Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!decvax!harpo!gummo!whuxlb!floyd!clyde!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!sri-unix!Katz.UCI@Rand-Relay
From: Katz.UCI@Rand-Relay@sri-unix.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: Space Station Politics (reusing external tanks)
Message-ID: <12203@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Sep-83 13:01:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.12203
Posted: Fri Sep 30 13:01:03 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Oct-83 00:59:20 EDT
Lines: 11

I think that you have a good point.  Many of the early NASA views on
how to build a space station were based on hollowing out Saturn V
boosters and attaching them to a maintenance core.  The idea was that
since the boosters were already leaving the ground, why not make use of
them.  The same argument applies to the Shuttle's external tank.  How
much would it take to modify it into an accessable compartment?
How much extra fuel would it take to leave the tanks in LEO instead of
having them burn up in the atmosphere?  I think that NASA and the
government may be thinking too high tech, but not of what is needed.
What we need first is not specially designed facilities, but life
support and space -- the rest will follow.