LewBob wrote:
Yes, as some have said, people like the pretty pictures. But what people
really crave is inspiration. The pretty pictures of our incredible universe
provide that. The space shuttle, in itself, does not. ISS does not.

NASA really really really blew it when it decided to "ignore" Tito's visit to
ISS. That was the perfect PR opportunity to provide inspiration and show that
there was indeed big progress being made since, a "tourist" with little
training could make it up. Although NASA didn't shun Shuttleworth, it also
failed to capitalise on his visit. I can see a lot of conflicts where the
astronaut office wants to maintain the illusion that space is very dangerous
and requires 10 years worth of training. (no differentiation between tourist,
mission specialist and pilot from a public perception point of view).


The shuttle is also underestimated. Look at the data generated by the SRTM
mission. While the fear-mungering regime has made much of the data unavailable
after 9-11, it is progressively being made available again. Hopefully, the
public will come to realise the value of this before the Shuttle is dead. What
would be needed is some clause whereby any media outlet that uses SRTM derived
data for 3d animations etc would be required to mention on air that this data
came from the space shuttle.

When you ask people what the space programme gave us, they are likely to
respond "microwave ovens". (Or Tang simulated orange juice). The fact is that
there are real benefits that the shuttle has provided, but NASA hasn't taken
the steps to ensure that these are attributed to the shuttle.