posted 02-02-2003 01:25 AM
The tragedy of the loss of Columbia today is a reminder of the dangers of space exploration. Our sympathies to the families of the crew.In the l970's the space shuttle was sold by NASA as a routine, cost-effective, safe method of access to space that would replace expendable launch vehicles. None of this has come to pass.
The shuttle system is so complicated and labor intensive that, even with unlimited funding, no more than 8-10 launches per year would be feasible. Due to funding limits, NASA can only afford 5 flights per year. So much for easy access to space.
The space shuttle system is inherently unsafe in that there are too many points in the flight where a failure is catastrophic-- during launch while the solid rocket boosters are still attached, during reentry with damage to tiles, etc. While NASA has redundant systems and anticipates problems, there are too many things that can go wrong.
Any mechanical system can fail-- your car or an airplane, for example-- but the velocities, temperatures, pressures and altitudes are a lot more forgiving on the ground or in the air than in space.
In the long-run, we need routine, safe, affordable access to space. This will never be possible with the space shuttle system. Instead of spending money to upgrade the shuttle to fly until 2020, as NASA plans, a better course would be to design alternative systems.
The Russians have used essentially an evolutionary approach with their rocket launchers, relying on dependable technology.
NASA needs reliability, safety, ease of operations and checkout, and cost savings in any new launch system. Exotic new technologies are not necessarily the answer.
As we mourn the Columbia crew, we need to start thinking about the inherent dangers in the space shuttle system, correct what can be corrected in the short term, and speed up design of a replacement in the future.
posted 02-02-2003 01:25 AM
advertisement