A Rocket To Nowhere

http://www.idlewords.com/2005/08/a_rocket_to_nowhere.htm

.....

Future archaeologists trying to understand what the Shuttle was
for are going to have a mess on their hands. Why was such a powerful rocket used
only to reach very low orbits, where air resistance and debris would limit the
useful lifetime of a satellite to a few years? Why was there both a big cargo
bay and a big crew compartment? What kind of missions would require people to
assist in deploying a large payload? Why was the Shuttle intentionally crippled
so that it could not land on autopilot? 1 Why go
through all the trouble to give the Shuttle large wings if it has no jet engines
and the glide characteristics of a brick? Why build such complex, adjustable
main engines and then rely on the equivalent of two giant firecrackers to
provide most of the takeoff thrust? Why use a glass thermal protection system,
rather than a low-tech ablative shield? And having chosen such a fragile method
of heat protection, why on earth mount the orbiter on the side of the rocket,
where things will fall on it during launch?

Taken on its own merits, the Shuttle gives the impression of a
vehicle designed to be launched repeatedly to near-Earth orbit, tended by five
to seven passengers with little concern for their personal safety, and requiring
extravagant care and preparation before each flight, with an almost fetishistic
emphasis on reuse. Clearly this primitive space plane must have been a sacred
artifact, used in religious rituals to deliver sacrifice to a sky god.

As tempting as it is to picture a blood-spattered Canadarm
flinging goat carcasses into the void, we know that the Shuttle is the fruit of
what was supposed to be a rational decision making process. That so much about
the vehicle design is bizarre and confused is the direct result of the Shuttle's
little-remembered role as a military vehicle during the Cold War.

.....

Spot on. Read the full post.