Foam On The Range: NASA Grounds the Shuttles
NASA just reported all future shuttle flights are grounded as a sizable chunk of foam fell from Discovery’s fuel tank in a similar fashion as the foam that felled Columbia in 2003.
This time, engineers believe, the foam tumbled harmlessly away during liftoff and Discovery was spared.
I’m as staunch a supporter of our space program as anyone, but with the workable lifespan of the shuttle nearing its conclusion and the $1B fix that didn’t take, I feel strongly it’s time for NASA to move on. Move to another vehicle—smaller, more efficient, and safer. Or as Rich and I discussed last night build the space elevator already. Let’s not risk any more lives when we have the power to make a better vehicle.
I’ve had this discussion before, with people who know something about carbon nanotubes. In fact, I had this discussion after a seminar I had attended about these nanotubes. Here’s the reality of carbon nanotubes:
And thats from a handful of groups throughout the world. 100 microns is not going to get an elevator that far. I know, maybe I’m blowing the whistle to early; but as of now, this technology, if it is even anywhere feasable, is decades off. And, one must look into the current procedures used to make these nanotubes — many are simple combustion runs, requiring alot of energy for very small chunks of nanotubes. We’ll have to see. But why not invest the $1 billion that Nasa did on their retro space vehicles towards reducing fossil fuel usage?
That’s disappointing for a sci-fi nut like me, though it’s pretty typical that far-flung scientific speculation can be a bit optimistic to say the least. Still, the prospect of ‘launching’ orbital equipment without the use of conventional rocketry is SO tempting it has to be worth funding?
Call me pessimistic, but if NASA ever gets $1B toward energy, it’ll be for prospecting H3 on the moon and nothing an ounce more practical. We’ll save the federal energy funding for private energy companies—since they have SO much motivation to become increasingly efficient.
Still, I give you props for even knowing what “nanotubes” are. Not many do.
Thanks. From what I’ve read nanotubes carry many of the same promises often heralded in stem cells-they could have a multitude of applications and could potentially quickly and drastically change our world. Nanotubes thermal, conductive, and structural properties vary widely based on simple characteristics like length, diameter, and chirality. They might as easily find their way into new forms of microprocessors as skins of spacecraft- who knows? Now if we can just get the funding for research and produce them-I guess the nice thing is nobody gets in a twist when you ask for lasers and noble gases, but it’s another story if you ask for stem cells.