Space Shuttle

New & improved Space Shuttle readies itself for launch:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/s ... efault.stm

despite a few problems:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4677495.stm

 

Surely it either new OR improved, not both. :-?

 

Would you go up in it?

The last one blew up, this one they are patching up as the crew are getting in!

FNG

 

I'd go!

 

Are you sure?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4681327.stm

 

FNG wrote:

Astronauts accept the risks involved. Many have been military or civilian test pilots involved in testing aircraft which is statistically riskier than space flight.
Space flight is not yet an everyday ocurrence with very low risk like air travel yet though you may not be aware of it sometimes repairs are being done on jet airliners as you are boarding or waiting to taxi out. That's accepted procedure when dealing with very complex mechanical machines..they aren't like automobiles but instead need constant attention.

 

I'd still go.

There are some challenging/risky/out of ordinary things I want to do in life. I'd jump at the chance to go up on the shuttle.

Somethings I want to do:
Safari (will go in September)
Sky diving
Cave exploring (can't spell the term)
Mountain climbing

 

its a heap of junk you would think they could come up with something better by now!

lets face it it been around for 25yrs..nothing that it does or any of its missions interests me in the slightest.

why cant they go back to the moon or even have a go at mars?
where's all the fun gone????!!!

 

Well in case you hadn't noticed, space flight isn't just the world's most expensive entertainment, it's actually about science and gathering knowledge about the universe...

 

i know that..but thats just boring..there is no romance about space travel anymore...no more heroes anymore..as the song goes.

isnt it about time we bodly went where no man has gone b4?

 

Cheeky monkey wrote:

Lol..hate to break it to you but there is a difference between reality and cheesy television.

 

you seem to be under the assumption that i am a fan of star trek and the like..which im not...just pointing out the space programme has been treading water in the last cpl of decades thats all.

 

cheeky monkey wrote:

I agree, to a certain extent. No US leader has been willing to commit to the gargantuan effort (not to mention the fantastic cost) of continuing the pace of the space program as it was in the 1960s. The same can be said for the other powers in the world that possess the technological resources to attempt such an endeavor.
A visionary leader is needed first who can challenge the nation to pursue a particular goal. People need specific identifiable goals rather than a broad general mission like explore the universe.
Second there must be a favorable intellectual and philosophical climate in the country to willing to commit to such a goal.
Lastly of course the money/ resources must be available.

Who knows when all the factors will come together again?
Could be decades, could be centuries from now.

 

Gentlemen, allow me to introduce myself, my name is Dave, greetings.
I think we need to make a distinction here between the manned space programme and the unmanned space programme. The unmanned programme is going along better than ever before, look at what has been happening lately, the ongoing Martian twin rovers programme, the ongoing Cassini-Huygens probes to Saturn and it's moon Titan, the Deep Impact comet probe from just a couple of weeks ago, amongst several other recent and ongoing events. There is plenty to be enthusistic about with all this.

Unfortunately, the same can not be said of the manned space programme, and as I see it, the problem is largely due to the lack of a serious competitor for NASA in the current era. Back in the 1950s and 60s there was an arms race and a space race (as we all know!) between the USA and the USSR, and it was driven largely by ego and prestige. Russia was winning in the first few years of this "space race", but when America beat the Russians to the moon, the pace of the whole competition started to slow. The shuttle was developed a few years later largely as a way to save costs and serve more practical purposes in light of the reduced need to compete in the now slower competition.

Today, instead of competition in space, we have co-operation, eg the International Space Station. This co-operation unfortunately has only re-inforced the lethargy and penny pinching attitude which prevails today, and which has seen the manned space programmes become repetitive and un-interesting.

I think the best chance we have for things to pick up again is for China to find it's feet in space (literally). They have indicated loosely defined intentions of establishing a permanent lunar base in the next couple of decades, as well as building a space station of their own. The ideology of the Chinese administration is such that they are more likely to be motivated to stage some big publicity events in space, for the glory of their motherland.

Also, possibly, since Russia is finaly starting to show significant ecenomic improvements now after the chaotic restructuring and rebuilding in it's post communist era, it may have more financial capacity to ramp up it's manned space programme, though I don't know much about this to be honest.

Either way, there may be some renewed competition from one of these quarters in the next decade or so so for NASA to focus on, we can only hope.

Anyway, you might have guessed by now that I have a moderate interest in space exploration, since I am, afterall, stranded here from the planet Vwecnort in the Pleiades constellation, (I crashed my space vehicle in Roswell, New Mexico in 1947 (I'd had a few and was trying to take the back route home from my mate's place on Venus to avoid the cops ) and the American government won't give it back to me, so I am hoping to survive long enough to see humans develope interestallar space tourism, then I can catch a charter cruise back home, I've only got 200 years to live though, so I hope they get their buts moving on this soon.

 

Ah, he came in peace!

The problem with manned space flight is, besides a lack of competition and of the other circumstances Grieg mentions, also the simple lack of a goal. We've been on the moon several times, and sending a man out to orbit the earth for a few days and then return isn't exactly exciting (and it's become common, too). The next nearest object in space (Mars) is so far away, however, that the technology required to reach it will take decades if not more to develop. Most important in this is that if we don't develop much, much faster engines then travel to Mars will take months, something which many human minds simply can't handle.

 

Even good friends have disagreements Imagine been on a 20 year fight and after 5 years you become annoyed with someone's habits or mannerisms, you can't go outside for a breather, well you can but it is not advisable.

 

People have lost interest in space travel since the first moon landing, theres been some moments but the public isn't particularily interested in space travel anymore , well until they try to get to mars , Nasa has complained of underfunding , why don't they sell add space on their space shuttles ! :lol:

 

That's actually a really good idea canadiansuperpatriot!

 

The scientists at NASA says that when they didn't find life 29 years ago, their government fundings dropped as a consequence. Probably because, as you guys said, that the people lost interest. OR maybe because Russia was not a great rival anymore.

 

Sounds like the crew are in danger of having to get out and walk.