Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!ulysses!allegra!alice!alb
From: alb@alice.UUCP (Adam L. Buchsbaum)
Newsgroups: net.columbia
Subject: The Final Definitive Answer on the Fuel Question
Message-ID: <2706@alice.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Apr-84 19:27:50 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.2706
Posted: Wed Apr 11 19:27:50 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Apr-84 01:46:20 EST
References: <93@brl-vgr.ARPA>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 26

OK, this is an all encompassing answer to all the fuel questions.

1) Nelson's MMU did ''red-line'' on fuel.  That is why he
   broke off the SMM stabilization attempt and flew back
   to the shuttle.
2) There was another, fully-fueled MMU on board.
3) The MMU's can be refueled in orbit in about 20 minutes.
4) The shuttle itself ran low on maneuvering fuel, due to
   numerous attempts to grab SMM with the RMS while the
   satellite was wobbling and tumbling.  The fuel reserves
   for the front steering jets dropped to about 21 percent.
   This is why no further MMU-propelled EVA was executed;
   there may not have been enough shuttle fuel left to pick
   up the astronaut if his MMU failed.
5) There was no danger to reentry due to the low fuel reserve
   on the shuttle.
6) It was decided that there was enough shuttle maneuvering
   fuel (nitrogen tetroxide and monomethyl hydrazine, for those
   who are wondering) to attempt another grab at the SMM once
   it was stabilized (but still spinning).  As an aside, the
   additional maneuvers performed Tuesday in which the snare
   was successful burned up only half the fuel that ground
   controllers thought they would.

That should answer any and all questions.  If I missed any,
let me know.