Their decision about the future of the shuttle project may include a re-examination of the shuttle's original role and whether they have lived up to expectations
The space shuttle Atlantis was supposed to move this week, so the launch is in preparation for a launch to the International Space Station at the beginning of March. Instead, NASA must now decide when, if ever, the grounded fleet will take off again.
Since last Saturday, when Columbia disintegrated during its return to the atmosphere with seven astronauts on board, committees including engineers, generals, senators and more, began a long and tedious process of trying to find what went wrong and what needs to be done next.
Their decision about the future of the shuttle project may include a re-examination of the shuttle's original role and whether they have lived up to expectations.
Will NASA ground the fleet for more than two years as it did after the Challenger disaster in 1986? You probably won't, given that the International Space Station is currently home to three humans and requires frequent shuttle visits.
"We are still flying into space. We have a crew in orbit now, and we have a space station in orbit and they deserve our utmost attention to ensure they have a productive and safe mission." says Bob Cabana, director of flight crews at NASA.
Both the Americans and the Russians have tons of food, fuel, air and supplies that will last them until June, three months longer than they planned to live in orbit at an altitude of 360 km in a chain of components linked together by metal sausages.
If the fleet has to be grounded for months at a time, another vehicle will be needed to replace the shuttle crew, a spartan, reliable craft built by the Russians who are on rotation to assist.
The Apollo program that helped the Americans overtake the Soviet Union to claim first prize in the space race ensured a safe round-trip flight to the moon, and led to the development of engineering concepts used to build the shuttle. Space shuttles still take off from the same launch pads from which the Apollo spacecraft took off in the XNUMXs and XNUMXs. The problem is, say critics, that the technology of the ferries is outdated, unsafe and expensive. The computers are powered by old chips and software. The engines have many more moving parts than the new rocket engines, and the tiles that provide thermal insulation do not include advanced materials that have been discovered so far.
The shuttle is based on outdated technology that has long been out of use in the fields, says Republican Senator James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, former chairman of the Senate Science and Space Committee. "We are simulating to see how we will continue to explore space, said Sensenbrenner.
NASA initially envisioned the shuttle as a reusable launch vehicle that might provide an inexpensive way to get satellites into orbit. Actual reality and cost made this assumption look wrong.
The initial numbers NASA gave the White House were that the shuttle would cost about $5.5 million to launch and the rate of launches would be between 50 and 60 per year, said John Logsdon, director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. Instead, the cost was $400-500 million per launch, just 5-8 launches at a time, Logsdon said. Any way you look at it, that's a lot of money.
After Columbia became the first space shuttle in 1981, shuttle crews became de facto messengers for a mission disposable rockets could perform at the same price or even cheaper and without endangering humans.
The shuttle needed additional justification and it found it at the space station. A dream started in the USA in the 15s and finally won the support of XNUMX countries - has become an expensive project, and the most grandiose engineering project ever.
The first crew did not board the station until 2000 and in the meantime NASA astronauts performed scientific missions. In recent years, most shuttle crews have flown huge chunks of metal and attached them to the space station, but the fatal Columbia mission was a throwback - to the days of science.
Man vs. Machine
Is there a better way? Theodore Postol of MIT thinks so. According to him the shuttle is not suitable for manned flights nor for conducting scientific experiments. Disposable launchers and a simple cell for returning to Israel would be safer and cheaper, Posletol suggests. "They invest a lot of money in returning a shuttle that weighs 68 tons back just so it can fly into space again.
During the return to Earth, only the crew should be brought back. It shouldn't be in such a large plane-shaped vessel with all these tiles.
NASA is considering alternatives to the space shuttle. After sinking $33 billion into an advanced prototype of the X-2001 vehicle, it canceled the project in XNUMX due to engineering limitations.
In December, NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe introduced another shuttle replacement. This time it's a downgrade of an orbital plane - a lander to be precise, that will transport astronauts to and from the space station at a fraction of the cost of the shuttle flight.
NASA estimates that it will take 12 billion dollars and at least seven years to develop it.
Postol comes out as a buffer against sending humans into space in general, saying that the hostile arena should be left to unmanned aircraft. "Many scientific experiments can be performed using robots, it's much safer and we won't have to risk human lives," he said.
Gerard Faith, a scientist from the University of Michigan who launched experiments at Columbia, objected, precisely for the scientific reason. "Robots will be excellent for observational sciences, when a satellite looks at an area on Earth and sends back the image. We had an active laboratory on the shuttle, and humans are needed there. Robots are rarely used in laboratories on Earth. I don't think they are effective in space."
Another objection for slightly more complex reasons is that humans like to discover, take risks and sail in uncharted waters. It is no coincidence that the names of the shuttles - Endeavour, Atlantis and Discovery are taken from ships that had crews of goats on them. The original Columbia was the first American ship to circumnavigate the globe. The Columbia shuttle did just that, only slightly higher.
Curiosity is an essential element of humanity's existence and discoveries have been a large part of humanity for a long time." Says Gene Cernan, Apollo 17 astronaut who was the last person to leave the lunar soil in 1972.
Space exploration, like discovering life, if you will is a risk, we must want to do it.
An interview with Gene Cernan, the last astronaut to walk on the moon in the Apollo program (Marib.)
