I've always been slightly taken aback that more people aren't aware of intended purpose of the shuttle. That it was originally conceived of as, essentially, an orbital PT Boat which we never got around to arming (or at least not publicly). It was supposed to be a prototype flagship of what would later become USSPACECOM. The soviets saw right through the civilian song and dance, but many here did not.

What did they think our government forked out so much money on? Flowers, prayer beads and lab coats? I'm kind of a geek, here, not about space mind you, honestly....the specifics bore me to tears (even if the broad strokes make me feel all fuzzy inside). But the machine.....good god the machine! Now it may be unfortunate, but it's also unfortunately true that machines the DOD finds useful, or even potentially useful tend to have a long, long life in service. The Shuttle did, given it's cost and relative value (which was essentially non-existent), I think.

However....having been discontinued with a whimper, whilst other, equally aging weapon platforms are being fought for tooth and nail for shows the value -in our current system- of having a design intended for conflict being made explicitly so. Fairchild Republic put the first A-10 (Warthog) in the sky in the early 70's).....and look at the little kafuffle recently when we decided to retire it. It will, btw, even though it's being "retired" see continued civilian service, for purposes I can only imagine will be thoroughly well reasoned and justified on the basis of it's cost/benefit and sustainability........

My comment was tongue in cheek, but only half so. In our system, in this environment, there is value in being a weapon, or having some utility as a weapon that can be sold to those who make decisions. The shuttles perception as a civilian vehicle, I think, devalued it in the eyes of the powers that be, even though it -was- designed as a weapon. If it were gun, perhaps the money wouldn't be rolling in - but I think that we'd have the Ted Cruz's of the world lining up to positively demand that our money be thrown down -that- rabbit hole until the final bell tolled. As Chuck said, we got billions out of an investment of many tens of the same, but if grift is the name of the game (and isn't it?) then why not grift a little science, eh?

The shuttles replacement, btw.....also a massive fraud. But here's to hoping we turn that to our benefit like we did with the shuttle (or that the contracts recently awarded come to fruition before we get too far down the hole with our newest excuse for grift).

The A-10 will stay in military service, I bet.

Well space, it was a good run, but looks like we won't be exploring you for some time now...

(January 13, 2015 at 3:43 pm)Rhythm Wrote: The shuttles replacement, btw.....also a massive fraud.

Can you go into more depth here?

And maybe I'm weird, but I really don't care much for an actual hard ROI with the space program. Expand our knowledge, get capable of (relatively) safely being able to launch scores of people into space in case we need to get off this rock, and I'll be happy. Anything else, like legit asteroid mining, is gravy at that point.

Neither do I, honestly (with the ROI). It's space, alot of it is single use, you end up leaving alot out there, it's exceedingly expensive even when it's cheap...and it isn't like we don't have the money. We spend more on liquor than we do on the entirety of our space program, our government spends more on discontinued weapons platforms that are still receiving funds despite no hope of actual delivery or deployment, in addition to spnding more on propping up aging weapons platform with no practical or conceptual use on a modern battlefield. Money is the least of our issues when it comes to space exploration and research. It's a manufactured issue, more appropriately. Proceeds from NASA patents, btw...haven't even stayed at NASA, so the game is already rigged when it comes to sustainability.


About the SLS Project.

We retired a working vehicle and we're now bumming rides from other agencies, in part, so that funds could be freed up to pursue other ventures (arguably rightfully freed...the Shuttle was not fiscally sound). However, part (a huge part) of the sales pitch of our new pod is that it's a step forward toward the stars-to turn a phrase- with a return to the moon and a future mission to mars being pitstops along the way. In addition to this, it's going to do what the space shuttle could already do "someday". Block 1 SLS will have a proposed 70t payload (compared to the shuttles 25) to LEO (low earth orbit). In order to achieve this they're basically stacking the retired shuttles SRBs (in a non-recoverable configuration...hello atlantic ocean debris) and attaching them to the sides of their modifed RS25 core engines...which just began testing this month (and are in fact, the engines used by the shuttle). The upper stage (jn exploration config..not lifting config) is an R10 - a Saturn upper stage engine. That's the plan. They hope to have an actual vehicle system by 2018, to do what the shuttle could already do, using the same tech the shuttle used - but...on balance, they'll be able to lift more per launch to LEO - keep this in mind nearer the end.

The Block 2 variant is supposed to be the (lifting) equivalent of an old Saturn V, that's right, you heard me, the next step......if they get the first step working right and the money doesn't run out, is the equivalent of a system flown back in '66 (just like the upper stage is now). Plenty of problems on that count, not the least of which that they have to essentially redesign a Saturn V. Neither the core engine or the boosters called for in this variant actually exist, at present. The upper stage will rely on "advanced boosters" and the renamed EUS core (which is a cluster of Rl10s, a Saturn favorite, first developed in the US as a system in the '50s...seeing a pattern?). The earliest projected mission for this system in toto, is 2021, more likely sometime in the 2030's...at which point we could send a manned expedition with payload to the moon (or LEO, or PO, or GTO). A much, much larger payload than ever before, again, on balance.

All of that said...consider that even with the projected payloads of each stage and ignoring the fact that all we have in operation as of yet, and only barely, is the damned Pod - very credible organizations (folks like Sagan's Planetary Society - people largely engaged in lobbying the gov for -more- funding for space) have run the numbers assuming the sweetheart projections and see no decrease in current launch costs. This prompted them to call for cancellation of the project (you may not recall the ruckus, but even though our betters didn't do shit for the shuttle they fell on a grenade for the as-yet fictional SLS).

It appears as though the whole program may have been designed to revitalize contract opportunities the Shuttle could not, after having lost it's luster due to being long in the tooth and, of course, the disastrous flights we all remember. The SLS is, at present, less than a reskinned shuttle. In a few years it will actually -be- a reskinned shuttle. In a decade or more, it will be a reskinned Saturn V - if they ever get around to figuring out how to do that again.....but more than anything, during this entire time, it will be a PR vehicle for pork. This isn;t the narrative we hear, is it. We'd be forgiven if we thought that this system had already been realized..because they just "shook the bugs out" with a real flight..... riiiiight? Wrong. PR.

Get this.....they actually got -more- money than the Obama admin asked for in our budget....and that's pretty much heathen magic, in the current climate. Que the Senate Launch System.

(if it wasn't immediately apparent, I'm all for the SLS.....lets throw money at it....but I see no sense in pretending that it's something that it's not, or that it isn't something that it is, eh? Way I see it, if we're upfront about it, everytime some jackass wants to reduce the funding and lays all of this out we can look them right in the eye and say "Okay, you're right...but......do you want -your- pork or not? Shut your fucking mouth and sit down".)

Interesting. I haven't actually paid much attention to thee SLS beyond the notion of actually having some sort of manned presence on the moon and Mars, which I generally support because I'm a dyed in the wool nerd.

From a usability standpoint, I'm a lot more interested in SpaceX and whether or not the Planetary Resources fever dream can actually become a reality at some point.

Interestingly, Elon Musk has weighed in on a heavy lifter, stating that he could likely make one better, cheaper, and quicker than the SLS projects proposals. I think that this offer is doomed to failure because if the SLS is the model, cheaper and quicker isn't what we're looking for, and even though we seem perfectly content with allowing an entity like SpaceX to ferry our spacemen to and fro, we seem unwilling to relinquish direct congressional oversight on a project -guaranteed- to produce as much opportunity for career perks as the SLS. Put simply, if there were some folks in government who thought that farming it out to SpaceX would make their buddies more money on grift than the cureent SLS - they'd go with that....and damn the rest of it, but they know better.

(January 16, 2015 at 4:37 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Interestingly, Elon Musk has weighed in on a heavy lifter, stating that he could likely make one better, cheaper, and quicker than the SLS projects proposals. I think that this offer is doomed to failure because if the SLS is the model, cheaper and quicker isn't what we're looking for, and even though we seem perfectly content with allowing an entity like SpaceX to ferry our spacemen to and fro, we seem unwilling to relinquish direct congressional oversight on a project -guaranteed- to produce as much opportunity for career perks as the SLS. Put simply, if there were some folks in government who thought that farming it out to SpaceX would make their buddies more money on grift than the cureent SLS - they'd go with that....and damn the rest of it, but they know better.

Is the Falcon Heavy going to be developed/used for anything? I *think* I read that it's supposed to be used with the Dragon 2, but that seems like a bit much for the job.

More payload to LEO per launch. Commercial application of a heavy lifter pretty much boils down to the bottom line.

Fuck..... there goes nasa.... and any hope for humanity in the future.