NASA Achievements?????

[Andy44]

I would say that NASA's greatest achievment should be to find a way to hand off space exploration to private and commercial sectors. Pave the way and then get out of the way. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be in the cards; NASA remains a self-licking ice cream cone, and all space exploration is considered a government-only affair. STS's failure to make space flight cheap didn't help any.

 

[movieman]

Not included is the "SCE to AUX" event which nearly ended in an abort during early ascent of Apollo 12.

The shuttle doesn't launch in lightning storms, because unlike Apollo/Saturn V, a lightning strike would probably be fatal.

That said, flying through lightning storms is a really bad idea in general, so I can forgive them that one .

 

[Missioncmdr]

The shuttle doesn't launch in lightning storms, because unlike Apollo/Saturn V, a lightning strike would probably be fatal.

That said, flying through lightning storms is a really bad idea in general, so I can forgive them that one .

Remember, the Saturn V was designed to launch during a rainstorm. At the time of Apollo 12's launch, there was no apparent risk of lightning.

 

[tblaxland]

Remember, the Saturn V was designed to launch during a rainstorm. At the time of Apollo 12's launch, there was no apparent risk of lightning.

The big lesson from that was that exhaust plume extended the electrical length of the spacecraft enough that lightning was triggered under conditions that natural lightning would not have occurred. I guess nobody had launched large rockets into a cold front before. "Analysis of Apollo 12 Lightning Incident" - interesting reading.

 

[Moonwalker]

The shuttle doesn't launch in lightning storms, because unlike Apollo/Saturn V, a lightning strike would probably be fatal.

That said, flying through lightning storms is a really bad idea in general, so I can forgive them that one .

On the other hand they fixed the whole problem just by moving one switch as we know

The Saturn V was not that sensitive as STS. The Saturn V was something I call a real rocket. Powerfull, robust and it had a nice design. Today, almost 40 years later, I sit in front of my computer watching this amazing vehicle lifting off and it still amazes me a lot each time. A Space Shuttle launch just is nothing compared to a Saturn V launch, even if I watch the Shuttle launch live.

Also, with the Shuttle we have seen so many, even too much delays. Like Jim lovell said, the whole thing slowed down a lot and we are afraid of accidents. But I even go the extra mile and say that STS on the whole didn't really continue what mankind has started in the 1960's. I'm rather tired to watch the Shuttle lifting off and off just to orbit and orbit the Earth again and again. Year after year, decade after decade. I was born in 1979. I would like to see a progress of manned space flight still in my lifetime.

2010 will be a sad year for a lot of space flight fans for sure. But for me the very last Shuttle missions will be a celebration. Because NASA finally is going to do something really interesting again...

 

[astrosammy]

2010 will be a sad year for a lot of space flight fans for sure. But for me the very last Shuttle missions will be a celebration. Because NASA finally is going to do something really interesting again...

I think I'll cry when I see the last launch, but I also think that it's the beginning of much more interesting things , like you said it. I can't wait to see a moon landing live :speakcool:.

 

[Moonwalker]

I think I'll cry when I see the last launch, but I also think that it's the beginning of much more interesting things , like you said it. I can't wait to see a moon landing live :speakcool:.

Of course I won't be totally callously that moment when the Space Shuttle touched down on the runway and fully stopped for the very last time. I grew up with the Shuttle so it will be a strange feeling. But on the other hand we really have to do something totally different finally and so "Constellation" definately is something which makes me celebrating. I can't imagine watching live coverage from the Moon possibly in HD quality at that time. That would be breath taking...

PS: Actually I wish and wait for the end of STS since 1992 when I became interested in space flight. I just can't wait to see NASA returning to the Moon...

 

[Andy44]

Well, I have a feeling that you're going to be waiting a long time for another moon shot. Constellation isn't exactly sailing smooth right now, and when the bill for the Ares rockets (or whatever rocket they end up with) finally comes due, I think Congress is going to laugh in NASA's face. And that lack of steady funding is why NASA can't seem to get ahead. They had a hard enough time just trying to fund the shuttle, and they had to give up the Saturn family, Skylab 2, and the follow-on space station to do it, and as a result, the full capability of STS was never used.

My crystal ball tells me that we will likely see Orion get aloft one way or the other, since the US won't want to rely on Soyuz for too long, but going to the moon anytime soon is unlikely, especially since projects like this are easy targets in a down economy.

 

[Zatnikitelman]

Not too sure if NASA has much of a manned future if SpaceX can get going. If their numbers are truly what they're expecting, then it just might be cheaper to launch stuff with Dragon and pay the bills, than to fund both the R&D, and everything else that comes with launching a big rocket.

 

[Andy44]

Good, because that's what NASA does on the aeronautical side. Exotic research, not trying to run an airline. I imagine it may be a while before NASA gets to that point, though.

 

[Eagle]

A good thing about the constellation program just occurred to me.

One of the problems with the Space Shuttle program was that NASA kept killing off its successors just before the prototype stage. Because the shuttle was already a sunk cost it would be cheaper to keep using it than develop a new craft.

With the Ares/Orion most of the hardware is not reusable. There is little incentive to continue to build the same thing exactly the same each time. So each Ares rocket will be a little bit (maybe a lot) different.

Also, there may be enough 'shuttle guys' who may demand the development of the next spaceplane (or flyback booster).

 

[Moonwalker]

With the Ares/Orion most of the hardware is not reusable.

Which hardware are you talking about? Only the second stage is not resuable which is by far not most of the hardware. The first stage will be reusable like the STS SRB's while Orion will be reusable up to about 10 times.

There is little incentive to continue to build the same thing exactly the same each time. So each Ares rocket will be a little bit (maybe a lot) different.

Before STS, each manned rocket and spacecraft was build several times which was and still is no problem (just look at Soyuz). This even is a good chance to correct possible design flaws. Anyway, Orion as well as the first stage of Ares will be reusable. The only thing which needs to be build again for each mission is the second stage. This already is the case for the ET of the Space Shuttle which is no problem at all.

Also, there may be enough 'shuttle guys' who may demand the development of the next spaceplane (or flyback booster).

This is not the case, at least not for NASA.

 

[Andy44]

Which hardware are you talking about?

Almost all of it. Only the SRBs will be reusable; and "reusable" means taking the entire thing apart and rebuilding it completely, discarding the nozzle lining among other things. And if I were a betting man, I'd bet that the entire spacecraft, including the CM, will be disposable, especially since they've gone to a water landing. Ares V first stage, and both upper stages, fairings, etc., will all be destroyed.

 

[Moonwalker]

Almost all of it. Only the SRBs will be reusable; and "reusable" means taking the entire thing apart and rebuilding it completely, discarding the nozzle lining among other things. And if I were a betting man, I'd bet that the entire spacecraft, including the CM, will be disposable, especially since they've gone to a water landing. Ares V first stage, and both upper stages, fairings, etc., will all be destroyed.

Orion itself will be reusable too. Of course, only 10 times if at all.

But anyhow, why has a launch vehicle and spacecraft to be resuable on the whole? Because we've seen the Space Shuttle?

 

[Urwumpe]

I think NASA should concentrate on developing a "national space access" instead of running the show. Instead of keeping all stuff inside them, they should create open architectures, which can be bough, build and used by private companies, maybe under open rules by NASA as national space traffic control. Of course, this means NASA could shrink in size. But more jobs could be created outside NASA.

But why should only NASA be able to use capsules developed by tax payers money?

 

[Moonwalker]

But why should only NASA be able to use capsules developed by tax payers money?

Because NASA actually has the achievement to take a leading role in space flight. By listening to its managers and policymakers it is for sure that this is going to continue. And in my humble opinion there is nothing wrong with it that big manned space flight programs are under governmental control. Without strong leadership we won't go to nowhere in space and we wouldn't have seen Apollo, STS and all the other things.

 

[Spicer]

I voted yes, but with some reservations. The Space Shuttle was a wonder, but now is an outdated wonder. It hasn't lived up to the expectations of what it could have been,even though in reality, that was a bit far-fetched.

The ISS is the long-delayed fruition of our post-apollo plans. It is also scaled back from it's initial plan as space station "freedom" or "alpha."

Project Orion will be innovative when it is enacted, but I feel like Nasa will be dropping the ball by not flying their own manned spacecraft for up to 5 years.

Nasa has been and will continue to be the world leader of spaceflight. In that Nasa's achievements are amazing, but there is potential for more.

 

[Moonwalker]

/signed

But I think it is not a problem to stop flying for 5 years. NASA has to develope a completely new system while they still operate the Shuttle fleet which is much more difficult to do than it looks like. It's a real challenge still. This agency just is amazing. Imagine how long it takes to develope a new heavy passenger airplane. NASA still does the job of developing manned spacecraft systems very well.

 

[Urwumpe]

NASA has to develope a completely new system while they still operate the Shuttle fleet which is much more difficult to do than it looks like. It's a real challenge still.

But still, if NASA would have been a commercial company, such a development would have been expected from it, especially since it's survival would really depend on it. SpaceX couldn't afford replicating this weakness.

 

[Andy44]

But still, if NASA would have been a commercial company, such a development would have been expected from it, especially since it's survival would really depend on it. SpaceX couldn't afford replicating this weakness.

+1 to that.