Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

We Never Should Have Mothballed the Space Shuttle
scientificamerican.com ^ | 1/28/2016 | Leroy Chiao

Posted on 01/29/2016 8:03:15 AM PST by rktman

In the aftermath of Challenger, there was never any doubt about continuing, never the thought of quitting. After the Columbia accident almost seventeen years later, however, the program was wound down over the next eight years. Once construction of the International Space Station was completed, the Shuttles were grounded and the shuttle program ended.

I think that was a mistake. Space Shuttle was and remains the most capable flying machine ever conceived, built and operated. We learned much from the thirty years of Shuttle flights, and in my opinion, we should still be flying them. Shuttle carried a crew of seven, plus nearly sixty thousand pounds of payload to low earth orbit. After transforming from a rocket into an orbital research or construction platform, it entered the atmosphere and landed on a conventional runway at the end of its mission. After around one hundred days of processing, it was ready to fly again.

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.scientificamerican.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government
KEYWORDS: nasa; shuttle
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 next last
To: battlecry

We have some shuttle engines available but looks like we’re gonna be dependent on Russian engines for the most part. How come elon hasn’t come up with some solar engines yet? :>)


21 posted on 01/29/2016 8:16:24 AM PST by rktman (Enlisted in the Navy in '67 to protect folks rights to strip my rights. WTH?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

Having built it, shutting it down without a replacement was wrong.

...

Why?


22 posted on 01/29/2016 8:17:13 AM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rktman

They were only designed to last 20 years, the remaining ships had done many more flights than they ever were intended to. More disasters were going to happen. The big problem isn’t their retirement but that 5 presidents in a row failed to greenlight their replacement.


23 posted on 01/29/2016 8:17:30 AM PST by discostu (This is a different kind of flying... all together.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

I’m not opposed to us having a shuttle program, but we should be looking forward not backwards. How about launching a shuttle from a dirigible platform? Save yourself the bother of pushing through the lower atmosphere, and you don’t need huge booster rockets, so you could make a true SSTO spaceplane work.


24 posted on 01/29/2016 8:18:11 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Some people here obviously believe that since the shuttle was not 100% safe that it should not have ever flown; that anything to do with manned space flight is a waste of money; that somehow unmanned drones should be used to replace far cheaper unmanned resupply missions to the ISS.

We’ve seen all these arguments before - they basically boil down to a group of people so ingrown staring down their lint filled navels that they rival fundamental Islamists in their fervent dislike of anything which contradicts what they believe should exist; its their religion.


25 posted on 01/29/2016 8:18:11 AM PST by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now it is your turn ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

If the Shuttle had been built
in the numbers first stated it
would still be in use.


26 posted on 01/29/2016 8:19:25 AM PST by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

The second incident was directly related to “green” materials put in place of original materials.


27 posted on 01/29/2016 8:19:29 AM PST by MortMan (I am offended by those who believe they have a right not to be offended.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lacrew; All

For all of the technical and design issues what really killed both crews was not technical.

The first shuttle was lost because of management and politics that forced a launch outside of operational limitations.

The second shuttle was lost largely due to EPA regulations which resulted in an inferior application of the required insulation.


28 posted on 01/29/2016 8:20:20 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

Shutting down the shuttle program with no replacement left us with no manned spaceflight capability.

I find that to be a bad situation.


29 posted on 01/29/2016 8:20:24 AM PST by NorthMountain ("The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: lacrew

- Using the entire vehicle as a re-entry device caused a huge need for heat shielding...since the very beginning, the heat tiles were a problem, always some were lost...which really was walking on a razor’s edge

...

The Shuttle was designed for a military mission to launch from California, snag Soviet satellites and glide back to California in one orbit without being detected. It had to glide a long distance, so the wings were unnecessarily large. That increased weight and required more tiles. Of course, the Shuttle was never used for that purpose but we were stuck with the design.


30 posted on 01/29/2016 8:21:41 AM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MortMan

The second incident would have happened sooner or later regardless of “green” materials. Debris falling from the fuel tank damaged the heat shield tiles on every flight.


31 posted on 01/29/2016 8:22:49 AM PST by NorthMountain ("The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rktman

We are building the aurora.


32 posted on 01/29/2016 8:23:02 AM PST by longfellow (Bill Maher, the 21st hijacker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Maybe build more, but the ones we had probably went well beyond their day and would have eventually shook apart on a launch.


33 posted on 01/29/2016 8:23:13 AM PST by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MortMan

The second incident was directly related to “green” materials put in place of original materials.

...

That’s a myth that was spread by Limbaugh.

The fatal piece that hit the wing was made with the older foam.


34 posted on 01/29/2016 8:23:38 AM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: lacrew

To add to your list:

- Because the PR aspect of the shuttle needed to plant the idea of space travel as routine, the shuttle was designed to land like a conventional aircraft. This meant landing gear, wings, and systems to control an aircraft-like landing process.

Much weight, cost, and complexity could have been saved if the shuttle simply splashed down in the ocean like a typical space craft returning from orbit, but that didn’t fit NASA’s marketing plans.


35 posted on 01/29/2016 8:24:23 AM PST by ConservativeWarrior (Fall down 7 times, stand up 8. - Japanese proverb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

I think I read that the first “populated”(can’t say ‘manned’ anymore due to PC rulings and regs) launch has been pushed to 2021 now. Also, Sierra Nevada has gotten a contract for their mini-shuttle to fly some missions after all.

http://spacenews.com/europe-to-invest-in-sierra-nevadas-dream-chaser-cargo-vehicle/

Then there’s this about Orion:

http://spacenews.com/lockheed-says-orion-still-on-schedule-for-2018-mission/


36 posted on 01/29/2016 8:24:26 AM PST by rktman (Enlisted in the Navy in '67 to protect folks rights to strip my rights. WTH?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
The STS never lived up to its billing as a quick turnaround transport vehicle. It was inefficient and too costly for payload.

Should have planned a second transport vehicle before shuttering the STS.

37 posted on 01/29/2016 8:25:17 AM PST by DrJeff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

There was some risk, but so far it’s been less costly, probably safer, and hasn’t caused us any problems other than some concern that relations with Russia could deteriorate further.

We’re at the point now that a United States crewed vehicle could be sent to the ISS within a few months if there was an emergency.


38 posted on 01/29/2016 8:26:26 AM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Two hundred billion dollars and thirty years wasted riding around and around and around in a clunky low earth orbit pickup truck instead of returning to the moon and prepping for journeys to other planets.

Should have just saved the money.


39 posted on 01/29/2016 8:28:27 AM PST by Iron Munro (The wise have stores of choice food and oil but a foolish man devours all he has. Proverbs 21:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

I never said the problem wasn’t solvable.

It’s still a problem.


40 posted on 01/29/2016 8:28:27 AM PST by NorthMountain ("The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson