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"?

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.

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.