Saturn Sky Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,049 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
The final Space Shuttle flight is coming this weekend, currently scheduled for Friday July 8th.
Y'all in Florida who always thought you would head over to The Cape for a shuttle launch one day,
... this is your last chance!

Like it or not, 50 years of American leadership in space exploration is coming to an abrupt halt.

G_d Bless our brave astronauts, our rocket scientists, and support personnel
who gave their best efforts to help keep an American Dream alive.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,584 Posts
The last shuttle. I think they should just leave them in space attached to the space station. Once they are in space you can use them to ferry back and forth to sats and other. They could launch cargo into space and have the shuttles pick the cargo up and take it to resources.

It is another serious waste of our tax money to put them in museums and let them rot. Use them in space where they were designed to work. They get all the damage from lifting off and re-entry.

Nobody ever said these geniuses at NASA have a lick of common sense.

They could even use the shuttles to haul crew to the moon and setup a sky ladder to lower equipment for a moon base.

:cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
The last shuttle. I think they should just leave them in space attached to the space station. Once they are in space you can use them to ferry back and forth to sats and other. They could launch cargo into space and have the shuttles pick the cargo up and take it to resources.

It is another serious waste of our tax money to put them in museums and let them rot. Use them in space where they were designed to work. They get all the damage from lifting off and re-entry.

Nobody ever said these geniuses at NASA have a lick of common sense.

They could even use the shuttles to haul crew to the moon and setup a sky ladder to lower equipment for a moon base.

:cheers:
Well, since they were not designed for continuous space use, and they require ungodly amounts of maintenance, maybe this isn't such a good idea.

There are much more efficient ways of shuttling people around space, and retrieving cargos.

Oh, and how would you get the astronauts home if you left the shuttle in space?

Jim :cool:

PS Maybe they have more brains than you give them credit for. :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,584 Posts
Well, since they were not designed for continuous space use, and they require ungoshly amounts of maintenance, maybe this isn't such a good idea.

There are much more efficient ways of shuttling people around space, and retrieving cargos.

Oh, and how would you get the astronauts home if you left the shuttle in space?

Jim :cool:

PS Maybe they have more brains than you give them credit for. :lol:
They are fine with continous usage in space like I said the tiles and damage come from launch and re-entry.

What more efficient ways of shuttling people and supplies do you suggest??? Or do you mean spending billions on a new launch delivery system?

They can launch with a small team. Hell even put a return capsule in the cargo bay of a shuttle for that exact purpose. They have been working on a return system for the space station for years.

Lets go with your ideas though... Waste billions and spend more on new craft. That's NASA logic for you. Do you work for them???

:cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
372 Posts
I thought the idea was to give other countries billions of tax payer dollars to haul our **** up to space in one of their vehicles until the private sector steps up to the plate.

Anyway, I don't think its the NASA guys retiring the shuttle fleet, it's the politicians. Some people did vote for change...:leaving:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
They are fine with continous usage in space like I said the tiles and damage come from launch and re-entry.

It is not just the tiles that take a beating. The propulsion systems need rebuilding every time they are used. This includes manouvering jets, and cleaning, purging and refilling tanks. Also, the Breathing/rebreathing systems require servicing, as well as the facilities like showers and toilet facilities. All this requires on the ground specialized facilities to do. Take a tour of NASA if you don't believe me.

What more efficient ways of shuttling people and supplies do you suggest??? Or do you mean spending billions on a new launch delivery system? You said "you can use them to ferry back and forth to sats and other." I was ONLY referring to those duties, NOT a new launch vehicle. Something designed for those duties would be much less complicated, and designed for easy refueling and reuse, unlike the shuttle. Cost is going to be high for ANYTHING put into space. It costs $450 million to launch a shuttle, cheaper for a cargo rocket that could put a recovery vehicle in space.

They can launch with a small team. Hell even put a return capsule in the cargo bay of a shuttle for that exact purpose. They have been working on a return system for the space station for years. What recovery capsule are you referring to? One that will cost billions to design from scratch? The US doesn't have any such thing.

Lets go with your ideas though... Waste billions and spend more on new craft. That's NASA logic for you. Do you work for them???
I don't have to work for NASA to have a little background in these things. I grew up with a fascination with space, and how they got there. I understand the challenges faced, and the costs involved. I do not pull this stuff out of my butt, unlike many who complain.

:cheers:
Sorry if this comes off as confrontational.

I will respond part by part in hopes that I can make some sense for you.

:cheers:


Sorry if this sounds confrontational, I don't want it to, but if I am to respond to your accusations about NASA, it is pretty much the only way.

:grouphug:

Jim :cool:

PS http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/about/information/shuttle_faq.html#10
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
I usually stand on my back porch and on a nice clear day I can follow the con-trail.. Today, however, with all the rain & clouds bwt us, no way, I'll watch it on TV :D, less crowded that way and a better view,,:cheers::lol:
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
7,019 Posts
Outstanding lift-off... To bad I wasn't able to watch the trail of smoke in the sky from my back yard. cloudy and raining here in my area of Florida........
Saw the launch on Fox Network News....
G0D Bless America! :patriot:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,049 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,831 Posts
The last shuttle. I think they should just leave them in space attached to the space station. Once they are in space you can use them to ferry back and forth to sats and other. They could launch cargo into space and have the shuttles pick the cargo up and take it to resources.
How will you fuel the shuttle?
It needs fuel cell replenishment for basic power needs.
It needs thruster replenishment for maneuver.
I doubt either replenishment method is on-orbit capable.

There are probably a hundred other items that need routine maintenance and/or replacements....which can only happen on earth. A shuttle docked at Space station will atrophy....quickly.

Speaking of maneuver, the shuttle does not have the intrinsic energy to service any satellites outside a very narrow orbital band within its current orbit plane. It can't (never could) reach the Geostationary commsats. It could do some Hubble work. But again, it has to be launched into the Hubble's plane. It can't just undock from the space station and fly around space like we see in the movies. Moving about orbits, changing orbital planes and what not, takes enormous amounts of energy. The Shuttle doesn't have this energy...never did.

In fact, I doubt there are any serviceable satellites within the energy range of a fully fueled shuttle docked at the space station.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
How will you fuel the shuttle?
It needs fuel cell replenishment for basic power needs.
It needs thruster replenishment for maneuver.
I doubt either replenishment method is on-orbit capable.

There are probably a hundred other items that need routine maintenance and/or replacements....which can only happen on earth. A shuttle docked at Space station will atrophy....quickly.

Speaking of maneuver, the shuttle does not have the intrinsic energy to service any satellites outside a very narrow orbital band within its current orbit plane. It can't (never could) reach the Geostationary commsats. It could do some Hubble work. But again, it has to be launched into the Hubble's plane. It can't just undock from the space station and fly around space like we see in the movies. Moving about orbits, changing orbital planes and what not, takes enormous amounts of energy. The Shuttle doesn't have this energy...never did.

In fact, I doubt there are any serviceable satellites within the energy range of a fully fueled shuttle docked at the space station.
:agree::agree: In other words, this puppy is obsolete.. :D :(:sorry:

we need a newer, improved HIGH powered shuttle, call it the kappatle :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,831 Posts
Mankind's ability to look into the future, and step off into realms that only a few years before were impossibilities....that is our future. We can invest in ignorant existence or we can push to the stars. Develop the talent. Keep the talent. Pass the talent onto other generations. Keep reaching.

Our ability to manage and control space will ultimately be necessary in order to manage and control our survival as a species.

In the meantime.....

nl5dlbCh8lY&
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
576 Posts
I thought the idea was to give other countries billions of tax payer dollars to haul our **** up to space in one of their vehicles until the private sector steps up to the plate.

Anyway, I don't think its the NASA guys retiring the shuttle fleet, it's the politicians. Some people did vote for change...:leaving:
yeah, too bad they couldn't take Mr.Change Obummer with them and leave him at the space station.


C'mon 2012 !
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top