Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!cci632!ritcsh!ultb!ritvax.isc.rit.edu!isg7243 From: isg7243@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (GEERTS, IS) Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: Skeptical Shuttle Enquirer Message-ID: <1991Apr18.223753.25610@isc.rit.edu> Date: 19 Apr 91 01:32:50 GMT References: <910@idacrd.UUCP> <1991Apr9.172200.13427@zoo.toronto.edu> <4287.280ac92a@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> Sender: news@isc.rit.edu (USENET News System) Reply-To: isg7243@ritvax.isc.rit.edu Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology Lines: 16 News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4 Nntp-Posting-Host: vaxb In article <4287.280ac92a@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>, herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com writes... >In article , heskett@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Donald Heskett) writes: >> >> It does seem to me, however, that a significantly higher percentage of >> failures have occured among satellites lofted by the Shuttle, compared >> with those lofted by expendable boosters. Unfortunately, I haven't >> kept records good enough to verify the conjecture. Nor have I ever >> come up with a good hypothesis for a cause. My friend, all you have to do is write Nasa, requesting information on, say the future of the space program, phrase it politely and show you do have some use for the information (I think they'd respond anyway, but it helps) and they will sind you a two inch thick stack of information on everything from new projects to old results to hypothesises to their budget. Try it, you might prove a point. -Indra