Shuttle forever?

THE TDF QUESTIONS

  • NASA deleted the X-33 project, and plans now to use the shuttle fleet for next 20 years. What do you think about such news? Does it mean that in the next 20 years we will not have the 10-fold reduction of the cost to orbit?
  • Is this a victory of the space bureaucrats, that in this way they assure their wages for another 20 years from public money?
  • Was X33 such a bad project?
  • Should we resign ourselves to follow the ISS-shuttle path for the next 15 years?
  • What else could really be an alternative? Does some private enterprise have any chance of really competing on this ground?
  • The news says that X33 “…relied on too many untested technologies, opponents argued, when a more practical but less glamorous design would do the job”. Such a fact starts speculations about reasons and future:
  • is such a “SF” strategy true?
  • If yes, why did NASA adopt it, or never correct it?
  • Was NASA never really aiming to cut the cost to orbit in a short time?
  • And, now, will they try again with a more practical approach?

SOME ANSWERS

  • Dale M. Gray (Frontier Status – USA) “Shuttles forever? Not exactly.” – The Shuttle is an evolving system. In the current investment climate NASA is the only remaining player capable of developing a reusable spacecraft.
  • Peter Wainwright (SpaceFuture – UK/JAPAN) – “Shuttles forever? But Venturestar was not designed to carry passengers, anyway” – It will take a lot, for NASA, to convince anyone that they are really and truly committed to reducing the cost of access to space and giving us what we all really want – space tourism.
  • Michael Martin-Smith (Space Age Associates – UK) – “Shuttles forever? NASA reckons without its host (China)” – Budget cuts will reduce the power of the bureaucrats and boost new players. Moreover, the Chinese competitor will soon break the silence.
  • Fabian Eilingsfeld (RocketFinance – Germany) – “Shuttles forever” – The abortive launch of VentureStar/X33 “proved” that free access to space is not feasible, quod (NASA) erat demonstrandum.
  • Adriano Autino (Technologies of the Frontier) – “Moon jazz” – The expendable rocket lobbies oppose the development of the SSTO technology, as the oil lobbies oppose the photovoltaic, both terrestrial and space based, the military lobbies keep their dominion on the access to space closed … But we keep on dreaming of the Moon.
  • Adriano Autino (Technologies of the Frontier) – “A Cold War 2?” – The new US Administration finds the yearly expense for civilian space exorbitant, and aims to decrease it. The US expense for civilian space is less than 5% of the military one. The US military expense is going to be increased by 50 billions US$ per year.
  • Adriano Autino (Technologies of the Frontier) – “Tourists and frontiers” – The circum-terrestrial orbital space enters the decisional space of individuals, whether NASA likes it or not.