Skip to comments.
NASA: Shuttle may be reborn as rocket
Florida Today ^
| 1.27.04
| Florida Today
Posted on 01/27/2004 10:20:34 PM PST by ambrose
Edited on 05/07/2004 6:04:12 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
CAPE CANAVERAL -- NASA's shuttle, or some variation of its components, could play a role in President Bush's plan to send astronauts back to the moon.
The president this month directed NASA to retire the three remaining shuttles by 2010 and begin flying the replacement Crew Exploration Vehicle by 2014.
(Excerpt) Read more at floridatoday.com ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: mars; martians; moon; nasa; rocket; shuttle; space; spaceshuttle
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
1
posted on
01/27/2004 10:20:34 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: Phil V.
ping.
2
posted on
01/27/2004 10:21:07 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: ambrose
bttt
3
posted on
01/27/2004 10:22:25 PM PST
by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
To: ambrose
I don't think this is anything new. Sounds like a re-presentation of the "Shuttle - C" concept that has been around for as long as I can remeber.
4
posted on
01/27/2004 10:24:20 PM PST
by
Kakaze
To: ambrose
Makes sense. But why is it that we are going to take so long going back to the moon? Pretty unambitious time schedule if you ask me.
5
posted on
01/27/2004 10:24:46 PM PST
by
11B3
(So many idiots, so few comets.)
To: ambrose
Without a shuttle, are we going to work on something else to use to repair satellites in space, or is the cost low enough for companies just to send up new ones?
6
posted on
01/27/2004 10:25:28 PM PST
by
Fledermaus
(Democrats are just not capable of defending our nation's security. It's that simple!)
To: ambrose
The imminent end of the shuttle program has worried some of the 14,000 Brevard County workers at Kennedy Space Center. I bet it has. But not worried enough to get out of the way and let it get done right!
7
posted on
01/27/2004 10:25:35 PM PST
by
Coyoteman
To: 11B3
All this talk of Mars when the moon is only 240,000 miles away.
8
posted on
01/27/2004 10:26:04 PM PST
by
cyborg
To: 11B3
I agree... and in fact, it is far enough off into the future that a future Rat president could kill the project, even if Bush is re-elected in '04.
I am hoping that President Bush will accelerate the timetables after he is re-elected.
9
posted on
01/27/2004 10:26:36 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: Kakaze
Yawn. Anything to keep their own bureaucracy alive.
If one wants engineering successes, then one turns the project OVER to the engineers, and management only worries about acquiring competent engineers. Perhaps this situation obtained at NASA at some time in history, but it most CERTAINLY does not obtain now.
Defund this clownish organisation, Mr. Bush.
10
posted on
01/27/2004 10:30:39 PM PST
by
SAJ
To: ambrose
actually this is a resurection of an old proposal. You replace the shuttle with wings to a wingless tube with engins attached to the booster rocket. It was to get building materials into orbit. Waste not, want not.
To: ambrose
What a wuss project.
If Bush had any real kahones, he'd build a runway to orbit vehicle. There are three or four great ideas on the drawing boards (I'm tired of describing them).
But, if he did that, Bill Gates would just buy one, and then where would NASA be????
12
posted on
01/27/2004 10:33:26 PM PST
by
narby
(Who would Osama vote for???)
To: narby
" If Bush had any real kahones, he'd build a runway to orbit vehicle "
I'm with you there!
We need the vehicle and there are alot of people trying to build them....Burt Rutan comes to mind.
13
posted on
01/27/2004 10:36:54 PM PST
by
Kakaze
To: ambrose
I'm sure NASA could come up with a cheaper heavy-payload alternative. We had one 30 years ago, after all. Oh wait, this is NASA, after all.
To: KellyAdmirer
JPL seems to have its act together...
15
posted on
01/27/2004 10:40:55 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: Fledermaus
You could get 10 new satellites in space for the cost of a single shuttle mission.
Let's face it, the shuttle is a dead project and needs to be put to rest, and so is the ISS that was created solely to give the shuttle a destination. Together, they do nothing of use proportionate to the expense.
It's time we updated to modern technology. I bet we can do a LOT better now, in 2004, than we can with this 20-year-old tech.
16
posted on
01/27/2004 10:46:48 PM PST
by
thoughtomator
("I will do whatever the Americans want because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid"-Qadafi)
To: ambrose
The president this month directed NASA to retire the three remaining shuttles by 2010 and begin flying the replacement Crew Exploration Vehicle by 2014.
Just what do they plan to use to service the space station during the 4 year gap?
17
posted on
01/27/2004 10:48:51 PM PST
by
DeepDish
To: DeepDish
It is an "International" Space Station. The Russkies have rocket ships.
18
posted on
01/27/2004 10:55:31 PM PST
by
ambrose
To: Fledermaus
We're outsourcing to the Baikonur Cosmodrome...
prisoner6
19
posted on
01/27/2004 10:58:53 PM PST
by
prisoner6
(Right Wing Nuts hold the country together as the loose screws of the left fall out!)
To: Kakaze
I really like the idea of building an air breathing airplane that has a kerosene/LOX engine in the tail. Takes off on a runway with a cargo of LOX and a bit of JP4. Hit's a tanker just like a regular F-18 at alititude and gets enough JP4 to feed the rocket up to mach 10 or so. Climbs to around 300k feet, and dumps out an upper stage during its 45 seconds in space.
Fly it every day for the cost of an international 747 flight.
Don't spend much money on the orbital hardware. After all, if it fails, just send up another one.
Space flight can be so cheap, if it just wasn't for the government.
20
posted on
01/27/2004 11:04:42 PM PST
by
narby
(Who would Osama vote for???)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson