Today's edition of Robert L Park's "What's New" column includes his latest broadside against the manned space program:
<Begin quote>
In today's issue of Science, Dan Charles takes a clear-eyed look
at "Science on the Shuttle." For 30 years the space shuttle has been the
only Highway to Space for US astronauts. Next week, space shuttle
Atlantis, STS-135, will deliver a load of groceries to the ISS. After its
return 12 days later Atlantis will remain in Florida as a museum piece. The
other surviving shuttles will likewise serve as museums in the district's
of key members of Congress. Near the end of the retrospective, I find
myself cast as the chief shuttle critic: Among some scientists, Dan says,
antipathy to the shuttle – or any human space flight – runs deep. He
quotes me, "It indulged humankind's impractical space fantasies at a cost
that retarded genuine progress." And so it did, but was there any science?
He cites only the repair of the Hubble space telescope, but it would have
been cheaper to launch a new Hubble.
...
THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND.
Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the
University of Maryland, but they should be.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at
http://www.bobpark.org<end quote>
Bob Park is assuming that a new Hubble, unlike the old Hubble, would be launched by an expendable rocket. We could have had a fleet of such Hubbles for the price of a shuttle launch.