Other

Glenn: don’t retire the shuttle yet

If former senator and astronaut John Glenn had his druthers, he would keep the shuttle flying after 2010, he said Tuesday after a Capitol Hill event, according to Florida Today. “The shuttles may be old, but they’re still the most complex vehicles ever put together by people, and they’re still working very well,” he said. He also advocated keeping the shuttles going, despite the expense, to avoid paying for Soyuz flights. “[I]t’s also going to be expensive to contract with the Russians to put our people up in space in Russian vehicles to our space station and bring us back. Is that the kind of economy the American people want? I hardly think so.” (What he means by “economy” there isn’t clear.)

The report didn’t offer any more details about Glenn’s comments, but if you’re really curious, and have a lot of money to spend, you could always bid on a tour of the National Air and Space Museum with Glenn. Minimum next bid, as of this writing, was $15,500.

11 comments to Glenn: don’t retire the shuttle yet

  • I think we should see what the private sector (mainly SpaceX) can do before retiring the shuttle.

    If NewSpace can fulfill most of NASA’s needs during the gap, then retire “that old bird” and allow the Falcon (via SpaceX) take its place.

  • reader

    Keep it flying to do what, precisely ? Complexity is not a virtue on its own. Pay 5 billion a year to avoid paying a fraction of that to Russians ? Yes that all makes perfect sense.

  • Me

    “If NewSpace can fulfill most of NASA’s needs during the gap, then retire “that old bird” and allow the Falcon (via SpaceX) take its place.”

    Why just Falcon? Why just nuspace? Who say Spacex is going to win CSR (COTS II) and not other contractors like OSC, Boeing, Spacehab?

  • Me,
    1 – I’d argue that Spacehab is part of NewSpace
    2 – I don’t think anyone really has a problem with big aero, at least in theory – its more a question of whether they can/want/are able to actually produce something that doesn’t fall in the catagory of cost-plus contracting

  • Charles in Houston

    Esteemed Space Enthusiasts –

    Everyone knows that I am a supporter of keeping our Shuttle flying (since it is all we have) and “reader” said:

    Keep it flying to do what, precisely ? Complexity is not a virtue on its own. Pay 5 billion a year to avoid paying a fraction of that to Russians ? Yes that all makes perfect sense.

    It might come in handy to resupply the Station – say with Control Moment Gyros.

    And what would be the cost of flying on the Soyuz to Station, once the Shuttle is retired? On other threads here we read about Russia cutting off gas supplies to neighbors when they would not agree to increased prices. That could NEVER happen with Soyuz flights, right???

    I only hope that the Russians would agree to fly astronauts – at any cost. They can sell the seats to Europeans and Japanese, and that puts them in charge. They might not be willing to sell astronauts a seat regardless of what we offered them.

  • Me

    Ferris,

    CSR is not Cost plus, so does that mean that big aero isn’t going for it?

    As for Spacehab, they had Boeing as their prime contractor for most of their existence and are/were using LM for ARCTUS. They are big aero with a facade

  • Me, remind me what CSR – and, as I said, I have no problem with them going after any contract – they just need to realize the game is changing (and, I think some of them are, actually).

  • anonymouspace

    Glenn’s comments make no sense:

    “‘The shuttles may be old, but they’re still the most complex vehicles ever put together by people,'”

    Complexity is not a figure of merit, especially for human-rated flight systems.

    “‘and they’re still working very well,’”

    I guess if 1-in-60 LOC/LOV/LOM figures, flaky ET ECO sensors in the critical path for certain launch failure modes, and more and bigger pieces of foam falling off the ET than ever all count as “working very well”, then yes, the Shuttles are still “working very well”.

    “‘[I]t’s also going to be expensive to contract with the Russians to put our people up in space in Russian vehicles to our space station and bring us back.'”

    It’s going to be more expensive, by an order of magnitude or more, to recertify the Space Shuttle and fly it until Ares I/Orion or some alternative is operational.

    “you could always bid on a tour of the National Air and Space Museum with Glenn. Minimum next bid, as of this writing, was $15,500.”

    If only a Glenn tour went for $30-40 billion, then maybe there would be enough money to back up the retired Senator’s claims and wishes regarding Shuttle operations extension.

    FWIW…

  • Me

    CSR – Commercial Station Resupply aka COTS II

  • Glenn’s comments make no sense

    You expected otherwise? It’s John Glenn.

  • […] that this is hardly the first time Glenn has advocated for extending the shuttle. Back in May 2008 Glenn called for extending the shuttle, saying that the shuttles are “still working very well” and that it will be […]

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>