Shuttle Advocate Team's Positions On Keeping the Space Shuttle Flying: A letter by Allen J. Richardson to L.A. Times
EMAIL TO RALPH VARTABEDIAN (L.A. Times writer)
In a recent speech President Obama presented his plan for NASA which in many respects is a continuation of the plan initiated by George W. Bush, and which will terminate the Space Shuttle program. I am one of a group of Apollo and Space Shuttle engineers who strongly advocate continuing the shuttle program. Your recent article on the Obama plan indicates you are covering Space Shuttle developments for the L. A. Times so I am writing to you to present facts we have assembled which prove conclusively that shuttle based exploration of the solar system is not only feasible but is the cheapest and safest way to do so. It is my hope that you and your editor will find the enclosed information compelling enough to agree to a brief question and answer meeting.
Background
Because of my Crater involvement I was asked by PBS a year or so back to review a draft of their up coming documentary on the Columbia disaster.The draft was a blatant anti shuttle propaganda piece containing many unfounded even ludicrous accusations about the shuttle and the engineers who created it. I circulated the draft to shuttle engineering colleagues for comments. About a dozen of the more incensed (yes we were and are outraged ) wrote to PBS with the result that most of the most damming material was toned down or removed and a PBS opinion piece was written by these engineers supporting the shuttles. As a follow up, the Shuttle Advocates Team (SAT) was formed, a group of mostly local former shuttle engineers, whose objective is alert the public before it is too late that a shuttle based system can take us anywhere in the solar system cheaper and more safely than either the Constellation system or the Obama proposed system. To that end we have assembled facts which support our main positions as follows.
Shuttle Advocates Team Positions
1. The Space Shuttle System Is In Its Prime
Each space shuttle and its support system was designed for a 100 mission life, with a factor of safety of four. The most used shuttle has flown a little over 30 missions so that over 65 percent of the life of the shuttle fleet remains. Furthermore, current shuttle operation has become flawless, a testament to its design and the people who operate it. The President's own Augustine Committee advised him that "the Shuttle is in the enviable position of being through its infant mortality phase. Its flight experience and demonstrated reliability should not be discounted.". Hence as it stands now the shuttles are not being retired but rather they are being terminated, prematurely
2. Space Shuttle Suited to Solar System Exploration
The now operational Space Shuttle and International Space Station have put the nation in perfect position to explore our solar system without the need and cost of a new heavy lift rocket. Supporting information for this claim is presented in the PBS web site www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/columbia/richardson.html and in the attached 9-page report sent by SAT to the Augustine Committee. Probably the most prestigious supporting information is that of Bob Thompson, one of the original planners of the shuttle program, reprinted below.
3. Space Shuttle Safety is Unparalled
The shuttle has proven itself to be a safer system for astronaut transport to and from the space station than the capsule and parachute (Apollo/Soyuz) type system. The latter system is the same type of system to be used in the Constellation program and in the Obama plan and touted by John Logsdon ( Ref. PBS Columbia documentary.) to be ten times safer than the shuttle. The fact is the protracted uncontrolled parachute descent of the heavy capsule is inherently problematical and has resulted in a astronaut transport system which is less safe than the shuttle system. Support for this claim is contained in a 2009 letter to the Orlando Sentinel by astronaut Bob Crippen .
4. Cost of Shuttle Based System is Far Less Than the
Constellation System or the Proposed Obama System
This claim results from simple arithmetic. At a shuttle cost per mission of 500 million for the round trip transport of 6 astronauts, the per man cost of shuttle transport is 80 million. The system to be developed in the Constellation program or the Obama plan would duplicate the Russian Soyuz system. The Russians are to be paid 50 million per astronaut per trip. When the huge cost to develop a new U S system is added in, the resulting per seat cost would greatly exceed that of the existing shuttle system. Considering the cargo superiority of the shuttle makes the shuttle system even more cost effective, and it is in place now, no interruption, no space dollars spent overseas.
Origin and Impetus for the Redirection
Six years ago the Bush Administration unilaterally redirected the manned space program to (1) terminate the shuttle system and (2) to recreate the Apollo system, consisting of large boosters and a capsule and parachute crew transport system. If you accept the SAT positions why did NASA opt for the redirection and for and sustain the disassembly of a 200 billion dollar Space Shuttle System? One can only speculate but one reason for the redirection could have been a nostalgic desire within the NASA leadership and the Bush Administration to remake the Apollo experience. A second and perhaps more compelling reason could been a desire within NASA leadership to reclaim the prestige associated with creating a new massive heavy lift vehicle similar to the Apollo Saturn V. .
The Obama Administration has basically endorsed the redirection by supporting creation of a new heavy lift vehicle, the return to a capsule and parachute system and allowing the termination of the more advanced shuttle system to continue. Pressure has apparently been put on pro shuttle astronauts to stifle it. Again one can only speculate as to the reason. Certainly any desire within NASA for new heavy lift vehicle would be ongoing.The fact that two presidents have sided with the heavy lift segment of NASA shows the power of this group. On the president's side it one could add - lack of vision, political pressure, and the effects of the anti shuttle propaganda. It makes one wonder if the SAT information reached him.
Anti Shuttle Propaganda
Part of the shuttle termination initiative has been a deceptive ongoing anti shuttle propaganda campaign by a cadre of " Space Experts"and the then NASA Administrator. The PBS Columbia Documentary is the most extensive example. In it the shuttles are labeled as "worn out, old technology, too risky, too costly, a mistake and not capable of supporting solar system exploration" none of which is true.The initiative has been very effective and after six years the anti shuttle rhetoric has become a media myth.
Myth versus Reality
Even with the approaching termination of the Public's 200 billion dollar shuttle system the nation still has a choice. Considering the facts above it is clear the reality is the shuttle based system for space exploration is the correct choice both technically and financially. .
The press could make the difference. SAT has approached numerous media publications with our message and they have chosen to continue to support the myth. These include PBS, the NY Times ,Flight International, the Orange County Register, NASA News and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. It is my hope that you will read the pro shuttle information noted and will arrange for me to meet with you and your editor for a one hour question and answer session. It is your choice as to time place and agenda. It is vital to the nation that someone of your stature in the press investigates and acts on this information. I have an impressive list of engineer sources (Bob Thompson and three former Chief Engineers for a start) ready to answer any question you might have, people you would be honored, as I am, to associate with and people who are true space experts. By Interviewing these guys you would become the most space shuttle knowledgeable reporter on the planet.
Without media support to get our message out the shuttle legacy will probably be similar to that of the Titanic and the Hindenberg, manned space travel will regress fifty years, the Public's money invested in the Space Shuttle System will have been wasted, and America's leadership in space will be forfeited.
Respectfully,
Allen J. Richardson, SAT Spokesman
In a recent speech President Obama presented his plan for NASA which in many respects is a continuation of the plan initiated by George W. Bush, and which will terminate the Space Shuttle program. I am one of a group of Apollo and Space Shuttle engineers who strongly advocate continuing the shuttle program. Your recent article on the Obama plan indicates you are covering Space Shuttle developments for the L. A. Times so I am writing to you to present facts we have assembled which prove conclusively that shuttle based exploration of the solar system is not only feasible but is the cheapest and safest way to do so. It is my hope that you and your editor will find the enclosed information compelling enough to agree to a brief question and answer meeting.
Background
Because of my Crater involvement I was asked by PBS a year or so back to review a draft of their up coming documentary on the Columbia disaster.The draft was a blatant anti shuttle propaganda piece containing many unfounded even ludicrous accusations about the shuttle and the engineers who created it. I circulated the draft to shuttle engineering colleagues for comments. About a dozen of the more incensed (yes we were and are outraged ) wrote to PBS with the result that most of the most damming material was toned down or removed and a PBS opinion piece was written by these engineers supporting the shuttles. As a follow up, the Shuttle Advocates Team (SAT) was formed, a group of mostly local former shuttle engineers, whose objective is alert the public before it is too late that a shuttle based system can take us anywhere in the solar system cheaper and more safely than either the Constellation system or the Obama proposed system. To that end we have assembled facts which support our main positions as follows.
Shuttle Advocates Team Positions
1. The Space Shuttle System Is In Its Prime
Each space shuttle and its support system was designed for a 100 mission life, with a factor of safety of four. The most used shuttle has flown a little over 30 missions so that over 65 percent of the life of the shuttle fleet remains. Furthermore, current shuttle operation has become flawless, a testament to its design and the people who operate it. The President's own Augustine Committee advised him that "the Shuttle is in the enviable position of being through its infant mortality phase. Its flight experience and demonstrated reliability should not be discounted.". Hence as it stands now the shuttles are not being retired but rather they are being terminated, prematurely
2. Space Shuttle Suited to Solar System Exploration
The now operational Space Shuttle and International Space Station have put the nation in perfect position to explore our solar system without the need and cost of a new heavy lift rocket. Supporting information for this claim is presented in the PBS web site www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/columbia/richardson.html and in the attached 9-page report sent by SAT to the Augustine Committee. Probably the most prestigious supporting information is that of Bob Thompson, one of the original planners of the shuttle program, reprinted below.
3. Space Shuttle Safety is Unparalled
The shuttle has proven itself to be a safer system for astronaut transport to and from the space station than the capsule and parachute (Apollo/Soyuz) type system. The latter system is the same type of system to be used in the Constellation program and in the Obama plan and touted by John Logsdon ( Ref. PBS Columbia documentary.) to be ten times safer than the shuttle. The fact is the protracted uncontrolled parachute descent of the heavy capsule is inherently problematical and has resulted in a astronaut transport system which is less safe than the shuttle system. Support for this claim is contained in a 2009 letter to the Orlando Sentinel by astronaut Bob Crippen .
4. Cost of Shuttle Based System is Far Less Than the
Constellation System or the Proposed Obama System
This claim results from simple arithmetic. At a shuttle cost per mission of 500 million for the round trip transport of 6 astronauts, the per man cost of shuttle transport is 80 million. The system to be developed in the Constellation program or the Obama plan would duplicate the Russian Soyuz system. The Russians are to be paid 50 million per astronaut per trip. When the huge cost to develop a new U S system is added in, the resulting per seat cost would greatly exceed that of the existing shuttle system. Considering the cargo superiority of the shuttle makes the shuttle system even more cost effective, and it is in place now, no interruption, no space dollars spent overseas.
Origin and Impetus for the Redirection
Six years ago the Bush Administration unilaterally redirected the manned space program to (1) terminate the shuttle system and (2) to recreate the Apollo system, consisting of large boosters and a capsule and parachute crew transport system. If you accept the SAT positions why did NASA opt for the redirection and for and sustain the disassembly of a 200 billion dollar Space Shuttle System? One can only speculate but one reason for the redirection could have been a nostalgic desire within the NASA leadership and the Bush Administration to remake the Apollo experience. A second and perhaps more compelling reason could been a desire within NASA leadership to reclaim the prestige associated with creating a new massive heavy lift vehicle similar to the Apollo Saturn V. .
The Obama Administration has basically endorsed the redirection by supporting creation of a new heavy lift vehicle, the return to a capsule and parachute system and allowing the termination of the more advanced shuttle system to continue. Pressure has apparently been put on pro shuttle astronauts to stifle it. Again one can only speculate as to the reason. Certainly any desire within NASA for new heavy lift vehicle would be ongoing.The fact that two presidents have sided with the heavy lift segment of NASA shows the power of this group. On the president's side it one could add - lack of vision, political pressure, and the effects of the anti shuttle propaganda. It makes one wonder if the SAT information reached him.
Anti Shuttle Propaganda
Part of the shuttle termination initiative has been a deceptive ongoing anti shuttle propaganda campaign by a cadre of " Space Experts"and the then NASA Administrator. The PBS Columbia Documentary is the most extensive example. In it the shuttles are labeled as "worn out, old technology, too risky, too costly, a mistake and not capable of supporting solar system exploration" none of which is true.The initiative has been very effective and after six years the anti shuttle rhetoric has become a media myth.
Myth versus Reality
Even with the approaching termination of the Public's 200 billion dollar shuttle system the nation still has a choice. Considering the facts above it is clear the reality is the shuttle based system for space exploration is the correct choice both technically and financially. .
The press could make the difference. SAT has approached numerous media publications with our message and they have chosen to continue to support the myth. These include PBS, the NY Times ,Flight International, the Orange County Register, NASA News and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. It is my hope that you will read the pro shuttle information noted and will arrange for me to meet with you and your editor for a one hour question and answer session. It is your choice as to time place and agenda. It is vital to the nation that someone of your stature in the press investigates and acts on this information. I have an impressive list of engineer sources (Bob Thompson and three former Chief Engineers for a start) ready to answer any question you might have, people you would be honored, as I am, to associate with and people who are true space experts. By Interviewing these guys you would become the most space shuttle knowledgeable reporter on the planet.
Without media support to get our message out the shuttle legacy will probably be similar to that of the Titanic and the Hindenberg, manned space travel will regress fifty years, the Public's money invested in the Space Shuttle System will have been wasted, and America's leadership in space will be forfeited.
Respectfully,
Allen J. Richardson, SAT Spokesman
Sent from my iPad
No comments:
Post a Comment