San Diego Housing Bubble News and Analysis

This isn't news. They've been planning to retire the shuttles for years. The reasons are many, cost, safety and the fact they are now dinosaurs full of 1970's technology to name a few. The replacement is in the works. Unfortunately its a giant step backwards instead of forwards. We are going back to capsules, a man in a can......

I don't think scrapping space shuttle is a very big deal. They were getting very old and unreliable. I think the whole notion of manned space exploration is wasteful in terms of cost to scientific value ratio. The future will be in unmanned space explorations. Just look at ISS; a $100 billion motel 6 with constant problems of plumbing, toilet, ventilation etc., AFAIK, zero scientific output. The Mars lander programs are infinitely more exciting. The Hubble has produced more science in 20 odd years than what human space flight has produced in more than 40 years; at probably 1% cost.

So when Apollo ended in 1973 did you think America was over?

For the first time ever, i'm with patb! My geekish roots are firmly entrenched with the shuttle, but like all things, technology changes, it's actually kinda suprising they made it this far. One of my fondest memories will always be driving out to edwards afb to see it land, here's a recap. My cousin drove a vehicle that got 8 mpg to the landing strip and we listened to some tunes on 8 track during the journey and somehow there is a connection to the end of the world that the shuttle is retiring?

The sad thing is that we didn't fund enough or didn't plan well enough for there to have been a shuttle replacement on deck for when it retires. So in the meantime we'll be paying the Russians for rides on their rockets. No, America is not over, but my how the mighty have fallen.

It's not that bad, considering that Russians will be providing rides on rockets whose original design dates back to 1965. They had even less progress than we did.

"They had even less progress than we did."

That isn't accurate - the Russians used the motto, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" in their space program

They developed functional, reliable launch vehicles and then used them for decades - they are using a 1960's launch vehicle because it still does the job that it is intended to do

Actually it is not that bad

Boeing 747 : First Flight ~1968.
Boeing 737: First Flight ~ 1967.

Granted, they have been extensively updated over decades

Submitted by partypup on August 30, 2009 - 6:46pm
I wasn't sure if I was reading this correctly at first, but it really seems to be the case: this is the end of America's era in space.

Partypup--are you kidding me? End of American's era in space? Have you not heard about the international space station? American is on that!

Have you not heard about Spirit and Opportunity? The rovers on Mars--we are doing that.

Have you not heard about LRO/LCROSS? American is doing that. (really cool pictures of the Apollo landing sites were you can see the astronauts' foot trails)

Have you not heard about the planned man mission to the moon? America is doing that.

Have you not heard about the Ares Rocket? America is doing that.

Have you not heard about the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle? American is doing that too.

Having been through the Mercury program, the Gemini program, the Apollo program, countless unmanned programs like explorer, voyager, and surveyor, I know that that the end of one program is not the end of America's efforts in space.

www.nasa.gov

+1

+ Hubble, Dawn, New Horizons, ... NASA is involved in all kinds of things.

Space shuttle seemed like a good idea at the time. It was supposed to be a lot cheaper and more "nimble" than it turned out to be. Too bad. In the mean time, maybe we can hitch rides to ISS using SpaceX launchers.

Ultimately the problem is that human beings aren't all that suited for space exploration. They require a lot of heavy support equipment and you need to get them back safely once you're done. For the cost of a single space shuttle mission (where we put 7 humans into low Earth orbit for two weeks, so that they can spend half of that time inspecting the shuttle and making sure that they can get back to Earth without problems), we can build, launch and support two new Mars rovers, or send another unmanned probe to Pluto.

That is like saying that the future of asymmetric warfare for the Air Force is unmanned drones.

Oh wait...

The shuttle ended up being a boondoggle and in a lot of ways complete overkill for the eventual job. Rockets can do the same job, but cheaper and safer. The point of the shuttle, was to have a re-usable vehicle, but it requires so much maintenance between flights it's not that feasible.

Anyways, I'd rather have a design where the heat shield isn't exposed to the elements during launch, than the current shuttle design.

The existing Space shuttle is a very old, unreliable, costly way to send people to space. There are much more effective ways to accomplish that (smaller spacecraft, less complicated, more fuel efficient) in the work. ;)