Replies

I grew up wanting to be an astronaut, went to the US Air Force Academy and flew F-16's. I say this because even I understand (reluctantly) that the era of manned fighters is ending, being replaced with UAV's and unmanned fighters without putting the pilot at risk. We aren't there quite yet but you can see it coming. The B-17 had 10 people on board - a navigatoor, bombadier, gunners, etc., all now replaced 50 years later on the B-2 by black boxes. It's just the way of things.

Similarly, it seems clear to me that manned space flight is simply too expensive (note - I didn't say dangerous) to continue at this time. Maybe a hiatus wouldn't be such a bad thing until SSTO rocket technology matures. Even the casual observer sees that the space station manning appears to be largly a maintenance staff tasked with keeping the thing in orbit.

Manned spaceflight was important to prove we that could land on another 'planet' and to investigate the long term effects of spaceflight on the human body. Now let's take a breather and stop launching people for the sake of it. If we choose to go to Mars and need flights to validate the technology (as Gemini did for Apollo), great. I felt this way before the tragedy - the reincarnation of NASA's "teacher in space" program was the final straw for me.

Missions like the Hubble repair prove the need for humans in space (i.e. if we want to have powerful astronomical telescopes in space, that is). What is clear to me is that the shuttle is approaching end of life and we need to get a replacement. The questions are what and how, IMHO?

I agree with you, but I go farther. Clearly, the concept of spam in a can in space is an artifact of the 1940s-1960s. It's an anachronism due to deeper understanding the value of space and its limitation and technical advances--computers, sensors, improved communications, robotics, miniaturization.

The B-17 had 10 people on board - a navigatoor, bombadier, gunners, etc., all now replaced 50 years later on the B-2 by black boxes. It's just the way of things.

Most of those extra people were along to shoot back at the interceptors, the B-2 can't do that. Even those with other jobs, radio operator, bombadier, etc would also man the .50s. (Although to be fair, I'm sure the B-2 can scramble their radar and IR sensors).

the reincarnation of NASA's "teacher in space" program was the final straw for me.

I agree 100%. Wasting money to put a teacher in space makes as much sense as sending a 102 year old ex-astronaut politician up for a joy ride.....

Similarly, it seems clear to me that manned space flight is simply too expensive (note - I didn't say dangerous) to continue at this time. Maybe a hiatus wouldn't be such a bad thing until SSTO rocket technology matures. Even the casual observer sees that the space station manning appears to be largly a maintenance staff tasked with keeping the thing in orbit.

I couldn't agree more. It's a foolish waste of money and they keep trying to say there is a scientific benefit but they sound like janitors trying to write a resume to be surgeons.