Tuesday, May 6, 2025
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > Columns > M.D. Lias > Column article
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
M.D. Lias

Atlantis finally sunken (or taken apart)

February 27, 2006 | Comment icon 4 comments
Image Credit:
It's not like this was a long time coming. But all the same, it has come as a surprise to many NASA and space enthusiasts.Some of these folk are very upset that Atlantis "will be cannibalized for spare parts for [the two other remaining shuttles] Discovery and Endeavour," as one put it, also labeling this event a "NASA blunder."But others are more open and understanding of the agency's decision, calling NASA's decision "financially more sensible."The NASA officials, said an SEDS member, "have the right to do what they need to do to be successful."The upset folk, in turn, have wondered why Atlantis, if it is to be removed from the launch pad in two years, cannot be displayed at the Smithsonian.Well for one, the Air and Space building is running out of room, what with all the other craft in there. For another, the mock-up shuttle Enterprise is already on display.In addition, if the STS program will be retired in four years, why would two out of three shuttles available for the final two years make a difference? Complaining about scrapping Atlantis in two years, said the SEDS member, "just adds stress."

But why not use money or capital to fix up Discovery and Endeavour rather than spare parts from Atlantis? Well, NASA is a "large organization that has grown up in a government that has a history of constantly changing its mind and sending mixed signals to the agency"; it lacks the financial opportunity envisioned by many of its enthusiasts.This decision would not have been seriously criticized nor highly contested if made by a company in a competitive market. But this is no private company; this is NASA. And personally, I have no problem with NASA's decision; if it can eliminate its STS program without consuming an overdose of short-run supply, then I'm all for the sinking of Atlantis.[!gad]It's not like this was a long time coming. But all the same, it has come as a surprise to many NASA and space enthusiasts.Some of these folk are very upset that Atlantis "will be cannibalized for spare parts for [the two other remaining shuttles] Discovery and Endeavour," as one put it, also labeling this event a "NASA blunder."But others are more open and understanding of the agency's decision, calling NASA's decision "financially more sensible."The NASA officials, said an SEDS member, "have the right to do what they need to do to be successful."The upset folk, in turn, have wondered why Atlantis, if it is to be removed from the launch pad in two years, cannot be displayed at the Smithsonian.Well for one, the Air and Space building is running out of room, what with all the other craft in there. For another, the mock-up shuttle Enterprise is already on display.In addition, if the STS program will be retired in four years, why would two out of three shuttles available for the final two years make a difference? Complaining about scrapping Atlantis in two years, said the SEDS member, "just adds stress."

But why not use money or capital to fix up Discovery and Endeavour rather than spare parts from Atlantis? Well, NASA is a "large organization that has grown up in a government that has a history of constantly changing its mind and sending mixed signals to the agency"; it lacks the financial opportunity envisioned by many of its enthusiasts.This decision would not have been seriously criticized nor highly contested if made by a company in a competitive market. But this is no private company; this is NASA. And personally, I have no problem with NASA's decision; if it can eliminate its STS program without consuming an overdose of short-run supply, then I'm all for the sinking of Atlantis. Comments (4)


Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #1 Posted by AztecInca 19 years ago
Indeed I must agree. NASA funding is not guranteed and quite often when the government needs to cut costs NASA has to pay the price. This decision just makes economic sense in my opinion and considering the mock-up shuttle Enterprise is already on display I dont see why another shuttle ness to be put up as well.
Comment icon #2 Posted by ROGER 19 years ago
Still after all the shuttles are retired I would like to see if some private company will buy them. Maybe incorporate them into the new low earth orbit flights. Or rework the engines to burn liquid oxygen and Methane. To scrap them out of hand is some what wasteful and a very American way of thinking. If you look at the research and development craft NASA has invested in , then scraped because of politics or financing over the last 30 or so years you can see how good , innovative ideas and machines have been lost to us.
Comment icon #3 Posted by SparkOfOm 19 years ago
Awww.. I thought this post was going to be something about the so called 'Lost City.' When I opened it up it was about a shuttle.
Comment icon #4 Posted by PadawanOsswe 19 years ago
can they at least save a bit of the Hull of the shuttle?


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


 Total Posts: 7,754,086    Topics: 324,185    Members: 203,536

 Not a member yet ? Click here to join - registration is free and only takes a moment!
Recent news and articles