E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mark Wilson / Getty Images
Retired senator-astronaut John Glenn is surrounded by other space veterans in front of the space shuttle Discovery during its handover to the Smithsonian at the Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Va., on Thursday. Glenn says the shuttles were "prematurely grounded" but accepts the shuttle program's end.
For some veteran astronauts, today’s transformation of the shuttle Discovery into a museum exhibit is a cause for celebration. For others, it’s a reminder of their regrets. But for John Grunsfeld, the one-time “Hubble Hugger” who is now NASA’s science chief, the dominant feeling is a sense of relief.
Discovery's handover to the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum has re-ignited questions about the end of the 30-year space shuttle program. Why did they have to be retired? The short answer is that in the wake of the 2003 Columbia tragedy, policymakers decided that once the job of building the International Space Station was finished, it would just be too risky and expensive to keep the shuttles flying.
Instead, President George W. Bush decided to re-target the space program on destinations beyond Earth orbit. For Bush, the first focus was going to be the moon. President Barack Obama shifted that initial focus to near-Earth asteroids, but the endpoint is the same: eventually getting to Mars. And the shuttles could never do that. They weren't built to go beyond Earth orbit.
Nevertheless, some of America's best-known astronauts think the shuttles should have been kept around a while longer — particularly because NASA will be dependent on the Russians for rides to the space station for the next three to five years.
'Unfortunate decision'
"The unfortunate decision eight and a half years ago to terminate the shuttle program, in my opinion, prematurely grounded Discovery and delayed our research," retired senator-astronaut John Glenn said during today's handover ceremony at the museum's Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Virginia.
Former senator-astronaut John Glenn speaks as the Smithsonian formally accepts space shuttle Discovery for permanent exhibition.
Another retired astronaut who rode on Discovery, Tom Jones, voiced similar frustration during an interview conducted before today's ceremony. "I'm reliving the disappointment that the shuttles are retiring without a rapid successor," he told me.
Jones wishes that the White House and Congress had revved up NASA's plan for new spaceships capable of going to the space station and beyond: the Constellation Program, which initially aimed to put U.S. astronauts back on the moon by 2020. Instead, Constellation was so cash-starved and technically challenged that the Obama White House scrubbed the program and reworked elements of it into the current plan to visit an asteroid by 2025.
"We dropped the ball on this," Jones said. "If we just went from 0.5 percent of the federal budget to 0.6 percent, this would all be a non-issue."
The benefit of retaining an American system for resupplying the space station is what motivated Glenn's call to keep the shuttles flying. Glenn made his pitch to the White House in 2010 — but Obama didn't go for it, and the former Democratic senator told me today that he accepts the verdict.
"No need crying over what happened in the past," Glenn said. "Let's get on with the future."
The 'Hubble Hugger' and his pin
Grunsfeld thinks the White House made the right call, at least on the question of grounding the shuttles. He's best-known for his role as a spacewalker on Hubble servicing missions in 1999, 2002 and 2009. During that last mission, Grunsfeld was the one who bade the Hubble Space Telescope goodbye forever. Now he's NASA's associate administrator for science. The way Grunsfeld sees it, keeping the shuttles flying might have led to another disaster like the 1986 Challenger explosion — or the loss of Columbia and its seven STS-107 crew members in 2003.
"There's a possibility we could have flown them for a little bit longer, or extended them at some cost," Grunsfeld told me. "I'm actually extremely thankful that we are rolling Discovery into the Air and Space Museum, and not burying its parts. We flew out the space shuttle program gracefully. We didn't lose another one. It would have been tragic. The fact is that the space shuttle program was ended with dignity — it was an amazing accomplishment, and I'm just thankful for that."
Then he shared what he called a "small, personal story."
"Just this morning, on my flight suit for the first time since the loss of Columbia, I took my STS-107 pin off. I felt like this was an apt celebration, that we flew out the program safely after Columbia, and that affected me very deeply," Grunsfeld said. "Now that we are where we are, I'm looking forward to getting the next space vehicle going."
The end ... and the beginning
Retired astronaut Eileen Collins, who became NASA's first woman shuttle pilot during a 1995 mission on Discovery and went on to command shuttle missions in 1999 and 2005, has some firsthand knowledge about the risks associated with flying the shuttles.
The 2005 mission on Discovery marked NASA's "return to flight" after the Columbia tragedy. She and most other people at NASA had thought they had solved the foam-loss problem that led to the Columbia's doom — but mission managers were shocked to see that the fuel tank shed a substantial piece of foam insulation during Discovery's ascent. No significant harm was done, but it took another year for NASA engineers to rework the problem to their satisfaction.
This week, retired NASA shuttle manager Wayne Hale recounted the episode in a blog item headlined "How We Nearly Lost Discovery."
Today, Collins noted that each shuttles was originally designed to fly for 100 missions or 10 years, whichever came first. Discovery, the most traveled of the shuttles, flew 39 missions ... over the course of 28 years. She recalled that she agreed with the shuttle retirement plan that was announced in 2004, but was disappointed when the Constellation Program was canceled in 2010.
"At that time, I would say yes, we should keep the shuttles flying — with one major exception. Back in 2006, we at NASA made major decisions to start shutting down the pipeline for parts. In 2010, to reverse the decision and continue flying the shuttles was going to be very expensive and take a very long time. So it wasn't realistic to fly them again," she told me.
"The worst thing we can do to our people is to constantly change things ... so in the end, the right thing to do was to fly out shuttle. I am personally very sad to see it go. But the big problem is, we don't have anything to follow on right now. We're going to get there. It's just that right now, we don't have it."
It's not the end of the shuttle program that bothers Collins. Rather, it's the possibility that NASA won't be able to follow through on the beginning of the next program.
"I don't want to see any more canceled programs," she told a school group after today's ceremony. "If we have problems, we need to fix those problems and press on. We can't just cancel and walk away from them. I go to schools, and I talk to kids, and I say, 'If you have problems, stick with it, fix it, don't give up.' We don't want to continue to give up on programs that are going to be taking us out into space, whether it's with robots or with people. We need to keep working on those programs."
What do you think? Here's your chance to weigh in on the end of the shuttle program and the beginning of the next chapter in exploration. Just leave a comment below.
More about what's next for NASA:
- NASA gives all-clear for commercial launch to space station
- NASA's chief says end of shuttle era could usher in new age
- NASA unveils giant rocket design for future space odysseys
- NASA retools spaceship design for missions beyond Earth orbit
- Next steps in a commercial space race
Alan Boyle is msnbc.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter or adding Cosmic Log's Google+ page to your circle. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for other worlds.
Leave a Comment:
I agree with John Glenn and others that it was a mistake to retire the Shuttles "as planned" without a revision when it became clear that NASA was being derailed on a number of their plans by an apathetic US Government that in my opinion, no longer represents the majority of the American people's interests on this matter. I think people are really angry and disheartened that NASA is no longer supported by our government in a tenable way to continue to be the leader in space. (Republicans and Democrats alike) It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you can't create a congressional order for NASA to accomplish their goals with one hand and then with the other hand be taking away the funding for the capability to do it. The red-light, green light funding game for projects that need long term research doesn't work either. Pleading poverty so as to not properly fund NASA while they're handing over billions and billions of tax dollars to their crooked banking friends doesn't fly and it sends the wrong message to our children: "Your future and the future of America doesn't matter." Continuing to fly the shuttles until the US had their own replacement would have been a much better use of our money than a number of choices that they have made in the past 10 years. It was short sighted to ground the shuttles just because the ISS was finished. I agree that private enterprise might also have had a need for these work horses,especially with the advent of space tourism or building other business in space which is now being discussed. Every Commander who brought in every last Shuttle flight stated that these amazing ships were still in tip top shape. We owe thanks to the stellar crews that NASA has had for this. It is sad that not only is the most amazing spacecraft that ever flew in the history of mankind grounded for no justifiable reason, but that also our top-notch talented scientists who have led the world in space are also now given the boot. As an American it is a bitter pill to swallow that the leadership of this country no longer seems to care about the space program as a most precious aspect of our country's modern heritage. It is not only a question of losing our heritage, but I believe it is also a potential threat to our national security to not maintain our lead in space. I am glad that Discovery's final resting place is in a place of honor and I treasure the Smithsonian, but seeing her put into her tomb today was not something I cared to celebrate.
"RATIONAL GUY" your a freaking moron lol. And you need to shut your mouth. But you probably get your little peni* hard when you talk trash to other people. Everyone has their opinions and the right to say what they think despite what your barbie ken playhouse mind thinks. Oh and if your planning on responding to this...lol you can take frustration in the fact that i'll never be back on here to see what you've written back. It's people like you who are polluting this world with your garbage. Goodbye.........Ken doll.
I think this Country should re-design the old school Ship and keep our own Space Program. Shi+ can Prez Obama and vote a real Prez and re start our Space Program, PERIOD.
Or we could put more in education and research, the would learn that the next flight capsule was tested earlier this month. You would also know that consruction will soon start on the new assembly building at the cape, and training center at space center in Huston. But instead you bring up ^%% and want to Shi+can someone because of your failings.
Sorry for you I am
i just hope we didn't end the shuttle program due to the chance of the senseless loss of life probability. we ask our men and women of the armed forces to do it daily. what next, end the military program? sure a better chance at a senseless loss of life getting shot at daily in a foreign country than space exploration will ever encounter. if we let other countries lead us in war like they are in the space program, we are just handing over the keys to the u.s. better learn to speak Chinese. quick!!!!
I agree with John Glenn and others that it was a mistake to retire the Shuttles "as planned" without a revision when it became clear that NASA was being derailed on a number of their plans by an apathetic US Government that in my opinion, no longer represents the majority of the American people's interests on this matter. I think people are really angry and disheartened that NASA is no longer supported by our government in a tenable way to continue to be the leader in space. (Republicans and Democrats alike) It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you can't create a congressional order for NASA to accomplish their goals with one hand and then with the other hand be taking away the funding for the capability to do it. The red-light, green light funding game for projects that need long term research doesn't work either. Pleading poverty so as to not properly fund NASA while they're handing over billions and billions of tax dollars to their crooked banking friends doesn't fly and it sends the wrong message to our children: "Your future and the future of America doesn't matter." Continuing to fly the shuttles until the US had their own replacement would have been a much better use of our money than a number of choices that they have made in the past 10 years. It was short sighted to ground the shuttles just because the ISS was finished. I agree that private enterprise might also have had a need for these work horses,especially with the advent of space tourism or building other business in space which is now being discussed. Every Commander who brought in every last Shuttle flight stated that these amazing ships were still in tip top shape. We owe thanks to the stellar crews that NASA has had for this. It is sad that not only is the most amazing spacecraft that ever flew in the history of mankind grounded for no justifiable reason, but that also our top-notch talented scientists who have led the world in space are also now given the boot. As an American it is a bitter pill to swallow that the leadership of this country no longer seems to care about the space program as a most precious aspect of our country's modern heritage. It is not only a question of losing our heritage, but I believe it is also a potential threat to our national security to not maintain our lead in space. I am glad that Discovery's final resting place is in a place of honor and I treasure the Smithsonian, but seeing her put into her tomb today was not something I cared to celebrate.
I totally agree that the shuttle program was stopped and dismantled far too soon. Being American means we don't bow down to anyone. We started it and should not be out of it now. This program was one of the most important programs that America has had and it should still be in our field of work to do it ourselves. Our shuttles are the best and our astronauts should still be flying OUR shuttles to the spacestation not hitching a ride and at the mercy of other countries at all. Stopping the program is an insult to all American People everywhere and we really want it back. Give us back our dignity, honor, and freedom to run our own shuttle program and be free like we should be to add to the science of the world without degrading our country.
Over and over again! We are fighting 2 Major Wars and lots of Little Wars all over the planet and the Re-pubs don't wanna pay for them. Release the Bush Tax Cuts and increase the millionaire taxes. Quit blaming McDonald and Walmart workers as to why Willard Romney has to keep his profits in the Cayman Islands. If bin Laden was mad at poor people he would have driven those planes into Harlem instead of Wall Street.
Wall Street millionaires, please pay for the wars, after which we can worry about buying more Space Shuttles.
#1) The mideast has nothing to do with any funding for the space program. The biggest drain of resources is mandatory Federal spending social welfare programs. Defense budget + conflict =app. $165billion. Mandatory federal spending social welfare programs= app. $2trillion annually. The conflicts will end, welfare is forever. That is setting aside the small iddue that defense is a legitimate function of a Federal government, long term welfare is not.
#2) The Federal government can not afford to reverse the tax reform measures of the Bush administration. That reform increased revenue from the higher tax brackets while decreasing tax rates for lower tax brackets. The lower 50% tax brackets currently account for less than 3% revenue, 45% of that tax bracket group pay zero. You are suggesting major tax rate increases for the lower tax brackets again? As for why any citizen keeps assets out of country? If I had a fistful of dollars I would look for the safest haven as well, you can not tax your way to prosperity and a nanny state is just a money pit.
#) Currently the top 1% tax bracket accounts for over 36% of all tax revenue. The highest 25% tax brackets account for over 87% of all tax revenue collected. The ones you rant about are paying for the legitimate function of a Federal government, defense. They are also paying for the illegitimate costs of welfare. Trim the illegitimate waste and there just might be a space program, highly doubtful post Clintons "new economy" with "no more manufacturing in America". You want someone to rant about take a good hard look at the Democratic Party Agenda, it has never been good for the economy and that agenda has never worked for a nation at any time in recorded history.
An end to many NASA space programs due to spirally government debt - yes! You voted for Hope&Change so sit back and enjoy it! Quit complaining. You got it exactly what you voted for, peeps!
"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me, as we try to change it." Barack Obama ............... What nobody asked is just what he was going to change "the greatest nation in the history of the world" to! Or maybe the Party did after all.
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton ..... Can somone name one single time in any civilization at any period in recorded history when that worked out well? It seems every civilization that was stupid enough to go that route ended up bankrupt just before it degraded into tyranny.
Great! Hopefully Obama's pushed Russian/NASA/International Moon base will happen now that we don't have to worry about our overpriced rockets. We can start worrying about new more cost efficient designs that will hopefully put humans semi-permanently on the moon!
I am an Independent, not a DemocRat/ReThuglican. Being neutral, I can only say that the end of the Space Shuttle will mean more pain for the middle class American family. Also, why should any 20 something guy/gal want to work in NASA ? Wall Street pays much better, for doing nothing. Capitalism, right ? Capitalism was the reason the US was leading the world on Space ? Don't worry. "The market will take care of America."
There is no more massive middle-class tax base to pay for anything. That was ceded by clinton when encouraged the exportation of the very means that made the tax base possible .. manufacturing. Capitalism brought you the Republic, capitalism made that Republic the greatest nation in history, capitalism made the free citizen of the Republic the highest quality of life on the planet. All for nothing in the wake of the Democratic Party vision of a "new economy".
"Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.' Phelps Adams
I too have been inspired by NASA and believe it was time to shut down the current shuttle program.
However America is NOT taking a back burner to the exploring space but we are taking ourseleves
out of the running of becoming the local taxi service to outer space.
The future of space flight/satelite deployment should be more commercialized allowing NASA
to take on a new role sanctioning as the FAA does with the airline industry.
Not only does that provide a way to fund the "New Space Program" without using tax dollars
the but it also gives us time to re-think the program and allow the flood gates for innovation to open.
I like to believe that NASA has employed some of smartest minds on the planet but I'm not a 100% covinced
that attaching a space craft to the backs of rocket busters justifies their brilliance.
I think there are more effective and ecological ways to get into space and out of earth's orbit.
Until we have a better understanding of each other, our own planet and our surrounding solar system. We humans don't stand a chance at venturing into the vastness of the universe. It's clear that we are too primative and lack the technology to visit our neighbors to say the least "communicate".
Hopefully in a decade we will emerge as pioneers with a "new space program" that will expand beyond our moon,
with larger space crafts that is capable of exploring galaxy.
So we have a little growing to do and a whole lot of listening.
"Until we have a better understanding of each other, our own planet and our surrounding solar system. We humans don't stand a chance at venturing into the vastness of the universe."
Sorry, but one has nothing whatsoever to do with the other...
I don't believe that the shuttle program would be cancelled if the USA didn't have military space vehicles which are "secret" - I really don't.
That makes zero sense. Another conspiracy?
For all of you who blame Bush, it is Obama who ended space exploration. Plain and simple. He's of the belief that many hippy commie types were when I was growing up.we were walking on the moon and these libtards would say,
"We need to spend our Money on feeding the poor and ending war, not wasting it on going to the Moon.,"
Well going to the Moon, and manned space flight helped contribute to me now tapping this missive out on a hand held touchscreen futuristic device known as an iPad.
If we concentrate on wealth spreading and other commie ideas that Obama embraces. We'll continue to hitch rides with the commies that had the sense to keep their space program. Obama is making it impossible for NASA to do ANY space flight, robotic or manned. While he's busy subsidizing bankrupt pie in the sky solar companies and paying off constituencies out of his "stash." simply because he believes that hippy crap they said all those years ago.
John Glenn is rirght, it's a tragedy! Godspeed John Glenn!
What is pathetic is that the Russian program that a once great Republic is relying on was based on stolen technology of ours. I can remember the first comment made when a U.S. got a glimpse of Russian space technology, it was still based on Vacuum TUBE technology! Yes the Nanny State trend has destroyed the economy and it still has a ways to degrade yet. Once it reaches universal poverty (the fate of every nanny state in recorded history in multiple civilizations) there is complete economic collapse and the rise of an oppressive tyranny .... the end of another Republic when the voters vote for the candidate that promises the most "free lunch" instead of voting for long term freedom and liberty and health of the Republic.
"It;s not over until the fat lady sings" America has a lot of overweight citizens. We as American's spend millions for weight loss programs. Has anyone considered what a terrific "weight loss" program the Shuttle Program was. Three minutes to orbit and "weightless" . Let's see any "weight loss" program match that!!!!
The space program is further proof our federal government could not organize a bake sale. Emphasis on PR rather than accomplishing goals, and the inability of our politicians to work together for the common good get in the way. There was a time when we could all pull together to achieve great things, but not anymore.
NASA itself has become a huge federal bureaucracy which simply cannot get anything useful done.
If anyone goes to Mars, it will be China or India, not the US. For the US, space is now a private enterprise, which may be the best option for us. With our crushing national debt, we cannot afford to fund NASA at the level required to go to Mars and beyond.
The space program was a tremendous source of national pride, and it did produce incredible scientific and practical dividends. But most of our politicians would prefer to spend money on some meaninless local project that generates votes and goodwill right now than on a long term national program. It really is a shame.
Dan
Space program is another example how our country is leaderless with no vision. We may have a President and Congress but none can see beyond the next fundraiser and have no leadership qualities.
Harry Reid or John Glenn?
Neil Armstrong or Mitch McConnell?
Jim Lovell or Nancy Pelosi?
Alan Sheppard or Chuck Shumer?
It is time for NASA to become 0% of the federal budget. The space program that gave John Glenn his first ride and his last vanity ride was created to convince Americans that they were superior to the Russians. It is telling that just as the Apollo program hit its stride with a geologist on the moon it was being truncated after the public and policy makers lost interest. As for the shuttle; every major project that NASA has run has had huge cost over runs and delays. The ISS is the billion or perhaps closer to the trillion dollar boon doogle of space. The US has succeeded in satellite technology that is laregly financed by the private sector for commercial purposes. If the US wants to return to space it should leverage the Boeing X-37A and the Atlas V missile system and run it as a mini=shuttle and let the billionares pay for it all by offering a week at the ISS on their many dimes. 'nuf said.
"If the US wants to return to space it should leverage the Boeing X-37A and the Atlas V missile system and run it as a mini=shuttle..."
A manned Atlas V will happen. with possibly three different orbital vehicles. None of them will have much to do with X-37.
Commercial Crew is no secret. Google the phrase. It's been covered here. And yet, so many people think we're doing nothing but growing spiderwebs, and China will take over the universe, since the last Shuttle flight.
It's astounding. But hopefully, the SpaceX Dragon (a craft designed to ultimately be manned) test supply flight to ISS in a few weeks, will start to turn this around in the popular mind...
Revisiting the shuttle is not the answer. Unfortunately we have the technology to do a whole heck of a lot better than the shuttle but this technology is kept under wraps. By “we” I do not mean we the people, I mean the “powers that be”.
Technology that is available today is the cumulative result of three trends: Technology that naturally results from science and scientific experimentation over the years and is released to the masses. Technology that naturally results from science and scientific experimentation that is not released because it threatens the profit and interests (business and financial) of those with great wealth (oil companies and big industrial/manufacturing/pharma companies). And finally, technology that results from reverse engineering of objects that did not originate from our planet.
Put this all together and “we” have the ability to not only go to other planets and even to the stars, but we have the ability:
Prosperity.
Nothing makes me sadder than when we go thru disasters like the Gulf Oil Spill – knowing that they can be eradicated within hours with the technology that exists. Children in third world countries that are starving to death as we speak – no excuse for this.
Let alone the global financial woes we are seeing.
It is not Obama’s fault. Nor is it there anything that Romney can control. Because the President of the United Sates long ago stopped being the leader of the free world. That ended in the fifties.
We the people need to demand Disclosure. Now.
Just what planet are you from and just what is your nefarious plan of world domination? Lets get real here ..... there are no outer space advanced vehicles to reverse engineer, if there were it would already have happened. If there were any fantastic technology to cure the all the worlds woes it sure would not be secret!! It would be in the interests of big business to be the first to market those miracles for the profit that would make every other profit look like chump change. Heck anytime there are two people involved it is impossible to keep a secret and you are suggesting something that big involving thousands? Not even a chance.
There is no way poverty will ever be eliminated, there will always be those who can not or will not work, a welfare system just increases the number who will not. Hunger will only get worse as the world population increases, it is 7 billion PLUS now. Neither party will take constructive steps to restore the Republic, it has fallen into the classic phase where the citizen has found they can vote for the candidate who promises the most "free lunch". Once that happens its a degradation to economic collpase and the rise of a tyranny and oppression for every civilization in recorded history, the nanny state is not anything new and never works.
SpaceX
I too voted for Obama with the understanding that this President would bring about Change for the better. Unfortunately it has been Business As Usual. Only problem now is, I do not see a different between the two. Nether parties can't be trusted to get our National Debt down. Both Parties have sold us out. We once had a space program that We the Citizens of the US could be very proud of. Now, that had been taken away from us by our Government continually running huge deficits. While we the American People said and did nothing to stop the Rampant Spending. And for that, we only have ourselves to blame.
The Space Shuttles needed to be retired because it was based on Technology of the Late 60s and 70s. If I'm not mistaken, we were promissed that this would be a beginning of things to come. New Shuttles would be developed and that didn't happen.
Of course the deficit is going, each step towards the nanny state just adds a couple zeros to the deficit. Right now Mandatory Federal spending social welfare programs account for 2/3s of the national debt. The space program was only possible with a massive healthy middle-class tax base ... that no longer exists post clintons "new economy". The Republic ceded the very thing that made a missle-class possible, manufacturing, in the great cause of redistribution of wealth from the developed world to the 3rd world remember? Just like every other PC fantasy all that does is spread the poverty. Instead of a massive middle-class tax base the Republic is left with a situation where the highest 25% tax brackets are paying over 86% of all tax revenue while the lower 50% are paying less than 3% (and 45% of that brackets pay zero)... how is that sustainable?
You know what they say about hindsight being 20/20... except in the case of NASA and Congress it was always myopic. The Shuttle flew 133 times beginning in 1981. We knew beyond a doubt by about mission 25 or so , about the time of Bush 1 , that the vehicle was not going to live up to its expectations or be affordable... not when the engines needed to be totally overhauled after each flight ; orbiter turnaround times went north of 6 months; and each orbiter needed bow-to-stern refurbishment after a few missions.
Point being, the US space program managers and Congress KNEW by 1990 that a followon vehicle for manned flight was necessary. Development of a new manned vehicle should have been approved concurrently with shuttle missions after it was used ( mostly ) exclusively for space station construction missions , not waiting till the program had been cancelled and parts lines shut down before starting over with a blank sheet of blueprint paper. That as a HUGE faux pas... killing off our only American ride to orbit well before we had a replacement. [ insert drum beat here ].
NASA managers and Congress utterly failed the American people by not having their myopia treated. The succession and evolution of American manned launch vehicles became a policy failure and political failure that future historians will not look kindly upon. I'm already there.
Next week, Elon Musk's SpaceX will send its Falcon 9-Dragon capsule towards its first real space station mission. Pray that can-do private sector spacecraft is up to the job ... a lot is riding on it, if not in it. Never mind a successful Dragon flight will finally strip away the facade of NASA once and for all. A shame it had to come to that, but it was necessary.
It was time to retire the shuttles - but monumentally stupid to have the hiatus in the overall program. When we see every day the vast amounts of money spent by the government on programs that are not necessary, or bring very dubious benefits, compared to the relatively small budget for the space program, it is hard to believe that America has its priorities in order. What other government program so energizes our children, thrills our population with the great successes (no one else could have built the ISS, no one else has walked on the moon, no one else has a Hubble, etc), and provides not only something to be hugely proud of, but leaves footprints in the sands of history (and of other planets even). Much of the giant economic growth spurt of the last 40 years can be traced to materials and electronics and computer advances that private industry was too risk averse to take on, but the space program forced their rapid development. And unlike classified military programs, the technology developed by Nasa is adoptable by all and sundry, thus providing a wonderful R&D resource for the entire society. Especially for those technologies whose risk levels scare away shareholders of corporations.
To close the shuttle program having nothing in its stead other than a hope and a prayer that private industry picks up the slack is just heartbreaking. It shows me that our politicians cannot be trusted to plan our future - neither party shows vision, or honor, or a sense of striving and destiny. They all just show a bunch of greedy children grabbing for all the marbles they can. Bah.
It is a sad day to see greed and political exigencies crowd out the noble effort of space exploration.
I find Obama horrible in permitting this imbecilic decision to go forward, he will forever be linked to the closing of the space shuttle and the loss of America as the world leader in our expansion to the stars. We have to, we must, contribute more to NASA, they have to push the boundaries. Have you seen Moon Machines? We don't have the balls to accomplish that anymore, hell, there'd be so many lawsuits regarding atmospheric poisoning after the 3 astronauts, so much hullubaluu we'd have stopped. BS, get the pansies out of the way, lets roll, get this nation in gear. It sure as heck isn't welfare, its technology that has driven the USA. Stop medicaid, medicare, social security bs, fund the NASA programs. Or at least let us donate to the cause!
To fund a real space program it is not neccessary to cancel SS or Medicaid, just stop using those designated funds for other things. Its the multi-generational welfare and welfare fraud that could fund a real program again, that a working middle-class again.
Thanks for letting an intern do the research and letting Bush get away with another thing. In an interview with the Dallas Star Telegram on January 11, 2009, Bush told a reporter
"I was very concerned about the dwindling enthusiasm for NASA when I first got here. And the reason why -- and so we did a whole study of NASA and its future, and it became apparent to me that the space shuttle was losing its glamour and, frankly, people weren't convinced of its necessity. And the space station was important, but it just didn't have -- the mission itself didn't capture a lot of folks -- the imagination of a lot of folks in Congress.
And so we changed the mission, as you know, of NASA. We said we're going to stop flying the shuttle in 2010 and develop a Orion rocket or Orion launching vehicle to go to the moon, to get back to lunar exploration. And the purpose there is to eventually settle in and develop enough facility in the Moon to then be able to go beyond.
And so my first purpose on the NASA issue was to develop a mission that would excite the scientists, the employees, and the Congress.
This data is available at NASAWatch for January 11, 2009.
This had nothing to do with the 2003 accident. I was all about electing a president who was clueless about science, and remained that way. Sally Ride was correct when she, as part of the Columbia investigation said "shades of Challenger - NASA has not learned a thing from the first accident". A Rookie mission manager was in charge of Columbia's last mission. She was being informed hourly by some of the best contractor engineers that there was a problem. She ignored it - and in fact took an extra long weekend without meeting with the mission team. Many engineers I know said that there were possibilities that both Columbia and her crew could have been returned to earth safely.
In the fall of John McCain personally wrote to Bush and asked him NOT to cancel the program, and leave it to the next administration to make the decision. I know these things as fact, as a 30-year veteran of the Shuttle program.
Its the end of an era past and the dawn of new one.
When we look back at it as a whole, the Shuttle Program was a failure. It accomplished very few of its goals and cost far more than ever imagined.
It was originally supposed to be the inexpensive, convenient and safe way to "shuttle" satellites and astronauts into orbit. It was never any of those things.
Lets look forward to the future and not dwell on this checkered (at best) past.