• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Space Shuttle Flies Today

BenBurch said:
An aircraft can last forever with enough maintenance. I met a B-52 pilot who was flying the same plane his great-grandfather flew at the end of his career
Click to expand...

The shuttle is not a mass-produced aircraft. Each flight is still essentially an experiment.

I think spacecraft, including the shuttle, are cool, but really...

ugh. :p
 
Vorticity said:
I just watched the launch. It seemed to go well.
Click to expand...
Yes; but for what purpose? IIRC it will double the volume in which the astronauts will do nothing useful.

Moreover, the shuttle may be in bad shape for re-entry. They say they have survived that problem before; but, as Feynman observed, that is like surviving Russian Roulette ...


The astronaut program is an astonishingly expensive and pointless stunt that should be canceled.
 
Retire Buck Rogers

JJM said:
... The astronaut program is an astonishingly expensive and pointless stunt that should be canceled.
Click to expand...

Or at least cut back; I think that some manned repair missions will always be necessary.

But in the main, I agree. Robotic exploration is the right direction, and not as unromantic as it sounds. Heck, you can feel a lot of affection for a little toy tractor crawling around Mars -- we all do.

ETA: They're up there in harm's way, and I'm down here sitting in a chair. Good luck to all of them, and a safe return.
 
Last edited:
sackett said:
Or at least cut back; I think that some manned repair missions will always be necessary.

But in the main, I agree. Robotic exploration is the right direction, and not as unromantic as it sounds. Heck, you can feel a lot of affection for a little toy tractor crawling around Mars -- we all do.
Click to expand...

Nothing beats having a human there with imediate problem solving abilities. It takes the Mars rovers a week to do what a man can do in a few hours.

Manned spaceflight is a logistical nightmare, but much can be learned in the endevour.
 
uruk said:
Nothing beats having a human there with imediate problem solving abilities. It takes the Mars rovers a week to do what a man can do in a few hours.

Manned spaceflight is a logistical nightmare, but much can be learned in the endevour.
Click to expand...

True; but if knowledge can be won without risking anybody's life, then a slower return is acceptable. Recall the horror and grief you felt -- and I know you did -- when the shuttles disintegrated.

Mind you, I'd be gung-ho as hell for manned space flight using more developed (= safer) propulsion and life-support technologies. And those better technologies can be developed without a manned space program.

I believe all I'm saying is, Take it slow, fellers. Space will be there.
 
sackett said:
True; but if knowledge can be won without risking anybody's life, then a slower return is acceptable. Recall the horror and grief you felt -- and I know you did -- when the shuttles disintegrated.

Mind you, I'd be gung-ho as hell for manned space flight using more developed (= safer) propulsion and life-support technologies. And those better technologies can be developed without a manned space program.

I believe all I'm saying is, Take it slow, fellers. Space will be there.
Click to expand...

How slow is slow enough?
We made a big dash to the moon in the 60s/70s. We know it can be done and safely. We did it succesfully seven times, and then nothing for thrity years.
I know Apollo was a politcal stunt. But right when real scince was being done with Apollo, the program was shut down. Apollo 17 was the first mission to carry and actual scientist. A geologist named Harrison J. Schmitt.

We've just been poking our toes onto the porch for the last 10 years.

Risk to life is everywhere. Loss of life is to be expected in any great endevour. People die building skyscrapers and bridges, Heck you risk getting killed in a car crash everytime you go to work in the morning.
How many people are killed going to work every year as compared to the manned space program?

And I think the choice of risk should be left up to the ones who want to take it.

I agree that the space shuttle was and is a dangerous boondoggle. I think the new system (orion) we are planning to use is safer. It is based on technology and designs we already know and tested.

I can see propulsion technology being developed without a manned program As it is being done right now. The only way to develop life support systems and it make it safer to travel in space is by going forward with the manned programs. They are going to have to be tested in space anyway. You can design and build a boat on land but its going to have to put in water to test.

Anyhoo. The great manned push into space is not going to be for science anyway. It going to be done by private companies and the tourisim industry. What do you think the X-prize is all about.
 
Last edited:
BenBurch said:
The late James Van Allen's arguments pretty much lay to rest the need for humans in space. If we go, it will be for ADVENTURE, not science.
Click to expand...

Like I said. Corporations and the tourist industry will be the main impetus for man being in space.

Space probes can do it safer and cheaper, but not better.
 
There's science up yonder...bet Allen was right...it's mostly adventure.

And other things.
 
sackett said:
Space will be there.
Click to expand...

So will scientific discovery. This should not be a zero-sum game in the sense that one or the other should be forbidden to exist. Different people have different goals.

Scientists may want grants for their planetary research. Spaceflight propulsion researchers also want grants, too, you know...
 
JJM said:
Yes; but for what purpose? IIRC it will double the volume in which the astronauts will do nothing useful.

Moreover, the shuttle may be in bad shape for re-entry. They say they have survived that problem before; but, as Feynman observed, that is like surviving Russian Roulette ...


The astronaut program is an astonishingly expensive and pointless stunt that should be canceled.
Click to expand...

And so what do you think astronauts are doing up there?

Do you think we should never go up there?
 
uruk said:
Nothing beats having a human there with imediate problem solving abilities. It takes the Mars rovers a week to do what a man can do in a few hours.

Manned spaceflight is a logistical nightmare, but much can be learned in the endevour.
Click to expand...
You are imagining an ideal that does not exist.

A person on Mars cannot stray far from a shelter from a Solar storm (from which our magnetosphere protects us). Moreover, when doing exploratory research, one cannot know what supplies one needs from day-to-day. The cost of launching anything into space limits the supplies they will have. In your scenario, imagine a chemist on Mars who needs a sample of iridium that is not at hand.

The "humans can solve problems on the spot" is a fantasy belied by scientific experience.

The only thing we have learned from manned-flight is how to exist in space, and we don't really need to know how to do that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom