The articke kind of confuses me, IF this was to happen, would NASA fly and operate the shuttle still or would it go to a private company??It states MAYBE 2 Shuttles would be kept in service and fly one mission each per year through 2017, if so since it would start in 2013, I assume that is adding in time to start up production of new tanks since it will take atleast 2 years to get new ones produced right?How realistic is this to actaully happening and keeping 1 or 2 active and keep flying?What man power would be required to keep one in flight ready status in the OPF? I mean once processed for a flight which takes months, what staff would be required to watch it just sit there for the next year or two?
Very confusing article. Says they will fly Endeavour, but then says they will fly Atlantis too. Nothing about OMDPs. Quoting officials saying they aren't commenting.
Very confusing article. Says they will fly Endeavour, but then says they will fly Atlantis too.
If they are able to commercially operate the Shuttle at $1.5B per year, it makes you think that the same could be done for the SD-HLV. This is thinking outside the box!
This is the worst idea ever. Talk about crippling the future. These birds need to be retired now, not in 2017. We need to start building on the future for new private vehicles that can do multiple uses such as the ISS,Bigelow station and the russian station. NASA continues to throw away the future for the past. Encouraging new technology such as Dragon, Orion, Dreamchaser and the Prometheus is the way to go.
Quote from: yg1968 on 02/03/2011 02:30 PMIf they are able to commercially operate the Shuttle at $1.5B per year, it makes you think that the same could be done for the SD-HLV. This is thinking outside the box!Makes you wonder whether that is what the end goal for USA through this scenario.....
Shuttle can take up more modules