Getting The Shuttles Aloft May Simply Be Too Dangerous

Is it worth it? Almost eight months after the Columbia tragedy, some members of Congress say the space program lacks direction, the budget is too tight and the space agency has a culture that simply isn't thoughtful enough about safety.

"We're putting American men and women at great risk for their lives, flying orbiters that are 30 years old that cannot be made safe," Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) told NASA chief Sean O'Keefe at a congressional hearing. "My proposal is ... to use these orbiters in an unmanned capacity, build a new space plane or space orbiter that's just for people."

But O'Keefe faced perhaps the most poignant question from Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS): "Are we throwing good money after bad?" Picking up the pieces and analyzing what went wrong in the February 1st Columbia crash has so far cost about the same as a single shuttle launch -- $400 million. That doesn't include implementation of the 29 recommendations made by the organization that investigated and reported on the accident, the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB).

Ironically, lawmakers at hearings last week criticized NASA for its "skimpy" budgets, as if those very lawmakers weren't instrumental in implementing cuts that have hobbled the space program for years. Yet, there seems to be little disagreement that the US "wants to retain a continuing capability to send people into space, whether to Earth orbit or beyond."

If there can be said to be a positive result from so tragic an event, it seems to be a renewed interest in moving both the technology and the agenda for space travel forward. NASA's O'Keefe put it this way: "What we're dealing with is a much more widespread ... equally frightening ... terrorist campaign that has to be countered in very different ways than the way we took on the Cold War."

FMI: www.nasa.gov