On Mar 11, 1:05*pm, wrote:
On Mar 11, 12:25 pm, "
wrote:

1) Some people imply that the space shuttle and its support structure
(like the Manned Orbital Laboratory) was designed from its inception
to accomplish military goals.

Not an implication but a fact. *It wasn't just "military goals", it
was military missions, as simple as spacecraft delivery



2) Since the Challenger disaster with an IUS aboard, the space shuttle
has been deemed too dangerous for non-astronauts.

3) Yet military advocates don't blame the Air Force for what they
consider our civilian space shuttle / space station dilemma.

How is it logical for advocates of failed military orbital
capabilities (manned) to denigrate our current civilian orbital
capabilities?

It had nothing to with manned capabilities. *The shuttle was The
National *launch vehicle and hence the DOD was flying payloads on it





JTM- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

From http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4221/ch9.htm:

Nixon stated that NASA should stress civilian applications but should
not hesitate to note the military uses as well. He showed interest in
the possibility of routine operations and quick reaction times, for he
saw that these could allow the Shuttle to help in disasters such as
earthquakes or floods. He also liked the idea of using the Shuttle to
dispose of nuclear waste by launching it into space. Fletcher
mentioned that it might become possible to collect solar power in
orbit and beam it to earth in the form of electricity. Nixon replied
that such developments tend to happen much more quickly than people
expect, and that they should not hesitate to talk about them.

He liked the fact that ordinary people would be able to fly in the
Shuttle, who would not be highly-trained astronauts. He asked if the
Shuttle was a good investment, and agreed that it was indeed, for it
promised a tenfold reduction in the cost of space flight. He added
that even if it was not a good investment, the nation would have to do
it anyway, because space flight was here to stay. Fletcher came away
from the meeting saying, "The President thinks about space just like
McCurdy does," referring to a colleague within NASA's upper
management.

Although his formal statement largely reflected NASA's views, Nixon
edited the draft in his own hand. The final version showed a firmness
and sense of direction that had been utterly lacking in his March 1970
statement on space policy. It also featured a grace note that might
have suited John Kennedy:

I have decided today that the United States should proceed at once
with the development of an entirely new type of space transportation
system designed to help transform the space frontier of the 1970s into
familiar territory, easily accessible for human endeavor in the 1980s
and '90s.

This system will center on a space vehicle that can shuttle repeatedly
from earth to orbit and back. It will revolutionize transportation
into near space, by routinizing it. It will take the astronomical
costs out of astronautics. In short, it will go a long way toward
delivering the rich benefits of practical [413] space utilization and
the valuable spinoffs from space efforts into the daily lives of
Americans and all people....

----------------------------

All of that from Nixon, with the only mention of "military" being by
implication, that NASA should "note" military uses.

You say, "It had nothing to with manned capabilities." If the shuttle
had nothing to do with manned capabilities, what in the world was
Nixon talking about?

JTM