Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!waikato.ac.nz!pjs1
From: pjs1@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle Enterprise
Message-ID: <1991Apr25.140350.3543@waikato.ac.nz>
Date: 25 Apr 91 14:03:50 +1200
References: <1991Apr20.161545.14633@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> <1198@sppy00.UUCP> <1648@vtserf.cc.vt.edu> <2814A667.538E@ibma0.cs.uiuc.edu>
Followup-To: sci.space.shuttle
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
Lines: 24

In article <2814A667.538E@ibma0.cs.uiuc.edu>, noe@sunc4.cs.uiuc.edu (Roger Noe)
 writes:
> 
> Can someone confirm this?  Is OV-100 Pathfinder?  One of the lists Ron Jarrell
> refers to would look like the following:
> 	OV-099 Challenger
> 	OV-101 Enterprise
> 	OV-102 Columbia
> 	OV-103 Discovery
> 	OV-104 Atlantis
> 	OV-105 Endeavour
> I assume they actually started the numbering scheme at 101, with what were to
> be the operational OV bodies, and then backtracked when Challenger was turned
> into an operational OV.  Does anyone know differently?
> 

	I have always assumed that Challenger was OV-101 and have never heard
of the Enterprise. As it never flew would I be correct in thinking that
something was wrong with it's body and hence it's inards were used to make the
challenger?

	On a similar subject, we (New Zealand) are about to see THE CHALLENGER
(the movie), is it any good and how accurate/factual is it.