Profile: This week's troubled space shuttle launch confirms Nasa's spacecraft is past its sell-by-date, writes Shane Hegarty
On Tuesday morning, a large bird flapped its way through the Florida skies. Gliding over the shoreline, probably oblivious to the fuss going on below, it may have been a little curious about the large white perch just ahead. At that moment it may have wondered why, contrary to all its previous experience, the clouds were suddenly rushing upwards from the ground. If it did, it was probably its last thought, because right then the bird was clobbered by a giant spacecraft accelerating at such a rate it would reach the speed of sound in just 50 seconds.
On board space shuttle Discovery, the seven-person crew was only 2½ seconds into a mission. Even if they had noticed the impact, they were not in a position to get out and check the damage. If only it had been the worst thing to have happened on this flight. It wasn't. Even if the bird might quibble with that assessment.
Two-and-a-half years after a loose chunk of foam led to the destruction of space shuttle Columbia as it re-entered earth's atmosphere, Discovery set off on a mission intended to restore confidence in manned space flight. Instead, several chunks of foam fell from the external fuel tank during the first few minutes, one of which may have struck the wing. Discovery was already a week behind schedule, thanks to a faulty fuel sensor that still has the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa) baffled. So, the shuttle programme has been suspended once again. Discovery, however, is currently docked with the International Space Station (ISS); its crew busy sweeping the ship for problems. But whatever damage has been done to Discovery, that done to the reputation of the space shuttle is now irreparable.
It was once nicknamed the "space taxi" but the space shuttle is now like a car that keeps breaking down moments after leaving the garage.
Ageing and heading for retirement, it really shouldn't be up there at all. The shuttles were only supposed to have a lifespan of 10 years, but Discovery was first flown in 1984. Only half the original fleet survives. Until this mission, it had a record of two explosions in 113 flights, killing 14 astronauts. It mightn't be the fairest comparison, but if aircraft blew up as often as shuttles there would be at least four accidents a day at Dublin airport alone.
For the first time a rocket scientist heads Nasa, and from the off Michael Griffin made it clear that the space shuttle is vital to the agency's future. In reality, it's vital to Nasa's ego because the shuttle has no future to speak of. Before this week's crisis, there were only two dozen missions left anyway. It is due to be retired in 2010 in favour of a capsule called the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). Because that was originally not scheduled to launch until 2014, meaning a four-year spell during which the United States could not send anyone into space without having to send them via Russia, Griffin wants to bring the CEV's launch date forward.
However, Nasa is yet again under enormous budgetary pressure. George W Bush's pledge to send people back to the Moon by 2020, and then on to Mars, remains central, and Griffin agrees that these are more worthy aims than "sending astronauts to circle the earth time after time". However, there have been cutbacks to other missions. Aboard the ISS, many of the scientific experiments have been shelved. At a time when money is tight, the shuttle is a drain on resources. With private firms now engaged in their own space race, Nasa needs to encourage this entrepreneurial zeal..
THE IDEA OF a space shuttle was first drawn up in the 1960s when Nasa wanted a vehicle that would service a space station and lunar colony and become a stepping stone to Mars. It would be inexpensive, reusable and reliable. During the years of the Vietnam war and economic uncertainty, though, funding was gradually eroded. Given the choice between lunar colonies and the space shuttle, Nasa opted for the transport system, even if it didn't have an obvious destination.
The first shuttle was to be christened Constitution, but a campaign by Star Trek fans persuaded Nasa to rename it Enterprise. Its mission was to boldly fly up and down the sky a bit before Columbia came along in 1981 and became the first shuttle to go into space.
Since the beginning, the shuttle has attracted sceptics. It was expected to be cheap, but turned out to be anything but. The average launch costs $1.3 billion (€1 billion), with much of that down to trying to keep an ageing fleet active. It was supposed to be ready to fly again two weeks after each previous mission, but the turn-around actually takes months. And an inordinate amount of time and cash is spent simply keeping the astronauts alive, when some question the need for manned space flights at all.
Even the toilets require constant and expensive maintenance. They are, by the way, smart designs, meant to prevent any unwanted leakage while accommodating gender differences. Its technical challenges include a properly functioning "male interface" attachment.
The shuttle, as with any space station, has always had the potential to become a smelly, dirty little vehicle. During a 1985 Challenger flight, while being tested for their responses to weightlessness, 24 rats and two monkeys produced such a "flood" of faeces that the crew had to wear face masks.
WHILE THE SHUTTLE originally got off the ground because the US Air Force agreed to let it carry its satellites, it hardly serves that purpose any more as most satellites are put into space by old-fashioned rockets. And while it may have come into its own with the construction of the International Space Station, the merits of having a space station at all are debatable. The docking of shuttle and station is seen by some as the mating of two white elephants.
There have been some worthy scientific experiments, but critics argue that nothing major has come from the space shuttle programme.
Astronauts have watched spiders make confused webs in space and grown flowers in microgravity, but they haven't arrived back with new drugs or cures for cancer. Nasa claims that there have been several spin-offs of the shuttle missions. Fuel pumps have been adapted for artificial hearts; the fuel tank's foam insulation is used in prosthetic limbs. It also lays claim to a "modesty aid to curb mammary bounce". Ladies, that means you've got the space shuttle to thank for your sports bra. According to Nasa's Spinoff publication, the technology of the space suit was adapted to solve "problems encountered by women runners and joggers, particularly those with large breasts". Gravity has its drawbacks too.
ULTIMATELY, THE SPACE shuttle's chief function may have been to remind us of just how dangerous manned space flight really is. Seventy-three seconds into a mission in 1986, Challenger exploded because of a gas leak through a faulty rubber ring. Concerns had been raised about the problem, and a handful of engineers who had asked the launch be stopped watched in dread expectation of what was to come. On board was Christa McAuliffe, who was to be the first civilian in space, and her death alongside six other astronauts punctured Nasa's hubris and shattered the American public's complacency about space travel. There is film of the passenger module plummeting from the sky. The astronauts were almost certainly still alive as they took 2½ minutes to fall 11km (seven miles) and hit the sea at 320km/h (200mph).
Now, the world once again watches the shuttle, but not with the awe and pride it once did. Instead, it cranes towards space to see if Discovery makes it home safely. Nasa was meant to learn lessons from the Challenger disaster, but the Columbia accident proved otherwise.
Now, having had over two years to fix the shuttle, it has encountered a litany of problems. The astronauts will soon be told if they'll be staying in space while a rescue vessel is sent up or coming home as arranged on August 7th.
It will be a nervous flight for both those in orbit and those on the ground. The shuttle will hopefully land in one piece, but it will come trailing the shards of its reputation.
The Space Shuttle File
What is it? Nasa's "space taxi"
Why is it in the news? On the first flight since the Space Shuttle Columbia was destroyed after loose foam damaged the ship, more debris came loose on Discovery. Nasa has responded by grounding the fleet
Most appealing characteristic It has ferried more humans into space than any other spacecraft
Least appealing characteristic Expensive and unsafe, it now looks like a relic of a more idealistic era in space exploration
Most likely to be seen In a hangar, surrounded by puzzled engineers who can't figure out what's wrong with it
Least likely to be seen In space