/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9454397
yes
government retardation took something that could have been useful and turned it into the biggest waste of money ever seen, surpassed only by the F35 today

>>9454550

>biggest waste
The Shuttle protected the budget from Apollo v2 - Ultra Martian Edition.

Keep in mind that was around the time of the cold war, internal strife, economic stagnation, and fresh hot vietnam.

The Shuttle did everything it was supposed to and more.

>>9454573
>the shuttle did what it was intended to do
"no"

>>9454550
The F-35 has no competitor, no equivalent, and is clearly the best fighter in the sky at a very affordable price, less than any other 4.5th gen fighter, while being markedly superior

>>9454573
Thats like saying the SLS or Orion or w/e preservd the budget
That if they don't waste their budget on makework, it'll all disappear

No surprise NASA is actively sabotaging space flgiht even today.

>>9454675
>a very affordable price
L0Lno fgt pls
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/341312-pentagon-predicts-f-35-program-costs-to-jump-by-27-billion-report

>>9454700
compare per plane cost against any currently produced 4.5 gen aircraft

>>9454707
compare $406.5 billion against any other single defense item

>>9454397
Originally, no. However, because the government had their hands into it up to their elbows it became boondoggle. At least we got lots of cool tech we can use everyday because of it. Now NASA is completely fucking wrecked and subverted. It is filled with nothing but grant chasers now.

>>9454397

No, it wasn't and don't let anyone tell you it was. The STS program did a lot for aerospace research and materials research, more than enough to make the program worthwhile. It's crowning achievement, the International Space Station, would have been considered utter lunacy if you had suggested such a thing to someone in 1960. Boeing's recent XS-1 vehicle is proof that the STS concept works.

Now, whether or not it was the most practical transportation device available is another question. SpaceX has shown that traditional rockets could have done what the STS did at a lower cost, a huge black eye for NASA and the entire establishment. Perhaps if NASA was more committed to it's original shuttle concept (a 5-10 person vehicle with no cargo bay) and the Pentagon more committed to it's X-20 project the STS wouldn't have existed as it did.

>>9454712

$100 Billion has already been earmarked for the B-21 program, and about $200 Billion for Columbia Class submarines. $400 billion is not much for a fighter jet considering it will be THE fighter jet the Air Force, Navy and Marines will use. Which is to say it's a procurement for three branches instead of one, which would be about $130 Billion each. That's very average considering how important fighter jets are.

>>9455214
ISS is essentially Mir 2.0, and, lik Mir, could have been built and operated without STS.

The main problem is that we expect space exploration to be free of casualties and tragedies. It won't be. Many already died, many more will. This is the nature of exploration.

You're, quite literally, strapping people to a missile and shooting them into the sky. It's gonna get ugly occasionally. We need to carry on, not treat every space accident like a fucking unmitigated disaster.