Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!gecrdvm1!gipp
From: GIPP@gecrdvm1.crd.ge.com
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: launch rates
Message-ID: <90270.125759GIPP@GECRDVM1.BITNET>
Date: 27 Sep 90 16:57:59 GMT
References: <10195.26fde341@pbs.org> <1990Sep25.033816.16652@zoo.toronto.edu>
 <10209.26ff5e6c@pbs.org>
Organization: General Electric Corporate Research & Development
Lines: 32

In article <10209.26ff5e6c@pbs.org>, pstinson@pbs.org says:
>
>In article <1990Sep25.033816.16652@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu
>(Henry Spencer) writes:
>
>>  -- Apollo 9, in early 1969, was the first Saturn V launch that was
>> considered a "production" launch, not encumbered by major debugging work
>> on KSC facilities and equipment -- and post-1969 launches were slowed down
>> by the Apollo 13 accident (which is why there was only one in 1970)
>And STS-5 was the first comparable launch in the Shuttle proram.  STS-1
>through
>STS-4 were billed as test flights and were encumbered by revamping of KSC
>facilities.   Shuttle launches had to recover from Challenger (which is why
>there weren't any launches in 1987.)  Shuttle went through the same stuff     n
>Satur
>V did.   You can not argue away the Shuttle's better performance as compared
>to
>Saturn V by claiming extenuating circumstances.  I made no allowances when I
>compiled the Shuttle launch figures and I see no reason why I should have with
>the Saturn V data.  I treated them both the same.

Perhaps a better measure of reliability would be a comparison of each
vehicles ratio of launch success vs launch attempts.  I think it's
pretty well documented that the shuttle, throughout its career, has
encountered numerous delays of launch (of days and months). What is
the record of saturn v, or saturn 1b?  Also, how does each vehicle
compare against intended useage?  Methinks Saturn V was launched
approximately as often as desired, whereas the Shuttle family is
way behind on the launches intended.  Aw, heck, as long as we're
comparing, how much environmental damage did the RP-1/LOX do
vs the SRB (been meaning to ask that one since the great ozone
destruction debate)?