Now that Endeavour has landed safely..

Can we start thinking about a new shuttle design to be implemented to prevent that damage from happening again, and again?

Budget cuts may delay shuttle replacement
23:59 05 February 2007
NewScientist.com news service
Kelly Young

NASA may not be able to launch the space shuttle's replacement by 2014 as promised, according to the agency's 2008 budget request to Congress.

This could increase the gap between the retirement of the space shuttles in 2010 and the launch of their successors, the Orion spacecraft and Ares I rocket, forcing NASA to rely on Russian Soyuz and future commercial spacecraft to send astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS).

The potential delay is due to the combined effects of the higher-than-expected costs of returning the space shuttles to flight, budget cuts to the Orion and Ares programmes, and new legislation that may limit NASA's 2007 funding to that of 2006.

"I'm concerned about our ability to bring these new capabilities online by 2014," says NASA Administrator Michael Griffin. "If we do not quickly come to grips with this issue, we may have a prolonged gap between the end of the shuttle programme and the beginning of operational capability in our new systems, like that which occurred between 1975 and 1981, when we transitioned from Apollo to space shuttle." He says the gap led to the loss of engineering know-how within NASA.

More at
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn11112-budget-cuts-may-delay-shuttle-replacement.html


I remember seeing a lifesize mock-up the original prototype replacement vehicle, the X11, while I was at the Kennedy Space Center back in 1993. It was right after viewing a launch, and I remember being so excited to see it, until I realized it was being hauled away! :(

The shuttle design has been declared obsolete and no more will be built.
The "reusable space truck" never proved to be realistic.

The new launch vehicle will be the disposable capsule style.

That said, I expect yet another round of attention will be paid to the "ice chunk" issue

Well, there's a very real space station that cannot have been built without a space truck.

The Hubble Space Telescope was delivered -- and repaired, twice. Many communications and telemetry satellites have been delivered. And a lot of science has been done.

Yes, there have been trajedies. But there were also tragedies in the Apollo and Mercury Programs. The danger is inherent.

Yes, it has cost alot of money. But look at it this way, the cost of the war in Iraq easily eclipses the cost of the entire shuttle program from start to finish.

but the vision of a quick-turnaround low-cost "shuttle" never materialized
the number of flights per year never came close to expectations

that is why they are going a different route

I am a space junkie since sputnik

had the pleasure of working on the Space Station Freedom program for 3 years, until it was mothballed to be replaced by ISS

They do seem to use a lot of what does work in the Shuttle program, combined with what worked in Apollo. The crew vehicle's going back on top of the rocket, instead of being strapped to the side, meaning no more chunks of ice and foam falling to hit delicate parts like heat shields. The new crew vehicle's going to be a lot smaller, basically looking like an enlarged Apollo capsule, which will be cheaper and more efficient - one vehicle for launching astronauts, another large vehicle (Ares) which will be used for payloads.

At least that's the plan. It looks good from a general perspective - the new vehicle doesn't have big heavy wings, doesn't have to have a huge cargo bay, instead meeting in orbit with cargo launched on a different vehicle optimized for the job. It should be far more efficient and sustainable than the Shuttle, which never lived up to its promise of reusability, efficiency or making space flight like jumping in an airliner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator

Still a ways off but I love the idea.