[CWOJackson]

Today we pay tribute to seven brave people. These seven people were combat pilots, aeronautical engineers, scientists…astronauts. Many of them had been with the space program for years, for others this was the culmination of their dreams.

Within hours of this terrible disaster there were some on FR claiming that the disaster was the result of NASA’s incompetence, that the disaster was avoidable and that the cover up had already began. They have offered up memo’s, doctored photos and wild rumor as evidence.

In order to be true than we must also assume that the seven astronauts who died were fools or somehow duplicitous in their own deaths. Are we expected to believe that the knowledge of a few rumor mongers on the internet is greater then that of those who flew on Challenger?

Are we to believe that these seven astronauts were not aware of the foam problems on the shuttle program or the effects of budget cuts on the program? Are we to believe that they were foolish enough to fly a platform into space that was doomed from the beginning as some on FR claim?

If we accept their speculation then we must also assume that their fellow astronauts, walking the woodlands of east Texas looking for their remains, will not seek to discover the real cause of their deaths, but will work to cover up for NASA. Do you really believe this?

Is this what we’ve come to on FR? This doesn’t just smear NASA, it smears the seven brave people we honor today.

[cynicom]

Axe the vote buying scheme for money for Africa and give the lions share to NASA. That will never happen of course, politics at its sleaziest, the country comes last.

[_Jim]

Shuttle Loss Highlights Need for New Space Vehicle

And replace the heat-shield system with WHAT exactly?

DOES that not seem to be the crux of the problem here Reuters?

(Change the tires - NOT the car ...)

[Gary Boldwater]

NASA should be shut down. Let the Air Force deal with space for military purposes and let private citizens and industry deal with space exploration. NASA is unconstitutional by its very existence. The science spinoffs from NASA are marginal to non existent.
If space exploration focused on the conquest of territory - ownership of the moon/Mars by settlement then space exploration would move ahead by the true and only proper motive - profit.

[AdA$tra]

Developing the next-generation space vehicle, with far more modern technologies available, would help reduce those frightening statistical odds, Walker said.

I would be willing to bet some WWII B-17 crews would have loved "frightening statistical odds" like that when they flew their missions every day. I think it is wrong to do a long term grounding of the shuttle fleet. There are no inherent problems that would only rear their heads after 107 shuttle missions. We should find out what happened, fix it, and move on.

[southernnorthcarolina]

I apologize in advance for second-guessing NASA. I am, after all, not a rocket scientist in either the figurative or the literal sense.

But those insulating tiles have always bothered me. I am old enough to have remembered the first shuttle flight, and it seems to me that the tiles have been a problem from the start. Even by the standards of the 1970s, they always seemed a clumsy, low-tech solution. Not that I'm smart enough to offer an alternative -- and that's the danger of criticizing from the peanut gallery. But surely there's now a better way.

Whatever insulating material is used must 1) provide adequate heat-proofing or deflection; 2) be damage-resistant; 3) be lightweight; and 4) not impair the aerodynamics. Is there no material or layered combination of materials that is inherently heatproof as well as structurally sound?

[southernnorthcarolina]

I apologize in advance for second-guessing NASA. I am, after all, not a rocket scientist in either the figurative or the literal sense.

But those insulating tiles have always bothered me. I am old enough to have remembered the first shuttle flight, and it seems to me that the tiles have been a problem from the start. Even by the standards of the 1970s, they always seemed a clumsy, low-tech solution. Not that I'm smart enough to offer an alternative -- and that's the danger of criticizing from the peanut gallery. But surely there's now a better way.

Whatever insulating material is used must 1) provide adequate heat-proofing or deflection; 2) be damage-resistant; 3) be lightweight; and 4) not impair the aerodynamics. Is there no material or layered combination of materials that is inherently heatproof as well as structurally sound?

[chilepepper]

Under current plans, NASA expects to make a decision around 2006 or 2007 about what type of spacecraft would succeed the shuttle

This would be insane even if Columbia hadn't burned up, given that the NASA bureaucrats would take another 10 years to actually build it, assuming a Leftist president in the interim didn't come along and cancel it outright.

If it weren't for Clinton I think we would have the next generation shuttle ALREADY. gosh, i hope i'm wrong and the Aurora really exists and is space capable!

[apillar]

On one of the news shows last night, they were interviewing some NASA administrator. He said that building a replacement shuttle using the current design would be as costly and possible more costly than developing a new shuttle because none of the construction facilities existed anymore.

My personal belief is that they should develop a launch platform that supports three different types of crafts, a cargo carrier similar to the current shuttle, a spaceplane for ferrying people and a long range "apollo-esque" version for extended duration / lunar missions. That way you could tailor the type of craft used to the mission and wouldn't be stuck with the one size fits all approach.

[Joe Hadenuf]

We need to develop a new type spacecraft and establish a small, manned, lunar base of exploration on the Moon.

Once the lunar base is established, go to Mars...

[miloklancy]

We do not need to look ahead at developing a new space vehicle that is more up to date. However I think we need a replacement shuttle rather than a shuttle replacement. In other words I think that any new vehicle that suits the needs of NASA would have to be an outgrowth from the designs of the current fleet. This process should begin immediately in light of losing Columbia. Yes we do need to look into what went wrong with Columbia and revise the plans of any new space vehicles accordingly. However we do not need to go back stage rockets which just continue to pollute the upper atmosphere with space junk, which would make space flight more dangerous and eventually impossible.

[RightWhale]

For some time to come, there should be a rescue vehicle sitting on the pad during every manned launch. In addition to that, the Space Shuttle should carry a minimum of freight. Space Hab is an idea that is probably at an end. The ISS should be doing all the science from here on. A new vehicle should be used to launch heavy freight, oversize freight, and not any crew. That is, Space Shuttle should fly nearly empty and with reduced crew for the forseeable future.

[montag813]

Anyone have links to cool new designs for a shuttle replacement?