Can the remaining shuttles do 16-17 flights in 4 years?

[erioladastra]

"However, NASA provides "safety" training for free since Tito. Putting up with tests might be the price of that safety training and tours of the non-Russian areas. "<br /><br />No, that is covered in the costs each pays for the programs - paid in hours on payloads, maintainence, Shuttle/Soyuz flights (though not with additional $ you can buy Soyuz flights), exhcnaged training (i.e., "we train your guy for our EVA if you train our guy for your EVA"), etc.

 

[frodo1008]

Sorry, I am just attaching this to your post as you are the last poster at this time, but I consider it very important!<br /><br />I have just learned on another thread that ATK has now increased its estimate for the developement of the five segment SRB from $1 billion to $3 billion in less than 6 months!<br /><br />THis promted the following post from me on that thread, and I thought it would be worthwhile to include it here:<br /><br />"A Three BILLION dollar developement cost for going to the five segment SRB? Absolutely NOT! <br /><br />Some time ago Rocketdyne stated that they should be able to start up the F1A again (including modern improvements) for some $2 billion or even less. I am equally certain that Boeing could upgrade the Common Booster Core manufacturing line to produce a Common Booster Core for either a single (or possibly even two) such F1's and still keep the total costs to the same range. We could then get rid of the solids entirely! <br /><br />For one thing solids are inherently less safe than liquids (you can't hot fire a solid and then use the same solid for your actual launch vehicle, but it is a common practice for liquid engines), this advantage alone wipes out any safety advantage of the simplicity of solids! <br /><br />I too would be angry if I were Griffin! What ATK has done is to increase the cost to such a level as to totally wipe out any savings for using the shuttle derived hardware! They have killed their own golden goose here, such stupidity should NOT be rewarded! Although knowing the power of the Utah congress people, it would still quite probably end up being used anyway! If I were Girffin I think I would simply state that such an increase would make the entire CEV/CALV program too expensive, and threaten to resign! <br /><br />Then hopefully the rest of congress could step up and give the man a free hand to do his job! <br /><br />I am NOT angry with NASA over this. What I am angry with is a single politically supported contractor gouging bo