Shuttle and ISS were mistakes - Nasa chief

[bemildred]

Washington - Nasa's chief had harsh words for the space shuttle and International Space Station, calling them costly strategic mistakes in an interview out Wednesday that raised doubts about US commitment to getting the shuttle back in flight.

Asked by the daily USA Today if the decision to build a shuttle back in the 1970s, to replace the Apollo programme, was a mistake, Michael Griffin said: "It is now commonly accepted that was not the right path. We are now trying to change the path while doing as little damage as we can. My opinion is that it was" a mistake.

"It was a design which was extremely aggressive and just barely possible. Had the decision been mine, we would not have built the space station we're building in the orbit we're building it in," Griffin added.

The shuttle fleet, which has flown since 1981, has had two major disasters, with the 1986 Challenger explosion and 2003 in-flight breakup of the Columbia, claiming the lives of 14 astronauts. Amid concerns about the aging fleet, President George Bush decided to end flights in 2010.

IOL

[Maple]

1. He's right. They were.

And everyone told them so at the time.

[bananas]

2. "Calvert Fears China May Beat U.S. Astronauts Back To The Moon"

Cool - another space race!
Congress is going to cut the fat out of NASA to make sure we beat China to the moon.

http://aviationnow.ecnext.com/free-scripts/comsite2.pl?page=aw_document&article=CHLU09265

Aerospace Daily & Defense Report

Calvert Fears China May Beat U.S. Astronauts Back To The Moon
09/26/2005 08:10:03 AM
By Jefferson Morris

Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Science subcommittee on space and aeronautics, said he fears that China may beat U.S. astronauts back to the moon if NASA's current schedule target of 2018 isn't accelerated.

"I've been talking to a number of people that are much more knowledgeable about that than I am, some things that maybe are still classified, but they believe that the Chinese are probably on the mark to get there sooner," Calvert told The DAILY.

<snip>

Rohrabacher said he believes that some tough "prioritizing" will have to take place within the NASA budget to carry out the plan. "And prioritizing is a very tough thing to do," he told The DAILY. "Congress is quite often unable and unwilling to do it. And certainly NASA seemed unable and unwilling to do it up until now. However, I've got full confidence that Mike Griffin will be up to the task."

<more>

[phantom power]

3. That was part of what was wrong with NASA to begin with.

The entire organisation was built up as a means to "win the space race." Well, we crossed the finish line first. But then what?

We never had a sufficiently good reason for actually going. We got to the Moon, declared victory over the Communists, and... spent the next 30 years not knowing what to do next.

So, I hope that next time we have something more in mind than just "Beating Red China."

[Maple]

6. The race wasn't the problem

the quitting was.

Think of the advances there could have been by now...

[phantom power]

7. I think they quit because they'd won the race.

Winning the space-race was their raison d'etre. Once it was won, they had no further goals.

In defence of NASA, I would add that this was equally true for the American public, and Congress. Everybody saw the Appollo program, either consciously or unconsciously, as a contest with the Soviets. Once we had beaten them, we lost our direction, because we never had any other goal, except "winning."

I want to see us go to the moon. But I'd like us to stay. Not just plant a flag and go home.

[enlightenment]

10. "everybody saw the program . . ."

Not me!! I was heart-broken when they came abandoned Apollo in exchange for the flying bus.
I don't disagree with your assessment -- but not everybody felt it was just a contest . . .

[phantom power]

11. That's a good point. I guess I was a true believer, too.

Still am, I suppose, although I now wonder if we'll ever really leave earth. I hope so.

[enlightenment]

13. I don't think it will be the US, but I am hopeful that another nation

-- or nations working together (what a concept) will manage it sooner rather than later.
I understand all the reasons why we should "concentrate on our own planet" but I believe it is possible. Of course, we might have to reconsider how we apportion our money -- maybe start with stop the freakin' war?

[Johonny]

4. But

returning to the moon and going to Mars are just as big a mistake.

[Maple]

5. They

are only the beginning.

It's time to leave the nursery.

[Johonny]

8. Not really

There is no point to going to Mars or the moon. What we learned from Apollo is there is no reason to go to the Moon. The one thing the shuttle and space stations have taught us is it's hard work to survive in space for a long space mission. It's even harder on the health. Our robots will explore the solar system and beyond. We aren't going anywhere.

[bemildred]

9. FWIW, the whole "man in space" deal was premature.

Far more bang for the buck was to be had with unmanned
missions. And this does not means I oppose man in space,
I like that idea a lot. But you gotta walk before you
run, and knowledge is power, and the unmanned missions
have been able to go farther and cheaper than anything
with humans on board.

[NNadir]

12. The one big achievement of the shuttle program was the Hubble.

For my money, the Hubble may have been the single most thrilling achievement of the entire space program.

I am not a big fan of the human presence in space, and I have always felt that the ISS was silly. I also think that there were possibly other, maybe even better, ways to do a space telescope. But still, the Hubble is a part of NASA history of which the entire human race should be proud and for which the entire human race should be grateful.

It has truly added a new dimension to our vision.