3 ms·

Thats a rather slanted view. While the shuttle was more or less dated by the 80s, it was still the most capable launch and recovery craft we have ever produced.

• wallace_f 8y ago
  A lot to say here, but you should try to do a web search for these ideas as they're widely published. I even was given results with famous Youtubers having videos dedicated to exactly this topic. This one[1] opens up with exactly what I said: 'Most dangerous and expensive manned launch system in history.' It would be great if people were inclined to, when presented with evidence or arguments which disagree with their worldviews, to examine the evidence themselves. In this case, it would even be really convenient (and fun) to do that. But I know most people aren't like that, and are more likely to rely on their prejudgments and say, as you did, "that's a rather slanted view." It's very common, even where it should be nowhere to be found, like in science. Reminds me of the famous quote by Planck: >A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. You may be aware of some other more-famous mismanagements in the space industry like the Pioneer Anomaly being difficult to study because no data was retained--same as with most all of the work done in the Apollo program. The problems were of groupthink, and authority/hierarchy. The shuttle was chosen by Nixon over Von Braun's plans because of those reasons. The military industrial complex was involved, as well as the intelligence agencies, and they tranformed the shuttle into something other than what NASA originally designed. And nobody really knows why he chose the side-grouped design, many speculate because Nixon thought it looked cool. Before Challenger killed 7 people, there were engineers that had raised precise concerns of the exact problem, under the exact conditions, which would cause this disaster. Culture and politics had become so bad that detailing the problem was unacceptable. Groupthink and hierarchy developed a culture not tolerant of dissent. That's why Feynman agreed to testify of the problem because he had credence to lend to the engineer's claims. It was negligent manslaughter that killed those astronauts. 1 - https://youtu.be/Ja4ZlswGvpE https://youtu.be/Ja4ZlswGvpE
  • gamblor956 8y ago
    If you think the space shuttle was the most dangerous launch system ever made, you clearly are unfamiliar with the Russian launch vehicles of that era, most of which were literally put together from spare parts.
    • wallace_f 8y ago
      I'm unfamamiliar? Really? The Let's look at the facts. Have a look yourself(1). Manned Russian launch vehicles of that era were more dangeroys? No. Russia had zero fatalities since 1970. By contrast, the space shuttle accounts for the vast majority of fatalities in all of launch history, and the most dangerous launch system per launch. The design itself has been criticized as inherently dangerous compared to a traditional rocket+capsule. Please consider, as I just wrote above, it would be nice if when people were confronted with information contrary to their worldviews, if they would please consider the evidence in front of them, instead of just shouting out their defiance as their cognitive bias wills them to. How else to stop people from being willfully stupid? 1 - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_...