Shuttle Flights May Continue

This is some good news to me, considering that that ax was given to NASA's Constellation program. Sen. Hutchinson (R-TX) proposed a bill in the Senate which would extend the space shuttle's "life".



I agree with the Senator when she says that the United States must be independent in being able to reach space. Why should a nation that has been going to space now for fifty or so years have to rely on others to get up there? Doing so would have been like giving up ships during the Age of Exploration! Let's hope that this bill passes and that America herself can continue to go into space, with or without the extra money that is being asked for.

If NASA has plans to explore celestial bodies in the future, yes, the shuttle will eventually need to be retired when a similar vehicle has been created that also has the capability to land and relaunch away from Earth. The retirement of the shuttle shouldn't come though until that vehicle has been made; in order to keep America space "independent" but also so that NASA and America can continue to increase scientific knowledge in a manner that is needed/wanted. Know what I mean?

Sorry, I have mixed reactions on this.

First I don't feel 2 additional flights (per year) to ISS would add ANYTHING.

Second, Obama has already pledged $19 Billion for NASA. She wants to add $1.3 Billion per year.

Third, The Space Shuttle is obsolete and costly to get "Recertified."

Fourth, Please remind me of the benefits of floating around in a low earth orbit again? ( Something we've done since the 60's)

On a personal note. I love the Shuttle and witnessed first 6 launches from Press Site at KSC. It was an awesome spacecraft that has served well beyond its intended lifespan. Also, as a Floridian, I realize the
advantage of the economic impact to my state. Plus I recognize the ability of Shuttle to serve as a "Space Wrecker" by fetching malfunctioning satellites. However, to me, the bill is a recipe for another disaster.

A smaller craft seems like a more viable alternative if you insist on servicing ISS.

Just my .02¢

Regard...kk


[edit on 4-3-2010 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by kinda kurious


I understand what you mean from the monetary aspect. I was thinking that $1.3 billion is not much compared to the $19 billion already pledged. Whether that's included in the final decision or not isn't that big of a deal to me.

If this bill is approved though, I think that way more than two flights would be done. After all, it would keep the space shuttle in commission until a viable alternative is created; whether that be a landing type vehicle or another that would just go into low Earth orbit (which would be smaller). A smaller "servicing" type craft may be easier for NASA to build at the moment than something else actually. But I'm not sure about that. I never really thought about it before.

You're right. There really are no "benefits" at the moment of floating around in low Earth orbit. I can't think of anything else that we can glean from that scientifically. That said, the space shuttle can simply do things that are very helpful. An example would be being able to actually bring cargo into space. (Sometimes just sending stuff up in a rocket isn't helpful!) I guess to me, it just seems silly that a space-faring nation would just kind of end their own missions and rely on someone else to take their astronauts into space. Like I said before, that would be like a nation giving up it's navy in the old days. Could you imagine England asking the Spanish if they could take some of their sailors around with them?

Finally, I hope the shuttle stays in commission so that once I go and visit Florida again, there is a chance that I would be able to see one take off! Though I'm a Floridian, I never have had the chance to see it lift off!

reply to post by octotom


Because keeping with the aged shuttle will waste so much NASA money that could be used to build a new spacecraft that will keep the US in the space game.

The analogy would be more akin to sinking money in keeping the Wright Brother's plane flying instead of spending it on making better planes. The shuttle is old. It's out-dated. Newer vehicles (and launch methods) are required to keep up.

If it ain't broke, dont fix it. yes, the shuttle is expensive, but there's really no good alternative, yet. this is bad, because the ISS is mostly the US's project and are flipping most of the bill.

we might be able to get a good alternative to the space shuttle (maybe the imperial shuttle from star wars ) and get that warp drive invented sooner if we tell congress that the little green men on mars are hoarding oil