Posted on 02/01/2003 8:26:17 PM PST by Magnum44
NASA Unlikely to Build New Space Shuttle Sat Feb 1, 6:15 PM ET
By MATT CRENSON, AP National Writer
NASA (news - web sites) is extremely unlikely to build a new space shuttle to replace Columbia, according to experts, leaving the space agency with the three remaining orbiters as its entire fleet for the foreseeable future.
The next generation of reusable space vehicles is at least 10 to 15 years off, said Donald H. Emero, who served as the shuttle's chief engineer from 1989 to 1993.
"I think the country will not invest in any more shuttles," Emero said Saturday.
Until a few years ago, NASA was exploring several designs for vehicles to replace the space shuttle. But NASA's new administrator, Sean O'Keefe, has shelved those designs and committed to operating the space shuttle for the next 10 to 15 years. The fleet's primary mission during that period will be constructing and servicing the international space station (news - web sites).
Discovery, the oldest of NASA's three remaining shuttles, has been in service for 18 years. Endeavour, built at a cost of about $2 billion to replace the Challenger after that spacecraft exploded shortly after takeoff in 1986, has been flying for a decade. Atlantis, the third remaining shuttle, has been in use for 17 years.
NASA's shuttle fleet was grounded for nearly three years following the Challenger disaster, as investigators struggled first to determine what had caused it to explode with seven astronauts on board and then to fix the problem. In the hours after that accident, few could have guessed that the cause would be a rubber "O-ring" — stiffened and cracked by low temperatures.
At that time, NASA had sufficient spare parts to assemble Endeavour as a replacement for Challenger. But today the space agency does not have that capability.
Emero said the investigation of Saturday's accident could take as long as that inquiry, but doubted it would because Challenger was destroyed by such a minor defect that was difficult to find.
There is no doubt that the remaining space shuttles will be grounded for some time pending NASA's investigation of the Columbia accident.
"Certainly there is a hold on future flights until we get ourselves established and understand how this happened," said space shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore.
The next shuttle mission on NASA's flight schedule is a March 1 trip to the space station by the Atlantis orbiter.
During the 1990s, NASA spent billions of dollars investigating a radical design to replace the space shuttle. The X-33 vehicle would have had a dramatic "lifting body" design propelled by a type of rocket that had never been used in spaceflight. But persistent engineering problems led NASA to abandon the vehicle in 2001.
Weldon is quoted as saying "There are going to be a lot of people who are going to say 'If we are going to stay in the manned spaceflight business, we are going to have to move on more quickly with another space vehicle."
I personally disagree. Time will tell for the nation as a whole, but I am still pretty darned intrepid and so are a bunch of other Texans and Freepers.
There may be a bunch of whiney newscasters and the people they put on tv to give that impression, but I think Red US vs Blue US shows a big hunk of this country is still the same country at heart as we have always been...
IMHO - I hope...
You are absolutely incorrect. Less then half the country is composed of whiners and hand wringers, the rest of the country is as courageous and innovative as ever. The reason no other country has been able to compete completely with us is that the type of creativity that is requied for true innovation required a freedom of spirit and faith in the individual that currently only exists in this country.
As our president said, that kind of freedom is God's gift to humanity, but so far only we have dared to reach out and grab onto it. That may not always be the case, but here it is second nature.
I doubt they would be interested in restarting production on an obsolete design, even if NASA requested it.
They also merged with McDonnell Douglas, who designed Venture Star (a proposed replacement for the shuttle).
They have a working model of its aerospike rocket motor and would be more interested in building this new orbiter than revisiting the old one.
Question is, is the design mature enough? Will NASA be able to pay for it? I don't know the answer to either question.
If true, it is quite depressing, isn't it.
Just my opinion, but I see three major space entities in the foreseeable future, and all three have major challenges to overcome.
The US program has always been most ambitious, most demanding, and as a result, most high risk. The space shuttle is a remarkable engineering feat, but a single loss is catastrophic. We've now had two and lost 14 of our brightest stars. Follow on programs had requirements set so high that all so far have failed and been cancelled. We couldn't just build a new vehicle learning from the mistakes of the current one. We have to set our sights on a 'next generation' that is beyond our current ability to complete given budget constraints. This is a mistake.
The Russians have a robust set of vehicles that are 60's technology but have been gradually refined into the most reliable launchers in the industry. Yet Russia is bankrupt and their infrastructure is crumbling, except where western money is being invested.
China, trying to leap ahead by 'buying' or stealing the lessons we have already learned, may succeed, but will probably soon experience the cost of loss themselves, as their regime may be more interested in the prestige of joining the manned space club than the safety of their crews. I say this not from knowledge of the Chinese manned space program, but from their general attitude towards respect for life. The leaps they want to make will burn them at some point.
If we could combine the engineers and resources of the US with the mentality of the russians, and stop making 'better' and 'best' the enemy of good enough, we could develop a modest but reliable and safer transportation system to replace shuttle. Otherwise, the picture this article paints is the slow death of manned space with no vision of a future shuttle replacement.
It cannot take twenty to build a new orbiter.
The way that entirely too many Freepers have been wailing and shreiking about "Conspiracy!..Terrorists!...Pan Am 800 redux!....OKC" today makes me wonder if they'll morph over into the 'man didn't really go to the moon' thing by tomorrow. This place has been pretty shameful today.
It pains me to have to say that I agree with you.
This has come about, IMHO because of the legitimization of cowardice and the denigration of the virtues of honor and duty.
redrock
I suggest supplementing shuttle missions with cargo launches using expendable vehicles.
The Russians supplied Mir for years with unmanned, automated rockets. We should be able to do the same for ISS components, saving the shuttle as a "people mover".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.