Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!eos!aio!vf.jsc.nasa.gov!kent
From: kent@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Edwards landings
Message-ID: <1991May13.172224.1@vf.jsc.nasa.gov>
Date: 13 May 91 23:22:24 GMT
References: <1991May10.181129.1554@athena.mit.edu>
Sender: news@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (USENET News System)
Distribution: usa
Organization: NASA Johnson Space Flight Center
Lines: 32

In article <1991May10.181129.1554@athena.mit.edu>, mmachlis@athena.mit.edu (Matthew A Machlis) writes:
> 
> I would definitely like to see them landing at Florida regularly to save all
> that money, but only when it has been determined to be totally safe (at least
> not any riskier than landing at Edwards).
> 
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Matt Machlis
> MIT Space Systems Laboratory
> (617)253-2272


Its safer to land at Edwards.  The lake bed has a large margin for error.

Moving the prime landing site to KSC is waiting on:

1) the new brakes on the orbiters  (this is complete)

2) Installation of the drag chutes on the orbiters.  (Endevour will be the
first)

3) complete testing of the new brakes, drag chute, and nose will steering.

When all this is done.  Then the KSC will be prime.


-- 

Mike Kent -  	Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company at NASA JSC
		2400 NASA Rd One, Houston, TX 77058 (713) 483-3791
		KENT@vf.jsc.nasa.gov