[MERGED] The Shuttle

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/0....ap/index.html

Now does this article inspire confidence?

However it will be nice to think that maybe the future of space exploration may have a chance to continue..As long as the Bush allows it that is..

[Pierre]

Space travel is a dangerous business, it's never going to be completely safe.

I'm sure they've made it as safe as they can.

I'm glad it's going to fly again.

[Paul K]

Missed a launch last time we were in Florida due to the flights being cancelled after the last shuttle loss. Will be good to see the shuttle launch again but will be even better to see a more cost effective launch vehicle in use sometime in the future

[AndrewJ]

That is being worked on though, with hypersonics, and even fusion drive ( which everyone disses but personally I think is the future) then we have hydrogen cells, which no doubt could be adapted into launching.

Anyway back on topic its good to see the shuttle back.

They should rename it Voyager. Seeing as we are going into the unknown up there.

[zoombini]

Of course NASA have got to start them again, there are several other (countries) groups getting ahead in space flights so NASA need to keep in front so that they can claim all the planets for the US.

Well it loks like it is going ahead http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4673261.stm

I'm wondering how much interest will be shown at the launch tomorrow.

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Well it loks like it is going ahead http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4673261.stm

I'm wondering how much interest will be shown at the launch tomorrow.

Considerable, a return to flight like this will be covered globally and will get extreme coverage in America. There is a lot of pride inbedded into the Space program by the thousands of people working within the space industry.

[Nugget]

I was reading about this in the paper at the weekend. According to the article, NASA are using part of the operation to see if the shuttles could be repaired (if necessary) in space. However, it also said that there are rumours that, for safe flight, NASA would be better off using the old Soviet Soyuz capsules instead of the shuttles.

There's also apparently some resentment amongst the other space agencies that, having ploughed billions of dollars into the International Space Station for the purposes of research, the US pretty much just want to use it as a waypoint for inter-planetary flight.

[basa]

Originally Posted by Paul

Considerable, a return to flight like this will be covered globally and will get extreme coverage in America. There is a lot of pride inbedded into the Space program by the thousands of people working within the space industry.

Pity the US Govt and NASA aren't as interested in Hubble.

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by basa

Pity the US Govt and NASA aren't as interested in Hubble.

Actually they have agreed further funding recently to keep Hubble serviced for at least another 2-3 years. Hubble is a long way past it's mission time now and if NASA and the US government wasn't interested then it would have been left to die.

Originally Posted by Nugget

I was reading about this in the paper at the weekend. According to the article, NASA are using part of the operation to see if the shuttles could be repaired (if necessary) in space.

I think that part of the mission was always going to happen, NASA needs to know whether repairing damage to the shuttle tiles in space is possible. They already have a special boom mounted camera for inspecting the shuttle for damage.
Link
As to using the Soyuz craft, it is known that the Soyuz craft are reliable and safe (to a point) but the Shuttle is a lot more than just a delivery lorry in space and I would be suprised if the Soyuz craft could carry out all the types of missions that the Shuttle can. Also I doubt that the US military would enjoy asking the Russians if they could borrow a Soyuz to launch their latest satellite packages LoL.
NASA is already testing the next generation of launch vehicles (along with other groups) and hopefully sometime soon there will be a safe, reliable, re-usable and cheap launch option available for use.

Originally Posted by basa

Pity the US Govt and NASA aren't as interested in Hubble.

It's because Hubble is in an orbit that would be difficult for another vessel to reach, should the shuttle sent to service it become damaged and in need of assistance.

NASA has become so risk-averse it's in danger of disappearing up its own bottom. They have absolutely no chance of getting to Mars in their current frame of mind. If this lot had been running the show in the 1960s its a sure bet no-one would have landed on the moon either.

[Aragorn]

Originally Posted by Chris T

If this lot had been running the show in the 1960s its a sure bet no-one would have landed on the moon either.

Are you sure they really did

The truth is out there

Originally Posted by Aragorn

Are you sure they really did

The truth is out there

Can the conspiracists among us please make their own thread about it...

Why wont nasa tell us if the moon was made out of cheese i need to know?

[Aragorn]

Sorry - couldn't resist - yes, I do believe they landed.

Back on topic, I think there are too many conficting interests competing for NASA money - it will be difficult for them to
1. keep the shuttle going and
2. design a new reusable launch platform and
3. get back to the moon and
4. get to Mars and so on.

Iirc, Bush has committed to more manned exploration which probably means Hubble will be left to rot