Proposition to keep the shuttles flying past 2010

[Argos]

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071218/sc_nm/space_shuttle_dc)


CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (Reuters) - The United States should keep flying the space shuttles past their 2010 retirement date to avoid depending on Russia to fly astronauts to the International Space Station, a U.S. congressman said on Monday.

[NEOWatcher]

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071218/sc_nm/space_shuttle_dc)

Ok...that's 0.25% of congress... and one whose district has a big stake in the decision.


NASA says, however, it is unsafe, expensive and counter-productive to keep flying the shuttle past 2010.
The big question is, can he convince the other 99.75%? Without NASA's support.



"The 2010 date was really an arbitrary date that was really picked more by OMB (the U.S. Office of Management and Budget) than NASA," said Weldon spokesman Jeremy Steffens.

Aribitrary? Wasn't the date set by the amount of funds that could be made available, and the flight schedule that those funds would allow?

[Dave J]

One would hope that the deadline doesn't create a scheduling pressure already implicated as significant factors in the two previous losses.
I think NASA would love to get back to simple boosters, just takes time to get it all together with tepid public interest in "what's next for manned spaceflight".
They do have challenges ahead.

[novaderrik]

i know away to keep them "flying" past 2010..
sell them off to airlines along with a modified 747 to carry them piggy back. the airlines can sell rides on the shuttles where the "mother ship" 747 takes them up to 30,000 feet, then the orbiter is released and it glides back to earth like they did back when they were doing the aero tests back in the 70's. i figure a pilot, co pilot and 5 paying passengers per drop, unless they put a module in the back and add a few windows. then maybe 20 passengers.
there- i found a use for the shuttles. they become amusement park rides.

[Cugel]

Aribitrary? Wasn't the date set by the amount of funds that could be made available, and the flight schedule that those funds would allow?

The date was set by the time the orbiters are due for their next great maintenance overhaul. So there are 3 options in 2010:

1. Stop flying the orbiters and invest the money saved into the new system.
2. Keep on flying without maintenance. (ouch!)
3. Keep on flying and somewhere find the money to maintenance the orbiters.

I think they're now talking about option 2. Its an enormous safety gamble.