On the Early Retirement of the Space Shuttle

LaunchSpace Training ^ | May 24. 2010 | George W. Jeffs

[anymouse]

Space ping.

[Names Ash Housewares]

Extend shuttle!
Get external tank production back up and fly shuttle on a limited basis until we build the next US vehicle.

Relying on russians to get the the space station we just built is insane!

Not to mention we safeguard the massive investment that is the space station by having shuttles ready to repair and rescue it if something bad happens. Shuttle has unique abilities.

[oh8eleven]

U. S. Taxpayers Have Not Yet Realized Their Full Return-on-Investment (ROI) From the Shuttle System
And they never will. NASA =

[Pyro7480]

Not even close to the trillions wasted in entitlement programs.

[MinorityRepublican]

I don’t want to read this. This depresses me.

[elpadre]

have we turned the space station over to the Russians??

[Alberta's Child]

Maybe it’s just me, but the fact that 50% of the original space shuttle fleet has been lost to catastrophic failures in the last 25 years seems to be an indication that the whole program isn’t nearly as safe as this author makes it out to be.

[Pyro7480]

He addressed that: The System is Safe for Continued Man Flights: No critical failures have originated from within the triply redundant Orbiter itself but like any spacecraft designed for light-weight, it is vulnerable to abuse (e.g. SRB O rings, ET insulation debris); these are now known and addressable problems.

[whd23]

The author calls the shuttle "young" and a "new system" except that if you were to register the shuttle at the DMV you could get "antique" plates for it.

In any case, using the shuttle to boost satellites or cargo into space is an extremely stupid idea. Why waste the time and money using a man-rated vehicle for heavy-lifting?

[thulldud]

Not even close to the trillions wasted in entitlement programs.

Hey! That wasn't wasted, it bought lots of votes!

[Alberta's Child]

Well, OK. But the biggest flaw with the space shuttle is that the large number of humans it accommodates makes it essential to provide all kinds of life support systems and safety measures that reduce the payload capacity of the vehicle.

I thought the space industry has known for years that traditional rockets -- both manned and unmanned -- are far more effective at delivering people and payloads into space when measured on a unit cost (e.g., dollars per ton) basis.

[oh8eleven]

Not even close to the trillions wasted in entitlement programs.
You couldn't be more wrong. At least the trillions spent on welfare (as much as I detest it) helped people.
All NASA has done in the last 30 years is spend an average $10 billion dollars a year and accomplished little if anything.
The shuttle went up, the shuttle came down, the shuttle went up, the shuttle came down; year after year after year. In return, we the taxpayer got nothing.

[Pyro7480]

The shuttle went up, the shuttle came down, the shuttle went up, the shuttle came down; year after year after year. In return, we the taxpayer got nothing.

Nothing you say? Space Shuttle Spinoffs

That leaves out the secret (to this day) military missions it flew, the satellites it launched that serve us and expand our knowledge of the universe (the Hubble, above all), and keeping up our superpower status.

[oh8eleven]

Please spare me the "Tang and Teflon" BS. Probably 95% of the spinoffs would have been discovered w/o the shuttle.
$300 billion - poof! - up in smoke ... just like Challenger and Columbia.

[Pyro7480]

That’s why I added that last part, which you apparently didn’t read.

[Young Werther]

The Shuttle can live on if you expand out thinking about Space Exploitation.

1. Fill all the seats on each flight. The going rate of $20 Million paid to the Russians for their Soyuz rides could be used to offset the launch costs.

1. Fly the Tanks into orbit. We throw them into the Indian Ocean when a little more propellant they could be flown into space. Let Exxon or one of the other fuel companies pay for the external tank and once in orbit these tanks can be assembled into tank farms to hold propellants. they can also be used as modules to be fitted as maintenance and warehouse facilities.

3. sell the shuttles to FedEx, UPS or some other transport carrier and we can open the Earth Lunar highway!

<4> Use some of those tanks in orbit to build the Lunar colony which would then be transported to the moon.

5. The shuttle experience can be the seed upon which the new dreamers will begin our trek to the Stars!

Read my paper about Space University at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/NorthTexasSpace/files/

Enjoy

[Pyro7480]

If you don't like that, how about these apples?

Neil Armstrong: "America is respected for its contributions it has made in learning to sail on this new ocean. If the leadership we have acquired through our investment is simply allowed to fade away, other nations will surely step in where we have faltered. I do not believe that would be in our best interest."

[Rooivalk]

Please spare me the "Tang and Teflon" BS. Probably 95% of the spinoffs would have been discovered w/o the shuttle. $300 billion - poof! - up in smoke ... just like Challenger and Columbia.

Any system that lofts something into space like Magellan or the Hubble never is a waste of resources as you mistakenly try to say. Too bad a luddite such as yourself cannot see the forest for the trees

[Rooivalk]

....Shuttle has unique abilities.

Your words and the words of millions of Americans who look upon the wonders of space, fall on deaf ears when directed towards Obama
Obama is anti space exploration by the United States. He is an ignorant man who needs to be thrown out of office as soon as possible