|
When the specifications for the space shuttle were being developed the military salivated about what they might be able to do with it. If NASA had been left to their own desires the shuttle would have become a smaller, and possibly safer, vehicle.
The 1,200 mile cross-range landing ability and the maximum landing weight were due, in part, to the military requirement of launching into polar orbit from Vandenberg, grappling a Russian spy satellite into the payload bay, and returning it to Edwards within one orbit before the Russians were aware of what had hit them, thereby denying them of an intelligence asset and giving us one of their crown jewels.
This was not a bad idea. Not knowing, during the 1970s, where detente with the Soviets might lead, one of the jobs of the designers was to consider missions that might become important for military or political purposes. Stealing a spy satellite was one of those missions. So, we ended up with a big ship, in part, for this reason.
Unfortunately, the Air Force botched the construction of SLC-6 at Vandenburg, apparently wiring all of the 3 phase electrical power backwards, or something stupid like that, and the cost of repairing it wasn't worth the effort. I think SLC-6 was eventually used a few years ago to launch something but the big-vision-thing never roared off that pad.
One of NASA's charges is to develop new technologies, so even if the shuttle had been smaller it's likely that the fragile thermal protection system would have been used in any case, and damage to it would have always been an issue. NASA can't even fly the shuttle through clouds during cross-country ferries from Edwards to Kennedy because the water droplets damage the tiles. As someone else on here said ... it was, and remains, a prototype system.
Getting into space is a dangerous business and will always remain so. You've got to absorb a lot of energy, slowly or quickly, to get up there and stay there. Today's hazards are riding in a hydrogen and oxygen bomb - tomorrow's might be sliding along carbon nanotubes fibers - who knows what problems lie ahead?
|