Space Shuttle Blew Up

[Insidious Rex]

Originally posted by Dunadan
Also, I don't see how going to Mars is going to lead to more money for the Shuttle; if anything, it'll divert funds away from it.

Well there are quite a number of devout space enthusiasts who agree with you here and think that the shuttle program really shouldnt be the main focus of NASA in that in the end its just kind of a science experiment moving van for hire. And that NASA should really be thinking well beyond that at this point. Theres only so much we will ever be able to get from space shuttle missions. But exploring another planet well the benefits could be unfathomable.

[jerseydevil]

I think we should be working even harder to get the next generation space shuttle built, continue to develop the space station and start work on the lunar colony. I think we need to figure out how to have permanent colonies of humans in space (on the moon and/or the space station). This won't be the last group of space explorers to die and we have to realize how dangerous this is.

By the way - it doesn't seem like anyone is calling for the elimination of the space program and it seems like NASA will be receiving more money. For the past 10 years - they've had no increase in budget supposedly - not even keeping up with inflation.

[Dunadan]

The point I was making was that I'd prefer to see NASA money (seeing as how they're given buckets of it) go on the shuttle programme, which has reasonably clearly established benefits. There's also the issue of the commercial revenue from servicing satellites etc. I agree with JD's comment about improving what we know works.

I honestly believe that sending a person to Mars would be a phallocentric folly of the most spectacular order. It seems like these kinds of projects have more to do with making the incumbent president look like Captain Kirk than with benefitting humanity.

cheers

d

[Elvellon]

Originally posted by Dunadan
Good point; in the paper today someone wrote that the Spaniard Magellan set off on the first circumnavigation of the globe with five ships and over 200 men. Of those, only one ship and about 20 men returned.

I also take IRex's point that scrimping and saving may be found to be the culprit here (tho' cynics might doubt NASA saying "if only we had been given more money..." as an excuse)

Personally, I doubt the cost-benefit ratio of a Mars expedition; it's good for the ratings, and puts Bush in the same camp as Kennedy, but not much else. It's a sad fact that the Shuttle programme is not covered in the media until something goes wrong. Also, I don't see how going to Mars is going to lead to more money for the Shuttle; if anything, it'll divert funds away from it.

Aham, actually Dunadan, Magellan was a Portuguese, working for Spain at that time.

As for the Mars program. To send someone to mars (I believe it is that you are referring), you will need to build a ship in orbit, therefore you will need better and larger space shuttles.

The usefulness of going to Mars is unknown. Fact is, with all we know already, we still know very little about it. We are not even sure about the life factor. The simple possibility o finding the simplest alien organisms may be reason enough. Other good reason is, that despite what modern technology can achieve, no robot can be as versatile as an astronaut. A single manned expedition can bring much more information that all the unmanned expeditions up to now. In any circumstance, Mars can actually aid us to understand better our world

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Dunadan
I honestly believe that sending a person to Mars would be a phallocentric folly of the most spectacular order. It seems like these kinds of projects have more to do with making the incumbent president look like Captain Kirk than with benefitting humanity.

I do think that astronauts on Mars can benefit mankind, but short term we should be concentrating more on lunar colonies. Mars has polar ice caps, which will enable us to terriform Mars at some point and possibly make it habitable for humans, but we have to first set up a colony on the moon. Mars should a long term goal though.

On the other hand - sending astronauts up to Mars would answer A LOT of questions about the planet that we're restricted in finding out with just probes. Probes are either preprogrammed and can't make decisions - or else they're controlled by operators on earth by using video monitors to make decisions based on the environment. Humans on the other hand - by being up there - can spot something that a probe might miss and then can make an intelligent decision to investigate. Nothing at this point can replace humans in terms of exploring. Probes lay the framework and can be used to answer basic questions, but humans are required to make the real discoveries.