Rumors of not returning space shuttle to flight

NASA's fear of flying: What if the shuttle never flew again?

Michael Griffin, former NASA Chief Engineer and the Associate Administrator for Exploration, recently scoped out a beyond-the-shuttle plan before the House of Representative's Committee on Science.

"I, and others, have elsewhere advocated that the shuttle should be returned to flight and the ISS brought to completion, if only because the program's two-decade advocacy by the United States and commitment to its international partners should not be cavalierly abandoned," Griffin testified. "But, if there is no additional money to be allocated to space exploration, this position becomes increasingly difficult to justify. It is worth asking whether our international partners might judge the issue similarly," he advised.

Griffin said that money saved by not returning shuttle to space would foot-the-bill, for example, on a small Crew Exploration Vehicle. This craft could be perched atop an augmented shuttle solid rocket motor for access to low Earth orbit. Funds would also be plowed into a shuttle-derived heavy lifter, sans a pilot-carrying orbiter.

The space station would be put on caretaker status until Japan's H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) and Europe's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) come online and are capable of hardware and supply delivery.

With all this in place, the reasoning goes, ISS could reach assembly complete sometime after 2010. Furthermore, key elements for pushing beyond low Earth orbit become available too — all spurred by a diversion of shuttle funds.

"I admit it's far-fetched. Inertia favors the shuttle," former shuttle astronaut Jones said. "NASA is not currently so nimble as to be able to tackle such a huge challenge. And the ISS partners would not like to see their modules sitting on the ground until 2012. But they might be waiting nearly that long anyway."

Since Columbia, Jones said, he has thought that shuttle should retire when ISS assembly is done. "With its slow return, we have to ask how long it makes sense to stick with the shuttle when it's costing us other options."

How serious is the White House edict to retire the shuttle in 2010 after 30 years of service?

First of all, it may take 30 shuttle flights to finish the station. The CAIB explained in their study that flying the shuttle more than five flights a year would be a challenge. Even if the shuttle is optimistically off-the-ground in March 2005, simple math adds up to not having space station construction wrapped until 2011-2012.

While the President's space vision is definite on that 2010 retire-the-shuttle decree, safety of crew remains paramount and could well influence that date. Meanwhile, White House space policy makers have begun asking if there are any alternatives to finishing the ISS besides potentially flying the shuttle past 2010.

Is the United States as a nation willing to endure a period of several years when humans do not fly in space like it did between the time of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project in 1975 and the first shuttle mission in 1981? Are we willing to end human spaceflight altogether?

"I think that the answer to both of these questions for most Americans is no," Launius responded. But while the support for human spaceflight is broad, he continued, it does not seem to be very deep.

"Americans like the shuttle and human spaceflight. They recognize the astronauts as heroes, but believe it is overly expensive — when really it is not. So what do we do for the future? It seems uncertain at present," Launius said.