Shuttle Atlantis lands for final time

[3v0]

Link to article

Many of you are too young to remember but the time between the final Apollo mission and the first flight of the Space Shuttle was unbearably long.

The fact that NASA is retiring the shuttles without a replacement in the air is troubling. It is depressing for me.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

The fact that NASA is retiring the shuttles without a replacement in the air is troubling. It is depressing for me.

I agree - there really should have been much more development on a replacement, something far cheaper than the shuttle - while it's 'reuseable', cost per launch wasn't that much cheaper than crude disposable rockets.

What happened to the English inventor who went over there?, he had designed a craft that took off horizontally like a plane (on normal jets), switched to ramjets once high enough, and then rockets for the final stages.

 

[3v0]

Are you talking about one of the X Prize people ?

At least in the short run my money is on Burt Rutan. But his stuff does not have anywhere near the lifting capacity.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

Are you talking about one of the X Prize people ?

At least in the short run my money is on Burt Rutan. But his stuff does not have anywhere near the lifting capacity.

No, it wasn't him - I can't remember the guys name (it was a fair few years back) - he tried to raise funds in the UK and couldn't, and last I heard of him he had moved to the USA and was talking with NASA.

 

[HarveyH42]

Link to article

Many of you are too young to remember but the time between the final Apollo mission and the first flight of the Space Shuttle was unbearably long.

The fact that NASA is retiring the shuttles without a replacement in the air is troubling. It is depressing for me.

It's really depressing for us here in Florida. NASA and the Space Program probably brought more money into this state, than Mickey. Now we are slaves to the mouse...

What was Obama thinking? Guess he not much into science and technology (gets his free from his Chinese friends). There was never really any hope of bring much of anything of great value from space, it was the work need to get there and back safely. We got smaller, faster computers, communications, all kinds of safety devices, sensors, well huge list. Kids study hard, stat out of trouble, just so they could be part of the space program. A lot of industries across the country were getting a piece of the NASA budget, since most everything was contracted out. Sure, a lot of tax dollars are spent, but a lot of it goes back into the local economies. I don't think our President has any idea just how many jobs he killed. Maybe the Nasa geeks get to keep their jobs, but their will be thousands of others drawing those 2 years of Unemployment benefits. Last I heard, NASA's new project was to track <Banned Topic> for Al Gore. From science, to science fiction...

So, what's to become of the INS (space station, not immigration)? We just hand over the keys to Russia, and hope the don't reduce their stockpile of nukes, by moving them upstairs, where we'll never be able to find them.

Maybe we should just look at it, like a two year vacation, there has to be at least one better choice in 2012. Of course, there are a lot of supporters still, if he keeps them happy with more jobless freebies, gay rights, and amnesty for aliens, that's a huge segment of votes to beat.

 

[Boncuk]

Are you talking about one of the X Prize people ?

At least in the short run my money is on Burt Rutan. But his stuff does not have anywhere near the lifting capacity.

Oops! Didn't you post that gravitiy is a weak force?

 

[bryan1]

Last night on TV here was a program based on the Saturn exploration, man it was interesting and they did say the next mission was on the horizon. So if the shuttle is finished does this mean Saturn will just be a star in the sky and all of the hard to date is going down the Obamation plug.......

 

[Mikebits]

There seems to be mixed view on this topic in the media.

Ride was most enthusiastic about the news that Obama will set specific goals for NASA's space program, with stepping-stone missions leading to a clear end goal: Mars. "The proposed program articulates a strategy for human exploration that will excite and energize the next generation ... Astronauts will travel to near-Earth asteroids and to distant space telescopes; they will visit the lunar surface and the moons of Mars."

FOXNews.com - Astronauts Spar Over NASA's Future

I guess we will see eventually...

 

[HarveyH42]

Obama was just plain lying to NASA (didn't want the geeks throwing calculators at him). None of those dreams are even going to be started during his presidency. The key point being, that private industry will be doing most of the work, and paying the tab. No profit, nobody is going to invest. It'll cost a lot, just to find something worth bringing back to Earth.

 

[3v0]

One would think that congress and the pres could look back and see the spin off benefits from the space program which alone justify the expense.

But the people who elect them do not.

The space program needs a better PR department.

 

[HarveyH42]

I think mostly it's because times have changed. People got greedy, if they actually have to spend money, they have to see some sort of return. We aren't likely to find much of anything out in space, that we can bring back, and show a profit from. That was never the reason for going, it was all the challenge of getting there. The space station was a huge mistake, but kind of necessary if we plan on taking longer trips in zero gravity. Would have thought a station on the moon a better choice, since it won't eventually fail and and burn up in the atmosphere. A little further away, so the geeks would need to come up with better transportation to get there and back, which would help on the next closest place to planet a flag, and leave some junk sitting around. The moon has some gravity, so should be too tough on people stay there for a while, won't loose as many $20,000 screwdrivers. There is room and material for a landing strip for a shuttle, the low gravity probably wouldn't require the booster rockets. Moon rocks and soil could also be used for constructing the station, offsetting some of the cost, and also below the surface is an option.

Unfortunately, most people have become obsessed with wealth, not the the challenge of achieving the impossible. They don't care about the work that goes into it, just how soon they can expect a financial return, and how much. NASA was never about keeping the stockholders happy, but creating the means to achieve things that have never been done before. We've been to the moon, but we really haven't mastered it. We don't have the means to return there anytime we choose.

 

[HiTech]

So, what's to become of the INS (space station, not immigration)? We just hand over the keys to Russia, and hope the don't reduce their stockpile of nukes, by moving them upstairs, where we'll never be able to find them.

Ground based telescopes can actually see the ISS with good detail ... even the Shuttle when it's docked to it. Amateur telescopes have already accomplished this and can resolve the ailerons, thrusters, windows and even the NASA logo!! Just think what a large observatory or the hubble or a military spy satellite can image! Oh lookie there... that cosmonaut is picking his nose!

 

[3v0]

According to the news it will be money rather then the keys.

 

[HarveyH42]

According to the news it will be money rather then the keys.

So, basically, we're taking the money saved from the NASA budget, and giving it to the Russians? So they get the money, the jobs, and the geeks move to Russia as well. Hopefully, it will only last another two years. Do think it kind of odd though, unemployment benefits run out, a year before the campaigning for the next election.

Oh, I've heard that the INS is visible without a telescope, if you know where to look, and conditions are right...

 

[3v0]

Yup looks like one more case of downsizing in favor of non US workers.

 

[HiTech]

Oh, I've heard that the INS is visible without a telescope, if you know where to look, and conditions are right...

Why do you keep calling it INS? It's ISS, International Space Station
Yes it can be seen with the unaided eye under proper conditions but not to detail without a telescope. Check out the following links:
Heavens-Above Home Page
**broken link removed**
SPACE.com -- Wow! Shuttle and Space Station Photographed Crossing the Sun

 

[Pommie]

I've seen the ISS a few times with my naked eye. It looks like a moving star. It's such a shame that people are too short sighted to see how important this stuff is.

Mike.