy, which meant that fail-operational/fail-safe reliability allowed the loss of two of the boxes before the function was lost. The avionics systems redundancy management scheme was essentially controlled via computer software that operated within the general purpose computers. This scheme was to select the middle value of the avionics components when the systems had three or four avionics boxes executing the same function. On loss of the first box, the redundancy management scheme would down mode to the “average value” of the input received from the functioning boxes. Upon the second box failure, the scheme would further down mode to the “use value,” which essentially meant that the function was performed by using input data from only one remaining unit in the system. This robust avionics architecture allowed the loss of avionics redundancy within a function without impacting the ability of the Orbiter to perform its required mission. 
MANEUVERABILITY, RENDEZVOUS, AND DOCKING CAPABILITY :-
MANEUVERABILITY The Orbiter was very maneuverable and could be tightly controlled in its pointing accuracy, depending on the objective it was trying to achieve. The Orbiter controllability and pointing capability was performed by the use of 44 Reaction Control System thrusters installed both in the forward and the aft portions of the vehicle. Of the 44 thrusters, six were Reaction Control Systems and each had a thrust level of only 111 newtons (25 pounds-force). The remaining 38 thrusters were considered primary thrusters and each had a thrust level of 3,825 newtons(860 pounds-force). The total thruster complement was divided between the forward thrusters located forward of the crew cabin, and the aft thrusters located on the two Orbital Maneuvering System pods in the tail of the Orbiter. The forward thrusters (total of 16) consisted of 14 primary thrusters and two vernier thrusters. Of the 28 thrusters in the aft, 24 were primary thrusters and four were vernier thrusters. The thrusters were installed on the Orbiter in such a way that both the rotational and the translational control was provided to each of the Orbiter’s six axes of control with each axis having either two or three thrusters available for control. The Orbital Maneuvering System provided propulsion for the shuttle. During the orbit phase of the flight, it was used for the orbital maneuvers needed to achieve orbit after the Main Propulsion System had shut down. It was also the primary propulsion system for orbital transfer maneuvers and the deorbit maneuver. The general purpose computers also controlled the tight Orbiter attitude and pointing capability via the Orbiter Digital Auto Pilot—a key piece of application software within the computers. During orbit operations, the Digital Auto Pilot was the primary means for the crew to control Orbiter pointing by the selection of different attitude and attitude rate deadbands, which varied between +/-1.0 and 5.0 degrees for attitude and +/-0.02 and 0.2 deg/sec for attitude rate. The Digital Auto Pilot could perform three-axis automatic maneuver, attitude tracking, and rotation about any axis or body vector. Crew interface to the Digital Auto Pilot was via the Orbiter cathode ray tubes/keyboard interface, which allowed the crew to control parameters in the software. With very accurate control of its orientation, the Orbiter could provide a pointing capability to any part of the celestial sky as required to accomplish its mission objectives.
RENDEZVOUS AND DOCKING 
The shuttle docked to, grappled, deployed, retrieved, and otherwise serviced a more diverse set of orbiting objects than any other spacecraft in history. It became the world’s first general purpose space rendezvous vehicle. Astronauts retrieved payloads no larger than a refrigerator and docked to targets as massive as the ISS, despite the shuttle being designed without specific rendezvous targets in mind. In fact, the shuttle wasn’t designed to physically dock with anything; it was intended to reach out and grapple objects with its robotic arm. A rendezvous period lasted up to 4 days and could be divided into three phases: ground targeted; on-board targeted; and human-piloted proximity operations. The first phase began with launch into a lower orbit, which lagged the target vehicle. The Orbiter phased toward the target vehicle due to the different orbital rates caused by orbital altitude. Mission Control at Johnson Space Center tracked the shuttle via ground assets and computed orbital burn parameters to push the shuttle higher toward the target vehicle. As the shuttle neared the target, it transitioned to on-board targeting using radar and star trackers. These sensors provided navigation data that allowed on-board computers to calculate subsequent orbital burns to reach the target vehicle. The final stage of rendezvous operations—proximity operations— began with the Orbiter’s arrival within thousands of meters (feet) of the target orbital position. During proximity operations, the crew used their highest fidelity sensors (laser, radar, or direct measurement out the window with a camera) to obtain the target vehicle’s relative position. The crew then transitioned to manual control and used the translational hand controller to delicately guide the Orbiter in for docking or grappling operations. The first rendezvous missions targeted satellite objects less massive than the shuttle and grappled these objects with its robotic arm. During the proximity operations phase, the commander only had a docking camera view and accompanying radar information to guide the vehicle. Other astronauts aimed payload bay cameras at the target and recorded elevation angles, which were charted on paper to give the commander awareness of the Orbiter’s position relative to the target. Once the commander maneuvered into a position where the target was above the payload bay, a mission specialist grappled the target with the robotic arm. This method proved highly reliable and applicable to a wide array of rendezvous missions. Shuttle rendezvous needed a new strategy to physically dock with large vehicles: the Russian space station Mir and the ISS. Rendezvous with larger space stations required more precise navigation, stricter thruster plume limitations, and tighter tolerances during docking operations. New tools such as the laser sensors provided highly accurate range and range rate information for the crew. The laser was mounted in the payload bay and its data were routed into the shuttle cabin but could not be incorporated directly into the shuttle guidance, navigation, and control software. Instead, data were displayed on and controlled by a laptop computer mounted in the aft cockpit. This laptop hosted software called the Rendezvous Proximity Operations Program that displayed the Orbiter’s position relative to the target for increased crew situational awareness. This display was used extensively by the commander to manually fly the vehicle from 610 m (2,000 ft) to docking. This assembly of hardware and software aptly met the increased accuracy required by delicate docking mechanisms and enabled crews to pilot the massive shuttle within amazing tolerances. In fact, during the final 0.9 m (3 ft) of docking with the ISS, the Orbiter had to maintain a 7.62-cm (3-in.) lateral alignment cylinder and the closing rate had to be controlled to within 0.02 m/sec (0.06 ft/sec). The commander could control this with incredibly discrete pulses of the Reaction Control System thrusters. Both the commander and the pilot were trained extensively in the art of shuttle proximity operations, learning techniques that allowed them to pilot the Orbiter to meet tolerances. The shuttle was never meant to be piloted to this degree of accuracy, but innovative engineering and training made these dockings uneventful and even routine. The success of shuttle rendezvous missions was remarkable considering its operational complexity. Spacecraft rendezvous is an art requiring the highly scripted choreography of hardware systems, astronauts, and members of Mission Control. It is a precise and graceful waltz of billions of dollars of hardware and human decision making.

ROBOTIC ARM/OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY The Canadian Space Agency provided the Shuttle Robotic Arm. It was designed, built, and tested by Spar Aerospace Ltd., a Canadian Company. The electromechanical arm measured about 15 m (50 ft) long and 0.4 m (15 in.) in diameter with a six-degreeof-freedom rotational capability, and it consisted of a manipulator arm that was under the control of the crew via displays and control panels located in the Orbiter aft flight deck. The Shuttle Robotic Arm was comprised of six joints that corresponded roughly to the joints of a human arm and could handle a payload weighing up to 29,000 kg (65,000 pounds). An end effector was used to grapple a payload or any other fixture and/or component that had a grapple fixture for handling by the arm. Even though NASA used the Shuttle Robotic Arm primarily for handling payloads, it could also be used as a platform for extravehicular activity (EVA) crew members to attach themselves via a portable foot restraint. The EVA crew member, affixed to the portable foot restraint grappled by the end effector, could then be maneuvered around the Orbiter vehicle as required to accomplish mission objectives. Following the Return to Flight after the loss of Columbia, the Shuttle Robotic Arm was used to move around the Orbiter Boom Sensor System, which allowed the flight crew to inspect the Thermal Protection System around the entire Orbiter or the reinforced carbon-carbon panels installed on the leading edge of the wings. During buildup of the ISS, the Shuttle Robotic Arm was instrumental in the handling of modules carried by the Orbiter—a task that would not have been possible without the use of this robotic capability.

EXTRAVEHICULAR ACTIVITY CAPABILITY The Space Shuttle Program provided a dramatic expansion in EVA capability for NASA, including the ability to perform tasks in the space environment and ways to best protect and accommodate a crew member in that environment. The sheer number of EVAs performed during the course of the program resulted in a significant increase in knowledge of how EVA systems and EVA crew members perform. Prior to the start of the program, a total of 38 EVAs were performed by all US space programs combined, including Gemini, Apollo, and Skylab. During previous programs, EVAs focused primarily on simple tasks, such as the jettison of expended hardware or the collection of geology samples. The Space Shuttle Program advanced EVA capability to construction of massive space structures, high-strength maneuvers, and repair of complicated engineering components requiring a combination of precision and gentle handling of sensitive materials and structures. As of October 2010, the shuttle accomplished about 157 EVAs in 132 flights. Of those EVAs, 105 were dedicated to ISS assembly and repair tasks. Shuttle EVA crews succeeded in handling and manipulating elements as large as 9,000 kg (20,000 pounds); relocating and installing large replacement parts; capturing and repairing failed satellites; and performing surgical-like repairs of delicate solar arrays, rotating joints, and much more. The Orbiter’s EVA capability consisted of several key engineering components and equipment. For a crew member to step out of the shuttle and safely enter the harsh environment of space, that crew member had to use the integrated airlock, an extravehicular mobility unit spacesuit, a variety of EVA tools, and EVA translation and attachment aids attached to the vehicle or payload. EVA tools consisted of a suite of components that assisted in handling and translating cargo, translating and stabilizing at the work site, operating manual mechanisms, and attaching bolts and fasteners, often with relatively precise torque requirements. Photo and television operations provided documentation of the results for future troubleshooting, when necessary. Extravehicular Mobility Unit The extravehicular mobility unit was a fully self-sufficient individual spacecraft providing critical life support systems and protection from the harsh space environment. Unlike previous suits, the shuttle suit was designed specifically for EVA and was the cornerstone component for safe conduct of EVA during the shuttle era. It operated at 0.03 kgf/cm2 (4.3 psi) pressure in the vacuum environment and provided thermal protection for interfacing with environments and components from -73°C (-100°F) to 177°C (350°F). It provided oxygen and removed carbon dioxide during an EVA, and it supplied battery power to run critical life support and ancillary extravehicular mobility unit systems, including support lights, cameras, and radio. The suit, which also provided crew members with critical feedback on system operations during EVA, was the first spacesuit controlled by a computer. Future space programs will benefit tremendously from NASA’s EVA experience during the shuttle flights. To ensure success, the goal has been and always will be to design for EVAs that are as simple and straightforward as possible. Fewer and less-complicated provisions will be required for EVA interfaces on spacecraft, and functions previously thought to require complicated and automated systems can now rely on EVA instead. During the shuttle era, NASA took the training wheels off of EVA capability and now has a fully developed and highly efficient operational resource in support of both scheduled and contingency EVA tasks.
CREW COMPARTMENT ACCOMMODATION FOR CREW AND PAYLOADS The Orbiter’s crew cabin had a habitable volume of 71.5 m3 (2,525 ft3) and consisted of three levels: flight deck, middeck, and utility area. The flight deck, located on the top level, accommodated the commander, pilot, and two mission specialists behind them. The Orbiter was flown and controlled from the flight deck. The middeck, located directly below the flight deck, accommodated up to three additional crew members and included a galley, toilet, sleep locations, storage lockers, and the side hatch for entering and exiting the vehicle. The Orbiter airlock was also located in the middeck area; it allowed up to three astronauts, wearing extravehicular mobility unit spacesuits, to perform an EVA in the vacuum of space. The standard practice was for only two crew members to perform an EVA. Most of the day-to-day mission operations took place on the middeck. The majority of hardware required for crew members to live, work, and perform their mission objectives was stowed in stowage lockers and bags within the middeck volume. The entire middeck stowage capability was equivalent to 127.5 middeck lockers in which each locker was about 0.06 m3 (2 ft3) in volume. This volume could accommodate all required equipment and supplies for a crew of seven for as many as 16 days
Performance Capabilities and Limitations Throughout the history of the program, the versatile shuttle vehicle was configured and modified to accomplish a variety of missions, including: the deployment of Earth observation and communication satellites, interplanetary probes, and scientific observatories; satellite retrieval and repair; assembly; crew rotation; science and logistics resupply of both the Russian space station Mir and the ISS, and scientific research and operations. Each mission type had its own capabilities and limitations. Deploying and Servicing Satellites The largest deployable payload launched by the shuttle in the life of the program was the Chandra X-ray Observatory. Deployed in 1999 at an inclination of 28.45 degrees and an altitude of about 241 km (130 nautical miles), Chandra—and the support equipment deployed with it—weighed 22,800 kg (50,000 pounds). In 1990, NASA deployed the Hubble Space Telescope into a 28.45-degree inclination and a 555-km (300-nautical-mile) altitude. Hubble weighed 13,600 kg (30,000 pounds). Five servicing missions were conducted over the next 19 years to upgrade Hubble’s science instrumentation, thereby enhancing its scientific capabilities. These subsequent servicing missions were essential in
correcting the Hubble mirror spherical aberration, thereby extending the operational life of the telescope and upgrading its science capability. 
ASSEMBLING THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION 
The ISS Node 1/Unity module was launched on STS-88 (1998), thus beginning the assembly of the ISS, which required a total of 36 shuttle missions to assemble and provide logistical support for ISS vehicle operations. As of October 2010, Discovery had flown 12 missions and Atlantis and Endeavour had flown 11 missions to the ISS, with each mission carrying 12,700 to 18,600 kg (28,000 to 41,000 pounds) of cargo in the cargo bay and another 3,000 to 4,000 kg (7,000 to 9,000 pounds) of equipment stowed in the crew cabin. The combined total of ISS structure, logistics, crew, water, oxygen, nitrogen, and avionics delivered to the station for all shuttle visits totaled more than 603,300 kg (1,330,000 pounds). No other launch vehicle in the world could deliver these large 4.27-m- (14-ft)- diameter by 15.24-m- (50-ft)-long structures or have this much capability. ISS missions required modifications to the three vehicles cited above— Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavour— to dock to the space station. The docking requirement resulted in the Orbiter internal airlock being moved externally in the payload bay. This change, along with the inclusion of the docking mechanism, added about 1,500 kg (3,300 pounds) of mass to the vehicle weight.
A Platform for Scientific Research 
The Orbiter was configured to accommodate many different types of scientific equipment, ranging from large pressurized modules called Spacelab or Spacehab where the crew conducted scientific research in a shirt-sleeve environment to the radars and telescopes for Earth mapping, celestial observations, and the study of solar, atmospheric, and space plasma physics. The shuttle was often used to deploy and retrieve science experiments and satellites. These science payloads were: deployed using the Shuttle Robotic Arm; allowed to conduct free-flight scientific operations; and then retrieved using the arm for return to Earth for further data analysis. This was a unique capability that only the Orbiter could perform. The Orbiter was also unique because it was an extremely stable platform on which to conduct microgravity research studies in material, fundamental physics, combustion science, crystal growth, and biotechnology that required minimal movement or disturbance from the host vehicle. NASA studied the effect of space adaptation on both humans and animals. Crews of seven worked around the clock conducting research in these pressurized modules/laboratories that were packed with scientific equipment. Much research was conducted with the international community. These missions brought together international academic, industrial, and governmental partners to obtain maximum benefits and results. The facilities included middeck glove boxes for conducting research and testing science procedures and for developing new technologies in microgravity. These boxes enabled crew members to handle, transfer, and manipulate experiment hardware and material that were not approved for use in the shuttle. There were furnaces to study diffusion, and combustion modules for conducting research on the single most important chemical process in our everyday lives. The shuttle had freezers for sample return as well as the capability to store large amounts of data for further analysis back on Earth. Scientists used spin tables to conduct biological and physiological research on the crew members. The Orbiter provided all the power and active cooling for the laboratories. A typical Spacelab was provided approximately 6.3 kW (8.45 hp) of power, with peak power as high as 8.1 kW (10.86 hp). To cool the laboratories’ electronics, the modules were tied into the Orbiter’s cooling system so thermal control of the payload was the same as thermal control for the Orbiter avionics. In an effort to share this national resource with industry and academia, NASA developed the Get Away Special Program, designed to provide inexpensive access to space for both novices and professionals to explore new concepts at little risk. In total, over 100 Get Away Special payloads were flown aboard the shuttle, and each payload often consisted of several individual experiments. The cylindrical payload canisters in which these experiments were flown measured 0.91 m (3 ft) in length with a 0.46-m (1.5-ft) diameter. They were integrated into the Orbiter cargo bay on the sill/sidewall and required minimal space and cargo integration engineering. The experiments could be confined inside a sealed canister, or the canister could be configured with a lid that could be opened for experiment pointing or deployment. The shuttle was also an extremely accurate platform for precise pointing of scientific payloads at the Earth and celestial targets. These unpressurized payloads were also integrated into the cargo bay; however, unlike the Spacelab and Spacehab science modules, these payloads were not accessible by the crew, but rather were exposed to the space environment. The crew activated and operated these experiments from the pressurized confines of the Orbiter flight deck. The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission was dedicated to mapping the Earth’s topography between 60° North and 58° South, including the ocean floor. The result of the mission was a threedimensional digital terrain map of 90% of the Earth’s surface. The Orbiter provided about 10 kW (13.4 hp) of power to the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission payload during on-orbit operations and all of the cooling for the payloads’ electronics.



The Columbia disaster occurred On Feb. 1, 2003, when NASA’s space shuttle Columbia broke up as it returned to Earth, killing the seven astronauts on board. NASA suspended space shuttle flights for more than two years as it investigated the cause of the Columbia disaster.
An investigation board determined that a large piece of foam fell from the shuttle's external tank and breached the spacecraft wing. This problem with foam had been known for years, and NASA came under intense scrutiny in Congress and in the media for allowing the situation to continue.
The Columbia mission was the second space shuttle disaster after Challenger, which saw a catastrophic failure during its launch in 1986. The Columbia disaster directly led to the retirement of the space shuttle fleet in 2011. Now, astronauts from the US fly to the International Space Station on Russian Soyuz rockets or aboard commercial spacecraft, like the SpaceX Crew Dragon capsules which began a "space taxi" service to the ISS in 2020.  
Columbia was the first space shuttle to fly in space; its first flight took place in April 1981, and it successfully completed 27 missions before the disaster. On its 28th flight, Columbia left Earth for the last time on Jan. 16, 2003. At the time, the shuttle program was focused on building the International Space Station. However, Columbia's final mission, known as STS-107, emphasized pure research. 
The seven-member crew — Rick Husband, commander; Michael Anderson, payload commander; David Brown, mission specialist; Kalpana Chawla, mission specialist; Laurel Clark, mission specialist; William McCool, pilot; and Ilan Ramon, payload specialist from the Israeli Space Agency — had spent 24 hours a day doing science experiments in two shifts. They performed around 80 experiments in life sciences, material sciences, fluid physics and other matters before beginning their return to Earth's surface.
During the crew's 16 days in space, NASA investigated a foam strike that took place during launch. About 82 seconds after Columbia left the ground, a piece of foam fell from a "bipod ramp" that was part of a structure that attached the external tank to the shuttle. Video from the launch appeared to show the foam striking Columbia's left wing. It was later found that a hole on the left wing allowed atmospheric gases to bleed into the shuttle as it went through its fiery re-entry, leading to the loss of the sensors and eventually, Columbia itself and the astronauts inside.
On Feb. 1, 2003, the shuttle made its usual landing approach to the Kennedy Space Center. Just before 9 a.m. EST, however, abnormal readings showed up at Mission Control. Temperature readings from sensors located on the left wing were lost. Then, tire pressure readings from the left side of the shuttle also vanished.



 The Capcom, or spacecraft communicator, called up to Columbia to discuss the tire pressure readings. At 8:59:32 a.m., Husband called back from Columbia: "Roger," followed by a word that was cut off in mid-sentence.
At that point, Columbia was near Dallas, traveling 18 times the speed of sound and still 200,700 feet (61,170 meters) above the ground. Mission Control made several attempts to get in touch with the astronauts, with no success.
Twelve minutes later, when Columbia should have been making its final approach to the runway, a mission controller received a phone call. The caller said a television network was showing a video of the shuttle breaking up in the sky.
Shortly afterward, NASA declared a space shuttle 'contingency' and sent search and rescue teams to the suspected debris sites in Texas and later, Louisiana. Later that day, NASA declared the astronauts lost.
"This is indeed a tragic day for the NASA family, for the families of the astronauts who flew on STS-107, and likewise is tragic for the nation," stated NASA's administrator at the time, Sean O'Keefe.
The search for debris took weeks, as it was shed over a zone of some 2,000 square miles (5,180 square kilometers) in east Texas alone. NASA eventually recovered 84,000 pieces, representing nearly 40 percent of Columbia by weight. Among the recovered material were crew remains, which were identified with DNA.
Much later, in 2008, NASA released a crew survival report detailing the Columbia crew's last few minutes. The astronauts probably survived the initial breakup of Columbia, but lost consciousness in seconds after the cabin lost pressure. The crew died as the shuttle disintegrated.





The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) was established to investigate the disaster and recommend changes to prevent such incidents in the future. Their report highlighted several key issues that contributed to the disaster and provided recommendations for improvement:
1.	Culture and Communication: The CAIB emphasized the importance of open communication and a strong safety culture within NASA. It recommended changes to ensure that safety concerns from lower-level employees were effectively communicated to management and addressed.
2.	Inspection and Repair: The CAIB recommended improving the inspection and repair capabilities for the shuttle's thermal protection system. This included developing techniques to repair damaged tiles while in orbit and improving the ability to assess potential damage to the shuttle's heat shield.
3.	Risk Assessment: The CAIB suggested enhancing the risk assessment processes to better understand and manage potential hazards during shuttle missions. This involved more accurately assessing the risks associated with potential damage to the shuttle's thermal protection system.
4.	Improve Imaging and Data Sharing: The CAIB recommended improvements to the ability to image and assess the shuttle's condition during flight. This would help in identifying potential damage and making informed decisions about reentry.
5.	Emergency Preparedness: The CAIB emphasized the importance of preparing for potential in-flight emergencies. The crew should have had more comprehensive training on how to respond to a variety of scenarios, and there should have been better protocols for dealing with potential damage to the shuttle.
6.	Vehicle Design: The CAIB suggested reviewing the design of the shuttle's thermal protection system and other critical components to enhance their safety and resilience.
7.	Contingency Plans: The CAIB recommended developing contingency plans for addressing potential damage that could occur during launch. This would involve having procedures in place for repairing damage or seeking safe haven on the International Space Station if necessary.



1.	@2 Anomaly Detection: I could assist in analyzing data from various sensors and instruments on the space shuttle to detect anomalies or deviations from expected behavior. If any unusual patterns or readings are identified, they could be flagged for further investigation.
2.	Data Integration: By integrating data from different systems and sources, I could help create a comprehensive picture of the shuttle's status. This could include data related to thermal protection system integrity, propulsion, navigation, and more.
3.	Automated Alerts: I could be programmed to generate automated alerts when certain predefined conditions are met. For example, if certain temperature or pressure thresholds are exceeded, an alert could be sent to the mission control team.
1.	@4 Image Enhancement: I could assist in enhancing images captured by spacecraft cameras by applying advanced image processing techniques. This could involve reducing noise, enhancing contrast, and sharpening details to provide clearer and more informative images.
2.	Data Compression: Space missions often deal with limited bandwidth for transmitting data back to Earth. I could help develop efficient data compression algorithms that reduce the size of image and data files while preserving essential information. This would allow more data to be transmitted within the available bandwidth.
3.	Real-time Analysis: I could process and analyze images in real-time, identifying noteworthy features or anomalies as soon as they are captured. This information could be quickly relayed to mission control or relevant teams for immediate attention.
4.	Automated Anomaly Detection: By continuously analyzing images, I could automatically identify and flag potential anomalies or deviations from expected conditions. This could include identifying structural issues, equipment malfunctions, or unexpected phenomena.
5.	Pattern Recognition: I could assist in recognizing patterns in large sets of images, such as tracking changes over time, mapping surface features, or identifying potential geological or atmospheric patterns.
6.	Data Fusion: I could integrate data from various sensors and sources to create a more comprehensive understanding of the environment being observed. For instance, combining images with data from spectrometers could provide insights into the composition of planetary surfaces.
7.	Data Prioritization: Not all data is equally important. I could help prioritize the transmission of critical or high-priority data, ensuring that mission-critical information is sent back to Earth promptly.