Science Last mission for space shuttle Atlantis tomorrow

[Lamp]

Atlantis to Fly Final Mission of US Space Shuttle Program | Transportation Nation

 

[Tom]

About time. I'm afraid I have no real enthusiasm for the expensive and largely pointless Space Shuttle programme. NASA should have stuck with rockets, they're cheaper, more reliable, and provide the basis for many more missions than are currently possible.

 

[cHodAX]

Have to agree with Tom, the shuttles time came and went, it didn't do anything we could not have done with rockets for alot less money. It is sad to see a great technical achievement sent to the boneyard but in truth it isn't really fit for purpose anymore.

 

[Scouse]

it didn't do anything we could not have done with rockets for alot less money.

IIRC it's ability to open along the whole length of it's back made stuff like the Hubble space telescope possible.

Erm. Quick wiki:

The orbiter carries the payload in a large cargo bay with doors that open along the length of its top, a feature which makes the Space Shuttle unique among present spacecraft. This feature made possible the deployment of large satellites such as the Hubble Space Telescope, and also the capture and return of large payloads back to Earth.

I'll miss it. And it looked cool

 

[old.user4556]

I'll miss the big special needs archaic buttons and switches.

 

[Shagrat]

and a whole space program run on something as powerful as my smartphone. SCARY

 

[Tom]

I think you'll find the combined computing power of NASA and the collective skills of it's staff and contractors is just slightly more powerful than your phone.

 

[cHodAX]

I think you'll find the combined computing power of NASA and the collective skills of it's staff and contractors is just slightly more powerful than your phone.

Yeah but it is no Intel Celeron dual core!

 

[Shagrat]

I think you'll find the combined computing power of NASA and the collective skills of it's staff and contractors is just slightly more powerful than your phone.

slightly mis-posted, was talking about when they moon landed, rather than shuttles

 

[Ormorof]

they never landed on the moon!!

<takes off tin foil hat>

ok ok maybe they did... but what about the "secret" military shuttles?

Second US 'secret space warplane' now in orbit ? The Register

what are they up to

 

[rynnor]

The main problem with the shuttle is that it failed in its aim at being cheaply re-usable - in practice they were practically re-built at great expense between missions.

 

[Cerb]

40 seconds to go...30......FAIL

 

[Lamp]

Shuttle separated at 1638 GMT. Textbook launch.

So....next year....£120,000 to fly into space on Virgin. Think I'll wait till I have enough Tesco Clubcard points...

Interesting site: SpaceX - Space Exploration Technologies Corp.
Guy serious about flying ppl to Mars. Only thing is: one way ticket.

 

[Lamp]

Elon Musk is the dude behind it.

 

[Embattle]

About time. I'm afraid I have no real enthusiasm for the expensive and largely pointless Space Shuttle programme. NASA should have stuck with rockets, they're cheaper, more reliable, and provide the basis for many more missions than are currently possible.

Indeed they should have, although it is still great to look at:

YouTube - ‪Space Shuttle Launch HD 1080p‬&rlm;

YouTube - ‪Space Shuttle Launch: Viewed From an Airplane‬&rlm;

 

[Job]

Travel to Mars and then that's it, everywhere else is out of bounds, too much radiation around the gas planets and too cold in the outer rocky planet/asteroids.
We just need to send our senses to these places and not putting the kikass 3D camera on the next Mars Rover was a joke, they should have ditched some science package, getting people interested is far more important than the science.
Send ultrahigh-def stereoscopic cameras to the planets and microphones when applicable and beam it all back in real time so people can visit by putting on a headset.

 

[Ormorof]

hehe yes because planetary exploration should be for the entertainment of the masses rather than trying to work out whats out there

 

[Zenith.UK]

Send ultrahigh-def stereoscopic cameras to the planets and microphones when applicable and beam it all back in real time so people can visit by putting on a headset.

Uhh... Mars is 4 light minutes distant at closest approach so you couldn't interactively put on a headset to take control of a rover and get instant feedback.

But ultra HD stereoscopic cameras could be the basis of IMAX shows so the point still works.

 

[Job]

Funding is very tight for Nasa, and there's no political will to change it unless it becomes more popular, they've 'scienced' Mars to death and every sensor on the new Mars rover is just a better version of one that's allready there.
The whole thing needs some Hollywood treatment, it has utterly failed to capture the attention of the masses and most people thinks it's for geeks and they don't help the situation by releasing endless press releases of some little rock that might have done this or that.
Mars is a whole planet with the deepest canyon and highest volcano in the solar system, we have sent electronic probes for decades to reveal it's secrets and most people don't give a flying fuck.

 

[Bigmac]

I dont think you'll get people interested in Mars etc till you start sending people up there.

 

[old.Tohtori]

hehe yes because planetary exploration should be for the entertainment of the masses rather than trying to work out whats out there

Rocks.

Lots and lots of rocks. And space dragons ofcourse.

 

[Ormorof]

and Iron (Mars has a dead core, nearly 3000km in diameter made mostly of iron), and of course there seems to be Water at the poles too...

it also has no plate tectonics, we learn alot from studying other planets, putting a camera so fat americans can whine "i thought it would be bigger" is hardly going to help the issue

The lack of fundamental research (research that has no immediately apparent commercial purpose) is a bit worrying, when you consider that many of the most commercially successful inventions have only been made possible due to discoveries found during fundamental research.

and research and inventions that were specifically undertaken with commercial success in mind have had some pretty disasterous consequences (pollution from old school fridges, CFCs, and leaded petrol came because of a desire to do things cheaper to make more money rather than to discover something new)

 

[Shagrat]

so which of these is the most viable long term alternative then?

BBC News - The shuttle's successors

I'm quite impressed with SpaceX and what theyve achieved so far.

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

SpaceX one looks like a novelty dildo