Space Shuttle Replacement?

[Ananda]

Hi all...Trying to find out this for some time..but from all access media or internet that I can find all indicating that after the schedulled 2010-2012 retirement..The NASA Space Shuttle still do not have viable replacement in hand..and the International Space Stations will have to soldier on with Old SOYUZ to continue operated...

Space Shuttle will gone in the next two - four years..BURAN projects will not and realistically can not be revived from the graves..
The Puttin new space 'TAXI' projects are still in the dark (right..??:()
The European and Japanese Shuttle programs were history right now (correct ???:confused:)

The Chinese only can offer less than what the Old SOYUZ can offered...

So What's Left..???

I know this is not an International Defence related Topics..Thus why I put it in this catagory..Hope it's all right with the Mod's..

Thanks in the advances for any info..:)

[Grim901]

The Soyuz is probably one of the best and safest launch vehicles operating, nothing wrong with it.

You also have the ESA ATV for cargo transfer, which could be altered fro reusable human flight, but that is some way off yet.

Apart from that I heard the Japanese were devloping something similar to a manned ATV. After that is the US Orion project, but that won't be operational for a decade or so.

None are shuttles so to speak, but all fulfil a similar purpose.

[dragonfire]

The Indian Space Program has planned two types of Vehicles. The first being the ISRO Orbital Vehicle which will be used on the GSLV Mk II to launch the first Indian Manned Space Mission in 2015. The second is the Avatar which is a reusable space vehicle which couldn be used for upto 100 launches, this program is still under development

ISRO Orbital Vehicle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISRO_Orbital_Vehicle)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVATAR_(spacecraft)

[windscorpion]

Soyuz will be continuing for some time, the current version the TMA has some changes requested by NASA and i think they'll be switching to the TMAT with further changes soon. Soyuz is a great ship, the DC-3 of space ships (or Li-2 if you prefer).

The US are working on Orion which i suppose is "Apollo 2000" (no not the electrical retailer).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)

As for lifting things into orbit, that will be done by rocket boosters old skool for now. I don't think there will be any new "shuttle" type spaceship until the 2020s at least.

[Gord Hyginus]

The next manned craft being designed is called Orion. It is described as an Apollo capsule on Steroids.The cargo bay is not useless on a shuttle. It is been used many, many times to launch satellites,to ferry space station equipment up, and to retrieve at least one satellite for repair. The shuttle was to combine the function of a manned vehicle, a heavy lift vehicle, and a transfer vehicle, all in one. With a fleet of 5,it was thought that costs would fall for tonnage lofted into space, but in reality, the shuttle was so complex that the price never fell. In hindsight, it would've been cheaper and easier to maintain an un manned heavy lift vehicle,a manned transfer vehicle, and a larger, manned work vehicle for orbital operations.


pro tools classes (http://www.cogswell.edu/program_dat.htm)

[JonMusser]

Hi all...Trying to find out this for some time..but from all access media or internet that I can find all indicating that after the schedulled 2010-2012 retirement..The NASA Space Shuttle still do not have viable replacement in hand..and the International Space Stations will have to soldier on with Old SOYUZ to continue operated...

Space Shuttle will gone in the next two - four years..BURAN projects will not and realistically can not be revived from the graves..
The Puttin new space 'TAXI' projects are still in the dark (right..??:()
The European and Japanese Shuttle programs were history right now (correct ???:confused:)

The Chinese only can offer less than what the Old SOYUZ can offered...

So What's Left..???

I know this is not an International Defence related Topics..Thus why I put it in this catagory..Hope it's all right with the Mod's..

Thanks in the advances for any info..:)

this is true but i read a couple reports first the space shuttles supply mission maybe replaced by a company charges with suppling the international space station...
Lockheed has a design to replace the shuttle its just 6 years away from introduction

[Ananda]

this is true but i read a couple reports first the space shuttles supply mission maybe replaced by a company charges with suppling the international space station...
Lockheed has a design to replace the shuttle its just 6 years away from introduction


Hi Jon, do you have any more info on this Lockheed program ?? Are NASA already approved the design, and on why Lockheed confidence that they only need 6 years to introduce a completely new space vehicles ??

Nothing wrong with the reliable Soyuz, however seems quite depresing for space programs that the only viable space craft after the Shuttle only the Soyuz

Afterall, no one, that included the Chinese, the Indians, The Europeans, The Japanese have anything ready on the table that's more capable than the Soyuz.

[JonMusser]

SpaceX - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX)
well be the company that is in charge of NASA supply obligations

the Replacement is right here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)

[nevidimka]

The Russian Klipper project is a great idea and would make a very good replacement for the shuttle. But not many are showing willingness to join in and make it happen.

[turin]

The Kliper would only offer a partial replacement for the Space Shuttle, namely crew transportation. It would not even come close to the shuttle in terms of payload capacity. Also the reluctance about joining the program is connected to the rather oblique nature of the whole program. The financial requirements are certainly not worked out properly and Russia might be a great partner in terms of know-how, but not so much when the discussion comes to long-term planning and funding.

I think at the moment that the Ares vehicles are a promising solution for current and future requirements. It remains to be seen if they can work out all the kinks and keep the whole program on schedule. I tend to be sceptical about US big budget tech programs, especially if they drag so much political weight with them.

[JonMusser]

I like the Ares program but i thought the Lockheed Martin X-33 was a more revolutionary idea and much much more cost effective vehicle after development or a much cheaper to operate myself sadly the X-33 was Canceled

[trickofthehand]

Nothing saddens me more than to see the space shuttle retired and replaced with throwback technology. The space shuttle was more than just a reusable space craft, it was a national symbol of American ingenuity and dedication to overcoming obstacles.

To see us fall back to apollo era technology, no matter how 'spruced' up is very discouraging. I understand the cost effectiveness of this technology, but the space shuttle even if expensive was one of the greatest investments America has ever partaken of. For decades it was a symbol of America's leadership and a representation of it's enduring and courageous spirit.

At a time when legions of countries are making their mark in space, the new space capsule is a huge PR stumbling block. The message it sends to a new generation of world citizens is that America is no longer fearlessly pushing new frontiers, instead we've become a dotting old man who's life has become the cummulative sum of calculated risks.

[nevidimka]

I still feel the kilpper program is more worthwhile persuing for than the rest. Reasons being, If you say that the klipper is mainly crew transportation, so is the ARES program. It only transports the crew in a capsule, while its cargo needs to be launched on a seperate heavy launcher and docked in space before travelling to moon.

The Kiliper is designed to address two objectives. It can be used as purely crew transport to a space station as well as trasport to the moon. You dont need a crew to always accompany your cargo to the space station, coz it can be done automatically, with a frequency that is different than the crew transport to the space station. While for moon journey, the same klipper can be docked with its moon cargo in space ala Ares b4 travelling to moon. So in effect the Klipper is more flexible solution, coz it can be used for both space station missions as well as moon landing. Also it can be somewhat used as a form of a taxi to transport cargo between the moon and the space station.

[Belesari]

The shuttle really isnt what we have needed. The shuttle project got messed up because the military needed it to carry boxcar sized loads to orbit. They no longer use the shuttle for that so the need for it is gone.

The shuttle was ment to move humans and a small amount of cargo into orbit. Instead it got made far larger and became what it was. An amazing, super expensive, super complicated machine that did some things ok but wasnt what was needed. Carrying things to space on the same vehicle as people is silly. To man rate a craft takes alot more money than one for cargo. People think its falling back but really why use a vehicle thats 3 times as expensive to launch something that is designed to go to space and stay there.

The space shuttle has lead to many discoveries that make it worth the cost to develope. However if you want to replace the shuttle in my opinion use a small lifting body for taking people to and from orbit and a large rocket for taking cargo. Far cheaper far safer.

[meat_helmet]

The shuttle really isnt what we have needed. The shuttle project got messed up because the military needed it to carry boxcar sized loads to orbit. They no longer use the shuttle for that so the need for it is gone.

The shuttle was ment to move humans and a small amount of cargo into orbit. Instead it got made far larger and became what it was. An amazing, super expensive, super complicated machine that did some things ok but wasnt what was needed. Carrying things to space on the same vehicle as people is silly. To man rate a craft takes alot more money than one for cargo. People think its falling back but really why use a vehicle thats 3 times as expensive to launch something that is designed to go to space and stay there.

The space shuttle has lead to many discoveries that make it worth the cost to develope. However if you want to replace the shuttle in my opinion use a small lifting body for taking people to and from orbit and a large rocket for taking cargo. Far cheaper far safer.

Thats correct, the whole Shuttle program was flawed from the start. It was an attempt to satisfy both NASA and the military, and did neither well. NASA never wanted a shultle in a form like that. They may have wanted a reusable craft, but they did not want one with an 18 meter long cargo bay - that was the military's requirement, they wanted something large enough to take their heavy satellites into space. The Shuttle was a comprimised design unfortunately, and its no wonder why NASA is turning to a cheaper and safer alternative.

As Belesari said, if there is a replacement that is to be resualbe, it should only be a small craft for astronauts, not a heavy lift cargo ship. They at least have the right idea now sending up heavy cargo seperately, especially with the amount of automation available these days.