Even as a Saturn and Apollo fan, I have to completely disagree with Nic.
The Shuttle has performed amazing work on its 30 years of missions, especially connected with the already mentioned International Space Station and Hubble launch and repair etc. Its value partly lies in being a fairly spacious combined flying space laboratory and workshop, as well as a very well laid out launch platform.
It shouldn’t be forgotten just what an incredible aircraft it actually is, it is quite easy to overlook as it entered in a period where the public didn’t care anymore, and missions became relatively ‘mundane’.
I welcome back the rockets, but weirdly I find myself asking are NASA going to loose another capability here, should they have developed a new Shuttle?
A well laid out launch platform? What happens when a SRB malfunctions as in Challengers O ring, a disaster for the crew, who are sat on top of the external Fuel tank. At least on Redstone,Atlas & Saturn they had a sporting chance with the Launch Escape Tower. Gemini had ejection seats as did the first 5 Shuttle missions either of which are not much good beyond Max Q.
I was priviliged enough to do a Shuttle rescue procedures course at Kennedy, in the event of a launch abort scenario. If the orbiter could not make a return to landing site abort, it would cross the Atlantic and land in various locations with a long enough runway, where we would be deployed incase of that eventuality. One thing has always stuck with me the instructors always said that the chances of getting the external tank to separate from the orbiter during a abort in high earth atmosphere without impact on the vehicle were almost nil. Launching into space is dangerous but the shuttles had no room for error built into the procedures.
It also is not that spacious interior wise a lot smaller than you would think even the lower deck is a bit pokey to say the least. The somewhat more useful orbital Laborotary was only flown in the cargo hold for a handful of earlier missions.
I agree the highlight of the Shuttles career was the Hubble mirror fix, but I am a firm believer that earth orbit missions are not the way forward. I do agree the orbiters are a fantastic engineering feat, but I still maintain the Shuttle was a left over from the Space station idea of the 70s and turned out to be a vehicle without a mission, until as Miniman suggested the ISS came along and gave it some sort of a purpose in the twilight of it’s career. And, even now Soyuz/Progress modules have done the lions share of the work of transporting crews and supplies to the station.
This is obviously my opinion only, but going out as opposed to going around in circles is the way to go.
Sign In
