Reply
Wed 28 Sep, 2005 10:40 am
NASA administrator says space shuttle was a mistake
By Traci Watson
USA TODAY
9/28/05
The space shuttle and International Space Station ?- nearly the whole of the U.S. manned space program for the past three decades ?- were mistakes, NASA chief Michael Griffin said Tuesday.
In a meeting with USA TODAY's editorial board, Griffin said NASA lost its way in the 1970s, when the agency ended the Apollo moon missions in favor of developing the shuttle and space station, which can only orbit Earth.
"It is now commonly accepted that was not the right path," Griffin said. "We are now trying to change the path while doing as little damage as we can."
The shuttle has cost the lives of 14 astronauts since the first flight in 1982. Roger Pielke Jr., a space policy expert at the University of Colorado, estimates that NASA has spent about $150 billion on the program since its inception in 1971. The total cost of the space station by the time it's finished ?- in 2010 or later ?- may exceed $100 billion, though other nations will bear some of that.
Only now is the nation's space program getting back on track, Griffin said. He announced last week that NASA aims to send astronauts back to the moon in 2018 in a spacecraft that would look like the Apollo capsule.
The goal of returning Americans to the moon was laid out by President Bush in 2004, before Griffin took the top job at NASA. Bush also said the shuttle would be retired in 2010.
Griffin has made clear in previous statements that he regards the shuttle and space station as misguided. He told the Senate earlier this year that the shuttle was "deeply flawed" and that the space station was not worth "the expense, the risk and the difficulty" of flying humans to space.
But since he became NASA administrator, Griffin hasn't been so blunt about the two programs.
Asked Tuesday whether the shuttle had been a mistake, Griffin said, "My opinion is that it was.
It was a design which was extremely aggressive and just barely possible." Asked whether the space station had been a mistake, he said, "Had the decision been mine, we would not have built the space station we're building in the orbit we're building it in."
Joe Rothenberg, head of NASA's manned space programs from 1995 to 2001, defended the programs for providing lessons about how to operate in space. But he conceded that "in hindsight, there may have been other ways."
So the US Government screwed up??? This has NEVER happened before! Oh wait...I mean it ALWAYS happens. Never mind.
It was a political decision by Nixon based on normal earth experience. The shuttle was a sort of a bus or shuttle bus to transport human load and cargo to and from space stations never thinking of the enormous risk, expense and difficulty.
Looking back it made perfect sense at the time.
personally i have no time for space exploration, the U.S spends billions on finding other planets when they won't help sort out poverty on their own. sort out your own planet before you go looking for others to screw up.
personally i have no time for space exploration, the U.S spends billions on finding other planets when they won't help sort out poverty on their own. sort out your own planet before you go looking for others to screw up.
Pix wrote:personally i have no time for space exploration, the U.S spends billions on finding other planets when they won't help sort out poverty on their own. sort out your own planet before you go looking for others to screw up.

Tell it to Queen Isabella. With a philosophy like that, Columbus would never have sailed.
To a degree, I agree. The initial idea, if I recall, was to use the Shuttle and Space Station as a platform for deep space exploration.
However, we never really funded it properly which was the mistake.
Pix wrote:personally i have no time for space exploration,
I don't have a lot of time for it either. But if I did I'd be off to some extraterrestrial paradise by now.
So, in what way is the moon the "right" path?
What ARE the aims of the space program?
Personally, I would want to see more and more exploration of other planets, by no means necessarily by people.....
you wanna be the first space rabbit?
I am sure many of my kin have already been.
I am really curious. What IS the current NASA thinking on the "right" aims, does anyone know?
The original plan called for a 2 vehicle inventory to get us to the outer planets.
There was going to be a heavy lift rocket to get large parts of a space station and parts for a moonbase into orbit.
There was supposed to be a 'space plane' based on the scramjet concept (Much like the vehicles that competed for the X-Prize recently), this was to have brought the inhabitants/workers of the space station to and from the station.
From the station, we were supposed to head to the moon to establish a base and then assemble a ship at the space station to take us to Mars and the outer worlds.
The problem was ... budget.
NASA, Congress and all the beancounters looked at all the pieces and said:
"We can only get funding for a small part of what NASA is asking for"
The powers that be took, shrugged, and said:
"A heavy lift rocket is of no use if we cant get people up there, and the space plane is no good if there is nothing to bring the people to"
On the drawing boards was a plan for a 'moving van' spacecraft that had been dismissed as to inefficient and limited in use during the heady days following the moon landing. It did however have one advantage... compared with the other programs ... it was cheap. (Relatively speaking)
So they looked at the moving van and said to themselves:
You know, if we put in some seats and some beds, I guess the 'moving van' could bring people up and down... and maybe we can pack some extra pieces onto the 'van' so it can build the station.
It was a wrong decision then, and its the wrong vehicle still.
My bosses dad worked for NASA for a lot of years and he said that after the moon landings, NASA had some amazing plans that would have put us on the moon, Mars and with a few stations by now, but the money tap was turned off after the landings. It broke his heart that they went with the 'moving van' as he still calls it.
Of course, if we took only a part of the $224 Billion the government has spent on this war there would be plenty of money for space research.