Author
|
Topic: NASA's 1972 aims for the space shuttle
|
AirKing Member Posts: 34 From: East Yorkshire, England Registered: Jan 2016
|
posted 02-07-2016 04:18 PM
I recently acquired an Apollo 17 launch kit and within it was a booklet by a NASA administrator on the space shuttle. There are a number of standout statements: - The shuttle is the only meaningful new manned space program which can be accomplished on a modest budget.
- The space shuttle will make launching of payloads into earth orbit a virtually routine event.
- The shuttle will encourage far greater participation in space flight. With the shuttle's easy and routine access to space, scientists, engineers and astronauts will be able to go into orbit to supervise and check on their space experiments.
- You don't have to be an astronaut to ride the space shuttle. Healthy individuals will be able to withstand the mild forces of acceleration and deceleration experienced when the shuttle is launched and re-enters the atmosphere. In addition, the shuttle will be built and pressurized so that passengers such as scientists, engineers and others will be able to ride in ordinary clothing, as in an airliner.
- The space shuttle is expected to be ready to play its major role in space by the end of this decade. It will then be used to launch all but the very smallest and very largest payloads. It will send some spacecraft into orbit from which the spacecrafts own rockets would send them into higher orbits or toward the Moon and other planets.
If only this had come true then space tourism could now be a reality. |
Hart Sastrowardoyo Member Posts: 3445 From: Toms River, NJ Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 02-07-2016 10:14 PM
Space tourism and sending scientists and engineers into space are two different things. For one thing, the space shuttle was not certified by the FAA — they had no idea how to do that then — so legally the shuttle could not carry passengers.For another thing, the goals are different. One could argue that payload specialists have nothing else to do on a seven-day flight once their satellites are deployed, but as noted, the primary job is to supervise and check on their space experiments. Not to go around the world a few hundred times and take photos. Space tourists or spaceflight participants do not have a primary job. Sure they may bring their own experiments, or run experiments by others, but they are not selected for spaceflight for a specific task. |
AirKing Member Posts: 34 From: East Yorkshire, England Registered: Jan 2016
|
posted 02-08-2016 01:59 AM
I did not say that NASA would be sending tourists into space and taking up the places of astronauts who have specific objectives to complete.In the booklet it says that NASA intended the shuttle to be run on a modest budget, for launches into orbit to be routine and for an average person with no astronaut training to be able to fly on the shuttle. If what NASA had planned had actually occurred then is it not probable that by now a private company would have a working space tourism project where the average person (with enough money) could book a ride into space? The booklet was written 44 years ago. Currently there are Virgin Galactic and SpaceX to name but a few who are working on space tourism projects and private individuals have been able to fly on the Soyuz to the International Space Station. Billionaires rent out their private yachts to contribute to the running costs so is it so hard to consider that the same could have happened with the shuttle if flights have been economical and routine. Initially NASA kept private spaceflight illegal but the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004 required NASA and the FAA to legalise private spaceflight. The greatest concern was the danger of going into space but if spaceflight could have been shown to be as safe as flying on a plane then who knows what could have happened. I hope that space tourism does become a reality in my lifetime as I certainly would like to go. |
issman1 Member Posts: 1042 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 02-08-2016 10:35 AM
Among the early architecture was one which called for liquid flyback boosters.It wasn't pursued for costs, apparently. Yet private U.S. companies today are showing NASA what could and should have been years after the shuttle programme's demise. It's like a Greek tragedy since the shuttle was touted — from the outset — to be revolutionary. They missed a trick with that which proved deadly in 1986 on the very flight meant to demonstrate space travel was accessible to the masses. |
Hart Sastrowardoyo Member Posts: 3445 From: Toms River, NJ Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 02-08-2016 10:42 AM
I'm not sure what NASA's plans with shuttle have to do with space tourism. Space tourism is not something that happened recently. During the late '70s/early '80s a few people were working on getting the average person into space. Among them was Robert Truax, whose effort failed due to lack of money, not because of anything NASA was doing. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42988 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 02-08-2016 10:53 AM
A low cost, successful shuttle program might have actually slowed the development of space tourism, rather than expedite it.Today's space tourism efforts are, to some degree, an outgrowth of the expendable launch vehicle (ELV) market. Had the shuttle met all of NASA's early goals, then it is possible the military would have relied on the orbiter, rather than ELVs, to launch its payloads, which in turn would have had an dampening effect on the commercial launch market as well. On the other hand, had the shuttle been proven to be everything NASA hoped at the start, than it is possible that the early-1980s proposed passenger module could have flown in the payload bay. |
Hart Sastrowardoyo Member Posts: 3445 From: Toms River, NJ Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 02-08-2016 01:09 PM
Be interesting to see if FAA regulations would have applied to that module, e.g., evacuating everybody out within 90 seconds. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42988 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 02-08-2016 01:23 PM
The FAA didn't gain purview over commercial spaceflight activities until 1995. Before that (since 1984), the Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) was under the auspices of the Department of Transportation. |
Ronpur Member Posts: 1211 From: Brandon, Fl Registered: May 2012
|
posted 02-08-2016 07:27 PM
quote: Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: On the other hand, had the shuttle been proven to be everything NASA hoped at the start, than it is possible that the early-1980s proposed passenger module could have flown in the payload bay.
Some of those concepts look a lot like the Shuttle Launch Experience passenger module. |