The author says that the Space Shuttle lacks the excitement and enthusiasm
associated with the Apollo
program. The Space Shuttle is less romantic – and less dramatic – than the Apollo program ever was. In fact, the next great leap forward in space appears to have been a step backwards! Whatever happened to the Moon and Mars missions? After all, what is the Space Shuttle but an external fuel tank (with two rocket boosters) strapped to a spaceworthy plane? The author says that if the Space Shuttle does not stir the soul – as it moves the mind – we should not be flying in space at all…
The promise held out by the Space Shuttle – orbiting satellites, medical labs, mineral resources, solar power, weather prediction and weightless environment – does not seem to have materialized. Either the costs proved to be prohibitive, or the resolve to push through these programs was lacking. Either way, the basic premises which led to the Space Shuttle becoming a central factor in the entire space effort do not seem to have been based upon reality. Mining the asteroids and building cities in the air remain an (unfulfilled) dream. All that the Space Shuttle has to show for itself:
i)Its use as a cargo ship to supply the crew of the International Space Station
ii)The launch of the Hubble Space Telescope
At an average cost per flight of 1.5 billion dollars, the Space Shuttle is prohibitively expensive. This belies the very rationale of the Space Shuttle – that it would usher in an era of inexpensive space flight. Besides, the Space Shuttle seems to have been all things to all people; and this seems to have affected the integrity of its design. The other factor – reliability – also seems to have taken a beating, as it was plagued by various technical faults throughout; and was always running behind schedule.
The argument is no longer one whether we have to go into space or not. That decision has already been made; and even if it was not it would have been cemented (in concrete) by India’s and China’s ambitious space programs. The decision is how to do so in a cost-effective and purposeful manner. On the other hand, the decision to develop the Space Shuttle seems to have been arrived at independent of its utility, and its relevance to the ongoing space effort. In fact, the Space Shuttle – at least, in the public view – seems to have supplanted the entire space effort.
Perhaps the harshest – and the most telling – criticism of the entire Space Shuttle program is that it represents an evolutionary dead end. There is no Space Shuttle Mark II or Mark III to follow in its footsteps – and to build upon the time, money and effort that has already been invested in the entire program. Instead, the planners have to go back to the drawing board; and to start from the vintage Apollo again!