Will Nasa accellerate a shuttle replacement?

[OS]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: BD2003
Yeah, NASA is way underbudgeted. Why did we even stop going to the moon? The shuttles were designed back almost 20 years ago, that is like flying around in apollo 13 by today's standards. We should get with the program.

Try 30 years ago.

Yeah, first launch was in 1981, which was over 20 years ago. Tack on a couple years for the design process.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Originally posted by: BD2003
Yeah, NASA is way underbudgeted. Why did we even stop going to the moon?

The Vietnam War.

more like there was no reason to go back. We had enough moon rocks.

 

[JimmyEatWorld]

Originally posted by: katka
Astronomy is great, but WHY do we really need to go into space? To spy on people? If we find intelligent life are we going to give them a bible tell them lies and take their land and then engage ourselves in a galactic war?

I don't know if you've heard, but the sun has a finite energy source, not to mention it will consume the Earth long before that. We have to leave sometime, might as well start preparing now.

 

[MacBaine]

Originally posted by: katka
Astronomy is great, but WHY do we really need to go into space? To spy on people? If we find intelligent life are we going to give them a bible tell them lies and take their land and then engage ourselves in a galactic war?

Besides the obvious fact that we can perform research in orbit that wouldn't be possible on the ground... why would we not want to go into space? Are you not at all curious as to what our universe contains? Are you contect with the human race living out its entire existance on a hunk of rock, when there is so much more in the universe than we could possibly concieve?

Do you play Sim City? If so... once you build a small town, do you stop playing... or do you build a city?

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Originally posted by: BD2003
Yeah, NASA is way underbudgeted. Why did we even stop going to the moon?

The Vietnam War.

more like there was no reason to go back. We had enough moon rocks.

I think that was probably the reason why we didn't plan any more than Apollo 20. We had the prestige, why do anything more? There was probably a lot more science we could have done up there if we had stayed but of course all we wanted to do was beat the Russians.

I think the reason the last three Apollo missions were cancelled was because of the Vietnam War though. Why spend billions sending people to the moon when you could spend it blowing people up?

 

[AmigaMan]

I hope the politicians don't cut more from the space program. You know they'll be all up in NASA's business trying to point fingers and grandstand. I believe NASA will continue to function and the shuttles will continue to operate...but will it be business as usual?

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: katka
Astronomy is great, but WHY do we really need to go into space? To spy on people? If we find intelligent life are we going to give them a bible tell them lies and take their land and then engage ourselves in a galactic war?

It is a chance to be great.

Also, many other inventions that help us in our everyday life are offshoots of the space program.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: katka
Astronomy is great, but WHY do we really need to go into space? To spy on people? If we find intelligent life are we going to give them a bible tell them lies and take their land and then engage ourselves in a galactic war?

Aside from the many technology spinoffs that power our economy, it's also a matter of national prestige.

The space program clearly marks US world leadership in technology. Europe has to collectively work together to have even a fraction of what NASA does. China is working around the clock to put it's first astronaunt into space, while the US sits on a couple hundred pounds of moon rocks personally collected by our astronaunts.

If we trash our manned space program, what does that say about our dedication to advancing technology? Do we give up, or do we try harder?

 

Astronomy is great, but WHY do we really need to go into space? To spy on people? If we find intelligent life are we going to give them a bible tell them lies and take their land and then engage ourselves in a galactic war?

We go into space not just for our own intellectual curiosity but to continue the species known as mankind, Earth cannot sustain our civilisation forever, we as humans must colonise other planets, otherwise we seal our fate, we as the human race face many threats, nuclear annihilation, planetary wide pollution that is affecting the weather, overpopulation etc.

We must continue our efforts into space, otherwise we might as well sit back and watch our race perish into oblivion.

 

[exp]

WHY do we really need to go into space?

Any species confined to a single planet is doomed to extinction.

 

[TapTap]

Originally posted by: optoman
..... They will find the problem and fix it and keep using the shuttles for at least another 10 years.

This was the oldest one left, 29th mission.
I think they have to accellerate a replacement.

 

[tcsenter]

Despite being the oldest shuttle, the first to see orbit in fact, the Columbia has been completely overhauled and upgraded twice in addition to undergoing constant maintanence.

We still have Atlantis and Endeavor, which NASA has not used since the Challenger explosion due to the Centaur engine configuration, which NASA deemed too risky.

Maybe they will dust one of those off as a replacement.

 

[OS]

I don't remember where I heard this story, but it goes like this. There are isolated tribes in Africa that live as if nothing had really changed in the last half millennia. They live life without ever seeing how people in first world countries live life. They've never even seen a TV before. But they know that people have walked on the moon.

So how will history look back on the US? Will it end up being a real life story about the race between the turtle and rabbit?

 

[Tominator]

Originally posted by: lowtech
NASA would get a lot more done if Bush sr or jr divert a small portion of the money from their war budget to the research fund.

NASA has become just another bloated beaucratic mess. It is funded mostly for political payback with space exploration and to better humanity a distant goal.

Like the military, it should be completely revamped as far as the purchasing and bidding on contracts.

Imho, if the same money we've spent on space by NASA were to have been spent by private industry, we'd be vacationing on the moon by now!

 

[ReiAyanami]

if the same money we've spent on space by NASA were to have been spent by private industry, we'd be vacationing on the moon by now!

or blowing up in space. or watching your house be rained with the fire of falling debris. INSURANCE alone will kill any potential commercial space flights. ur best bet is to bribe some russian officials lance bass style and have them sneek u aboard their speznov

this program is best left in the hands of the government

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: tcsenter
We still have Atlantis and Endeavor, which NASA has not used since the Challenger explosion due to the Centaur engine configuration, which NASA deemed too risky.

Maybe they will dust one of those off as a replacement.

Not true actually...

Atlantis, Discovery, and Endeavor all have flown in the past year. Endeavor was built as the replacement to Challenger. Personally I wanted to see it named "Challenger II"... But that's just me.

*shrug*

Hopper

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: Tominator

Originally posted by: lowtech
NASA would get a lot more done if Bush sr or jr divert a small portion of the money from their war budget to the research fund.

NASA has become just another bloated beaucratic mess. It is funded mostly for political payback with space exploration and to better humanity a distant goal.

Like the military, it should be completely revamped as far as the purchasing and bidding on contracts.

Imho, if the same money we've spent on space by NASA were to have been spent by private industry, we'd be vacationing on the moon by now!

Nobody's stopping private industry from going to the moon. Heck, private industry is having a hard time doing sub-orbital passenger flights (X-Prize).

 

[tcsenter]

Atlantis, Discovery, and Endeavor all have flown in the past year. Endeavor was built as the replacement to Challenger. Personally I wanted to see it named "Challenger II"... But that's just me.

Ok, that's right. NASA has never configured Discovery to use the Centaur engine in the payload bay, which Challenger and Discovery were modified for. Yeah, so we still have three shuttles, all newer than Columbia.

 

[exp]

Yeah, what the heck ever happened to the shuttle replacment program anyway? I could've sworn they had an X-something shuttle in the prototype phase a few years ago. I even remember seeing photos of it.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: BillGates
I hope they don't make any replacement.... Too much money is wasted in the space program IMO. It seems like every other month there is some 500 million dollar unmanned rocket destined to take pretty pictures of something 4820240 light years away blowing up on the launch pad. I wonder what percentage of an individual's taxes go to NASA?

The space program represents humanity's long-term future. Would you have us trade that future for an increase in tobacco subsidies and other pork-barrel projects? I believe I speak for many people when I say that I want my tax dollars and my government to look and take steps towards the future, not the past.

 

[rockyct]

Originally posted by: exp
Yeah, what the heck ever happened to the shuttle replacment program anyway? I could've sworn they had an X-something shuttle in the prototype phase a few years ago. I even remember seeing photos of it.

There was but the project was scrapped because it was costing too much.

 

[Grasshopper27]

I think it is a shame that Enterprise was not modified and turned into a working shuttle.

Enterprise was supposed to be the first Shuttle into space. Pathfinder was a basic test vehicle meant to test the overall structure. Enterprise was released from a 747 several times for glide tests. Challenger was meant as an engine test vehicle and was actually never meant to fly in space.

After testing, it was found that it would be cheaper to modify Challenger into a working shuttle than it would be to modify Enterprise into a working shuttle.

Pathfinder (MPTA-098)
Challenger (STA-099,OV-99)
Enterprise (OV-101)
Columbia (OV-102)
Discovery (OV-103)
Atlantis (OV-104)
Endeavour (OV-105)

The numbers are the order in which they were built. OV stands for Orbiter Vehicle. STA stands for Static Test Article. It was changed to OV-99 from STA-99 when it was rebuilt to fly in space.

Pathfinder is currently located in Huntsville, AL at the NASA Space Camp facility. Enterprise is going to be put into the National Air & Space Mesaum in another year or two.

Hopper

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: exp
Yeah, what the heck ever happened to the shuttle replacment program anyway? I could've sworn they had an X-something shuttle in the prototype phase a few years ago. I even remember seeing photos of it.

The X-33 was 80% complete when they decided to kill it off.

I believe now they're proposing a smaller shuttle similar to the CRV design that will be placed on top of a booster to serve as a transfer vehicle until we can be a real successor to the shuttle.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Originally posted by: exp
Yeah, what the heck ever happened to the shuttle replacment program anyway? I could've sworn they had an X-something shuttle in the prototype phase a few years ago. I even remember seeing photos of it.

The X-33 was 80% complete when they decided to kill it off.

I believe now they're proposing a smaller shuttle similar to the CRV design that will be placed on top of a booster to serve as a transfer vehicle until we can be a real successor to the shuttle.

probably 80% complete with another 80% left remaining

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: exp

WHY do we really need to go into space?

Any species confined to a single planet is doomed to extinction.

Speaking of which, Star Trek VI is on now. The Klingon homeworld goes to sh!t and will be gone in 50 years.