|
Author
|
Topic: Ares I-X versus STS-125 mission delays
|
LCDR Scott Schneeweis
New Member Posts:
From:
Registered:
|
posted 10-13-2008 03:51 PM
   
A cost/benefit threshold has been crossed. HST has produced some great science but is it really worth further delaying progress on a Shuttle replacement? NASA definately needs a change at the helm.------------------
Scott Schneeweis
http://www.SPACEAHOLIC.com/ |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-13-2008 04:05 PM
Hubble has been the most popular project NASA has done since Apollo (and some might argue that its overall public approval rating is higher than Apollo as a program). As such, killing Hubble is simply not an option. It doesn't matter who the administrator is, as has demonstrated more than once, HST is the one NASA project that has strong political support. That said, one might argue that the Launch-On-Need requirement should be waived (or at least moved to a single pad option, as was developed by NASA in preparation for STS-125), which would avoid some but not all of the Ares I-X delays (still needed is the mobile launch platform currently supporting Atlantis). |
cspg
Member Posts: 6347
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 10-13-2008 11:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by LCDR Scott Schneeweis:
A cost/benefit threshold has been crossed. HST has produced some great science but is it really worth further delaying progress on a Shuttle replacement?
Again, comparing apples and oranges. What scientific knowledge will Ares bring to mankind? None. It's just a rocket. If it flies.Chris. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 50516
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 10-13-2008 11:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
It's just a rocket.
And without the shuttle -- another rocket -- the Hubble would be just a huge piece of space junk... only it wouldn't be in space, it would be lying on the ground.Ares might not do science itself, but it will enable science, as rockets can and often do. |
cspg
Member Posts: 6347
From: Geneva, Switzerland
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 10-14-2008 12:20 AM
But the shuttle "rocket" was able to do science with the Spacelab missions.Chris. |
328KF
Member Posts: 1388
From:
Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 10-14-2008 11:01 AM
quote:
Originally posted by cspg:
But the shuttle "rocket" was able to do science with the Spacelab missions.
With the steady progression of ISS capability of over the past several years, the mission of the shuttle has long since evolved from that of a science platform to the space truck it was initially intended to be. STS-107 was to be the last of the dedicated science flights, I believe.The unique capability this country loses with the retirement of the shuttle is the ability to bring up large payloads, independently manipulate them, and to return large payloads to Earth. Having said that, I feel pretty confident that the shuttle's time for retirement has come. We have come to realize the significant safety shortfalls of this system, and many more lurk out there that the general public never considers. If the orbiters were to continue flying, I think that would do so only until the next accident, and that would be a very sad end to an incredibly successful program. Orion is the way forward. While we give up the (maybe never to be seen again) capabilities of the shuttle, we gain the flexibility of a system which can be part of an architecture to explore the solar system. Other transportation systems will come along, perhaps from the private sector. Space science will continue on ISS, and if we can get past this financial crises and not have the rug pulled out from under us by the next President, maybe we can start planning some moon landing parties. Having astronauts working, exploring, and mining on the moon someday will be the ultimate example of the science Constellation enables through the use of Ares or some other design. |
advertisement