Slashdot Mirror
The Real Reason for Sending Astronauts into Space
Puneet writes "An article on New York Times discussing the need for astronauts for carrying out experiments in space. Too many of the planned experiments depend on crew operations when they could more effectively be done without them. In many cases, the crew is needed only to deploy an autonomous experiment."
I don't mean to contradict you; I agree that the space shuttle is old, and that technology has marched an awful long distance since then. But my Real-time computing prof was one of the people who helped design the computer systems on the modern space shuttle. They're old 386s (5 of them), but they really are the best tool for the job.
1.) Since their circuits were larger, they were less vulnerable to space radiation.
2.) They were plenty fast enough for what was needed.
3.) Their faults and strengths and weaknesses are COMPLETELY known. NASA won't send up anything that they think they don't know everything about.
Whenever one of the computers makes a decision about something, two others also make the same decision. A fourth computer treats each of the three as a vote, and the majority rules. A fifth acts as a backup for the fourth. How's that for a stable system?
Yes, the space shuttle is old. But it's VERY well designed, and its flaws are poor fuel economy and it's weak material structure. Modern computers and all our other whiz-bang gadgetry aren't likely to be near as useful as a stronger or lighter construction material, or a better launch mechanism.
Austin is more fun than Dallas.
"The reason for the space race was a PR battle with the Soviet Union, nothing more. That reason obviously doesn't exist anymore."
Actually the real reason was to push the limits of heavy lift rockets. The Air Forces and Strategic Rocket Forces were happy with getting a megaton downtown into Moscow or New York, but our German Rocket Scientists and thier German Rocket Scientists wanted to go to the Moon and Mars and they whispered into the ears of Generals talk of the high ground of space, recce bases on the Moon, nuclear missile platforms in space, big FOBS rigs and all sorts of things.
In the mid 60s USAF and the Soviets were working on manned stations for space warfare and recon work. After Nixon and the Democrats starting wacking budgets USAF's station got crippled and turned into Skylab while the Soviet dreams died on the launch pad with thier Moon rocket's multiple failures.
It wasn't so much a PR battle as it was public devlopment of big rockets for military purposes with a civilian side.
I'm really curious as to what government agencies you think are actually doing their job.
The FAA is one. FDA, maybe...but they're going deeper and deeper into the pockets of the drug companies. I'm worried about 'em.
The reason nobody will invest in space is at least partly because they've seen NASA destroy every privately funded manned space initiative with white papers alleging that the rockets won't work.
Of course, when that company goes bankrupt and dies, NASA comes in and buys the (rather clever) rocket designs for pennies on the dollar.
Go read up on Beale Aerospace. Rotary Rocket is also another good example.
Were these firms ahead of their time? Perhaps, but NASA should have been helping them, not killing them.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!