Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
Actually, in terms of present day dollars, Apollo is cheaper than the Shuttle. $25 billion v $10 billion/year...for 28 years. Each Shuttle costs $4-5 billion, so just in spacecraft alone, the original fleet cost as much as the entire Apollo program. Let alone all the ancillary equipment and stuff. It's money that should've been used to get us permanently to the Moon, and it probably would've been done by the early 80's. The problem with NASA, and it became inherent in the Shuttle is that their "culture" changed. They went from over-engineering systems and making them reasonably cheap, to under designing craft on smaller budgets than was needed in order to cut costs and save money, but in the final analysis spending far more than was expected. The Shuttle did a lot of good things in its time, but I think history will show it to be a rather mediocre craft for the most part and an abject failure in some instances. It hasn't lived up to their design or flight expectations. It never could because it wasn't good enough and they seriously underfunded the program.
|
Sure Carl, it's an expensive exercise and not a truly versatile heavy lift concept.
But it never was supposed to be.
Compare 6 manned landings to the moon in an entirely one-off, non
re-useable craft to 130 odd missions where at least the vehicle is
reused in a turnaround of a month or two.
A backup shuttle is normally ready for use if needed.
You can't really compare the two concepts in only dollar terms.
It has served it's purpose well, expensive, sure, manned spaceflight is always
gonna be expensive.
Imagine where we would be now if they lost the first shuttle and crew in 1981.
It was the first time a new spacecraft concept was tested on it's maiden
flight using a manned crew. It was the first time solid fuel was used.
Did you know they nearly lost the craft? They did...the body flap was damaged
by a shock wave from the solids igniting and overextending the flap.
If the crew had known this they would have ejected at a safe altitude.
Loss of vehicle.
For the purpose of building and testing concepts in space....ie building
a VERY expensive ISS , to be shutdown in another decade or so....for the
purpose of having a proven, reliable, mostly re-useable lift vehicle for
low to medium Earth orbit payloads...for the purpose of simply keeping
the space program running and people employed in cutting edge industry,
I think the shuttle program is and has been justified.
Steve