Did You Know Today Is NASA’s Last Shuttle Launch?

In summary: Congress, and then we can make the future happen.In summary, thank you NASA for all that you've done. Private industry can carry on the torch of space exploration and discovery, but it would not be possible without the groundwork laid by NASA.
  • #1
dlgoff
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,432
3,230
I thought today would be a good time to give NASA some thanks for all the http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/k-4/home/spinoffs_feature_k_4.html" , being it's the last Shuttle mission to lift off today.

Thank you NASA.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
They aren't going away. Just the shuttle. To quote Neil deGrasse Tyson, "Many lament the shuttle era's end. But that's misplaced sentiment. Lament instead the absence of an era to replace it."

They just need Congress to wise up.
 
  • #3
boneh3ad said:
They just need Congress to wise up.

Exactly!
 
  • #4
Aye aye
 
  • #5
dlgoff said:
I thought today would be a good time to give NASA some thanks for all the http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/k-4/home/spinoffs_feature_k_4.html" , being it's the last Shuttle mission to lift off today.

Thank you NASA.
Stealing your thumbs up, dlgoff.
thumbs_up-icon.gif


Thanks NASA. Now get to work on the next adventure. :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
The spinoff argument is lame. There is no way to know what technologies would have existed in an alternate history in which the US didn't build a government-monopoly crewed space program as a cold-war propaganda exercise. Maybe we would have had bar codes, and maybe we wouldn't. Maybe we would have had something way more awesome than bar codes.

I want to say thanks to NASA for getting out of the way so private enterprise can step in.
 
  • #7
I’d like to thank the National Aeronautics and Space Adminstration for the wealth of information found within the pdf “STS-135: The Final Mission” - Dedicated to the courageous men and women who have devoted their lives to the Space Shuttle program and the pursuit of space exploration.
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/566071main_135_press_kit2.pdf

Thanks NASA! Love ya!:smile:
 
  • #8
bcrowell said:
The spinoff argument is lame. There is no way to know what technologies would have existed in an alternate history in which the US didn't build a government-monopoly crewed space program as a cold-war propaganda exercise. Maybe we would have had bar codes, and maybe we wouldn't. Maybe we would have had something way more awesome than bar codes.

I want to say thanks to NASA for getting out of the way so private enterprise can step in.

Would private companies have spent 10 billion dollars on a project with no chance of commercial gain? (Referring to HST). I believe NASA still has it's place in the pursuit of science for the sake of science. Also, let's not forget, NACA and NASA are the same organization and NACA did its fair share of work in the aero field.
 
  • #9
dlgoff said:
I thought today would be a good time to give NASA some thanks for all the http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/k-4/home/spinoffs_feature_k_4.html" , being it's the last Shuttle mission to lift off today.

Thank you NASA.
It's not just the popular spin-offs, IMO, that we need to be thankful for. I grew up in the cold war duck-and-cover age. Not many people in my little town had TVs, but the elementary school had one, and the entire school would assemble in the gym to watch each manned launch. NASA was a source of pride to the geeks of my generation.

Sometimes the intangibles are pretty darned valuable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
Regardless of spin offs or any economic incentive I would like to thank NASA for generations of inspiration!
 
  • #11
AIR&SPACE said:
Would private companies have spent 10 billion dollars on a project with no chance of commercial gain? (Referring to HST).

I didn't say anything about NASA's uncrewed programs, only about their crewed programs. There is no fundamental reason why the HST had to be launched on the shuttle, although it was. It was repaired by spacewalking astronauts, but again, there's no fundamental reason that it had to be that way. In an alternate history where we (god forbid!) didn't have barcodes and crewed spaceflight hadn't been a government monopoly in the US from 1961 to 2011, there still could have been an HST. It could have been launched by NASA or by some other government or by a private contractor.

I'm not proposing that all scientific research be left up to private enterprise, just that crewed spaceflight should not be a pork-barrel propaganda exercise run by a government monopoly.
 
  • #12
bcrowell said:
I want to say thanks to NASA for getting out of the way so private enterprise can step in.
AIR&SPACE said:
Would private companies have spent 10 billion dollars on a project with no chance of commercial gain?

Would private companies have needed to speed 10 billion dollars to get the same results?

I love all that NASA has done. And NASA isn't the problem--Congress is. Every billion dollars (the smallest denomination recognized!) that Congress spends is not spent with an eye toward our nation's future or mankind's future, but only with an eye toward getting reelected. Thus the inefficiency.

If private companies can find a way to make space profitable, the future will not be limited by any corruption in government. So let's get going!
 
  • #13
bcrowell said:
I didn't say anything about NASA's uncrewed programs, only about their crewed programs. There is no fundamental reason why the HST had to be launched on the shuttle, although it was. It was repaired by spacewalking astronauts, but again, there's no fundamental reason that it had to be that way. In an alternate history where we (god forbid!) didn't have barcodes and crewed spaceflight hadn't been a government monopoly in the US from 1961 to 2011, there still could have been an HST. It could have been launched by NASA or by some other government or by a private contractor.

I'm not proposing that all scientific research be left up to private enterprise, just that crewed spaceflight should not be a pork-barrel propaganda exercise run by a government monopoly.

Yep, you're right, I totally skipped over your use of "crewed." I can mostly agree with what you said, then. I do, however, think NASA's manned crew was necessary through the cold war era up until the present day.
 
  • #14
bcrowell said:
The spinoff argument is lame. There is no way to know what technologies would have existed in an alternate history in which the US didn't build a government-monopoly crewed space program as a cold-war propaganda exercise. Maybe we would have had bar codes, and maybe we wouldn't. Maybe we would have had something way more awesome than bar codes.

I want to say thanks to NASA for getting out of the way so private enterprise can step in.

Wow. Thanks for bringing this thread to life.

If this paper doesn't fit the guidelines of PF, then please delete this quote and link.

Abstract
This paper reviews the origins of NASA’s Electronics Research Center. Few know of the existence of the center, which remains the only major center that the space agency has closed. The center was located in Cambridge, Massachusetts, across the street from MIT, and functioned there briefly from 1964 to 1970. This paper surveys the process (from November 1961 to January 1963) by which NASA concluded that it needed the Electronics Research Center. It focuses on the agency’s perceived need for internal electronics expertise in order to manage its many industry and university contracts. The paper also notes congressional opposition to siting the center in Cambridge, and briefly mentions a few of the center’s major projects.

http://history.nasa.gov/ercaiaa.html"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
dlgoff said:
If this paper doesn't fit the guidelines of PF, then please delete this quote and link.
Delete the quote and link? I don't think so. I think a thank you is in order.

Thank you!

cited paper said:
This paper reviews the origins of NASA’s Electronics Research Center. Few know of the existence of the center, which remains the only major center that the space agency has closed.

I have worked for NASA for 30+ years (yikes!), including one of the organizations sited in that paper, and even I didn't know about this closed center until now. Interesting.
 
  • #16
What do you do for NASA DH?
 
  • #17
D H said:
Delete the quote and link? I don't think so. I think a thank you is in order.

Thank you!



I have worked for NASA for 30+ years (yikes!), including one of the organizations sited in that paper, and even I didn't know about this closed center until now. Interesting.

:smile:
 

Related to Did You Know Today Is NASA’s Last Shuttle Launch?

What is the purpose of the last NASA shuttle launch?

The last NASA shuttle launch is part of the Space Shuttle program, which has been in operation since 1981. Its purpose is to transport astronauts and cargo to and from the International Space Station, as well as conduct various scientific experiments and missions.

When is the last NASA shuttle launch scheduled to take place?

The last NASA shuttle launch is scheduled for July 8, 2011 at 11:26 a.m. EDT.

What is the name of the last NASA shuttle?

The last NASA shuttle is named Atlantis, and it will be making its 33rd and final flight for the Space Shuttle program.

What will happen to the NASA shuttle program after the last launch?

After the last launch, the Space Shuttle program will officially come to an end. NASA will shift its focus to new spacecraft and technologies, such as the Orion spacecraft and the Space Launch System, for future missions.

What will happen to the astronauts and crew after the last NASA shuttle launch?

The astronauts and crew will return to Earth on the shuttle after completing its final mission. They will then continue their work at NASA as they prepare for future missions and projects.

Similar threads

  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
29
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
78
Views
10K
Replies
11
Views
9K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
2K
Back
Top