You may or may not remember (or otherwise know) that one of the the first American Space Shuttles(1) to fly was the Enterprise. This was supposed to be a candy thrown to the Star Trek fans of the time.

Problem here is that the Star Ship Enterprise (from Star Trek,1966 – 1969) had a shuttle, introduced in the second season, and it was called Galileo.(2) That would have been more appropriate. Second problem is that the NASA Shuttle Enterprise never flew in space! It was for in-atmosphere test flights only. After which it became a museum attraction at the Udvar-Hazy Center, in Virginia, National Air and Space Museum.

That was a shame, really. It was a smart thing to do, on NASA’s part, enlist the Trekkies that way, but couldn’t they waited for the first “real” shuttle? Couldn’t the “Enterprise” have flown in space?

Another marketing almost for the history books — like Microsoft’s entry into China (another article around here goes into that one).

Just my thoughts, and maybe a lesson for some marketing & PR folks to chew on. Use it or don’t.

 


(1) NASA’s Space Shuttle has been discontinued, retired. Last flight was 2011. Which is a shame as NASA still has nothing to replace it, and has nothing like it on the drawing boards, though it appears some of the several new private space ventures do have something in design (Blue Horizon, for one, I believe). The real tragedy of the Space Shuttle is that it was built for a specific purpose that never materialized. So it’s design was compromised against the purpose it finally did serve. Alas and Alack, “tell me this isn’t a government project.” [can you name that quote?]

Further, considering the International Space Station was an international effort [hence the name, right?], many nations spending lots or money to make it happen, and that the American Space Shuttle was the only means of serious repairs, crew replacements, large amounts of supplies and even of changing/correcting the thing’s orbit, Congress closing the Shuttle program amounted to a violation of international trust with all the nations that had helped to build the thing. The American Congress does seem to write off international agreements pretty easily, though. Who can trust some one who continually violates his word? (Answer is obvious)

The maintenance of the ISS fell to Russia, and their small crew capsule, the Soyuz, after the Shuttle was discontinued. Any one who remembers the “Space Race” might consider that Ironic, to say the least. [It’s also interesting that the Soyuz capsule is still in service. That capsule goes all the way back to the Space Race days.]

On the positive side, some private space companies in recent years have successfully fulfilled supply-only (no crew) missions to the ISS for resupply and garbage retrieval (no garbage is thrown away in space — it could become a very serious hazard; this was the basis [incredibly exaggerated] for the movie Gravity). And then just recently (only weeks ago as I write this) SpaceX did a crewed mission to he ISS, spot-on perfectly. So, there’s some hope for Space yet. Which means there’s some long term hope for Humanity

Okay… my longest single footnote to date. Deal with it. 🙂

(2) They didn’t have the budget in the first season to set up a prop, (a set and several models) space shuttle. Expensive. That was how the “transporter” was born. It was an affordable dodge, to get folks on and off the ship during an episode and used special effects already pioneered in other TV shows.

 

 

Categories: Business