Science and Society

While I don't mind us getting help from the Russians in getting to ISS, I do have a problem in taking a step backward. We've been using the Space Shuttles for over 20 years now. They've worked great. Yes they are aging, but why not build a new fleet? It must be cheaper to build a newer, and vastly updated fleet of shuttles than to completely design a new orbital vehicle. Besides that, NASA had a replacement for the Shuttles in the works throughout the '90s if I'm not mistaken. But when Bush got into office he cut some of NASA's funding. This forced NASA to drop that project in whatever state of development it was in. So my suggestion is this, we rebuild a shuttle fleet of say, four shuttles. We use them while a new orbital platform can be designed, even possibly design it to be an interplanetary vehicle. Or, use the newly built shuttles to ferry materials into orbit, for the costruction of an interplanetary vehicle. That way, you don't have to worry about the fuel to get every thing up in one shot. It might even save money too, but I don't know. One thing is sure though, while the Soyuz is reliable, having been flown since 1966, it is old technology. We have the skills, knowledge, and manpower to build far better spacecraft than even the shuttles. We could even colaborate with all other countries on a vehicle, that way, we'd all be using the same vehicle, and it could be used as a world unifying project.

rocket propulsion is too expensive and dangerous when there are other alternatives that make more sense and cost less too.

space elevator(s) will be the next big thing, once perfected there will be more and more space elevators and that will be the end of that problem more or less.

there is also maglev / rail propulsion technology that can/will eventually be able to launch vehicles pretty far up near the verge of space with much less rocket fuel and much less danger as well.

basically anything that is fossil fuel fueled is on the way out folks, get used to it.

These Russians are the people and spacecraft that we will be paying hundreds of millions of dollars in the next 5 years to ferry our crewmembers to and from the station. When our under-funded program gets no notice from the White House or those in Congress, this is what happens. The cancellation of a fleet of working vehicles that function and a 4-6 year bracket of nothing until NASA can direct money to the new project and build it up. We will be second fiddle to Russia and China, who will be laughing all the way to the Moon, and perhaps Mars. Our politicians and the American people should be ashamed for their inaction.

In less than 2 years, the USA will be at the mercy of these Russians and their 1960's technology to get our payloads into space. All because this country is too broke to fund newer, more advanced Space Shuttles. And if Obama gets in, we will be even further behind as he cuts the NASA budget to fund his education plans.

NASA did have a new shuttle being developed called "VentureStar" back in the late 90s by Lockheed Martin with the test vehicle called the X33. It was to be a "One Stage to Orbit" vehicle that would be totally reusable. No external tank that sheds foam (cause of loss of Columbia) or solid rocket boosters (cause off loss of Challenger). The program was scrapped due to design challenges with the fuel tanks and possibly other factors. The new NASA project, the Constellation program, should be ready for manned flights by 2014, so the US will still be in the lead in manned space fight. The program is designed to go to the ISS, the moon, or other destinations in the solar system. I have always thought of the Soyuz as a good backup to the shuttle and the future Orion spacecraft, but with the rumors of this near catastrophic re-entry, plus the other re-entry issues with the spacecraft, I hope that the Orion is put into service as soon as possible or that the Russians fix these issues and not sweep them under the rug. Finally, isn't it strange though that someone had to leak this information in order to get NASA and Roscosomos (Russian Federal Space Agency) to respond.

I think we need to consider flying the shuttles until at least 2012, maybe longer. I don't think the US can afford a large gap between the shuttles and their replacement and after 2010, it's looks like there will still be work that can be done that only the shuttles can do.

Any sane person, operative word being sane, understands the volumes of proof proving the manned Moon landings ocurred. Please let's don't start fictional and "nitwittery" containing debates here on a discussion with REAL discussion of true events.

The Soyuz, is long in the tooth but as is the Shuttle, constantly upgraded. The news of guidance system malfunctions have been ongoing and plaguing for some time now and news of them are not the result of any "leak".
Unless and until OUR politicians and the American people wake up and fund OUR space program properly it will continue to decline. We will become dependant upon the Russians and pour hundreds of millions of $ into their economy instead of our own because of the short sightedness of our politicos. This will be the plan when, not if the Shuttle fleet is retired in 2010. We need to wake up Washington!

I've always been worried that the Soyuz capsules were no safer (and in fact probably less safe) than the shuttle system. We should definitely push Congress to continue having a working shuttle system until the Orion system gets on line. At least 1-2 launches a year to keep the shuttle expertise alive and at the Cape.