5 ms·

> The fact that the original goals couldn't be met was only made clear after the Challenger disaster. It only became official after the Challenger disaster, bu

• jessriedel 8y ago
  That's a very long link. Can you please quote the relevant parts that you think support your point?
  • oldgradstudent 8y ago
    The main bullet is: > And, according to The Washington Monthly's sources, flying the shuttle will cost more, not less, than flying those old disposable rockets. It is explained in the sections titled "Economy at any Cost" and "Turn Down the Volume". The main argument, which was shown to be correct, is that NASA inflated the launch volume in order to amortized their huge fixed costs on an unrealistic number of flights.
    • jessriedel 8y ago
      Thanks! However, this seems to be an economic estimate by one guy that sounds plausible enough but can't be fully assessed by a non-expert. Although it's useful evidence, it's not very helpful for determining the actual expert opinion at the time.
      • oldgradstudent 8y ago
        The 1973 GAO report[1] mentions the same issues. It does not reach a final judgement, but recommends Congress should examine the planned missions carefully. The recommendations and conclusions sections is a relatively short and easy read. I get the impression (though it could be my bias) that it is written skeptically. [1] https://www.gao.gov/assets/210/203748.pdf https://www.gao.gov/assets/210/203748.pdf
  • oldgradstudent 8y ago
    Also, it's a great article. Well worth reading. It withstood the test of time.