According to NewScientist online magazine
NASA and its international partners may be hard-pressed to keep the space station alive after the planned retirement of the space shuttle in 2010. The US House of Representatives Committee on Science and Technology's Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics held a hearing on the status of the space shuttle and the International Space Station (ISS) on July 24th in Washington, DC, US. After the shuttles retire in 2010, current plans call for other vehicles, such as the European Space Agency's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), to pick up some of the slack.
NASA and its international partners may be hard-pressed to keep the space station alive after the planned retirement of the space shuttle in 2010. The US House of Representatives Committee on Science and Technology's Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics held a hearing on the status of the space shuttle and the International Space Station (ISS) on July 24th in Washington, DC, US. After the shuttles retire in 2010, current plans call for other vehicles, such as the European Space Agency's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), to pick up some of the slack.
NASA is relying on commercial space vehicles currently under development in its Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) programme to make up the rest.
But Tommy Holloway, who retired in 2002 from his position as manager of NASA's space station programme, said he doubts that the commercial vehicles will be ready by the time the shuttles retire, as planned.
thanks to Shaun A. Saunders for the post
5 comments:
I KNEW it! so very very short sighted. After the first accident they should have known that there was a problem..
First accident? Do you mean Apollo 1, prior to that, or since???
no, since the article was about the shuttle, I meant to say the first accident with the shuttle...Columbia
OK (sorry).
My mind was on the earlier aspects of the Apollo prog, having just watched a doco on that and associated discussion of NASA's mgt culture etc (which, some might argue, hasn't really changed).
nothing to be sorry about, I know you young whipper snappers, dont....ummm what were we talking about?
Argue that things havent really changed? The only movement NASA does is when they crap themselves after an accident. And thats the only time things really get done. Look, they stopped painting the external tank. To save weight. unfortunitly the foam is bright orange. Geeee that attracts birds!
They knew this and did nothing. They had film of it breaking off after birds had been at it. Before that, MM had told them that launching in freezing weather was outside the specs that they build the SRBs on. NASA knew they had a problem and thats why they didn't launch in the cold....so why did they? Because its a business as usual bending to governmental pressure org.
Post a Comment