The Device NASA Is Leaving Behind

iminplaya writes "After years of delays, NASA hopes to launch this week a European-built laboratory that will greatly expand the research capability of the international space station. Although some call it a milestone, the launch has focused new attention on the space agency's earlier decision to back out of plans to send up a different, $1.5 billion device — one that many scientists contend would produce far more significant knowledge. "...it would be a true international disgrace if this instrument ends up as a museum piece that never is used.""

Comments

Huh?

[EngrBohn]

From the article: "The AMS is an automated device with a specific set of scientific tasks."

Would someone please explain to me why this device must be attached to the space station? (Other than that it was built to be attached to the space station.) It seems to me that such an instrument could've been placed on its own dedicated satellite.

Or is this a case of "we'll get funding for this if we hitch it to the best funding-horse around"?

A pity for physicists, perhaps but . .

[thaig]

Why do the rest of us care one iota about dark matter? It may answer fundamental questions etc and could eventually have some positive effect for the people who have to pay for it but surely if our discoveries have to wait 10 years for the next opportunity to put a similar instrument up it's no immediate tragedy?

On the other hand any biological experiments on Columbus might have a far more immediate effect on us e.g. understanding salmonella is important because all of us are at some degree of risk from it.

I am sorry for the people who see their great efforts at risk of being wasted - but not that sorry, because I know that the practitioners of every discipline think that theirs is the most fundamental and important to mankind in some way and all of them are wrong, because everything is important.

Re:A pity for physicists, perhaps but . .

[tomz16]

Why do the rest of us care one iota about dark matter? It may answer fundamental questions etc and could eventually have some positive effect for the people who have to pay for it but surely if our discoveries have to wait 10 years for the next opportunity to put a similar instrument up it's no immediate tragedy?

On the other hand any biological experiments on Columbus might have a far more immediate effect on us e.g. understanding salmonella is important because all of us are at some degree of risk from it.... Just consider that people would have posed the same argument about quantum mechanics, particle physics, etc. etc. a hundred years ago. Yet technologies based on the understanding of these theories fundamentally enables most of modern medicine today.
No reason to be short-sighted here. The point is that you simply cannot perform a higher level science like biology or medicine in a vacuum, or you will very quickly stagnate. Just imagine trying to do modern biology or medicine with equipment from a century back! A better understanding of how our universe works will let us design new, better, and cooler gadgets for the people working on your salmonella to play with!

Only 1 shuttle has blown up since then.

[Anonymous Coward]

Some needs to write Mr. Ting a memo, reminding him that since that commitment is made, not one but TWO shuttles have been blown to flinders along with their brave crews.

Um... no. The Challenger blew up in the 80s. The project was conceived in 1994.

So since that commitment was made, not two but ONE shuttle has been blown up.

You're also ignoring the fact that NASA is flying shuttle missions for far less important reasons. The ISS is a huge, ridiculous waste of resources. This piece is the silver lining on that cloud, the one major scientific venture. They're skipping it in favor of kiddie science projects and more stuff related to human activity, i.e. putting more lives in danger.

Re:Only 1 shuttle has blown up since then.

[theshowmecanuck]

They're skipping it in favor of kiddie science projects and more stuff related to human activity, i.e. putting more lives in danger.

If we want to make sure that human kind is not just limited to this one rock we currently inhabit, we are going to have to put lives in danger. Same thing happened when we wanted to be able to fly more than a few miles in an aeroplane. And this doesn't mean just making special test flights. It means making trips to space into a routine activity. Do it more often for whatever reason. The more it is done the more we know about how to do it, and eventually the cheaper it will become as that understanding is transferred to the technology of the day.
I for one would like to see us diversify our environment. With the number of countries aquiring nuclear arms on the increase, with Putin reformulating the Soviet Union and taking a more aggressive military posture, with China starting to expand its military even more and become more aggressive in its foreign policies... never mind America unilaterally doing whatever it wants and becoming the nuclear armed paranoid schizophrenic of the bunch (everyone is out to get us so we need to attack first before they attack us... and check out the republicans new front runners... even more right wing religious than Bush) ... there is still a really good chance we could wipe ourselves out.

Re:Why does it need to be launched with a shuttle?

[Zocalo]

Maybe because one of the "necessary bits" is a human being to run it? I'm just guessing here, based on the fact it's specifically called a laboratory as opposed to a module, but if it absolutely requires human intervention to operate and can't be automated then it's the ISS or nothing. It might even be possible to get the module into orbit with an alternate launch vehicle, but even if you can get it parked alongside the ISS, overcoming the logistics of physically mounting it without the aid of the Shuttle's robot arm could easily be another show stopper.

I'm not going to be holding my breath on this one, quite frankly.

Re:Calling Mr Tang

[Mr. Underbridge]

Worse yet, this is clearly a case of putting politics over science. This 'lab' will accomplish nothing more, it seems, than the same insipid crap that's been done since the beginning of the Shuttle era: materials science in 0-g. Zero gravity can be simulated on earth, fairly well. Doing good astronomy needs to be done in space away from sources of interference.

The remaining shuttle missions need to be used for real science, not some political crap that attempts to smooth over differences between US and Europe. As if a space station would solve political problems. Like they'll say "you guys really screwed up that Iraq thing, but you helped us out with the space shuttle so you're OK in my book."

That's been the problem with the ISS since the very beginning - cute story for political news, bad use of resources for science.

That ship has sailed.....

[Stanislav_J]

"The credibility of the United States is at stake here..."

I thought that in the last 7 years (the Bush reign), we had already pretty much lost whatever credibility we once had...

Re: The government at its' finest!

[Black Parrot]

If NASA were private, and actually had to respond to stockholders, and had to produce science discoveries in order to stay afloat, NASA wouldn't be making stupid political decisions like this. Of course not: it would be making stupid decisions to make its next quarterly report look good instead.

Some people's faith in businesses is as naive as others' faith in governments.

Re: The government at its' finest!

[Carewolf]

That's only because you don't "vote the bastards out", you just alternate between the same bastards.

An international disgrace?

[bl8n8r]

I think we've got a pretty good head start in that category already. Another one isn't really going to matter.