Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Blowing up the Shuttle
Message-ID: <1990Apr10.172659.4417@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <10556.1574.forumexp@mts.rpi.edu> <1990Apr5.035158.23244@utzoo.uucp> <10884@portia.Stanford.EDU> <1990Apr7.221851.14080@utzoo.uucp> <3035@phred.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 90 17:26:59 GMT

In article <3035@phred.UUCP> petej@phred.UUCP (Pete Jarvis) writes:
>>... A good bit of the orbiter was reconstructed from
>>salvaged debris, and probably most of it could have been if recovery
>>efforts had been more persistent.
>
>Challenger debris recovery went on until sometime in June. How much more
>persistent would you have them be?

"Persistent" wasn't quite the word I wanted, although it was the best
one-word approximation I could think of.  Debris recovery was aimed at
investigating the disaster rather than at recovering every possible
fragment; for example, I don't believe they tried to recover the TDRS,
although they did locate it and verify that it seemed to be in one piece.
-- 
Apollo @ 8yrs: one small step.|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
Space station @ 8yrs:        .| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu