26 ms·

When the Space Shuttle program was decommissioned in 2011, the U.S. lost human spaceflight capability. We are at a point in U.S. history that is similar to the

by Arjuna 13y ago

When the Space Shuttle program was decommissioned in 2011, the U.S. lost human spaceflight capability. We are at a point in U.S. history that is similar to the human spaceflight gap that existed between the Apollo program and the Space Shuttle program. There is an American flag that flew on-board STS-1. It was left on display in the ISS by the crew of STS-135. It is awaiting return to the U.S. by the next American crew that is launched from the U.S. I do my best to embrace the concept of being a citizen of the world rather than of a specific country, but I can't help feeling a little patriotic. Like many of you, I grew up watching the Space Shuttle launches; all of those memories of both the successful launches and the tragic losses. That zeitgeist you grew up with, seeing those launches: it indelibly marked young people like us, with the knowledge and firm belief that, anything is possible through science and technology, perhaps even more so because it was during that time that we were teaching ourselves to program on our Commodore 64, Atari 800, etc. Perhaps this feeling is heightened for me now, because in the U.S., I think there has been an under-current feeling for some time now, that could be paraphrased as, "Where are we heading, as a nation?" I still believe in those child-hood dreams, and my eyes get a little misty, thinking of when we will launch into space and bring that flag home.

JulianMorrison 13y ago
SpaceX has done low earth orbit, geosynchronous transfer orbit, and is working on reusable self-landing first stages and human spaceflight. Out of them and NASA, I expect SpaceX to get there first.
lotsofmangos 13y ago
When the Space Shuttle program was decommissioned in 2011, the U.S. lost human spaceflight capability. The real problem is that there are so many people who either don't care or think space exploration is a bad thing. If you look at some polls you get half of all people polled not knowing that Armstrong landed on the moon and a fairly clear majority opposing the idea of spending public money on going to Mars. http://www.gallup.com/poll/3712/landing-man-moon-publics-view.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/3712/landing-man-moon-publics-vie... So now there is the situation that NASA lost the ability to get people into space and only the nerds complained. It is going to be very difficult politically to get that capability back.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- harshreality 13y ago
  I think the question is not whether it's a good idea to return humans to space (of course it is), but what it will accomplish and at what cost. You can make observations such as, "You have to feed the soul, too!" (from The West Wing after Josh mocks the cost of Mars Direct). However, there are serious problems on Earth in the U.S. that cannot be solved by developing manned spaceflight tech, and those concerns are going to override thoughts about manned spaceflight for most people most of the time. What drove the space program (first unmanned, then manned, then to the Moon) was national pride and the desire to out-compete the Soviets. I don't see any available current of feeling that could generate similar support today. Ignore the Shuttle for a moment and imagine we'd kept human-carrying spacecraft perched on top of rockets, like we did before; in other words: safer, cheaper, manned spaceflight in the modern era. What has manned spaceflight achieved in the last 30 years? We've serviced some satellites, certainly, but at what cost compared to simply deorbiting them and launching new ones? Experiments in space have advanced medical and materials science technology somewhat, but consider how far we could have advanced if all the money thrown at the Shuttle and ISS programs had been allocated to automated/remote-controlled experiments and, where possible, simulations. Whatever the difference is, those are missions where you could make a case for a manned mission to conduct experiments, but I doubt there would be very many. Next, let's imagine a hypothetical Zubrin-inspired mission to Mars. It would inspire everyone, but for how long? People don't stay inspired forever, and suppose it becomes apparent that we'll never go back to Mars again because the cost/benefit is too high, or heaven forbid if the mission fails because the astronauts die unexpectedly. Things on Earth become worse because the hope of productive Mars missions will have dimmed. Americans have become much more risk-averse. I think that without a strong and sustained reason for sending humans back to space on a long-term or regular basis, we shouldn't bother. Space is not a very nice place for humans, even with all our technology. There's plenty of inspiration available by accomplishing things in space without risking astronauts' lives to do so.
  - lotsofmangos 13y ago
spiritplumber 13y ago
I don't know if I am patriotic or not. The worst thing that happened to my culture, was getting a state to go with it. (Italy)

by Arjuna 13y ago

JulianMorrison 13y ago

SpaceX has done low earth orbit, geosynchronous transfer orbit, and is working on reusable self-landing first stages and human spaceflight. Out of them and NASA, I expect SpaceX to get there first.

lotsofmangos 13y ago

When the Space Shuttle program was decommissioned in 2011, the U.S. lost human spaceflight capability. The real problem is that there are so many people who either don't care or think space exploration is a bad thing. If you look at some polls you get half of all people polled not knowing that Armstrong landed on the moon and a fairly clear majority opposing the idea of spending public money on going to Mars. http://www.gallup.com/poll/3712/landing-man-moon-publics-view.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/3712/landing-man-moon-publics-vie... So now there is the situation that NASA lost the ability to get people into space and only the nerds complained. It is going to be very difficult politically to get that capability back.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
harshreality 13y ago
I think the question is not whether it's a good idea to return humans to space (of course it is), but what it will accomplish and at what cost. You can make observations such as, "You have to feed the soul, too!" (from The West Wing after Josh mocks the cost of Mars Direct). However, there are serious problems on Earth in the U.S. that cannot be solved by developing manned spaceflight tech, and those concerns are going to override thoughts about manned spaceflight for most people most of the time. What drove the space program (first unmanned, then manned, then to the Moon) was national pride and the desire to out-compete the Soviets. I don't see any available current of feeling that could generate similar support today. Ignore the Shuttle for a moment and imagine we'd kept human-carrying spacecraft perched on top of rockets, like we did before; in other words: safer, cheaper, manned spaceflight in the modern era. What has manned spaceflight achieved in the last 30 years? We've serviced some satellites, certainly, but at what cost compared to simply deorbiting them and launching new ones? Experiments in space have advanced medical and materials science technology somewhat, but consider how far we could have advanced if all the money thrown at the Shuttle and ISS programs had been allocated to automated/remote-controlled experiments and, where possible, simulations. Whatever the difference is, those are missions where you could make a case for a manned mission to conduct experiments, but I doubt there would be very many. Next, let's imagine a hypothetical Zubrin-inspired mission to Mars. It would inspire everyone, but for how long? People don't stay inspired forever, and suppose it becomes apparent that we'll never go back to Mars again because the cost/benefit is too high, or heaven forbid if the mission fails because the astronauts die unexpectedly. Things on Earth become worse because the hope of productive Mars missions will have dimmed. Americans have become much more risk-averse. I think that without a strong and sustained reason for sending humans back to space on a long-term or regular basis, we shouldn't bother. Space is not a very nice place for humans, even with all our technology. There's plenty of inspiration available by accomplishing things in space without risking astronauts' lives to do so.
- lotsofmangos 13y ago

spiritplumber 13y ago

I don't know if I am patriotic or not. The worst thing that happened to my culture, was getting a state to go with it. (Italy)