End of the Shuttle Program

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

In an interview tonight a NASA spokesman said in 5 years the Shuttle program will close.

It is being replaced with old 'Capsule' technology.

He said "the 'Capsule' will sit atop a disposable rocket and will only be a Personel Carrier with little or no cargo area".

Now that's a step forward!!!!

Has anyone else heard about this?

[janoskiss (Steve H)]

Sounds like they are going to steal the good old proven technology that has been the Soviet & Russian space program for the past 50 years. It's probably for the best, as far as the safety of the crew is concerned. They could call it SoiUSA.

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

LOL!

I wonder if they will actually go back to the proven Saturn Rockets or come up with a completely new model. He didn't say.

Yes Steve, the Russians are up in space a lot using capsule and disposable rocket technology. It works quite well, but I thought we would be past that and onto something new once the shuttle was finished. Apparently not!

[MiG]

I haven't heard about this, but it isn't so crazy. Cargo will probably go in separate disposable rockets, like most satellites do these days.
For humans, capsules are a good option because they are more robust.

The thing that we will miss out on is bringing cargo back down from space. The shuttle is designed to be able to bring satellites back. AFAIK, there is no other solution that can currently do that, but that option never seems to get exercised anyway (although they are bringing back 3.5 tons of rubbish at the moment).

Edit: I forgot to mention that the shuttle is way cooler than these options

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

This might also explain why the constuction of the Collapsable fold-up 'Dobson Space Telescope'.

There's not a lot of room in a Capsule.

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Not to mention a cease to further construction to the IIS. Or a Moon Base or a Mars Base etc. Until they build some sort of launchable Space Semi-Trailers.

[slice of heaven]

Old news guys.
This is the CEV (Crew Exploration Vehicle) program.
NASA was originally going to have a flyoff between 2 prototypes by 2010 to choose the best setup. Now theyve jumped ahead and will choose the best option off the plans by 2008.
Yes, their using 1970 technology for launch ,but with upgraded 21st century technology for the craft.
It's also for the next lunar missions. So,no its not a step backwards.

[cometcatcher (Kevin)]

But it's so undignified (and dangerous) landing in the sea! Or are they going to land on the ground like the Russians?

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Thanks Slick. I remember him using the term: CEV (Crew Exploration Vehicle).

I also wonder if this will make the civilian programs a bit more active in development, for example an improved SpaceShipOne, to gain contracts for carrying stuff to and from space like carriers. Interesting thought.

[slice of heaven]

Yep BD, Entrepenuers will play a big part in reusable spacecraft, but the money is in passengers, not cargo.

On the land I think Kevin.

The proposed lunar module will carry more than 20 tonne of cargo to the moon. As for launching heavy payloads into orbit , they havent decided but their looking at systems to carry 100 tonne payloads into orbit. They keep changing their options every week.
NASA have a budget of 6 Billion $$$$ to spend on this until 2010.

[janoskiss (Steve H)]

6 billion over the next 5 years? That is so little for something so grand!

[slice of heaven]

Thats doesnt include launching anything , its only research and development.
Launch costs will drop back to $100million ,CHEAP.
They've already spent $15 billion , and their total allocated budget for the next 20yrs is $200billion, which includes launches.

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Of course they are going to change their minds weekly!

If they come up with a solution now, then their task is done and they will be unemployed sooner. They have to justify spending billions somehow.

Would you come up with a fast solution if it would put you out of work? or would you have fun tinkering with ideas for a few more years and keep yourself employed doing what you enjoy?

*Actually I think they have enough projects to work on for the rest of their lives and soon the next generation of Space-Cadets will move up.

[rumples riot]

This is fairly typical. Republican governments tend not to provide a lot of money to the space program. Nixon, Reagan and now Wild Bill. All those administrations had more money devoted to weapons of war and being in wars than anything else. I think if they put half of what they put into war into space and the other half into their health budget and then stayed the hell away from everybody else then the world would be a much better place, and space would be the better for it. Using an antiquated system with updated electronics just cries budget cuts. What about developing another propulsion and re-entry system. That would be better!!

[Soldant]

It's a shame to see the Shuttle go, but they obviously have some flaws and they're getting past their prime. When you have accidents like these it's time to move on. Human spaceflight is a tricky business I guess, if possible it would be better to simply send unmanned probes to do the work for us with no risk to human life if it explodes or something because a heat tile fell off.

Humans need to explore though and see with our own eyes

[MiG]

Don't you think the objective is to get the job done rather than design extravagant nifty options? We already have one of those.
As much as it pains me to say it, I don't disagree with this article:
http://www.idlewords.com/2005/08/a_r...to_nowhere.htm

Capsules certainly get the reentry part done well. Throw them in the atmosphere so fast that they hit 5G of deceleration (IIRC) and they still survive. Just one disposable circular shield a few meters in diameter is required for this.

For anybody that is looking in the direction of Space Ship One and thinking "they can do it", don't. SS1 goes much slower so its thermal protection needs are smaller.

P.S.
NASA just said to the shuttle crew that the guy flying approaches around KSC is seeing St Elmo's fire around the plane. St Elmo's fire is a blue glow that occurs around conductors in highly charged areas, like thunder storms.

[Soldant]

Why exchange a system that works for something that looks cool? I also agree with the article. But like Pluto and the Hubble Space Telescope it's become so much a part of the public that people hate to see it go.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by rumples riot

This is fairly typical. Republican governments tend not to provide a lot of money to the space program. Nixon, Reagan and now Wild Bill. All those administrations had more money devoted to weapons of war and being in wars than anything else. I think if they put half of what they put into war into space and the other half into their health budget and then stayed the hell away from everybody else then the world would be a much better place, and space would be the better for it. Using an antiquated system with updated electronics just cries budget cuts. What about developing another propulsion and re-entry system. That would be better!!

So they are just going to get the lunar lander and pull out the big calculator and add a Pentium 4?

What happens if they're half way there and Microsoft Windows crashes?

"Ah, Mr Bill Gates, this is houston, we have a problem!"

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

Stu,

They will have a sattelite internet connection so they can get upgrades on the way, if they can get off the gaming sites long enough!

[slice of heaven]

Mig
I think he goes a bit over the top.
I wouldnt say the shuttle program was a total flop as he's suggesting.
In 'hindsight' it's always easy to find flaws.