Experts against Space Shuttle Program


Recommended Posts

Experts Critisize the Space shuttle mission to International Space Station, say it is a Waste of time, Money (Hundred Billions!!!), and resource, not to mention endanger human lives.

They say NASA is doing it just to stay alive... the Best thing NASA has done are Non-human projects like Space Hubble, satellites, and Mars Rover, etc...

Just From NBC Nightly News, if anyone was also watching :)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8575088/

Edited by fred666
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schoolkids rediscover the wonders of space

In Cape Canaveral?s back yard, children look forward to the launch

b>

TITUSVILLE, Fla. - In Titusville, where the space program is both shrine and lifeblood, the Columbia disaster was a mortal blow, especially at Apollo Elementary School, where the children were devastated.

"The day when the Columbia was destroyed tore into all our hearts," reads Corey Tucci from her essay.

Here, where they honor Project Mercury and all the space shots, the mood has changed. The depression of two years ago is now giving away to growing excitement.

"For us to progress, we need to take a chance," says Patty Reisiger, who works as a receptionist at Apollo Elementary. "And I think getting back into the space program is going to be a good thing."

Nowadays at Apollo Elementary, students write essays about venturing into the unknown.

"Saturn is the planet I would most like to visit," reads 11-year-old Logan Stokely from his essay.

While the horror of Columbia has not been erased, scars are starting to heal.

"I'll be hoping it's not another Columbia incident," says 11-year-old Jesse Miller.

"Now it's even more safe to go," says Corey Tucci.

"I think they've improved it," adds Logan Stokely.

Convening over homemade cobbler, the older generation here has also come to terms with Columbia.

"Just like any other tragedy, you get by it," says Titusville Fire Department Battalion Commander Dave Again. "You realize a lot of people lost a lot of loved ones, but you also realize that's part of the space program."

Titusville knows the stakes are very high.

"If something happens to the shuttle on this one, it would be mistakenly shut down," says local businessman Tom Arceneaux. "Or [NASA would] really back off the program."

But it's a risk, Titusville agrees, worth taking.

"You have to take a chance in life, to advance," says cardiologist Naresh Mody. "So there is a risk in anything we do. If we would never take a risk, we would never be in this country what we are."

And Titusville would never be the community it wants to be again.

source

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Alex Roland is a space policy expert at Duke University. He says the shuttle's problems began more than 35 years ago when it was first designed to be an inexpensive reusable space vehicle.

"There is no question in my mind that it would be best policy to say forget it," says Roland. "The economic profile for it wasn't working out at all even before it flew." 

:sleep: More quacks out to kill scientific progress. If these "experts" were genuinely interested in criticizing science that doesn't pay, they'd be off targetting stuff like this:

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=...line-news_rss20

These guys are more like vultures, trying to pick off manned space exploration because there has been a setback.

Edited by Relativity_17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maby if our government would give more funding to nasa, they could develop a better alternative to the shuttle. Insted, they waste it on war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still wanna know what these "experts" are experts at? :huh:

586233239[/snapback]

Exactly. I always considered the personnel at NASA the experts of the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe we are in 2005 and any new kind of space vehicule has been made it, the shuttle have over 20 years, damn where is the Space technology?? the same bull**** :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still wanna know what these "experts" are experts at? :huh:

586233239[/snapback]

They all are PhDs in BS with emphasis on Financial Scandals and Social Life Styles Affairs... :devil: :laugh: :rofl: :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They all are PhDs in BS with emphasis on Financial Scandals and Social Life Styles Affairs...?:devil::?:laugh:h::rofl:fl::p :p

586233285[/snapback]

[/quoPlHatDegrees

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:alien: We so need a new space shuttle or better yet a new NASA perhaps the corporate sector should get into space

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% Bulls*it. I was watching CNN back when the shuttle was suppose to launch and they were going over all the stuff we use today that was invented for the Space program. I wish I could remember a few. If we stopped the shuttle, who knows what future things we could miss out on. :angry:

Update: I found a kid's link for the all the stuff that came from the space program. http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/en/kids/spinoffs2.shtml

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remembered something about a boeigh technology that will replace the shuttle, I don't remember the name, it was a prototype, guys can u refresh my mind, :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think manned space exploration is wonderful. Space is such a mysterious place. We can barely get off our planet, but someday things should be a lot more intresting. It is a shame though when we send up some of the brightest and most talented scientists, then they have a disaster. They know what they are getting into though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:alien:  We so need a new space shuttle or better yet a new NASA perhaps the corporate sector should get into space

586233315[/snapback]

something like this?

M

S

NASA

rocket science is better with the butterfly... :happy: :laugh: :rofl: :p ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

something like this?

M

S

NASA

rocket science is better with the butterfly...  :happy:  :laugh:  :rofl:  :p  ;)

586233356[/snapback]

damn, my bad, I thought it was from boeign :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how can you expect them to replace the shuttle when they can't even get manned shuttles it to the moon!

You all know it was a sham!

586233351[/snapback]

you know, there is an Area 51 section on neowin. right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it wasn't for exploration period humanity wouldn't be where it is now. So i say BAH! to those losers

586214896[/snapback]

They're against the shuttle program, not space exploration and science, so I say BAH! to people not reading articles.

They're giving examples of exploring space that doesn't include this behemoth draining NASA's funding like a deep wound.

"Basically, it will be America stepping backwards out of space," says astronaut Reilly.

No, it will be shuttles stepping out of the space program. America is currently driving around on Mars, taking high quality photos and making detailed soil and atmospheric analysis; these are examples of technology that work the way it should, and surprise, the shuttle isn't involved. No shuttles were involved in placing people on the Moon and taking them back either. We just crashed into a comet to get samples of its composition; no shuttles as far as I can see. And so on.

I agree with them, because the space shuttles build on pretty ancient technology in space science, and it's these huge, bulky, complex spacecraft that are not really good long term solutions, for their maintenance cost and complexity that leads to a high likelyhood of failure. There's no wonder they've had a very high ratio of disasters with them before, and just weeks ago had another problem causing delays. This is a crappy design that worked in the space race but not really well over several decades, put simply. They're using technology from the sixties in 2005.

The only reason I can see to use shuttles are in emergency missions, like if we'd need emergency repairs on Hubble. But for science? I really don't feel like that's the best use of their money.

BUT... NASA already knows this too, and I'm looking forward to their Crew Exploration Vehicle to succeed this dangerous and pricey design. Sure, space exploration will always be on the edge of what we can do, so it'll keep being higher risks involved than going on a ride with a car, but there are plenty of room for improvement.

From that link, a snippet of Bush's speech about it:

"Our second goal is to develop and test a new spacecraft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle, by 2008, and to conduct the first manned mission no later than 2014. The Crew Exploration Vehicle will be capable of ferrying astronauts and scientists to the Space Station after the shuttle is retired. But the main purpose of this spacecraft will be to carry astronauts beyond our orbit to other worlds. This will be the first spacecraft of its kind since the Apollo Command Module."
Edited by Jugalator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.