Criticism of the Space Shuttle program

rdf:langString Criticism of the Space Shuttle program

rdf:langString Criticism of the Space Shuttle program stemmed from claims that NASA's Space Shuttle program failed to achieve its promised cost and utility goals, as well as design, cost, management, and safety issues. Fundamentally, it failed in the goal of reducing the cost of space access. Space Shuttle incremental per-pound launch costs ultimately turned out to be considerably higher than those of expendable launchers.By 2011, the incremental cost per flight of the Space Shuttle was estimated at $450 million, or $18,000 per kilogram ($8,200 per pound) to low Earth orbit (LEO). In contrast, the comparable Proton launch vehicle is said to cost as little as $110 million, or around $5,000 per kilogram ($2,300 per pound) to LEO, despite not being reusable. When all design and maintenance costs are taken into account, the final cost of the Space Shuttle program, averaged over all missions and adjusted for inflation (2008), was estimated to come out to $1.5 billion per launch, or $60,000 per kilogram ($27,000 per pound) to LEO. This should be contrasted with the originally envisioned costs of $260 per kilogram ($118 per pound) of payload in 1972 dollars (approximately $558 per pound adjusting for inflation to 2019). It failed in the goal of achieving reliable access to space, partly due to multi-year interruptions in launches following Shuttle failures. NASA budget pressures partly caused by the chronically high NASA Space Shuttle program costs have eliminated NASA manned space flight beyond low earth orbit since Apollo, and severely curtailed use of unmanned probes. NASA's promotion of and reliance on the Shuttle slowed domestic commercial expendable launch vehicle (ELV) programs until after the 1986 Challenger disaster. Two out of the five spacecraft were destroyed in accidents, killing 14 astronauts, the largest loss of life in space exploration.