Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu!news
From: mboone@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Michael B. Boone)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: HST - Repair or Augment.
Message-ID: <1991Feb11.184542.6275@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 11 Feb 91 18:45:42 GMT
References: <91039.210444NU128479@NDSUVM1.BITNET> <1991Feb10.022414.2365@zoo.toronto.edu> <32iu02bN05Of01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
Sender: news@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University
Lines: 30
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu

In article <32iu02bN05Of01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> haw30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Henry Worth) writes:

>   For example: by not servicing the HST and using an ELV to launch
>a follow-on/supplement to the HST we would:
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Like what??

>   > Giving up on-orbit servicing opens up the possiblity of
>     a geo-sync orbit with reduced operating (communications)
>     costs and reduced solar array/battery capacity requirements.

If you could get it there without breaking something, what would you
do if something breaks early on in the "fixed" project?

>   > With no on-orbit servicing the project lifetime may be reduced.
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                                             No kidding!  A week or two?

>     But, some of that may be made up with a simpler, more-reliable
>     design and a more stable orbit. Then again, the shuttle is hardly
>     as dependable a repair service as the auto club, so there may
>     not be that much gained from on-orbit servicing anyway; perhaps
>     even a loss as there are more things to break...

If there are more things to break, putting it in a geosynchronous
orbit surely can't help matters!  And while the shuttle is no "Auto
Club", a human up there to fix things is much better than a radio.

>Henry Worth  --  haw30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com

Mike Boone -- mboone@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu