Possible future use for the space shuttles

[bdewoody]

If by chance Congress decides to extend the use of the space shuttles for another few years how feasible would it be to lease some of the capacity to say Bigelo or one of the space adventure corporations. Safety issues asside it seems that these outfits could offset a sizeable portion of the operating expense of the shuttle. I can't envision a new privately developed man rated orbital vehicle being much cheaper to operate after passing all the safety code regulations that will surely come to be.

 

[DarkenedOne]

The problem is cost. The space shuttle is a very capable vehicle, but at 1.2 billion dollars per launch it is ridiculously expensive. It consumes about half of the manned space budget every year in the US.

Now I did hear that the space shuttle could fit something like seventy passengers. If so it would probably make a good design for a space liner in the future, but there is not were near that demand now.

For the moment there is only is the need to put about 12 government astronauts and one or two private ones up per year.

 

[Polishguy]

Other threads about the Shuttles.

Should We Fly The Shuttle 2 More Years?
What of the Shuttle?
Space shuttle for space tourism and first stage TSTO.
What to do with the Shuttle
Shuttle
space shuttle
Shuttle contingency: Failed SRB sep

See the threat at the top of the SB&T forum, Multiple Threads on the Same Topic.

 

[bdewoody]

The problem is cost. The space shuttle is a very capable vehicle, but at 1.2 billion dollars per launch it is ridiculously expensive. It consumes about half of the manned space budget every year in the US.

Now I did hear that the space shuttle could fit something like seventy passengers. If so it would probably make a good design for a space liner in the future, but there is not were near that demand now.

For the moment there is only is the need to put about 12 government astronauts and one or two private ones up per year.

Well since it the only manned space vehicle the USA has I don't see a problem with it consuming half of NASA's manned space budget. As far as demand is concerned I would bet that if NASA announced a partnership with (for instance Bigelow) a private space adventure outfit the reservations would begin to stack up. I seem to remember that Pan Am sold a bunch of space flight tickets way back when 2001 a Space Odessy came out. As far as the $1.2 B is concerned it is spent mostly to pay people to do jobs, better than giving the money away to support out of work technicians.

The reason I didn't tag this onto an existing thread is that I was proposing a specific use that I had not seen any comment on.

 

[DarkenedOne]

Well since it the only manned space vehicle the USA has I don't see a problem with it consuming half of NASA's manned space budget. As far as demand is concerned I would bet that if NASA announced a partnership with (for instance Bigelow) a private space adventure outfit the reservations would begin to stack up. I seem to remember that Pan Am sold a bunch of space flight tickets way back when 2001 a Space Odessy came out. As far as the $1.2 B is concerned it is spent mostly to pay people to do jobs, better than giving the money away to support out of work technicians.

The reason I didn't tag this onto an existing thread is that I was proposing a specific use that I had not seen any comment on.

Well if you just happy with doing little more in human space flight than we are right now than sticking with the shuttle is fine. If you want NASA to go on and do something else than it is not.

The Soyuz is more reliable and is doing the same job for less than half the cost.

As far as Bigelow goes paying for a single space shuttle would cost more what has been invested in his company to date, so I think it is safe to say that it is out of the question.

 

[bdewoody]

I think it is the ultimate goal of the current administration to do away with US funded manned space flight all together. I have been hearing all my life, since Alan Shephards sub-orbital flight, from the liberal left that as long as there is hunger and disease spending money on space flight is criminal and should be stopped. Well due to the infighting between different factions in the space flight community they found their excuse and pulled the plug. The space shuttle has as good or better record of safety as the Soyez capsule. There's a giant leap forward for you hitching rides on 50 year old technology.

I never anticipated Bigelow footing the entire bill for using the shuttles. As with early airline flight civilian space flight will require huge government subsidization. But as the shuttle is a somewhat proven system its adaptation to carrying fare paying passengers it could be the least expensive way to provide civilian transport to space for quite a while to come.

I don't see any of the private venture manned orbital space vehicles being any cheaper to operate even after they go through an extensive testing phase that could last for decades.

 

[MeteorWayne]

The problem is cost. The space shuttle is a very capable vehicle, but at 1.2 billion dollars per launch it is ridiculously expensive. It consumes about half of the manned space budget every year in the US.

Now I did hear that the space shuttle could fit something like seventy passengers. If so it would probably make a good design for a space liner in the future, but there is not were near that demand now.

You may have heard that, but it is absolute BS.

 

[neutrino78x]

I think it would be an excellent idea to launch some things for Bigelow or another NewSpace company with the Shuttle! Now you guys are talking

--Brian