[Taristin]

oooor we could research stronger materials. Perhaps some sort of metalic-ceramic composite, strengthened with more metal and ceramics?

oh! Or energy shielding!

[Bobboau]

or we could just have a whole bunch of tethers so if one gets hit, the others can take over while the section gets fixed.

[Taristin]

I like energy shielding better...

[achtung]

or we could create a more efficient and safer launching system.

[ChronoReverse]

Originally posted by Deepblue


The shuttle keeps losing the foam actually because the "glue" they use to hold it in place was downgraded due to complaints from environmental groups. The original stuff was much better.

The foam itself was downgraded about a year before Columbia.  I learned not to correlate incidents like these with cause and effect but I can't say that I'm not almost convinced that it had something to do with it.

or we could create a more efficient and safer launching system.

Oh that's "easy".  Put the reuseable part on top of the rocket instead of beside it.  That's why the Saturn V could get away with having tons of ice falling off of it.



In any case, the Shuttle Fleet was meant to be retired by 2010 regardless to be replaced by the Crew Exploratory Vehicle (if that ever is designed and built).

[Mongoose]

Originally posted by Kosh
The foam is for insulation. I just say scrap the damn shuttle already. The Russians were smart and scrapped their shuttle a long time ago.

Query:  without the Shuttle's cargo capacity, how do you expect to finish construction on the ISS or perform other cargo-intensive missions?  The shuttle is far more valuable than the Russians' Soyuz capsules due to its large cargo capacity (not to mention its spacious interior, for which astronauts were incredibly grateful after the Apollo sardine cans ).  At the moment, the Shuttle is the best thing we've got and a necessity for maintaining a presence in space; while a replacement is desperately needed, we also need to keep them up and running.

[Kosh]

The shuttle keeps losing the foam actually because the "glue" they use to hold it in place was downgraded due to complaints from environmental groups. The original stuff was much better.

Nice statement, got any credible proof?

At the moment, the Shuttle is the best thing we've got and a necessity for maintaining a presence in space; while a replacement is desperately needed, we also need to keep them up and running.

Unfortunatly, you are right in that the shuttle is the best thing we have........which shows how pathetic our species really is.

Query: without the Shuttle's cargo capacity, how do you expect to finish construction on the ISS or perform other cargo-intensive missions?

Magic. It's not like the ISS will be finished within our lifetimes. It's rapidly turning into the vaporware of the international community.

[Knight Templar]

Originally posted by Bobboau
that is the one big problem, but I think a destributed array of tethers (in addition to moveing the individual tethers to avoid impact as much as posable, and dunow maybe lasers) could solve this problem

Sort of like Reagan's Star Wars, minus the "HAHA WTF UR J/K RITE?" part?

[achtung]

We need to accept the fact that the shuttle was good for what it was made for, which was throwing something in the ruskies faces

[Kosh]

Originally posted by Swantz
We need to accept the fact that the shuttle was good for what it was made for, which was throwing something in the ruskies faces

Not really considering that the Russians came out with a virtually identicle copy a few years later.

[pyro-manic]

Not to mention they actually built a "star wars" weapon, unlike America...

[Mefustae]

Originally posted by Kosh
Not really considering that the Russians came out with a virtually identicle copy a few years later.

That's what the Ruskies are best at, nicking other nation's ideas; like when they stole the design for the B-29 Stratofortress, a brilliant people they are. Not to mention the fact that they realised early that landing people on the Moon was impossible given technology at the time, and thus didn't go to the trouble of staging it to fool the entire world...like a certain Superpower went on to do...!:nervous:

Anyway, why can't the US just reorganise NASA and make a profitable, successful Space Program, hell, they spent several hundred thousand dollars proving that a Frisbee couldn't be used as a weapon! If they have enough money to try out Frisbee-Grenades, then they should have enough to restructure a competent Space Program, and get some Orion Destroyers into space...

...Just as long as they don't commercialise Space, like what's happening with that X-Plane Prize thing a little while back. Think of it, if Space Travel becomes commercialized, there'll be gigantic 'COKE' signs in orbit, and before long some American dip**** will have the bright idea of bringing an Asteroid into orbit so they can mine it...and suddenly 'oops!' there goes all life on the planet...

[FireCrack]

^

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

[vyper]

[q]Anyway, why can't the US just reorganise NASA and make a profitable, successful Space Program[/q]

Because there's no oil in space.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Mefustae

...Just as long as they don't commercialise Space, like what's happening with that X-Plane Prize thing a little while back. Think of it, if Space Travel becomes commercialized, there'll be gigantic 'COKE' signs in orbit, and before long some American dip**** will have the bright idea of bringing an Asteroid into orbit so they can mine it...and suddenly 'oops!' there goes all life on the planet...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/20/space_billboard_ban/

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Kosh



The foam is for insulation. I just say scrap the damn shuttle already. The Russians were smart and scrapped their shuttle a long time ago.

Specifically, the foam is to stop ice forming on the tank once it's filled up (the exterior parts are filled with freezing cold oxygen & hydrogen).  Basically so you don't get giant chunks of ice falling.

[pyro-manic]

A sensible thing to do whould be to add a second skin to the tank, and have the insulation between the two. Then it can't fall off. Or wrap the thing in gaffer tape like I suggested before...

[Mefustae]

Originally posted by aldo_14
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/20/space_billboard_ban/

Hmmm, the US Government doing something that could be 'positive'...not only is that something you really don't hear too often these days, it's definitely something that should be taken with a grain of salt...

...Well, thankfully, we'll still be able to what Red Dwarf so eloquently put forward; using a ship capable of Faster than Light Travel, initiate a series of specifically timed and placed Supernovas (shouldn't really be a problem if you've got FTL Travel down ) so that the light from the Supernovas all reach Earth at the exact same time...thus, you've got 'ENJOY COKE' tatooed across the night sky for Generations to come...

[Lynx]

Originally posted by Kosh
The foam is for insulation. I just say scrap the damn shuttle already. The Russians were smart and scrapped their shuttle a long time ago......Not really considering that the Russians came out with a virtually identicle copy a few years later.

The Russian canceled their program because of it's costs; as the Sovjet Union dwindeled, there wasn't any money left to run it, but not because of concerns for crew security.
Actually, while the Buran design is an aerodynamical copy of the shuttle, it's inherently different on the inside and only employs domestically developed on-board systems and is considered a superior design, partly because it was developed after the shuttle and therefore has newer on-board systems. Also, the heat shield tiles of the heatshields are employed in a different, more robust way than on the shuttle and are less susceptible to damage. Buran has a significantly  higher lift capability, no main engines(which makes it less complex) and instead relied on it's Energija booster, which is also very different to the shuttles launch system. Instead of three separate parts, it's just one big rocket. There are less chances of damage during separation, since there's only one compared to the two of the shuttle(boosters&tank) and since Energija is made from metal you don't have pieces of it falling down from it all the time.

The Energijas are also cool machines for themselves. They had a lift capability of almost 200 tons, so you wouldn't need shuttles for building the ISS since you could launch half the space station at once with one of those.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Mefustae


Hmmm, the US Government doing something that could be 'positive'...not only is that something you really don't hear too often these days, it's definitely something that should be taken with a grain of salt...

[tinfoil hat]  Perhaps they just realise they wouldn't be able to solely control the advertising?  [/tinfoil hat]