Replies

Rather, by freeing the Shuttle launch stack of the orbiter, and giving it a hydrogen/oxygen upper stage instead, we reconfigure it into a true heavy lift launch vehicle capable of duplicating the performance of the Saturn V. With such a system, we could deliver 120 metric tons to low Earth orbit (in place of the current Shuttle's 20), or send payloads in the 50-ton class on direct trajectories to the moon or Mars.

I like it!

I like it!

I don't. Why retrofit the shuttle lift system when Energiya boosters can be bought off-the-shelf? And we don't need the crew transfer vehicle, either: Soyuz works just fine.

The existing, unlaunched ISS modules are designed to be carried by the Shuttle. No problem: send the Shuttle up unmanned with its payload, and send the installation crew up with a Soyuz.

"I like it! "

I don't like it either. Got to go with Physicist on this one.

The priority is space should be "military superiority". I like some of the new military plans.

Other than that the funds would be better spend pursuing either better energy sources like "Fusion" or physics.

Fusion or other energy sources has practical ramifications here at home as well as the potential to make any space exploration safer and more rewarding.

Physics - We are having a lot of advances in learning more about the fundamental nature of things. What if we learn something that makes space travel easier or quicker or allows us an easier or quicker way to terraform Mars. Plus the military implications of this research are phenomenal.

I like the idea of colonizing Mars, I just think the timing is wrong.