Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "Why is NASA Throwing Away Reusable Engines?" video.

  1. The shuttle was horrendously bad on expenses but it wasn't that bad. The overall mission costs for each flight were about $350-450 million depending on the mission because the mission costs includes the payload costs. But that doesn't take away form the fact the shuttle cost too much to operate. I am an aerospace engineer and I do try and explain to people that the Space Shuttle was BOTH and amazing success and horrible failure. It was a success in that it actually worked. Despite all the interference from the USAF and CIA they actually made something that worked. If you go through the technical developments they got through it was extraordinary that they even made it work once let alone 130+ times for only 2 losses. It was a horrible failure in that its COSTS were so over what was intended. From the outset it starved other programs of money and people. You are right the refurbishing of the motors between flight was a major part of those costs but not the only costs. The heat shield was major hassle as well. Because of the insistence the shuttle be used it also meant the ISS cost a lot more than planned. All those costs have added up and all the people required to get it done is the main reason we are still yet to go back to the moon. Just so you all know I was doing my degree when Challenger happened. I was actually in Florida only 16 days earlier and watched Columbia take off. Up until the day Challenger happened all of my classmates and me expected that we'd build Space Station Freedom in the early 1990s and be headed back to the moon circa 2000-2002. And yeah that wasn't a good day. One of my aerodynamic profs lost a friend on that flight.
    2