Re: "The Shuttle Was a Mistake"
- From: Larry Dighera <LDighera@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 18:08:04 GMT
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 13:15:39 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
<kboatright1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<ZPmdndyk3MzKiN3enZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>::
>
>"Larry Dighera" <LDighera@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:m8tvj1huctigm6pt2a5qs02pmv4v8153a6@xxxxxxxxxx
>> On 2 Oct 2005 05:04:08 -0700, "Jay Honeck" <jjhoneck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
>> in <1128254648.095335.16860@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>::
>>
>>>The fact is, the ONLY long-term reason for a space station is for use
>>>as a launch point for interplanetary (or, eventually, interstellar)
>>>travel.
>>
>> Please provide the name of one other single human endeavor that has
>> brought so many nations together for a CONSTRUCTIVE purpose.
>>
>> The International Spaced Station is a start on the "long term" goal of
>> peaceful coexistence among the nations of our would, if not a
>> meaningful scientific achievement.
>
>You could argue that this is the UN's function.
Yes. One could. But you'd have to overlook the leadership role
incumbent on a nation in the world position of the USA. (Where is UN
headquarters located?)
>Also, the countries which are participating in the ISS generally are
>not the bomb throwing loonies who are the real concern in today's world.
Exactly. They are the technologically and politically advanced
countries with a well educated populace. They stand as examples of
successful (non theocratic) government to the rest of the world.
>In hindsight (always 20/20, right?), I'd say that the shuttle and the ISS
>were both boondoggles. The shuttle was built in order to transport stuff to
>a space station that didn't exist until 20 years after the shuttle's launch.
Do you think the US has learned anything of use for planning future
missions as a result of the Shuttle program?
>The US joined the ISS effort because NASA needed a space station to validate
>the shuttle. Circular logic and justifications like these have cost US
>taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.
Bureaucracy, by it's political nature, works in convoluted ways.
I would much prefer to see this nation's wealth used for cooperative,
constructive prepossess, than weapons and war. But that's just me.
You may feel differently about that.
>I am a fan of a space program, but it needs to be about exploration and/or
>scientific discovery.
How would you achieve the goals of exploration and scientific
discovery? What would you explore and how would you propose to
overcome the obstacles to achieve it?
>Instead, we're stuck with a Shuttle and ISS which are
>essentially the world's most expensive exercise in logistics.
>
It's a beginning, after all.
Because space exploration is not a real priority issue like arms and
military, progress has been slow. It is only now, after significant
satellite exploration of our solar system, that we have any idea of
the requirements of realistic exploratory missions. Engineers like to
see the mission accomplished successfully, unlike early airmen who
just wanted to try things out without benefit of knowledge of the
entire flight envelope of aircraft of that time. At least, that's how
I see it.
.
- References:
- NASA: "The Shuttle Was a Mistake"
- From: AES
- Re: "The Shuttle Was a Mistake"
- From: Jay Honeck
- NASA: "The Shuttle Was a Mistake"
- Prev by Date: Re: Best flying song?
- Next by Date: Re: check brake pressure in pre-landing checklist?
- Previous by thread: Re: "The Shuttle Was a Mistake"
- Next by thread: Re: "The Shuttle Was a Mistake"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
