What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
spectrum.ieee.org
What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
1–10 of 73 posts
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#2I'm more horrified they canceled the James Webb telescope (or are just about to).
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#3Interesting points from Prof. Brian Cox:
* NASA costs less than 0.13% of GDP
and provides 9x return on investment
* The entire Shuttle Program cost approximately
the same as the UK bank bailout
* The Iraq conflict so far has cost significantly
more than a manned mission to Mars
https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88955884390195202
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#4Aren't some of these things possible with the X-37B?
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#57. Dead astronauts.
The space shuttle was a bad idea and dangerous from the start. Bring on the robots!
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#6Interesting points from Prof. Brian Cox: * NASA costs less than 0.13% of GDP and provides 9x return on investment * The entire Shuttle Program cost approximately the same as the UK bank bailout * The Iraq conflict so far has cost significantly more than a manned mission to Mars Source: https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88955884390195202 https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/88956654539902976 https://twitter.c…
I wonder how he comes to the conclusion of 9x return. I think that we ought to invest in dragons instead and that they would bring returns in orders of magnitude greater than any space program, plus they live longer.
Source: http://blog.mises.org/6512/socialist-calculation-versus-magi...
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#7Yes, when you pour money down the money hole, you do tend to get a few things in return. My real question, which we'll see answered hopefully over the next few years, isn't "Were the capabilities we got with the shuttle cool?" but "Was the shuttle a cost-effective way to obtain those capabilities?"
And it's really hard to look at the Shuttle program and say yes.
In general, we really need to get over whining about what we could have if only we could spend money we don't have.
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#8Aren't some of these things possible with the X-37B?
Some, with limitations to most of the retained capabilities. The X-37B is substantially smaller and is not manned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37
1. Gentle delivery of large modules for attachment to existing complexes. - Probably lost, the main reason the shuttle is gentle is because it carries fragile humans.
2. Bringing cargo down gently. - Partially lost: the cargo bay is much smaller.
3. Safe "proximity operations." - Lost or at least made much more challenging.
4. Temporary deployment of a workbench in orbit for experiments, repairs, and other assembly. - Lost.
5. High-precision research orbits with specialized instrumentation. - Likely not lost.
6. Flexibility of crew composition. - Lost.
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#97. Dead astronauts. The space shuttle was a bad idea and dangerous from the start. Bring on the robots!
Going outside was a bad idea and dangerous from the start. Bring on the pizza delivery and cable TV!
See, that ain't no way to run a civilization. Without taking (calculated) risks, we're nothing.
Re: What We Lose With the End of the Shuttle Program
#107. Dead astronauts. The space shuttle was a bad idea and dangerous from the start. Bring on the robots!
Going outside was a bad idea and dangerous from the start. Bring on the pizza delivery and cable TV! See, that ain't no way to run a civilization. Without taking (calculated) risks, we're nothing.
Except those risks must be evaluated against the reward. In this present day and age, what exactly do we gain from using humans instead of robots in space that justifies their expense?