FS: Space Shuttle - Free! Just pay S&H

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
73,308
34,760
136
Tang and freeze dried ice cream. Need I say more?
Tang was invented in 1957 by General Foods. NASA didn't adopt it until 1962. Freeze dried ice cream was a technological deadend for NASA being used only on Apolla 7. NASA went back to real ice cream. Freeze drying technology was developed during WWII. I love the smell of Wikipedia first thing in the morning.
 
Last edited:

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
53,297
47,669
136
The problem is the shuttles are so old they don't just require more and more to operate, but that they are becoming moer and more unsafe.
The real problem was the Republicans mismanagement of the replacement program. Billions down the tubes during their reign of error.

I mostly fault the bureaucracy in place and he fact that the mission changes every 8 years with a new administration, which is unacceptable for such long term projects. Both parties are to blame, IMO.
 

BAD311

Member
Mar 18, 2009
88
0
0
Its still absolutely disgusting to me that Obama can find 100's of billions for his friends in the banks and unions but can't seem to find a couple extra bucks to keep the Shuttle flying until we have a viable replacement. We're going to have to kiss the ass of the Russian's to get our guys into space. What a joke, unfortunately its not funny and its embarrassing to our country.

The Space Shuttle program was designed for these things to only last 100 flights. With the loss of two of the shuttles, that meant a heck of a lot less flights. These were designed for 100 flights, nothing more. Do you really want a shuttle being lost in space or being lost on re-entry?? Think smart, read the facts. These things go through a lot of stresses each and every time they go to space and back.
 

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
The Space Shuttle program was designed for these things to only last 100 flights. With the loss of two of the shuttles, that meant a heck of a lot less flights. These were designed for 100 flights, nothing more. Do you really want a shuttle being lost in space or being lost on re-entry?? Think smart, read the facts. These things go through a lot of stresses each and every time they go to space and back.

The 3 remaining shuttle's have ~38 flights, 32 flights, and 24 flights on each of them. Thats less than 100 between them. Yes they are old and yes they are complex, but they are also still USEFUL. We routinely fly in planes as old as the space shuttles are, the last shuttle built is only 18 years old since its first mission. We got rocket scientists working on these things. :rolleyes:

We don't have a replacement for them. We have NOTHING that can do what they do. I don't want any astronaut losing their life but they know the risks and accept them. I bet nearly 100% of the current shuttle astronauts would sign off on the risk on keeping the program alive.
 

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
The problem is the shuttles are so old they don't just require more and more to operate, but that they are becoming moer and more unsafe.
The real problem was the Republicans mismanagement of the replacement program. Billions down the tubes during their reign of error.

Billions seems pretty nice when Obama is pissing away trillions.
 

dud

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2001
7,635
73
91
And the reason we need to spend tax dollars on getting people into space is?




Supposedly, for every $1 spent on the space program we realize a $7 benefit of some sort (weightless R&D).
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
73,308
34,760
136
Supposedly, for every $1 spent on the space program we realize a $7 benefit of some sort (weightless R&D).
And that's the problem with economic multipliers, everybody's got one. Seven to one is at the high end of the multiplier scale, I'd love to see what NASA was given credit for to hit that high.