As I write this, Space Shuttle Atlantis sits on its launch pad awaiting its takeoff. Its mission will be the last of the 135 in the program’s history. The United States has spent billions and billions of dollars on the Space Shuttle, and what do we have to show for it? Not much. Along with its fellow boondoggle, the International Space Station, the Space Shuttle program has been a colossal waste of money.
Now, I don’t know about you, but I want my spaceflight tax dollars going toward kick-ass stuff, the sort of stuff that would make a seven-year-old boy’s jaw drop. Going to the moon? That was cool. Going to Mars? That would be even better. A giant telescope that gives us amazing pictures of deep space? Pretty damn impressive. But most of the Space Shuttle’s and ISS’s science experiments did little to live up to the gigantic price tag of each mission. Head over to NASA’s website and take a look for yourself. There’s some great stuff there. One of the first ones I saw listed was about “Skeletal Development in Embryonic Quail.” Okay, I understand that people’s bones weaken in space and that animal studies about bones in microgravity could be useful, but do we really need to spend the money to send quail eggs into space?
The problem is that since the Apollo program there has been no real direction in the American space program. The space shuttle was supposed to cut the costs of putting things in orbit, but it didn’t. It makes sense that a reusable ship could cost less than a disposable rocket, but that never worked out. And beside, for cargo purposes, there’s no way a human-carrying spaceship could ever be cheaper than something without people. It’s not so bad if an unmanned rocket blows up. It’s really bad when Challenger explodes or Columbia disintegrates. It’s one thing to take on the added expense of human spaceflight when it involves something as significant as landing on the moon or Mars. It’s another when it involves routine, boring flights to and from the ISS, which is itself a giant waste of money. It’d be one thing if we were parking something in orbit so that we could use it as a starting point for manned missions to the moon or Mars. Every now and then, presidents talk about sending men to Mars. But these are nothing more than distant, empty promises. We’ve spent billions of dollars but are hardly closer to getting humans to Mars, which at this point has to be our long-term goal for human spaceflight. We’ve been in orbit, we’ve been to the moon, so Mars has to be the next step. The space shuttle has done little to advance that goal. So while everyone else mourns the end of the program, I say to Atlantis: Come home safely, then good riddance.
Actually, I heard an interview with two astronauts yesterday, and both admitted the shuttle program was a waste of money and had to end. The baffling thing is why it took so long to accept this — this is a good example of institutional inertia.
I don’t completely agree with you. To get to Mars, we can’t launch a ship in a single launch that will take us there – the ship would be too big to fit on any rocket available or on the drawing board! So, assembly in orbit is needed. And, that is actually rocket science…as in very complicated to do. This isn’t putting together a Lego set. Both the shuttle by itself in earlier missions and the assembly of the space station have given us a lot of know-how. Next, Mars is a six month trip out (at best), and probably 1.25-1.5 years total for a mission. Do you know where we get the understanding of how living in space wreaks havoc on the human body? Yep, the ISS, and Mir before that as well. A mission to Mars is also going to require more than one nation (at this point, I’m betting on an NASA, ESA, RKA, and probably even the CNSA). No one nation will be able to tackle it alone. The ISS has taught the different agencies (except for the CNSA) how to interact with one another and work as a team. And, they do it pretty well.
Let’s remember, most space probes that are sent to Mars fail to achieve orbit or land without a major malfunction….and those are “simple” probes, not complex ships with life support systems, significant radiation protection (human rated), food supply requirements, and huge power requirements. SO, getting to Mars require a lot of knowledge and technology, some of which we don’t have yet.
While I agree that NASA is not the best agency at budgeting (name one that is, for that matter!) and the shuttle and ISS have cost a lot, there is a significant amount of knowledge that has been gained. You should also remember that had NASA been given a great budget in the 70’s, the space transportation system would probably have been completely reusable AND may have actually cost less in the long run. You know the saying, you get what you pay for. I think there is too much politics surrounding NASA that has caused us to waste more money than we needed to – wasteful cutting of programs, pet programs to only benefit a district instead of a nation and science, etc. And on that I think we can both agree…
I cannot think of a single human benefit from manned space flight we have paid for that could not have been achieved without the terrible cost of human life and to our budget problems. The thought of populating space with more trash we leave behind is still scarier. We need to improve our infrastructure on earth and leave the space program some to some other nuts.
Cost of complete program: US$192 billion (2010 constant dollars)
Missions: 131 ( 2 destroyed)
Cost per successful mission : $1.5 billion
Dockings with Mir: 9
Dockings with ISS: 37
Benefit to humanity: