Grounding the shuttle again

[David Crockett]

Not Another Space Accident is a COLOSAL waste of tax-payer money, in my opinion. So long as we retain the ability to launch GPS, meteorlogical, and communications satelites into orbit, I fail to see the need to send manned space-flights into orbit. I mean, when was the last time the average US citizen really benefitted from the "research" these guys do? I think the last big by-product of the program was the introduction of the microwave to the gegeral population. Everytime I see pictures or video of the astronauts up there, all they are doing is flips and sommersaults in the vaccuum.



I may seem cynical, but I look at it from a soldiers point of view: all those billions of dollars could be diverted to other programs and missions such as fighting the war on terror, beefing up our border-patrol, or combating the influx of drugs and illegal weapons into the country. Heck, I bet we'd all like cheaper insurance and health care wouldn't we? I bet a few extra billion could sure make all of our lives a lot more comfortable. I mean, we do still have these horrible diseases called AIDS and cancer that we can't figure out. Maybe if we pulled some of our "smart people's" heads out of the clouds, we could make some head-way on fighting some of these issues we are facing.



And finally, what I consider even more ridiculous, is that little toy truck, crawling around and getting stuck up on Mars. What would the discovery of some petrified single-cell bacteria under a rock on Mars do for you and I, here on Earth? I just think it's sad that we can't find better (and safer) things for our hard-spent dollars to do. We beat the Russians to the moon. The space race is over. Let's move on.

 

[Josh Langel]

The reality of this is that we just saw the last shuttle to ever take off; NASA's next space exploration will not involve the Endeavor(sp), Discover, or Atlantis; a new craft will be made (10 years?). Look for those two crafts in the museums.

 

[Jeff C]

Davy, first off, thank you for serving our country.



Now, many people fail to see the benefits of space flight and Mars missions because it will likely not have an impact in our time. Think back through history. The Pyramids probably seemed pretty pointless to the builders (depending on which Discovery Channel version of the story you believe) but we still look back and marvel on them, and we could not do it again, the way they did it. In order for technology to advance, we must keep reaching further. Maybe before the end of my generation we will see some benefits of interplanetary travel, but it may not be until 10 generations down the line. This is done for the advancement of the human civilization. We WILL outgrow this planet and it's ability to produce enough food for the population, and where will we go then? The few billions spent now may save trillions or quadrillions a hundred years from now. People always want to look at the "now now now me me me" instead of what will be coming in the next century. That is why we have THE SMARTEST people in the world doing this stuff. Shuttle flight was routine because these people are damn good at what they do. Most of the general population could barely begin to comprehend the risks and problems involved in doing the math to figure out how to get into orbit, much less actually building something that gets there at 17,000mph through one of the most hostile environments known to man. When was the last time you saw a TV reporter with an Aerospace engineering degree? Never? They just relay the information that their boss gets from a press guy who has to dumb it down so that people can understand what's going on, and then they spin it to get the public fired up and get ratings. Yeah, let's quit wasting money on the future of the human race and find more ways to kill ourselves.

 

[Travis Munday]

DeadlyDavy-

Being in the militay, I'm sure you've had to wear biological/chemicial warfare protection masks, guess where the technology to make those things lightweight, and super effective came from? Or how bout the SCBAs the FireFighters wear, can you guess where the light weight technology for those came from? Or even the fire suits FF's wear, able to withstand extreme temperatures and still be mobile, with on board air and full face protection....sound anything like a space suit?



The advancement of technology, all technology, not just computers, owes a huge debt to the space program. You can't just go down to the local 7-11 and buy the stuff you need to go into space, it had to be created, once it was, the technology was filtered down into the general public. We use space techonology much more often then you might think.



At least with the shuttle program we can reuse the parts, last time I checked, whenever we launch a salvo of multi-million dollar missles, we don't get to pick them up and use them again. It's be nice, but we can't. Even if we did have the money used on the space program to use elsewhere, do you think it'd be used to significantly improve our way of living? No one can answer that, because each administration has thier own idea of what to do with our money, be it fight a war on terror (struggle against extremisim as they like to call it now), or go to Mars, there will always be wasted funds, domestic problems, international problems, and critics on both sides of the fence. No amount of money can overcome human tendicies to want whats better, to fight for waht they think is right, and damn everyone who disagrees.

 

[Dre L]

Wait, Davy, got one for you, MRE's



Freeze dried fruit cocktail, instant coffee, and orange bevarage powder...



Tang and astronaut Ice Cream!



The meat for those hot dogs, came from Pluto.



Omlette with ham? Those eggs are not of this earth.



High tech in the 70's, still giving you the $hit$ or lack thereof today.

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

Buzzworth-



The origional shuttle flights had computers that could add up to the computing power of an Ipaq.



Today however is a much differnt story. Every few years the shuttle fleet goes though a life extension program similar to what nuclear aircraft carries and other major navy ships go through or what the B-52s have gone trough. B-52's have been around MUCH longer than the space shuttles and there is no time frame as of yet to kill off those birds. They could easily be flying when they hi tthe century mark. And they can drop nuclear weapons....



Today, all they have to do to upgrade the computers abord the orbiters is to remove a sepcially designed laptop from a docking stion and replace it with a new one. That's the main computer with the flight data. There are HUNDREDS of other computers onboard now that control everything from how much thrust a OMS pod uses to how and when the toilet systems is discharged.



The design may have been a 1970's design, but the electronics and systems are still state of the art. The shuttles all now have what's called a "glass cockpit", that is every analog dial and instrument has been replaced by LCD screens and multi-function displays. There are hundreds of civilian sircraft flying that cannot say that.



Ever flown in any of the following:

DC-9 (Major Airlines)

DC-10 (Northwest Airline, FedEx)

MD-80 (Major Airlines)

MD-83 (Major Airlines)

MD-11 (Northwest, United, FedEx, UPS)

727-200 (Smaller Airlines, FedEx, UPS)

727-300 (Smaller Airlines, FedEx, UPS)

737-200 (Southwest, United, Northwest)

737-300 (Southwest, United, Northwest)

737-400 (Major Airlines)

747-200 (Major Airlines, FedEx, UPS)

747-300 (Major Airlines, FedEx, UPS)

767-100 (Major Airlines, FedEx, UPS)

767-200 (Major Airlines, FedEx, UPS)

757-100 (Major Airlines, FedEx, UPS)

757-200 (Major Airlines, FedEx, UPS)

Concorde (Recently Retired)

L1011 (FedEx, UPS, Smaller Airlines)

SAAB 340B (Regional Carriers)

ATR 52 (Regional Carriers)

ATR72 (Regional Carriers)



There are more that go on from there. All of these designs date back to the early 80's, late 70's or earlier. All of these in their origional configuration have dials and gauges that the space shuttle USED to have until around 1995. If you fly regularly I can almost guarentee that you have flown in an aircraft older than Columbia was, and most assuradly older than Endeavor and Atlantis. Discovery is the oldest ship in the fleet, Delivered in I believe 1982 or 1983. The number of commercial aircraft in this vintage dwindle everyday and are popular with smaller carriers and freight carriers.



In fact, there are many WWII era aircraft still flying (say DC-3's, DC-4's, Super Connie's, etc).



Age of aircraft DOES NOT MATTER when they have been properly maintained. The shuttles were designed to last more than 100 missions each. Were are at mission #114, With 5 origional shuttles, the fleet could be expected to have flown 500 missions. With the loss of two ships, 300 missions could be justifyable, add the 21-22 missions that Columbia flew and the 8-10 that Challenger flew and 340-350 missions could be expected.



Funding however is an issue... Look at what PRIVATE funding and capitalism has done with $30 million versus NASA's $1.2 Billion aircraft.



Turn NASA over to private hands and I can almost guarentee that 1) NASA would be safer and more successful, and 2) will be self sufficient.



Let me ask you a few questions....



1) Do you drive with Sunglasses on?

2) Do you have DirectTv or Dish Network?

3) Do you have a microwave?

4) Do you use a home computer?

5) Does it have a flat-screen LCD monitor?



I could go on further.



If you said yes to any of these, you can thank NASA.

 

[Jeff C]

I do think that private funding would change things...but the X Prize was for a single person to go into barely orbital flight. Granted it is an amazing feet, but now let's see someone send up 7 people and 36,000 pounds of payload in an area about half the size of a football field. If there is a company or group of people who could do this for under a billion dollars it would help create an arguement for privatizing. The shuttle can carry about 7-8 times as much as the Progress (Russian) and about 35 times as much as a Soyuz (also Russian). It costs about $23M to build and launch a Progress, so they can put the same payload, theoretically, up for about $.16B. Keep in mind that it takes about 18months to build one of these and they are not reusable.



I see the Russian space program as the safety net for us. We are the trapeze artists, up in the air doing things no one else can/wants to do, but should something happen, the Russians can send up a few reliable Soyuz capsules and bail us out. You only learn by trying new things, not by getting in a rut.



Like I said, if any private company can do what the shuttle does for under a billion, I will fully support them, but until that time, I'll stick with the guys that have been sending rockets into space for 50 years, not the billionaire who wants to have some fun and go into space.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Why is NASA to thank for home computers?



It's a serious question, because I was under the impression that until recently most home computers had more horsepower and used newer technology than the computers onboard the space shuttle.



TJR

 

[Jeff C]

Right, computers nowadays have more power than the shuttle did when it was first built and flown. My calculator that I had in 6th grade had more computing power than Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo capsules. It used to be that with less power computers, more skilled pilots were needed, and only Air Force pilots with 10+ years of training were allowed to fly for NASA. Now, while it's still beneficial, it is not even required that you be with the Air Force to go into space.

 

[David Crockett]

Tiger and Jeff C:



Clearly you guys are big NASA fans. That's fine. Everyone certainly has different ideas on what they consider to be valuable and worth-while programs. I guess I am one of those people who is more concerned with immediate threats



I didn't mean to imply that the program as absolutely worthless. Nothing could be further from the truth. A few of you mentioned some of the benefits the US military has reaped from the NASA program, as well as every day items we take for granted. All valid points, if not a little ambitious. All I was trying to say is that the NASA program is exceptionally expensive, for the limited number of gains we see these days. I can see limited benefit from sending these guys up to conduct research, but I absolutely and stead-fastedly refuse to agree that we need to start exploring Mars. Anyone who thinks we will "colonize" Mars, or any other planet any time soon is very far removed from reality and needs to stop watching Aliens (the movie) so much.



The astronauts are certainly brave people. Far be it from me to detract from the valor or heroism of others. I don't think I said anything derrogatory about them in my previous posting. I just expect NASA, in all of it's infinite and over-whelming knowledge (apparently), to make better use of the money we give them, to ensure the safety of these courageous men and women.



Jeff C, as to your comment about "forgetting about the future of the human race and find more ways to kill ourselves"....I don't know you from Adam, but a comment like that leads me to believe you live a very sheltered life back home in the good old USA. I don't mean to be the ugly reminder of reality, but pretty much the whole world hates us (American's) right now. You may have forgotten about these terrorist @$$-holes who killed a lot of Americans a few years ago. Oh yeah, they also just killed a bunch of our British and Egyptian friends, as well as some of our Spanish pals not too long ago. I speak from experience. I've lived in Europe for 6 years, and have been deployed extensively through-out SW Asia. The Global War on Terrorism is as close to WWIII as any of us are likely to get. Anyone who doesn't see the value of spending more on defense and homeland security doesn't value the freedoms they've been handed on a silver platter and should try getting out more. I think you'll find all is not quite so pleasant in the rest of the world as it is in the states, where we've grown confortable and complacent So ,yeah, I think finding better ways to neutralize threats to our nation as a priority. After all, don't you think the Kennedy Space Center would make a prime target for some religious zealot with 20 pounds of C4 strapped to his chest?



If the ultimate goal of the space program is to find us a new home in the stars, then perhaps we need to address the problems of over-population first. Humans are the only species on earth that don't live in harmony with their environment. We continue to expand and consume, expand and consume. If we continue to allow unfettered popluation control and ruthless exploitation of natural resources to go unchecked, then we are quickly going to run out of natural resources and we will continue to have to address spreading disease and famine. I guess I just prefer to deal with the immediate threats that face our society, rather than the long term possibilities.



I don't plan to address this issue any further. It doesn't relate to STs, so there is no need to waste time on it here. I'm new to the site, but it doesn't seem to be a politcal forum. I just wanted to add further clarification to what I said earlier. The space program is a very expensive national program and I think some of the money we spent on it could better be used on other programs and research here on Earth. God bless and thanks for your support.
<script s

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

As far as thanking NASA for home computers... home computing is a product of electronic miniaturization that started with NASA's need to reduce the size of electro-mechanical and solid-state components to be used on Mercury and Apollo missions.



The computers of the SS today as I said earlier as upgraded for every mission. They are just as advanced or more so than 747-400's rolling off the line in Everett Washington today.