The Last 10 Days In The Space Shuttle's Bunker?, Atlantis apparently to be scrapped in 2008 |
The Last 10 Days In The Space Shuttle's Bunker?, Atlantis apparently to be scrapped in 2008 |
Guest_BruceMoomaw_* |
Feb 21 2006, 03:05 AM
Post
#1
|
Guests |
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20060...lantis_spa.html :
"Under orders to retire the shuttle fleet by 2010, NASA plans to cancel shuttle Atlantis' next scheduled overhaul and mothball the ship in 2008. "Rather than becoming a museum piece, however, Atlantis will serve as a spare parts donor for sister ships Discovery and Endeavour to complete assembly of the International Space Station. " 'People are already calling us and asking us can they display one of our orbiters in their museum after we're done. I'm not giving anybody anything until we're all agreed the station is complete and the shuttles' job is done,' shuttle program manager Wayne Hale told Kennedy Space Center employees during a televised address on Friday. " 'We're going to keep (Atlantis) in as near flight-ready condition as we can without putting it through a (modification and overhaul) so we can use those parts,' Hale said. ____________________ Jeffrey Bell has recently finished a piece for "SpaceDaily" proclaiming that the wholesale cancellation of other NASA projects in the FY 2007 budget to keep Shuttle and ISS going is actually just part of Michael Griffin's Machiavellian strategy to get both of the cancelled, by making it clear that they can be saved now only at the cost of a swarm of other projects (including Bush's lunar program) which are now more popular. Certainly that is the overwhelming message being conveyed, whether Griffin planned it that way or not -- I haven't seen a single newspaper editorial yet that favors retaining Shuttle at this point. (Bell also claims to see other, subtler evidence of this strategy in Griffin's moves over the last few weeks -- and also signs that he definitely plans to throw ISS from the train as well, by just giving it to the Russians half-finished in a few years and paying off the ESA and Japan for their unlaunched space lab modules. These include the fact that he's cancelled work on the unmanned cargo variant of the Crew Exploration Vehicle that will be necessary to take up replacement Control Moment Gyros to the ISS after the Shuttle is no longer available.) |
|
|
Guest_Richard Trigaux_* |
Feb 21 2006, 05:34 PM
Post
#2
|
Guests |
When I think back twenty years ago, when the shuttle program was starting, all the hope we invested in it: cheap, easy, safe access to space, going in orbit as easily as we go in holidays, send up there tourists, scientists, artists, space stations, large science facilities, factories... and where we are now...
NASA is not the culprit: all the other shuttle programs were canceled, and space remains expensive, dangerous and difficult. There will perhaps not be a PRACTICAL space station and flight to Mars before several decades, and, unless something really new is discovered, there will never be easy cheap access to space. In facts the idea of the space shuttle came not from scientists and not from engineers, it came from science fiction. And we all tried to realize a scifi dream. Sometimes it is a good idea. Sometimes not. Let us search for something else for an easy access to space. Starting with what we know to do. Large aircraft or huge baloon at high altitude, perhaps? Would a very large aircraft such an A380 be able to hauld a rocket stage at high altitude? Certainly yes, but how large? For small satellites perhaps. |
|
|
Feb 21 2006, 09:33 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2492 Joined: 15-January 05 From: center Italy Member No.: 150 |
...In facts the idea of the space shuttle came not from scientists and not from engineers, it came from science fiction. And we all tried to realize a scifi dream. Sometimes it is a good idea. Sometimes not.... Agree, Richard. And I'm worried by this fact, because I'm convinced that also the new USA exploration program is something like this. Recently, I hear "expert" saying it will be easier (and cheaper) to launch satellites and spacecrafts from the moon, and make astronomical observations from it's "dark side". But a scientist, or even a space enthusiast, undertsands that this is not true: a base on the moon will be very hard to make and will cost a lot, making very difficult to pay back construction expenses (ISS should teach us something!); and best place to observe universe is far from any celestial body! And yes, I share with MahFL the impression that we will not see a man on Mars in our lifespan. But we have MER images! -------------------- I always think before posting! - Marco -
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 31st October 2024 - 11:38 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |