Originally posted by Kurt
I've never claimed to have any expert pwnage Deb... You don't see me in here saying I've got better ideas or saying that this vehicle or that vehicle does the job better than some other vehicle...
My posts have only been making a couple simple points... Space is hard, expensive and deadly... And that Nasa can take us anywhere if the government will give them the money. Lastly that private commercial space flight can only be viable if the FAA can figure out a way to regulate it without making it impossible. The FAA has too many problems and budget concerns as it is. I don't think the FAA will do well in the role of space flight controller.
So commercial space travel will only work if the FAA finds a way to REGULATE it? What part of regulation makes it physically possible?
When I read your post earlier, I was left with the impression that you were a shuttle fanboy who felt that it was unpatriotic to discuss shortcomings of the vehicle design or the medusalike bureaucracy that has grown at NASA that has the following priorities:
1. Stay employed.
2. Produce technical papers.
3. Produce space artwork.
...
...
...
124. Keep the vending machines at Goddard stocked.
125. Make sure all the flourescent lights in the administration building are working.
126. Fly people to space occasionally.
While I'm glad to see 126 makes it to the list, I'm sure that if they could keep their funding without it, they'd be satisfied. They've made a parody of the phrase 'risk averse'.
Russia has launched roughly the same number of Soyuz missions. 4 fatalities. The shuttle: 14.
The Soyuz costs 1/10th that of a shuttle launch, and THAT assumes the $500 million shuttle launch cost from a 'standard' year. The last couple launches (including today) have been in the multi-billion dollar range each.
Shuttle carries cargo? Fine, the Russians carry roughly the same amount of cargo to orbit with the Proton boosters, unmanned launchers with an excellent record. Shuttle can use crew to dock the cargo with robot arm? Fine, the russians developed automated docking technology in the 70s and have developed it since to the current KORS one that the ESA has licensed for their ATP cargo ship. Shuttle can carry 6-7 people? Fine, TWO soyuz launches can carry 6 people and still cost 1/5th the amount of a shuttle launch.
Kurt, your enthusiasm is fine. I'm a long time shuttle follower, but I have a realistic view about the limitations of the design, the problems with the organization running it, and the costs of continuing to use it. I'm ALSO aware of problems with the X-33/Venturestar programs that you appear not to be and know why they were cancelled. The short version? Expensive new technology that wasn't performing as expected (composite cryotanks), contractor that was taking NASA for a ride (Lockmart), and unclear mission (X-33 demonstrator=teh suck, in technical terms).
Be enthusiastic, I am. Support our astronauts, I will. Cheer you head off when the shuttle launches today, I'll be shouting along with you.
But when the fireworks are over, don't give NASA any blank checks. Scrutinize your investment and decide where the money should go.
