Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!e40-008-11.MIT.EDU!cabruen
From: cabruen@e40-008-11.MIT.EDU (Charles Alan Bruen)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Shuttle question
Message-ID: <1990Nov26.032232.14814@athena.mit.edu>
Date: 26 Nov 90 03:22:32 GMT
References: <3795@cuisun.unige.ch> <40040@ut-emx.uucp> <37200@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 20

>and land at KSC.  If the problem occurs after the KSC window, there are/were two
>sites in Africa(?) for an emergency landing.  If the shuttle were too far into
>the launch for Africa, I think that they just let it go into orbit for a few
>minutes and land it in the western US.
>


The KSC landing would be used only in the case of a launch abort. It
would need to invovlve pretty serious conditions, due to the loads put
on the shuttle. I believe that payloads are not designed to withstand
the loads during lanuch abort and therefore very possible might be
damaged.

The second launch site is in Madrid, Spain, Other than that the shuttle
should be able to make it around to a Edwards landing.


-Charles Bruen
 Aero/Astro MIT
 cabruen@athena.mit.edu