Space tourism, and the unspoken US victory in space

From: gardener1_98 [mailto:gardener1_98@...]

> I've wondered for years why we can't do something like this.
> After all, the shuttle is already kind of a "space bus", why not make
> it so in reality.

I remember reading an article by Gerard O'Neill where he basically said,
"OK, the Shuttle is an accomplished fact, now that it's here, what's the
best possible use we can put it to?" And of course the answer to that is
the answer to "What is the Shuttle better at than any other space
transportation system?" Sending up communication satellites or planetary
probes? Expendable boosters are cheaper. The obvious answer is "Taking
large numbers of people up and bringing them back down". So he felt the
best use we could put the Shuttle to was with those cargo-bay passenger
modules that came out for under a few engineer's blotters after the Shuttle
became operational.

> An unspoken US victory? Recent news about old Russian shuttles
> for sale, etc illustrated another fact. As steady and reliable as
> the old Soyuz boosters are, they are still updated 3-man expendable
> boosters (1960's tech). Try as they might, the old Soviet regimes
> could not get an effective shuttle transportation system up and
> running. They threw in the towel after one flight. Ours is still
> perking along after 109 successful flights. Put that in your pipe
> and smoke it :-) :-)

While I've always felt strongly that socialist nations can't perform as
effectively as free-market ones, we must be truthful and say that this has
more to do with how much money the respective space agencies were given for
the job. If Congress had chosen to, they could have easily strangled the
Shuttle after one flight. Barring total economic collapse of the US, it
would have been the height of stupidity to do so, but they could have done
it.

Regards,

Mike Combs