Does anyone know when NASA is going to build a new more advanced space shuttle?

Question

Also does anyone know where to find the new design?

Answer 1

Yes, the US is developing a next generation replacement for the space shuttle. The spacecraft has been tentatively dubbed "Orion."

Orion is currently in the initial design phase, and NASA is still evaluating several different configurations and cost/benefit estimates.

Orion will be launched by the new "Ares I" rocket, which uses many similar components and design principles of the original space shuttle, in order to reduce costs. Ares is a two stage rocket, with a reusable solid fuel lower stage similar to the solid boosters of the shuttle. The upper stage is liquid fueled by either O2/hydrogen or O2/kerosene, and will probably not be reusable.

Orion itself is a traditional "space capsule" design, and will probably resemble the original Apollo spacecraft, rather than the space shuttle glider. It will have a reusable crew capsule, and a "throw away" service module with fuel, water, air, and electrical supplies. The crew capsule will make a "soft" parachute landing on either land or water, as opposed to a gliding landing, which is actually much trickier and probably less safe. This design gives it a far greater range in orbit than the shuttle, and will probably be used for future manned moon missions.

The advantages of Orion are modular design, it uses mostly proven existing technology, many of it's parts are "off the shelf", and it is simpler, lighter, more versatile, and more reliable in concept. NASA is making a major effort to increase overall cost effectiveness in Orion over the space shuttle.

Orion is expected to start testing soon after the shuttle officially retires in 2010, and will probably begin operation no later than 2014

Answer 2

New Space Shuttle orbiters can be built at any desired time. The problem now is a political one. About the time the first shuttle flew, the proliferation of incompetents in the government was just getting into high gear, and the government was becoming incompetent on a large scale. As a result, the funding of the Space Shuttle program was cut so severely as to ensure that the costs would rise above estimates and the system would be marginally functional. This is chiefly a result of political maneuvering in the Reagan era.

For example, most people are not aware that the original design for the Grumman shuttle included a winged launch vehicle the size of a C-5 cargo plane that could carry the shuttle on its back to a high altitude and launch it for orbital insertion. This made the whole craft totally re-usable, and the system would have been much more efficient and economical.

The self-recovering launch vehicle was scrubbed for political reasons. Now the incompetents are talking about replacing the Space Shuttle with a capsule type spacecraft that looks laughbly comparable to the much more primitive rocket technology of 40 years ago. This is just a political grandstand play and will never actually fly.

Then we will have to wait until we can overcome the long-term effects of the incompetency of the current government and replace enough of them with sensible people so that the Space Shuttle can be resurrected. Then we will have American space flight again. In the meantime, it will be up to the Russians, the French, the Indians, and the Brazilians.

Maybe they will do a better job until the American people learn again whom they can trust to govern. It has gotten a lot better since the last election, but we have a long way to go to become a great nation again.

Answer 3

Nasa is unlikely to build any more space shuttles like the type flying today. There is talk that the European Space Agency might get together with the Russians to develope a new Space Shuttle type vehicle but it is likely that if it came to be it would be quite small in comparison to the Shuttle. Although we all love the shuttle and it's neat that it lands like a plane the fact is bringing wings up into space just to use mostly for landing it not the most economical way of going and coming into space. During development the Space Shuttle grew extensively larger to accommodate the Air Force requirement that it carry it's very large spy satellites into orbit. That was back the day when the Shuttle was going to launch from California for the military and was to launch all US payloads. In the quest for re usability the engines included, the system was designed as we see it with the orbiter riding on the side of it's own fuel tank. Thus the Shuttle was the first manned space launch system not to have a launch escape system. If you're going to build a new safer launch system to replace the shuttle NASA had to decide whether or not they had learned from their mistakes. The re usability never really materialized so why try for it again. A Space Shuttle launch today costs as much as each Apollo Lunar mission. They seem to have taken what they've learned from Apollo, the Space Shuttle, and what they've learned from years of working with the Russians to design a new system that uses Earth orbit Rendezvous for lunar missions, solar power instead of those accident prone fuel cells that caused the near tragedy of Apollo 13 and caused the aborting of an orbital mission by the Space Shuttle, and ballistic reentry like Apollo but on land like the Soyuz. They've decided to make the manned portion that looks like an Apollo Command Module but is much larger to have partial reusability.

Answer 4

The shuttle has basically been a failure in terms of what it was planned to do and what the costs were intended to be. NASA has decided that the loads that fit in the shuttle would be better be launched separately with much less structure going along so less fuel use. The astronauts would be sent in a vehicle dedicated to getting them up and down as efficiently as possible. Instead of a lab inside the bay, the lab would connect to the human vehicle via locks. The most obvious casualty of the change is the Canadian built arm which has been used for hanging on to satellites for repair and anchoring astronauts for work. The only imaginable arrangement retaining an arm would be a module that is rocketed into space and left there, the manned module mating with it and moving together to the satelite that needs repair. Which now that I read what I wrote looks like a pretty good idea instead of shipping that weight up with the shuttle each time.

Answer 5

Hahaha; the Orion vehicle IS advanced. If you haven't heard, NASA's soon going to discontinue using their space shuttle and create new up-to-date modules...kindof like the Orion.

Answer 6

wel the space shuttle is used for a specific purpose building the iss once this is done the space shuttle will sadley fly no more much like Concorde and thats when a new spacecraft will take place

Answer 7

Nope and no one is able to build a new space craft for this millennium because all talented and genius are condemned in this corrupted and dirty age. Comparing to the earlier century, a lot of new invention items created and just pop out like hot cakes.

And since 2000, look around what have we invented for the globe? Look back, Wright brothers are making plane already..

Where are U all, my talented and genius people? Don't hide....pls...

Isn't that I should call a reverse engineering and not something totally new from space shuttle? We are going back to apollo 13 again? lol

Anymore thumb down for me? it's good sign for me why? it's showing that faking of fact is better than the reality stark facts. haha...

Can mean can, cannot mean cannot. lol....
Can't design a better space craft already? lol....

Answer 8

Bud Tugly is correct. The CEV, Orion, is currently being designed by Lockheed Martin with the Avionics being done by Honeywell.

Answer 9

I understand it is in design stage. I will not be like the current shuttle with wings, elevator and rudder. It will be more the old Apollo with parachute landing.

Answer 10

They are right now , only it is top secret. If you gave me a thumbs down you will feel very stupid in 5 years when the new space craft is revealed to the public.