Secular Pinoy

This Slate article makes some valid points, that the shuttle is a waste of money, for most of the experiments done in it is trivial at best. Is there really a good reason for the shuttle, from a science perspective? Robert Park, in his book Voodoo Science, argues that the shuttle, as well as the ISS, is not worth its salt, as most of what it can accomplish is either not very useful for scientific progress, or can be done using cheaper unmanned vehicles. The costs, OTOH, is alarming, as it siphons off valuable budget money that could've been better used elsewhere.

Shadowy Man

The most valid use of the Space Shuttle in terms of science is its servicing missions to the Hubble Space Telescope.

But, then again, you shouldn't be believing the propaganda that the manned space program has anything to do with science.

Asha'man

In terms of Technology, I think the shuttle is one step in a long chain that we need to follow. We need a permanent space station, we need a moon colony, and we need a Mars colony. Only by working on manned space flight will we eventually acquire the technology to do that.

As for pure science, we could get by without the shuttle itself as long as smaller manned vehicles were available. We have to be able to maintain the Hubble (as Shadowy Man points out) and keep people in the ISS, and several other tasks that may require people in near earth orbit. Heavy launch could be done by non-reusable rockets, and the Russians have some good ones.

Jimmy Higgins

Two words pop right to mind, bull and shit.

All that money wasted? What about the missile defense shield or many other military items? What about funding a war against drugs which is more futile than man trying to reach heaven in a balloon.

The space shuttle is part of pure science. To take that away is to take away our inate sense of curiosity. Maybe some of the stuff seems pointless, but it is out there to be observed.

Even when all the guns have been destroyed and all the children clothed and feed, we will still be in space for it is our destiny to travel it. It is the next destination. Just as man explored the New World, so will man explore the galaxy, because it is what humans do. It is letting our curiosity choose our path.

echidna

The results here could be prety close. Don't underestimate the number of Trekkies out there.

Corona688

The space shuttle is still *THE* most advanced vehicle on this planet. Is there ANYTHING else that's remotely capable of flying up into orbit, retrieving a satellite, fixing it, and setting it loose again?

echidna

Hell I reckon for 8 times more we should build one twice as big.

Jackalope

Oh no, not this again...
We can't build any more Saturn Vs. The Russians can't build any more Energia, they've dismanted the assembly line. They can still build a few Soyuz, if they manage to pay their bills (the assembly plant is falling into disrepair right now). And Proton is even less reliable than the Shuttle. That leaves the chinese Shenzhou, which has had 3 test flights, but no manned ones yet.

Right now, the only heavy lift capacity on the planet is the Shuttle, Soyuz, and hopefully Shenzhou. And we won't have too many more Soyuz if things continue as they have been. Oh, and the Arianne 5, which just blew up another one recently. And the Delta, which is ours. But neither of those are for manned flight.

The "we can always fall back on the russians" was a good idea 10 years ago. Not now. It'll take a hell of a lot of money to repair/rebuild the factory areas, and the russian government doesn't have it. Better start hoping that the Chinese stay our friends. Or that the french get a hell of a lot better at launching things without blowing them up.

--Lee

Secular Pinoy

Why do we need any of this? It's probably not so much a need but an unchecked desire, a childhood dream gone terribly amuck.Hubble repair, yes we might use them. So that means we can reduce the funding for the Shuttle Missions a whole damn lot. So we agree to that extent. But the ISS? What's it good for? It's gone through several redesigns and the costs just ballooned beyond rational contemplation. I say use the shuttle to get them off, and let the ISS "do a Mir."

Secular Pinoy

Yes, but the question is, who is doing the shoveling?

A missile defense shield is nice science fiction, but to use billions for a system that is currently technologically unfeasible? And it probably will be not feasible until well after we're wormfood.

Sure we're all curious, that's the scientific drive, the unquenchable thirst for knowledge. So the zero gravity perfume research, which costs NASA billions, has every right to be carried out? At the expense of truly scientifically satifying research that can be accomplished had the money been spent on space probes and landers? Each may be science, but they are not equal in common sense and utility.

Our destiny? I hope we'd keep off metaphysics and stick with science, that's why we're in the SciSkep forum. Even granting your grandiose views, do we need to waste billions of dollars now on a future that's not even in its infancy? Have we conquered AIDS and cancer so that we can casually play around with billions of dollars of American tax money on childhood aspirations? There is a time to conquer the universe, but that's long after we're dead and fossilized. For now, we ought to stick with real-world problems.