Post by starbux on May 10, 2005 16:30:08 GMT -6
Many here may know that I hold a minority view that the Shuttle program should end. Now a prominent figure in the amateur astronomy community shares a similar view:
journals.aol.com/rmollise/UncleRodsAstroBlog/entries/206
Whither the Shuttle?
I wasn't exactly surprised to learn, thanks to the space.com website, that,
"Space shuttle officials are now targeting a launch window opening July 13 for the space shuttle Discovery, after it became clear that lifting off during the current window ...would be unattainable."
That's all well and good. But I don't wonder about the "how" of getting the Shuttle off the ground again, I wonder about the "why."
Looking back over the two plus decades the Shuttle has been flying, off and on, it's clear that its triumphs have been limited. Its successes have been the Hubble servicing missions. There is no denying the significance of them. It's fair to say that without the Shuttle, the HST would still be orbiting in spherical aberration heaven. These few missions to the space telescope almost tempt me to say the Shuttle program has been worth it. Almost. The HST missions have only constituted a few brief and glorious moments for the Space Shuttle. What else? Well, early in the program, the Shuttle performed some military missions. I'll leave it to you to decide their value in the larger scheme of things, but, in relation to other STS duties, they rank pretty high. What other duties? More reptitious "bugs-in-space" bio-experiments, and ISS, International Space Station, work.
Which brings us to the crux of the problem today. The Shuttle, near as this old boy can determine, is in the future to be exclusively devoted to servicing the ISS. It's not to be allowed to do anything else. The last crop of NASA bigwigs decided this was the only thing safe enough for the shuttle to do. Trouble rears its head? Abandon ship for the space station. But that inevitiably brings the question of the worth of the station. It's clear the Shuttle is still dangerous to fly. Is the ISS worthy of such chance taking?
I wish I coud say "yes." The problem is, with the demise of the Soviet Union, the ISS has no clear mission. It was originally developed as a showcase for Soviet - U.S. cooperation. Maybe if we cooperated on the International Space Station, we wouldn't blow up ourselves and everybody else. But reality has intruded.There is no more U.S.S.R., and the ISS is struggling tofind a mission for itself.
Unfortunately, as designed, it's not good for much. Astronomy is impossible on the station itself due to vibration problems. It is not designed for and can't easily be adapted for space construction projects (forget using it as a shipyard for Mars craft). What can it do? Three things only. First, more biological experiments like those done to death over the couse of the Shuttle program, which never seem to lead anywhere. Second, human endurance in space studies. Unfortunately, that ground was well and conclusively covered by Mir. Finally, its big draw for Program Administrators: it provides somewhere for the Shuttle to go.
I don't always agree with the ideas of our current U.S. Administration--that's for sure--but one thing they've got right. It's time to move on from STS. The nation needs a new space transportation system; one designed for a variety of tasks, not something restricted to low earth orbit. Not something for which we have to invent tasks. Certainly, we should be mindful of the Shuttle's accomplishments. And of the sacrifices made by too many of its brave crew members. But time has passed it by--assuming there ever really was a time for the STS design we wound up with. We can let the Shuttle go out on a high note, however. If it's deemed safe to fly, fly it to the HST for one last servicing mission. Seeing the Shuttle end with another meaningless trip to the ISS is just too sad for me to contemplate.
The ISS, like the Shuttle, is a white elephant. NASA has been utterly unable to devise a worthwhile role for it in the Agency's directionless manned space program. It's time for NASA to have the courage to move on. Not only would elimination of the International Space Station provide a way to gracefully retire the Shuttle. It would free up dollars for things like....err..."science," perhaps. ;-)
Of interest to urban astronomers, Rod will be publishing a guide to urban observing (with an emphasis on deep-sky) llater this year.
journals.aol.com/rmollise/UncleRodsAstroBlog/entries/206
Whither the Shuttle?
I wasn't exactly surprised to learn, thanks to the space.com website, that,
"Space shuttle officials are now targeting a launch window opening July 13 for the space shuttle Discovery, after it became clear that lifting off during the current window ...would be unattainable."
That's all well and good. But I don't wonder about the "how" of getting the Shuttle off the ground again, I wonder about the "why."
Looking back over the two plus decades the Shuttle has been flying, off and on, it's clear that its triumphs have been limited. Its successes have been the Hubble servicing missions. There is no denying the significance of them. It's fair to say that without the Shuttle, the HST would still be orbiting in spherical aberration heaven. These few missions to the space telescope almost tempt me to say the Shuttle program has been worth it. Almost. The HST missions have only constituted a few brief and glorious moments for the Space Shuttle. What else? Well, early in the program, the Shuttle performed some military missions. I'll leave it to you to decide their value in the larger scheme of things, but, in relation to other STS duties, they rank pretty high. What other duties? More reptitious "bugs-in-space" bio-experiments, and ISS, International Space Station, work.
Which brings us to the crux of the problem today. The Shuttle, near as this old boy can determine, is in the future to be exclusively devoted to servicing the ISS. It's not to be allowed to do anything else. The last crop of NASA bigwigs decided this was the only thing safe enough for the shuttle to do. Trouble rears its head? Abandon ship for the space station. But that inevitiably brings the question of the worth of the station. It's clear the Shuttle is still dangerous to fly. Is the ISS worthy of such chance taking?
I wish I coud say "yes." The problem is, with the demise of the Soviet Union, the ISS has no clear mission. It was originally developed as a showcase for Soviet - U.S. cooperation. Maybe if we cooperated on the International Space Station, we wouldn't blow up ourselves and everybody else. But reality has intruded.There is no more U.S.S.R., and the ISS is struggling tofind a mission for itself.
Unfortunately, as designed, it's not good for much. Astronomy is impossible on the station itself due to vibration problems. It is not designed for and can't easily be adapted for space construction projects (forget using it as a shipyard for Mars craft). What can it do? Three things only. First, more biological experiments like those done to death over the couse of the Shuttle program, which never seem to lead anywhere. Second, human endurance in space studies. Unfortunately, that ground was well and conclusively covered by Mir. Finally, its big draw for Program Administrators: it provides somewhere for the Shuttle to go.
I don't always agree with the ideas of our current U.S. Administration--that's for sure--but one thing they've got right. It's time to move on from STS. The nation needs a new space transportation system; one designed for a variety of tasks, not something restricted to low earth orbit. Not something for which we have to invent tasks. Certainly, we should be mindful of the Shuttle's accomplishments. And of the sacrifices made by too many of its brave crew members. But time has passed it by--assuming there ever really was a time for the STS design we wound up with. We can let the Shuttle go out on a high note, however. If it's deemed safe to fly, fly it to the HST for one last servicing mission. Seeing the Shuttle end with another meaningless trip to the ISS is just too sad for me to contemplate.
The ISS, like the Shuttle, is a white elephant. NASA has been utterly unable to devise a worthwhile role for it in the Agency's directionless manned space program. It's time for NASA to have the courage to move on. Not only would elimination of the International Space Station provide a way to gracefully retire the Shuttle. It would free up dollars for things like....err..."science," perhaps. ;-)
Of interest to urban astronomers, Rod will be publishing a guide to urban observing (with an emphasis on deep-sky) llater this year.
