TIME: Space Shuttle: Same Old Damage, Same Old Worries

[herm0016]

time is running this:

Here are three things NASA can do to become a safer agency: stop flying Atlantis, stop flying Endeavour, stop flying Discovery. Those, of course, are NASA's three space shuttles, and once the last of the snakebit ships is finally mothballed, here's one more piece of advice: Don't ever build anything like them again.

http://www.time.com/time/healt...0,8599,1897824,00.html

all this paragraph is doing is undermining every science and tech breakthrough of the last 100 years. If we do not take risks we will gain nothing. This is like saying the only way to make the roads safe is to ban all the cars and trucks. all that this can possible accomplish is to sway the public into not wanting to support one of the government agencies that consistently has driven the research and development of hundreds technologies. most of the freeks that are against them are probably also environmentalist, i bet they don't realize that without NASA we would have very little idea that the earth's climate was even changing.

do people really think that NASA should just shut down because of its risk?

Without the pursuit of knowledge we are nothing.

 

[Genx87]

Not sure what the point is. These units are already on the death bed destined for air and space mueseums across the country. I think NASA and many in govt already acknowledge the shuttle program never lived upto expectations and will be using other means in the future.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Not sure what the point is. These units are already on the death bed destined for air and space mueseums across the country. I think NASA and many in govt already acknowledge the shuttle program never lived upto expectations and will be using other means in the future.

No.

The shuttle program performed well beyond its expected time-frame and under a much smaller than expected budget.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Genx87
Not sure what the point is. These units are already on the death bed destined for air and space mueseums across the country. I think NASA and many in govt already acknowledge the shuttle program never lived upto expectations and will be using other means in the future.

No.

The shuttle program performed well beyond its expected time-frame and under a much smaller than expected budget.

The cost to fly the shuttle was much higher and the utility of having a relaunchable vehicle lower than expected. If a shuttle like program was such a blazing success why are they going back to single rocket capsule systems and not a new shuttle like system?

What was the expected budget? Each launch ran over 1 billion dollars. I find it hard to believe they really expected it to cost that much per launch.

 

[Alienwho]

The astronauts could fly nuclear waste powered cardboard boxes infected with the swine flu to the moon for all I care. Their safety is no concern of mine. Nobody is forcing them to take the risk.

 

[herm0016]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Genx87
Not sure what the point is. These units are already on the death bed destined for air and space mueseums across the country. I think NASA and many in govt already acknowledge the shuttle program never lived upto expectations and will be using other means in the future.

No.

The shuttle program performed well beyond its expected time-frame and under a much smaller than expected budget.

The cost to fly the shuttle was much higher and the utility of having a relaunchable vehicle lower than expected. If a shuttle like program was such a blazing success why are they going back to single rocket capsule systems and not a new shuttle like system?

What was the expected budget? Each launch ran over 1 billion dollars. I find it hard to believe they really expected it to cost that much per launch.

the shuttle filled its purpose well. the new capsule type ships are built for a different purpose, to get us off this rock, back to the moon, etc... the new designs will not fill the role of direct human control of satellite maintenance and launch or large experiments without purpose built extra modules and equipment. the shuttle is like the do all semi truck of space.

 

[Slick5150]

They need to develop something more akin to the Virgin Galactic ship that doesn't need to "blast off" to get into space.

It would make shuttle service to the space station, satellite launches, etc.. much cheaper.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: Slick5150
They need to develop something more akin to the Virgin Galactic ship that doesn't need to "blast off" to get into space.

It would make shuttle service to the space station, satellite launches, etc.. much cheaper.

It would also make its ability to carry a payload EXTREMELY limited. Thats why they have to strap on the massive solid rocket boosters.. there's no way you are getting off the ground weighing as much as the shuttle can hold in its cargo bay.

 

[1jzpowr]

Glad the space shuttle program is finally getting canned. It was one big budget dump and a waste of time. With all the money and time spent on the program, we could have done much more in the field of space. Anyone who thinks the shuttle had a small budget, or that describing it as a waste undermines science and tech breakthroughs needs to actually research it alot more. The Russians were able to achieve roughly the same with their capsules and do it for billions less. Capsules are the best option for space travel and exploration at this point, not the shuttles. They are safer, cheaper, and don't require such a huge investment like the shuttles so you can replace them faster and cheaper.

 

[yllus]

I think NASA probably should shut down the shuttle program until the next-gen comes online. Pay the Russians some money for use of the tried and true Soyuz capsules to do about the same amount of work in the meantime. I can only assume the shuttles keep flying because the risk factor is still tolerable.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: herm0016
all this paragraph is doing is undermining every science and tech breakthrough of the last 100 years. If we do not take risks we will gain nothing. This is like saying the only way to make the roads safe is to ban all the cars and trucks. all that this can possible accomplish is to sway the public into not wanting to support one of the government agencies that consistently has driven the research and development of hundreds technologies. most of the freeks that are against them are probably also environmentalist, i bet they don't realize that without NASA we would have very little idea that the earth's climate was even changing.

do people really think that NASA should just shut down because of its risk?

Without the pursuit of knowledge we are nothing.

NASA shouldn't shut down, that's just stupid. The point is that the Space Shuttle design itself is crap, and should be replaced by something that will allow us to more cheaply bring astronauts and heavy payloads safely to orbit.

 

[Brovane]

Originally posted by: yllus
I think NASA probably should shut down the shuttle program until the next-gen comes online. Pay the Russians some money for use of the tried and true Soyuz capsules to do about the same amount of work in the meantime. I can only assume the shuttles keep flying because the risk factor is still tolerable.

NASA cannot just shut down the shuttle program. The US still has a commitment to Russia and other member nations to deliver the final parts to ISS over the next couple of years. If there wasn't ISS the shuttle program would have probably been mothballed earlier. It was telling that NASA originally didn't want to do this mission and where essentially forced to do it by Congress. Basically as it stands right now the Shuttle is only space vehicle capable of delivering the bigger parts to ISS.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: Kadarin

Originally posted by: herm0016
all this paragraph is doing is undermining every science and tech breakthrough of the last 100 years. If we do not take risks we will gain nothing. This is like saying the only way to make the roads safe is to ban all the cars and trucks. all that this can possible accomplish is to sway the public into not wanting to support one of the government agencies that consistently has driven the research and development of hundreds technologies. most of the freeks that are against them are probably also environmentalist, i bet they don't realize that without NASA we would have very little idea that the earth's climate was even changing.

do people really think that NASA should just shut down because of its risk?

Without the pursuit of knowledge we are nothing.

NASA shouldn't shut down, that's just stupid. The point is that the Space Shuttle design itself is crap, and should be replaced by something that will allow us to more cheaply bring astronauts and heavy payloads safely to orbit.

And with all of the funding NASA's been getting, I'm sure they'll roll out the new spaceships tomorrow.

 

[Pneumothorax]

It's funny with all the hate on the shuttle's in this thread. The current mission (Hubble Repair) where they're able to capture a satellite and bring it in to a bay for repairs is not possible with any other space vehicle at this time. No other nation's space program has anything like this and probably won't until our tech advances for another 100 years that finally allows us to build a reliable spacecraft than can land and be re-used.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
It's funny with all the hate on the shuttle's in this thread. The current mission (Hubble Repair) where they're able to capture a satellite and bring it in to a bay for repairs is not possible with any other space vehicle at this time. No other nation's space program has anything like this and probably won't until our tech advances for another 100 years that finally allows us to build a reliable spacecraft than can land and be re-used.

I tend to agree. The shuttle has the unique capability to do these kind of repairs that no other spacecraft has. Its primary purpose was the construction and maintainence of a space station, which is what we are finally seeing with the ISS...the original station to be constructed with the space shuttle was cancelled. Once it is complete, it has served its purpose. It is time to move on to another type of craft for human transport/exploration once the station is built.

 

[sunzt]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
It's funny with all the hate on the shuttle's in this thread. The current mission (Hubble Repair) where they're able to capture a satellite and bring it in to a bay for repairs is not possible with any other space vehicle at this time. No other nation's space program has anything like this and probably won't until our tech advances for another 100 years that finally allows us to build a reliable spacecraft than can land and be re-used.

I tend to agree. The shuttle has the unique capability to do these kind of repairs that no other spacecraft has. Its primary purpose was the construction and maintainence of a space station, which is what we are finally seeing with the ISS...the original station to be constructed with the space shuttle was cancelled. Once it is complete, it has served its purpose. It is time to move on to another type of craft for human transport/exploration once the station is built.

agree.

The shuttle is nearing the end of its usefulness. Launching satellites can be done autonomously, and the primary concern that should be facing NASA is how to get to the Moon or maintain a space station. That means we just need to send humans to space in an economical and safe manner. The shuttle is too costly and dangerous for just human transportation and is better served by a more efficient model akin toa soyuz such as spaceX's dragon or Orion.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
It's funny with all the hate on the shuttle's in this thread. The current mission (Hubble Repair) where they're able to capture a satellite and bring it in to a bay for repairs is not possible with any other space vehicle at this time. No other nation's space program has anything like this and probably won't until our tech advances for another 100 years that finally allows us to build a reliable spacecraft than can land and be re-used.

I tend to agree. The shuttle has the unique capability to do these kind of repairs that no other spacecraft has. Its primary purpose was the construction and maintainence of a space station, which is what we are finally seeing with the ISS...the original station to be constructed with the space shuttle was cancelled. Once it is complete, it has served its purpose. It is time to move on to another type of craft for human transport/exploration once the station is built.

Hit the nail on the head.

I'm surprised to see the level of hate for the shuttle. Yes we lost 2, which was very sad, but overall the shuttle program has been a tremendous success for which NASA & USA can be justifiably proud. Like any technology they are getting old and need to be replaced which is exactly what is going to happen.

 

[Sacrilege]

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
It's funny with all the hate on the shuttle's in this thread. The current mission (Hubble Repair) where they're able to capture a satellite and bring it in to a bay for repairs is not possible with any other space vehicle at this time. No other nation's space program has anything like this and probably won't until our tech advances for another 100 years that finally allows us to build a reliable spacecraft than can land and be re-used.

I tend to agree. The shuttle has the unique capability to do these kind of repairs that no other spacecraft has. Its primary purpose was the construction and maintainence of a space station, which is what we are finally seeing with the ISS...the original station to be constructed with the space shuttle was cancelled. Once it is complete, it has served its purpose. It is time to move on to another type of craft for human transport/exploration once the station is built.

Hit the nail on the head.

I'm surprised to see the level of hate for the shuttle. Yes we lost 2, which was very sad, but overall the shuttle program has been a tremendous success for which NASA & USA can be justifiably proud. Like any technology they are getting old and need to be replaced which is exactly what is going to happen.

You should not be surprised. The shuttle thermal tile technology is ancient and dangerous. The system is needlessly complex. The shuttle may have a "special usefulness" but that can be replaced with cheaper, simpler substitutes.

If we didn't have the shuttle, we'd design satellites like the Hubble differently, so whatever spacecraft we did have could service it. We'd have other technologies to work in space.

Why carry the crew and payload up in one complex vehicle with flimsy thermal tile? You can launch the crew in a capsule with more robust heat shielding. And launch the payload on a expendable rocket that hasn't gone through the cost and rigmarole of human flight rating. Then meet up in orbit if you want to do repairs. The Russians seem to have built Mir (and about 10 other earlier smaller space stations) that way just fine. This is exactly the system NASA is wisely moving to.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Sacrilege

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
It's funny with all the hate on the shuttle's in this thread. The current mission (Hubble Repair) where they're able to capture a satellite and bring it in to a bay for repairs is not possible with any other space vehicle at this time. No other nation's space program has anything like this and probably won't until our tech advances for another 100 years that finally allows us to build a reliable spacecraft than can land and be re-used.

I tend to agree. The shuttle has the unique capability to do these kind of repairs that no other spacecraft has. Its primary purpose was the construction and maintainence of a space station, which is what we are finally seeing with the ISS...the original station to be constructed with the space shuttle was cancelled. Once it is complete, it has served its purpose. It is time to move on to another type of craft for human transport/exploration once the station is built.

Hit the nail on the head.

I'm surprised to see the level of hate for the shuttle. Yes we lost 2, which was very sad, but overall the shuttle program has been a tremendous success for which NASA & USA can be justifiably proud. Like any technology they are getting old and need to be replaced which is exactly what is going to happen.

You should not be surprised. The shuttle thermal tile technology is ancient and dangerous. The system is needlessly complex. The shuttle may have a "special usefulness" but that can be replaced with cheaper, simpler substitutes.

If we didn't have the shuttle, we'd design satellites like the Hubble differently, so whatever spacecraft we did have could service it. We'd have other technologies to work in space.

Why carry the crew and payload up in one complex vehicle with flimsy thermal tile? You can launch the crew in a capsule with more robust heat shielding. And launch the payload on a expendable rocket that hasn't gone through the cost and rigmarole of human flight rating. Then meet up in orbit if you want to do repairs. The Russians seem to have built Mir (and about 10 other earlier smaller space stations) that way just fine. This is exactly the system NASA is wisely moving to.

The idea of a reusable spacecraft is one that will pan out over time. Sure, the Russians built Mir and we Skylab, but neither of those can compare to the ISS. Their Soyuz tech could not have constructed the ISS, otherwise we would've scrapped the shuttle a decade ago. The shuttle system itself is not irredemable, imho. Perhaps you should look into the shuttle-C concept.

 

[Fox5]

Why don't they make one last new shuttle? Something with improvements on deficiencies of the shuttle (say those outdated thermal tiles?) that's only used when needed.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Originally posted by: herm0016
time is running this:
...
Without the pursuit of knowledge we are nothing.

Without perusing the right course of action we are nothing more than flesh sacks rudely animated for our own self delight. How much of our wealth should be spent on outer space when there is such dire need for our wealth to be spent on the people who, for only a fraction of one year of the NASA budget could have a life time of clean running water.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: Fox5
Why don't they make one last new shuttle? Something with improvements on deficiencies of the shuttle (say those outdated thermal tiles?) that's only used when needed.

That would take millions or billions of dollars, tons of development work. Better just to scrap what remains and move onto the next system.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: herm0016
time is running this:
...
Without the pursuit of knowledge we are nothing.

Without perusing the right course of action we are nothing more than flesh sacks rudely animated for our own self delight. How much of our wealth should be spent on outer space when there is such dire need for our wealth to be spent on the people who, for only a fraction of one year of the NASA budget could have a life time of clean running water.

Please,

NASA is one of the most poorly funded of all government agencies.

Pick on something else.

 

[Praxis1452]

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: herm0016
time is running this:
...
Without the pursuit of knowledge we are nothing.

Without perusing the right course of action we are nothing more than flesh sacks rudely animated for our own self delight. How much of our wealth should be spent on outer space when there is such dire need for our wealth to be spent on the people who, for only a fraction of one year of the NASA budget could have a life time of clean running water.

Compare NASA's budget to the "stimulus". Why not have the stimulus package provide a lifetime supply of clean running water. Oh wait... lol.

 

[Atreus21]

What I wanna know is....

If space travel is gradually being adopted by private companies....will we start to see a rapid advancement of space flight technology previously allocated to government-run organizations like Nasa?