Where will Three Retired Space Shuttle Land Next?

R

Robert_Whited

[H] News Editor
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
61
That is being worked out right as we speak. The space shuttles Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavor are all looking for a new home. One of these new homes may be the Intrepid. A U.S. Navy vessel responsible for getting a few of those astronauts back home safely. Nasa will be awarding them to 3 museums for permanent viewing.

NASA is expected to pick the winning museums in the coming weeks. The last shuttle flight is slated for February, with the aircrafts heading to sites like the Intrepid later next year.
Click to expand...
 
Wasn't the Intrepid the one responsible for the Apollo missions not the Shuttle?
 
I think it was heavily used during the Apollos. I am not sure about later missions since those shuttles landed on ground. It should have stated that the Intrepid brought a few of Nasa's astronauts home.
 
you would think with current nanotechnology and advanced polymers, you could make a new shuttle that far exceeds the current one's capability. but money dictates everything so we are going back to the 60's design...
 
krupted said:
you would think with current nanotechnology and advanced polymers, you could make a new shuttle that far exceeds the current one's capability. but money dictates everything so we are going back to the 60's design...
Click to expand...

Hell...after this administration is finished we'll be lucky to even have a space program.
 
Capsules. They're an older design than the shuttle, but inherently safer.
Click to expand...

It is deffinately more cost effective, we only went to the shuttle design to get the ruskies to emulate us and spend god aweful amounts of money on their space program during the cold war. The rocket/capsule design uses much less fuel. I read somewhere NASA had been trying to get private companies to design a much more cost effective shuttle but I guess since we're goin back to capsule it didn't work out or the whole recession deal hammered some nails in the ole coffin. :(
 
krupted said:
you would think with current nanotechnology and advanced polymers, you could make a new shuttle that far exceeds the current one's capability. but money dictates everything so we are going back to the 60's design...
Click to expand...

We could, but it would not make much sense.
First, is for what purpose. Never again will DoD/Civil payloads will use anything like STS. - Flying on an single launch system - cost, delays etc are not applicable for Defense purposes. Cost, infrastructure, workforce are expensive. After STS and if SDLV are not selected, then the VAB, crawlers, and LC93 may have to disposed of. And last, other launch vehicles exist for means to orbit and beyond. Detla/Atlas/Falcon are all what we need.

Someday winged vehicles might return, highly doubt it.
 
Only total fucking fools would retire the Shuttles BEFORE thier replacement was up and running and proven out.

Total fucking fools.
 
dude, they're nearly 30years old. Whats the point of dumping money into something that probably isn't safe or efficient anymore.
 
I still can't believe constellation is cancelled....

Its a tragedy that NASA has wasted the last 30 years, sure... but seriously, they can redeem themselves if they institute a "get your ass to mars!" plan and plugged away at all Apollo program style before the decade is out....
 
Nasa should just be shutdown. We really don't need to go to Mars period.
 
Catsonar said:
Nasa should just be shutdown. We really don't need to go to Mars period.
Click to expand...

The space race inspired hundreds of improvements in current everyday technology. Sure the destination may not have many benefits, but planning to make it to Mars or return to the moon would further boost our technology.
 
Catsonar said:
Would it be cost effective though?
Click to expand...
Let's see NASA's budge it ~ 0.5% of the Federal budget, 80% of the funds go to contractor work forces. Compare that to the other federal programs. Do you really want to chat cost effectiveness?
 
xX_Jack_Carver_Xx said:
Only total fucking fools would retire the Shuttles BEFORE thier replacement was up and running and proven out.

Total fucking fools.
Click to expand...

This is like me selling my 8 year old car to buy a 2011 model. I will get a better car when I buy, but I will walk until then.
 
the-one1 said:
This is like me selling my 8 year old car to buy a 2011 model. I will get a better car when I buy, but I will walk until then.
Click to expand...

more like selling your 8 year old car to get 2011 and then telling them stop making all 2011 cars the day after you sell your old one
 
Well, if one is going to the Intrepid then Huntsville, and DC are the most logical places remaining.
 
I would be happy if they made new shuttles. Using metallurgy and materials and electronics we have now, it can be SAFE, cheaper, and carry more cargo.

It was originally designed to be made from Titanium, but with the cold war and 99% of it behind the iron curtain, we just couldn't make that happen. Well, it aint the 70's now, and we have enough titanium to make friggin pencil holders out of it now. With titanium skin most of the tiles won't be needed, or if we did use them, damage wouldn't be fatal with a titanium skin underneath. Plus the whole ship would be lighter... using new materials and modern electronics...we'd save 1,000's of LBs in just the smaller lighter cooler electronics.

In case noone noticed, we have 30 million people out of work, a nice 10 shuttle jobs program for the highest of high tech workers would be nice.... as the cherry on top of a real WPA/CCC jobs program.

Just as an example of how far things have come. The new Chevy LSX engine, $1800, has forged titanium rods that weren't even possible to be made in the 70's and forged moly pistons 50% lighter than the lightest aluminum equivalent available. So in the same formfactor as a smallblock chevy 350, it is 427 cu in and puts out 660HP!!! on a single holley 850 dp. All thanks to the metallurgy and materials science in the last 30 years. Unleash this on shuttle design and we'd have a real kickass machine.
 
Catsonar said:
Nasa should just be shutdown. We really don't need to go to Mars period.
Click to expand...

You do understand that for humanity to survice it must leave the planet Earth.
We currently have all our eggs in one basket. An event such as the one that killed the dinosaurs will happen again at somepoint. IF we survive that long and have not left the planet then all of humanity was for nothing.
 
So We have to leave this earth huh?

I'm a firm believer of Star Wars too! ;)
 
westrock2000 said:
Non native american person in north america says what?

Its human nature to go places and do thing simply for the sake of doing it.
Click to expand...

Well, We haven't been able to stay in space for more than 100 days and to get to another planet would take a tremendous time to get there. Light years away people, light years.
 
I'm not talking about Mars anymore. You or someone else mentioned other planets that were Earth like, well they have found I believe 2 so far but they are beyond the reach(hence light years) from us right now and will most likely be for a very long time. I know that they have been talking about Mars for a while now but will they really fullfill going there? With what money? Why do We need to go if We have little rovers land on that bitch all the time doing the job We normally would do?
 
xX_Jack_Carver_Xx said:
I would be happy if they made new shuttles. Using metallurgy and materials and electronics we have now, it can be SAFE, cheaper, and carry more cargo.

It was originally designed to be made from Titanium, but with the cold war and 99% of it behind the iron curtain, we just couldn't make that happen. Well, it aint the 70's now, and we have enough titanium to make friggin pencil holders out of it now. With titanium skin most of the tiles won't be needed, or if we did use them, damage wouldn't be fatal with a titanium skin underneath. Plus the whole ship would be lighter... using new materials and modern electronics...we'd save 1,000's of LBs in just the smaller lighter cooler electronics.

In case noone noticed, we have 30 million people out of work, a nice 10 shuttle jobs program for the highest of high tech workers would be nice.... as the cherry on top of a real WPA/CCC jobs program.

Just as an example of how far things have come. The new Chevy LSX engine, $1800, has forged titanium rods that weren't even possible to be made in the 70's and forged moly pistons 50% lighter than the lightest aluminum equivalent available. So in the same formfactor as a smallblock chevy 350, it is 427 cu in and puts out 660HP!!! on a single holley 850 dp. All thanks to the metallurgy and materials science in the last 30 years. Unleash this on shuttle design and we'd have a real kickass machine.
Click to expand...

part of the choice to use ALU vs Ti was that with the heating that goes on at re-entry
both will melt so the question was did it matter that under the heat tiles can stand another 200c? the answer was no
the tiles one the shuttle would be more then fine to keep heating of the skin in the limits of much cheaper and easier to work with ALU
 
the-one1 said:
This is like me selling my 8 year old car to buy a 2011 model. I will get a better car when I buy, but I will walk until then.
Click to expand...

Seriously. Only the car is decades older than that and it's not like there are no other options, now and in the near future. If it's profitable, private companies will pick up the slack.
 
The melting point of Titanium is 3000+F and alloyed with Tungsten it can be closer to 4000F. Aluminum on the other hand melts at 1200F.

A Ti alloy skinned Shuttle does NOT need tiles anywhere but perhaps where the current blue tiles are.

Now use tiles anyway, or now use ceramic paint to achieve close to the same effect, but it isn't critical if there is a scratch.

Further, we can now do things with Ti alloys and Al alloys for the structural elements that were impossible back inthe 70's. So the ship can be 20-30% lighter and also be a little bigger.... the savings in fuel and maintaninence would equal the savings claimed for going to a totally new design as it is.

We have NO VISIONARY LEADERSHIP in Nasa or the government, none. Someone joked about "I believe in StarWars", well it is exactly that mindset that keeps us grounded.

Until we have leadership that does actually believe in startrek/starwars/stargate etc, we will forever be locked in the mind of some random beancounting banker fuckwad, with the imagination of a pet rock.

I lived through all this and had friends working at Nasa at the time. The original design called for Ti and it just wasn't possible specifically because the US did not have access to sufficient supplies... most Ti was controlled by the USSR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top