Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!watdragon!dvadura
From: dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Shuttle roll maneuver
Message-ID: <17825@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Date: 4 Nov 89 21:02:40 GMT
References: <1989Oct31.002441.7817@utzoo.uucp> <1758@cfa237.cfa250.harvard.edu> <7255@ingr.com> <1989Nov4.073508.10143@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura)
Organization: Computer Science Dept., University of Waterloo
Lines: 22

In article <1989Nov4.073508.10143@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <7255@ingr.com> hovanes@ingr.com (Kenneth Hovanes 7938) writes:
>looking out the window.  I went and [gasp!] looked it up, just to
>confirm my recollection:  the main reason for the roll is simply
>that most of the communications antennas are on the orbiter, and
>keeping them in line of sight of ground stations requires that the
>orbiter be on the underside of the shuttle assembly during ascent.

Not to mention the fact that if they turned the whole assembly around on
the pad, all those news people's cameras would have a wonderful view of
the back of the ET.  Not nearly as impressive as the view of the the
orbiter along with the roll maneuver.  I'm not suggesting this was a
factor in the decision of orbiter placement on the pad, but PR is important
and it wouldn't suprise me if someone hadn't pointed out the PR benefit of
the current orientation.

-dennis
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only happy people are Single MEN   |Dennis  UUCP,BITNET:    dvadura@water
and Married WOMEN.                     |Vadura  EDU,CDN,CSNET:  dvadura@waterloo
================================================================================