The Space Shuttle Must Be Stopped - TIME.com Article

[Chadder007]

I just don't like the initial tone of the article but he does have some points.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030210-418518,00.html

The Space Shuttle Must Be Stopped
It's costly, outmoded, impractical and, as we've learned again, deadly

 

[j@cko]

this reminds me of 911..... In a way, this is like the 911 of space history.

 

[BillGates]

Don't forget that it's arguably useless. I agree on the costly section. Space research is not a NEED - that money could be spent on alternative fuels and transportation and we wouldn't have to worry about trying to find another place to colonize (and destroy).

 

[axelfox]

hindsight is 20/20

 

[Maleficus]

Have we seen any real fruits of our labor in the space department? doesn't really seem like it.

Seems like we could be using our resources for much better things

 

[stormbv]

Oh no, a dissenting opinion! Run for your lives!

 

[dethman]

why does it make you mad.

it does make sense in a way...the space shuttle is expensive and outmoded, you'd think in that time frame they might have designed a more efficient and cost effective rocket to launch men into space.

i skimmed it, but i don't think the author is not arguing against space exploration, just that the shuttle programs were horribly expensive for what we got out of them. half a billion dollars per launch? thats a lot.

 

[Shockwave]

I would generally agree. Its time to scrap the Shuttles. Shut'm down
Then research, design and build the next generation of manned space craft. The Shuttle *is* the most advanced vehicle we have, but its still a 20 year old peice of equipment. Go from ground up with a new craft and reach for the stars baby

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: Maleficus
Have we seen any real fruits of our labor in the space department? doesn't really seem like it.

Seems like we could be using our resources for much better things

I guess the buttload of things that have come out of the space program mean absolutely nothing.

 

[tcsenter]

I'm not a fan of the space program, but I believe there is room in the budget for one.

Similarly, I believe that assistance to the poor and needy is a worthwhile endeavor, but I don't believe we should buy every welfare recipient a Mercedes Benz.

 

[ReiAyanami]

well our destiny is in space, as this 3rd rock from the sun will be incinerated by it within 4.5 billion years. better to get a head start. furthermore, when the natl defense budget is $300+ billion compared to a $14.5 billion for NASA, we could shift a few billion from defense and there'd be no problem.

let other nations fight their won wars while we get a head start in space [in preparation for the Outer Space Wars of 2026]

 

[kuk]

Originally posted by: Maleficus
Have we seen any real fruits of our labor in the space department? doesn't really seem like it.

Seems like we could be using our resources for much better things

Well, many projects that NASA started researching consist today of products used in YOUR daily live. I could do a search, but it's past 4AM here, I'm tired and I think someone in the next posts will have more information regarding this.

This is just a piece of text I found floating around the net.
Prototypes shot into space often splash down in the real world as useful and life-enhancing products. Spin-offs from NASA's cutting-edge inventions range from scratch-resistant sunglasses to global tracking systems that can find lost yachts and stolen cars. Vital medical equipment such as CAT-scanners and portable x-ray machines also had their first trials while orbiting the Earth.

 

[tcsenter]

well our destiny is in space, as this 3rd rock from the sun will be incinerated by it within 4.5 billion years. better to get a head start. furthermore, when the natl defense budget is $300+ billion compared to a $14.5 billion for NASA, we could shift a few billion from defense and there'd be no problem.

Well there is a lot of 'hidden' NASA costs in the defense budget since some militarily useful stuff comes out of the space program. There is an exchange of resources and 'overlap' of interests there. So there is the "published" $14.5 billion for NASA, plus another ~ $10 billion in the defense budget that NASA directly benefits from.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: Maleficus
Have we seen any real fruits of our labor in the space department? doesn't really seem like it.

Seems like we could be using our resources for much better things

We wouldn't have velcro, microwaves, and many other things had it not been for the space program.

 

[Shockwave]

Velcro, microwaves (I think) new insulation technologies. Hell, thw list of Nasa technology that went commercial is HUGE I betchya.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Here are some more benefits of space exploration...

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: Maleficus
Have we seen any real fruits of our labor in the space department? doesn't really seem like it.

Seems like we could be using our resources for much better things

We wouldn't have velcro, microwaves, and many other things had it not been for the space program.

space program my ass

The microwave oven did not come about as a result of someone trying to find a better, faster way to cook. It was discovered that microwaves could cook food. Called the Radar Range, the first microwave oven to go on the market was roughly as large and heavy as a refrigerator (see picture, below).

The idea of using microwave energy to cook food was accidentally discovered by Percy LeBaron Spencer of the Raytheon Company when he found that radar waves had melted a candy bar in his pocket. Experiments showed that microwave heating could raise the internal temperature of many foods far more rapidly than a conventional oven.

The first microwave ovenThe first Raytheon commercial microwave oven was the 1161 Radarange, which was marketed in 1954.

 

[BillGates]

Okay, so we benefit technologically from the NASA inventions. However, do we really benefit from taking pictures of some galaxy or star 483204672406 light years away. There is another part of the NASA budget that is spent on satellites and telescopes, etc.

I'm thinking that a lot of the technology they created could have been created for theoretical space missions and tested/perfected on earth without any loss of human life or extreme waste of money. I don't think one needs to be in space to test Velcro or microwaves or scratch proof sunglasses or XRay machines or CAT scan machines.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Cut NASA, raise unemployment, worsen the economy, have a Democrat win in 2004...I see the liberal agenda in this TIME article.

 

[tcsenter]

Velcro, microwaves (I think) new insulation technologies. Hell, thw list of Nasa technology that went commercial is HUGE I betchya.

Microwaves were invented and commercially available long before our space program.

In NBC News' coverage of the Space Shuttle and NASA related topics tonight, they interviewed a guy who has researched the claims of commercialized 'products' or 'technology' which resulted from the space program, and he found that in fact very few things have come from the space program. A lot of companies developed products that were "used" or "tested" by NASA, not developed by or for NASA, but the company may have made inflated or exaggerated connections to NASA or the space program for marketing reasons. Surprise.

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: BillGates
Okay, so we benefit technologically from the NASA inventions. However, do we really benefit from taking pictures of some galaxy or star 483204672406 light years away. There is another part of the NASA budget that is spent on satellites and telescopes, etc.

I'm thinking that a lot of the technology they created could have been created for theoretical space missions and tested/perfected on earth without any loss of human life or extreme waste of money. I don't think one needs to be in space to test Velcro or microwaves or scratch proof sunglasses or XRay machines or CAT scan machines.

Of course we benefit from taking pictures of galaxies so far away. We're not just trying to make pretty pictures. We're trying to learn about how the universe works. With a better understanding of the universe we'll have more power to control things in it.

 

[GTaudiophile]

No NASA manager was fired; no safety systems were added to the solid rocket boosters whose explosion destroyed Challenger; no escape-capsule system was added to get astronauts out in a calamity, which might have helped Columbia.

Complete BS! John Glenn was talking about this yesterday. An escape system was indeed developed, and the o-rings on the boosters were redesigned.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: BillGates
Okay, so we benefit technologically from the NASA inventions. However, do we really benefit from taking pictures of some galaxy or star 483204672406 light years away. There is another part of the NASA budget that is spent on satellites and telescopes, etc.

I'm thinking that a lot of the technology they created could have been created for theoretical space missions and tested/perfected on earth without any loss of human life or extreme waste of money. I don't think one needs to be in space to test Velcro or microwaves or scratch proof sunglasses or XRay machines or CAT scan machines.

actually figuring out and having it confirmed in the real world how the universe works has pretty real benefits as miniaturization continues

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

No NASA manager was fired; no safety systems were added to the solid rocket boosters whose explosion destroyed Challenger; no escape-capsule system was added to get astronauts out in a calamity, which might have helped Columbia.

Complete BS! John Glenn was talking about this yesterday. An escape system was indeed developed, and the o-rings on the boosters were redesigned.

ha, an escape system work at 200,000 feet and mach 18!

were the o-rings redesigned or did nasa decide to follow the manufacturer's instructions and not freeze them before a launch?

 

[HombrePequeno]

Here's a book of a few NASA inventions.