"Brian Gaff" writes:

Might I just throw ihnto the mix here the point that it seems to me that the
Shuttle was a great idea, and despite its problems, a lot of what is not
known about space travel would not be known if we had just piled into minute
cramped tin cans.

The sad part is that the development of its successor has been stifled for
many years, resulting in an ageing fleet and an effective end to how much
more reliable it can be made without a complete rebuild, or rethink.

Partly because NASA has had no clear direction for the craft. First
it's a CRV (crew recovery vehicle, or "lifeboat" for ISS). Then it
was a CRV/CTV (crew transfer vehicle, or crew transport to/from ISS).
Now it's a CEV (crew exploration vehicle), which will have
some requirements that are much different than a CRV/CTV.

If space policy in the US wasn't so schizophrenic, perhaps NASA
wouldn't be faced with changing requirements every year or two as it
has all throughout the space station program.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.