Atlantis Lands, Heralds End of Shuttle Era

[straitman]

Non of us will ever get there but this is certainly worth including for a read.

Atlantis Lands, Heralds End of Shuttle Era.

Jun 3, 2010

By Irene Klotz
Kennedy Space Center

With the completion of the STS-132 mission of Atlantis, the shutdown of the space shuttle program spreads from manufacturing facilities to the vehicle processing hub here.

There are no more flights planned for Atlantis, although the ship will be prepared as a launch-on-need vehicle for the STS-134 mission—the program’s planned finale—currently targeted for launch in November.

A proposal to continue processing Atlantis for launch in mid-2011 on an extra supply run to the International Space Station (ISS) is pending before the Obama administration and Congress. NASA would need an additional $150-200 million per month to maintain its shuttle workforce beyond 2010. Managers also would have to relax post-Columbia safety requirements that another shuttle be available for crew rescue and instead rely on Soyuz capsules for return flights home for astronauts seeking shelter on the ISS.

 

[Oneworldplus2]

On my next RTW, I was going to try to coincide it so that l could see a launch. Would be fantastic. Just gets dicey trying to pick the right dates as there tend to be a lot of delays with launches (mainly due to weather).

 

[nlagalle]

one thing I always wanted to see was a shuttle launch! looks like i'll miss it..

 

[meloz]

There are still plans for 2 more shuttle launches. This was the last for this particular spacecraft.

Meloz

 

[samh004]

At $150-200 million a month to just maintain them, I just don’t see why they’re spending the money. The ISS isn’t that awesome, it hasn’t really produced much (has it lead to any scientific breakthroughs?) and they’ve got all sorts of problems they really need to be fixing on the ground, especially their debt issue.

It’s a great ship, glided it a few times on X-plane, but what a waste of money. Good job Australia doesn’t really have a space program yet.

 

[simongr]

It’s a great ship, glided it a few times on X-plane, but what a waste of money. Good job Australia doesn’t really have a space program yet.

How much innovation comes from the space program alone? Would we have half the technology today that we do if there hadn't been a space race?

I can not believe how short sighted a view you have taken. I would rather they spent 150M-200M per month on space exploration than fighting an unwinable war in Iraq and now Afghanistan! The ISS is bringing nations together.

The only issue I have with space programs was Laika being sent up there by the Russians knowing she would die...

 

[markis10]

The ISS isn’t that awesome, it hasn’t really produced much (has it lead to any scientific breakthroughs?) and they’ve got all sorts of problems they really need to be fixing on the ground, especially their debt issue.
.

Sam

Try to be a little more patient before passing judgement, the builders have yet to finish the ISS and hand over the keys to the front door, ULF5 is the last US module and will go up on the last shuttle while the Russians have yet to have their research module delivered - 3R, which will be in 2011. Not sure what you mean by debt issue, are you referring to MIR instead?

 

[samh004]

How much innovation comes from the space program alone? Would we have half the technology today that we do if there hadn't been a space race?

I can not believe how short sighted a view you have taken. I would rather they spent 150M-200M per month on space exploration than fighting an unwinable war in Iraq and now Afghanistan! The ISS is bringing nations together.

The only issue I have with space programs was Laika being sent up there by the Russians knowing she would die...

I didn’t say war was better, but for the amount they have invested, it doesn’t seem worth it. And yes, it has yielded some great advances in aeronautics, which directly impacts on this community, but you really want to claim aircraft sales as an advancement from the ISS?

Sam

Try to be a little more patient before passing judgement, the builders have yet to finish the ISS and hand over the keys to the front door, ULF5 is the last US module and will go up on the last shuttle while the Russians have yet to have their research module delivered - 3R, which will be in 2011. Not sure what you mean by debt issue, are you referring to MIR instead?

It’s been under construction for years, certain key scientific modules have been scrapped altogether, and by the time it’s "properly" finished it’ll have 9 years of use before they deorbit it. They spent billions of dollars assembling the whole thing, when they could have done the same research far cheaper in a "vomit comet".

Anyway, this thread got sidetracked, it was talking about the space shuttle. While the shuttle was great because it was reusable, the costs of running the program now and too much, and a better solution needs to be worked out, not throwing money at it every month so you can use it to send one thing up there. The private sector has some good ideas, and yes they probably got some innovation from the various programs over the years, but that doesn’t mean they should continue running something that’s just haemorrhaging money.

And the debt I was referring to is the country debt of the US, that’s supposedly leading everyone else into space… well that’s all well and good now, but when you run out of money I doubt China is going to give you a free ride.

You either explore the universe for the world, or save your people from starvation and homelessness, building better infrastructure and making the world nicer. Etc. The US has chosen the universe, so the Americans (and others around the world) who are doing fine can see pretty photos of nebulas far far away. The ones that live on the streets, they don’t need help.

Getting sidetracked again though, shuttle was good when it was built, useless now. Propping it up for a delivery in a couple years is a waste of money, and decommissioning the ISS in 2020 is a waste too, though if there’s no specific scientific equipment up there to do the job anyway, who cares.

Sad to see it go as there’ll be no more launches and exciting landings, but it’s a bus that transports people, and I’m sure there’s a cheaper way.

However, it’s an opinion.

 

[nlagalle]

At $150-200 million a month to just maintain them, I just don’t see why they’re spending the money.

Sorry Sam, I don't agree with you either. Many of the "costs" for the shuttles filter down to general life down the track with all the R&D. The vast research NASA does is amazing. Remember the NASA budget is in the order of millions per year.

Remember Harry (Bruce Willis) from the movie Armageddon saying something along the lines of, "you've got people in a room just thinking **** up, and people backing them up"

 

[munitalP]

How much innovation comes from the space program alone? Would we have half the technology today that we do if there hadn't been a space race?

I can not believe how short sighted a view you have taken. I would rather they spent 150M-200M per month on space exploration than fighting an unwinable war in Iraq and now Afghanistan! The ISS is bringing nations together.

The only issue I have with space programs was Laika being sent up there by the Russians knowing she would die...

"The more time passes, the more I'm sorry....
We shouldn't have done it....
We did not learn enough from the mission to justify the death of the dog."

Agreed - although the same can be said about the US tossing monkeys out of aircraft at 30,000 ft without a parachute to see the effects of the drop...

As humans, we take the taking of lives of other animals with contempt, from ritual killings, killings in the name of science and in some respect, the humane (?) killing of beasts to eat. I think it is about time we all took 5 and had a good look at ourselves as humans and asked ourselves if we liked what we saw...

munitalP

 

[SimonM]

On my next RTW, I was going to try to coincide it so that l could see a launch. Would be fantastic. Just gets dicey trying to pick the right dates as there tend to be a lot of delays with launches (mainly due to weather).

My RTW is timed to be in Orlando for the September 16th Discovery Launch. I check the NASA launch schedule just about daily. I've only allowed 3, perhaps 4, days for delays, so hopefully I'll be right.

One disappointment. The causeway is to be used for VIP guests only for the final launch, as Sept 16 was, so viewing will only be available from the KSC for the public and there's trees between there and launch site. Not sure if that's going to revert to normal now there's an Endeavour mission planned for November.

 

[oz_mark]

I didn’t say war was better, but for the amount they have invested, it doesn’t seem worth it. And yes, it has yielded some great advances in aeronautics, which directly impacts on this community, but you really want to claim aircraft sales as an advancement from the ISS?

Suggesting that the only advances from space exploration is limited to aircraft sales is misguided. Many of the things we take for granted today came out of solving problems that came with space exploration. As one example, CAT and MRI, which today are pervasive in the health industry were originally developed as part of the space program.

Other things, off the top of my head include scratch resistant lenses, self inflating life rafts, dust busters, water purification systems and golf ball dimple design:!:.

 

[samh004]

Suggesting that the only advances from space exploration is limited to aircraft sales is misguided. Many of the things we take for granted today came out of solving problems that came with space exploration. As one example, CAT and MRI, which today are pervasive in the health industry were originally developed as part of the space program.

Other things, off the top of my head include scratch resistant lenses, self inflating life rafts, dust busters, water purification systems and golf ball dimple design:!:.

So there’s a lot, but does that mean the old space shuttle, which has finished innovating should continue to have money thrown at it, or should they move onto the next new technology and use that to come up with more new technology, hopefully for far cheaper too?

 

[straitman]

Suggesting that the only advances from space exploration is limited to aircraft sales is misguided. Many of the things we take for granted today came out of solving problems that came with space exploration. As one example, CAT and MRI, which today are pervasive in the health industry were originally developed as part of the space program.

Other things, off the top of my head include scratch resistant lenses, self inflating life rafts, dust busters, water purification systems and golf ball dimple design:!:.

Well put oz_mark.

There are many many more examples out there so to say nothing or very little has been learned is quite simplistic.

 

[nlagalle]

So there’s a lot, but does that mean the old space shuttle, which has finished innovating should continue to have money thrown at it, or should they move onto the next new technology and use that to come up with more new technology, hopefully for far cheaper too?

Ahh but even to Nasa they aren't "old". The fact that nearly all of it can be re-used is a major cost saver. You also have to remember that "cost" will most likely include in-direct costs. And the fact the shuttle is nothing like the original one that first launched in the 80's.

NASA are already working on a replacement "shuttle" but it is still years away. I think they are mad cancelling the shuttle before a new vehicle can take over in it's place.

 

[straitman]

NASA are already working on a replacement "shuttle" but it is still years away. I think they are mad cancelling the shuttle before a new vehicle can take over in it's place.

That is politics and politicians for you. Most have never had a real job in the real world :!:

 

[samh004]

I think they are mad cancelling the shuttle before a new vehicle can take over in it's place.

I think they’re mad wanting to visit Mars with people when they’ve hardly explored the moon.

 

[straitman]

I think they’re mad wanting to visit Mars with people when they’ve hardly explored the moon.

That can be argued onward forever.

Should we fully explore ALL of the oceans before we go into space? Maybe some of these things have a significant overlap so that by doing that little extra there is only an incremental cost increase.

 

[nlagalle]

That is politics and politicians for you. Most have never had a real job in the real world :!:

You summed that up perfectly!

 

[nlagalle]

I think they’re mad wanting to visit Mars with people when they’ve hardly explored the moon.

Sam, the scientific gains going to Mars far outweigh another trip to the moon. And again the flow on effect benefits us too.