Russia and the ISS
Discussion
It would probably be quicker to build a new one from scratch !
Even when it was still flying NASA were having problems sourcing spares for some items e.g. it's 1980s era flight computers - there are stories of them buying used parts off ebay to keep the fleet operating !
Now, 3 years after its last flight, the orbiters have all been decommissioned and had a lot of equipment stripped out to make them safe for museum exhibition. Spare parts have been sold off or scrapped. Their main engines are in the process of being adapted for use on the SLS, and the Boeing 747 Carrier has also been turned into a museum exhibit and will never fly again. The mobile launchers and launch pads have been converted for SLS or other launchers. Even the tooling used to make the external tanks has been stripped out in order to prepare for the production of SLS core stages.
So my wild guess would be a minimum of 10 years to get a flyable shuttle, at the expense of halting any work on the next generation launcher, and reversing a lot of the work already done for it.
And even then it would be just as dangerous to fly as the old one was, and will still only lift 24 tonnes to low orbit ( lower than the current ISS orbit - when the shuttle was flying ISS orbited lower so it could reach it, at the expense of requiring more frequent boosts due to higher drag ) compared to the 70+ tonnes of the first iteration of the SLS which is expected to fly in 3 or 4 years time.
Even when it was still flying NASA were having problems sourcing spares for some items e.g. it's 1980s era flight computers - there are stories of them buying used parts off ebay to keep the fleet operating !
Now, 3 years after its last flight, the orbiters have all been decommissioned and had a lot of equipment stripped out to make them safe for museum exhibition. Spare parts have been sold off or scrapped. Their main engines are in the process of being adapted for use on the SLS, and the Boeing 747 Carrier has also been turned into a museum exhibit and will never fly again. The mobile launchers and launch pads have been converted for SLS or other launchers. Even the tooling used to make the external tanks has been stripped out in order to prepare for the production of SLS core stages.
So my wild guess would be a minimum of 10 years to get a flyable shuttle, at the expense of halting any work on the next generation launcher, and reversing a lot of the work already done for it.
And even then it would be just as dangerous to fly as the old one was, and will still only lift 24 tonnes to low orbit ( lower than the current ISS orbit - when the shuttle was flying ISS orbited lower so it could reach it, at the expense of requiring more frequent boosts due to higher drag ) compared to the 70+ tonnes of the first iteration of the SLS which is expected to fly in 3 or 4 years time.
Eric Mc said:
That is me being optimistic. It could be closer to ten years.
NASA are ploughing on (slowly) with their Orion spacecraft.
Falcon have already test flown their Dragon capsule which eventually will be man rated - so MAY be flown manned by 2017.
The Dream Chaser mini shuttle is undergoing glide tests although these did not get off to a great start when the undercarriage collapsed on landing after its first glide test back in October.
Is it me, or does 'Orion' and 'spacecraft' bring up.... unfortunate connotations?NASA are ploughing on (slowly) with their Orion spacecraft.
Falcon have already test flown their Dragon capsule which eventually will be man rated - so MAY be flown manned by 2017.
The Dream Chaser mini shuttle is undergoing glide tests although these did not get off to a great start when the undercarriage collapsed on landing after its first glide test back in October.
( source)
Anywany, give the guys from kerbal space program a bell, they same to know their stuff
my opinion of the space shuttle has changed over the years
in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
Russian Rocket said:
my opinion of the space shuttle has changed over the years
in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
I think the embarrassment of having to rely on Russian engines and the impact that is now having will see a very big sea change with NASA and how it is funded with respect to domestic capability. Culturally the US like to be very self sufficient and having this proved otherwise on the world wide stage will rattle a few cages.in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
Russian Rocket said:
my opinion of the space shuttle has changed over the years
in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
Very much in line with my view too.in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
rhinochopig said:
Russian Rocket said:
my opinion of the space shuttle has changed over the years
in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
I think the embarrassment of having to rely on Russian engines and the impact that is now having will see a very big sea change with NASA and how it is funded with respect to domestic capability. Culturally the US like to be very self sufficient and having this proved otherwise on the world wide stage will rattle a few cages.in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
Russian Rocket said:
my opinion of the space shuttle has changed over the years
in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
I'd just like to add a "BUT" however:in the 80's I was an awestruck teenager thought it was cool, it was going to be cheep space flight with a launch every couple weeks and the way forward.
I now think it was a complete bodge job designed by a committee and doomed to failure. it turned out to be very expensive and unreliable, crappy payload, generally piss poor performance, about 2% catastrophic failure rate
I am sure it was just a matter time before they lost another one and that there was a collective sigh of relief when it retired.
Had nasa put the money into developing the Saturn rocket (like Russia continues Soyuz) then spaceflight would be far more advanced than it is. America cant even put a man into space at the moment Nasas next planned manned mission is at 7 years away
A lot Americans are very proud of it, I have seen it described as the most advanced machine ever built. I think as time makes the memory less painful it will be remembered in darker terms
Often in life, one has to perhaps make a mistake first to find a better way. With hindsight, the STS was too ambitious for the time, but over the last 30 years it HAS delivered some amazing results to all fields of science. In conjunction, we have learnt a lot about how to design, develop, and crucially, utilize a space transport system that has to work outside of "cold war" Politics and Financials(see note). Because we DID build the STS, we can't state "we would be more advanced if we hadn't" we simply don't know that. The important thing is to take the lessons learned from that program, both good and bad, and move forward to the next program without prejudice!
(Note: I don't think anyone would argue, that without the cold war, Apollo would most likely have never occurred)
I think Apollo was on the drawings before the Kennedy speech. That just hurried it up and gave it the loot to happen sooner rather than later.
I don't think anyone denys what they achieved with it, but what could they have done with a proper heavy lift. Imagine one that can reach the Hubble with ease and not worry about having a spare shuttle on the pad.
I don't think anyone denys what they achieved with it, but what could they have done with a proper heavy lift. Imagine one that can reach the Hubble with ease and not worry about having a spare shuttle on the pad.
Apollo was most definitely on the drawing board before Kennedy's 1961 speech. In fact, North American had already won the contract for the Command/Service Module and were well on their way to designing what would eventually be described as the Block 1 Spacecraft.
At roughly the same time, Von Braun's US Army team at Huntsville had already started preliminary work on the Saturn series of boosters and had transferred to NASA by the end of 1958.
HOWEVER, there is no doubt that even this early work would not have been done without the pressure of the Soviet Union's early successes. The foundation of NASA itself and Project Mercury were a direct response to Sputnik.
Originally, Apollo was seen as a follow on to Mercury. Essentially, it was envisaged as a more sophisticated spacecraft that would allow longer periods in orbit (up to two weeks) with possible lunar orbit capability.
So, by May 1961, a lot of the ground work had already been set in place and it was this initial work which allowed Kennedy's redefined Apollo to get a running start.
At roughly the same time, Von Braun's US Army team at Huntsville had already started preliminary work on the Saturn series of boosters and had transferred to NASA by the end of 1958.
HOWEVER, there is no doubt that even this early work would not have been done without the pressure of the Soviet Union's early successes. The foundation of NASA itself and Project Mercury were a direct response to Sputnik.
Originally, Apollo was seen as a follow on to Mercury. Essentially, it was envisaged as a more sophisticated spacecraft that would allow longer periods in orbit (up to two weeks) with possible lunar orbit capability.
So, by May 1961, a lot of the ground work had already been set in place and it was this initial work which allowed Kennedy's redefined Apollo to get a running start.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff