where does the shuttle belong? hou or ny

[Avatard]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Space.

JC

Correct answer.

Lift vehicles should be replaced, orbiters should continue to be used.

Original Space Shuttle plans were for a space plane lift vehicle, instead of the oxygen/aluminum "bomb" trio they ended up strapping it to for launch (keeping a straight face when the first one blew up must have been hard).

Put the damn thing on a reusable lift vehicle, as it should have been deployed in the first place, and it will continue to be a lower cost sustainable workhorse for years to come.

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by Avatard

Correct answer.

Lift vehicles should be replaced, orbiters should continue to be used.

Original Space Shuttle plans were for a space plane lift vehicle, instead of the oxygen/aluminum "bomb" trio they ended up strapping it to for launch (keeping a straight face when the first one blew up must have been hard).

Put the damn thing on a reusable lift vehicle, as it should have been deployed in the first place, and it will continue to be a lower cost sustainable workhorse for years to come.

But then the launch wouldn't be as much of an "ooooh, ahhhh" event. The American public only go for flashy. Flashy = Publicity. Publicity = Money. Sad that something can't be considered useful and therefore fundable for it's own sake...

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Avatard

Correct answer.

Lift vehicles should be replaced, orbiters should continue to be used.

Original Space Shuttle plans were for a space plane lift vehicle, instead of the oxygen/aluminum "bomb" trio they ended up strapping it to for launch (keeping a straight face when the first one blew up must have been hard).

Put the damn thing on a reusable lift vehicle, as it should have been deployed in the first place, and it will continue to be a lower cost sustainable workhorse for years to come.

They didn't go with the space plane lift vehicle due to complexity and cost. Even if they had gone that direction it still would have ended up being a rocket fuel "bomb" strapped to the shuttle, only one designed to go primarily horizontal rather than vertical. It would have used jet engines to get it to the right altitude and speed to fire its rockets, then used the rockets to get to the right altitude and speed to jettison the shuttle. There would be nothing "lower cost" about designing and building some today.

[Avatard]

I politely disagree.

Replacing the lift vehicle means undertaking a project to make an advanced lift aircraft, not replace an entire spacecraft program (read: mo' money).

You can talk some fucking shit, boy, but you can't convince me that some lift planes are gonna cost more than replacing an entire fucking space program.

[OneSickPsycho]

New York, we have a problem.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Avatard

I politely disagree.

Replacing the lift vehicle means undertaking a project to make an advanced lift aircraft, not replace an entire spacecraft program (read: mo' money).

You can talk some fucking shit, boy, but you can't convince me that some lift planes are gonna cost more than replacing an entire fucking space program.

What do you mean? We aren't replacing the entire space program. We will be using commercial launch services and Russian rockets, both of which already exist, to replace the shuttle which is essentially an SUV to low earth orbit.

What you are talking about is not only replacing that with a non-existent vehicle, but a vehicle that practically every space program has examined and subsequently discarded as too complex and expensive. I "can talk some fucking shit, boy" because I am backed up by every substantial space program on the planet.

[Avatard]

I don't think a lift plane is impossible. I think the government has to look to the private companies, and take bids on designs, though, and not try and do it "in house" with NASA.

That FO SHO ain't gonna fly [pun intended].

[goof2]

Nobody has said it is impossible, just more complex and expensive when compared to other options.

ETA: Also, neither Apollo or the Shuttle were built "in house" by NASA. They both went through a process similar to what you describe.

[anthonyk]

I never really understood the whole lift plane idea. You're gonna build a reusable vehicle with a sizeable payload capacity so it can ferry another reusable vehicle with a (relatively) crappy payload capacity most of the way up to orbit. (Actually, since the shuttle orbiter doesn't have tanks for its main engines, you'd have to get it all the way up to orbit, I'm guessing.)



Take the glider prop off the back, and fly that lift plane all the way up to orbit with something useful on its back.

[Avatard]

Actually, a proper lift plane could take an orbiter most of the way up, and smaller external Ox tanks could make the boost into orbit without having to use any aluminum "Roman Candles". Remember, the orbiter has engines.