The last flight of the Space Shuttle
 

So this is it, the era of the space shuttle is coming to an end. I remember the first start and how fascinated I was. I can't help but feel a little sad - to see it end, without something greater following. Maybe I'm sad for no other reason than that the space shuttle was the only spaceship that ever looked like I thought a spaceship should look, and not just like an oversized tin can. I wonder if and how the next big step in space exploration will come about, current plans of NASA are not really inspiring enthusiasm. Maybe its the turn of the chinese and indians to drive things forward…

I remember watching the first launch when I was a kid. I think the idea was great on paper, but I'm not sure it worked out like NASA wanted. I think they wanted a re-usable craft, which they got, the problem was it was only re-usable every 3 or 4 months. That said, it was a very cool era for NASA, despite the two failed missions.

There's no real reason to build a spacecraft that dedicates massive amounts of hardware and resources to support the environment for humans in space, when you can just use a basic rocket to get the job done.

If we're going to get to Mars, we need a heavy lifter type of spacecraft. Hell, I say dig out the plans for the Apollo rockets. The spaceship to Mars is going to have to be built in space over several years, and actual people are going to have to fly into space to do it. So instead of making one rocket (when one is basically a semi-truck to space that doesn't need human life support mechanisms), make one for the cargo, and one for the people that are going to have to handle the cargo already launched into space.

Both sad and disgraceful. Amazing that successive administrations have screwed this up so badly that we now have no launch vehicles and are dependent on the Russians. At leas the private sector seems to be moving along. There are several companies that expect to have orbiters ready in a few years.

I used to be disappointed, now I'm just jaded and angry - it's just another example of this country's growing inability to resolve its differences for the sake of the future. Nothing gets decided without waffling back and forth on an issue for months or years… and if a decision is indeed finally made, it has a good chance to be rescinded with the following session of congress.

And I'm really disgusted with the people, whether they bureaucrats or laymen, when say "current technology isn't enough to do such and such." I thought that was the point of R&D followed by experimental flights. Complacency for the sake of an easy answer sickens me.

I agree. It's sad to think that it's been 42 years since we put a man on the Moon, and yet we're still not even close to a manned mission to Mars.

I think we're closer to a return to space and maybe a trip to Mars a LOT sooner than a lot of folks think, it's just the major legwork is being done by the USAF (black ops programs) and not NASA. We need a craft that can take off, go into space and land horizontally with reliability, and I'm pretty sure the Air Force has been working on such a craft. I could be wrong, but IMO there's no way in hell the US hasn't been working on a new space vehicle.

I don't think the USAF is working on outer space. They *are* working on planes that can fly in nearly zero atmosphere, but taking that next step isn't exactly a trivial problem.

Yeah, I doubt the USAF is interested in the moon or mars, but flying at nearly zero atmo is attractive. Maybe that technology could be used for NASA as well. A good buddy of mine is leaving NASA next month. Been there for almost 15 years. At one point he was the director of the MER for the shuttle program. When Columbia was lost, he had gotten off about 2 hours before and was watching the decent on NASA TV.

He told me around that time, that US manned spaceflight was coming to an end. As with any govt program, bloat and waste is a problem, but with NASA it was made even worse due to the prestige of the program. There is absolutely no reason to have separate NASA centers in California, Ohio, Alabama, Texas, Florida and the 5 or 7 others (can't remember them all). It's all politics to divide up the pork, but it ends up driving the price of things up as well.

He did some work on what was supposed to be the successor to the shuttle (Constellation), and he told me even then after they'd put a few years into it, that it was 50% at best that it would be completed.

Sad and pathetic.

I know a few people who went down to the cape, JUST to see the last launch. Luckily, it launched on time! One of the few things I regret is not seeing shuttle launch. The best I've seen is an Atlas launch.

I think the cancellation of the constellation was a HUGE waste of taxpayers dollars. This is the problem, having a long term development mucked up by year to year politics in washington. Disgraceful.

Yup, same problem we had with the Super Conducting Super Collieder they started building in the early 90's in Texas. Spent millions on it, then killed it and for good measure destroyed the existing work so that it could never be started again. So now all that great research that could have been done here is being done in Switzerland. Good job politicians!

I wish I'd been to see the shuttle take off.

Oh, I was SO annoyed when that was cancelled, too. grrrrrr!

I guess my point is that having both the USAF and NASA developing similar technology is a waste of money. I just am of the opinion that the Air Force and NASA are working on the next generation of spacecraft.

Well Congress could have demanded that the military and NASA use the same technology, but imagine that, it didn't happen. The military wanted its own playground…

I'd say you're looking at two very different sets of criteria there. Ultimately, USAF is going to want something with guns or cameras. There's no advantage to taking military cargo that high, so it's pretty much guns or cameras. NASA couldn't give two hoots about guns, but is extremely interested in payloads. So, although there could be some synergies between two groups (which probably wouldn't happen, given the military's tendency to keep everything secret), ultimately you can't replace it with a single design group.

Remember that payload sizes can be reduced to fit the launch vehicle, so height is not really an issue. A design that is reconfigurable to add more boosters or stages could meet the needs of all. But that would require cooperation between two agencies that want to preserve their own power structure…

I get what you're saying. I've heard of the possibility of mag-lev launch technology that wouldn't even need rockets. Small payloads, but dirt cheap once built.

http://techfreep.com/magnets-not-roc…into-space.htm

And I'll note the Air Force is responsible for this research. It may not be what NASA wants, but it's going to be what NASA gets, and who knows where the funding is coming from.