Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!sri-unix!tim@uci-750a
From: tim%uci-750a@sri-unix.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: Space station?? How about other things too/first?
Message-ID: <365@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-May-84 12:23:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.365
Posted: Thu May  3 12:23:27 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 9-May-84 03:23:02 EDT
Lines: 23

From:  "Tim Shimeall" <tim@uci-750a>

   Date: 2 May 1984 21:43-EDT
   From: Robert Elton Maas <REM @ MIT-MC>
   To: DOUG @ JPL-VLSI
         A manned station would supply all of this and more,
     Unfortunately the manned statin won't be around for about ten years
     according to R.Reagan's proposal. In the meantime I'd like to see
     SOMETHING up there to mount long-term experiments, something that will
     cost only one shuttle launch instead of twenty and cost some
     infinitesimal fraction of the cost of a manned station, thus might get
     up there in a couple years from now.
Something like the space telescope?  IRAS?  Seriously: the manned
space station program is planned to be an Apollo-type program, and as
such, I'd expect it to include several unmanned platforms of increasing
complexity, leading up to the manned station.  I know that the talk I
heard on the space station included 2 platforms, one in polar, one in
28.5-degree inclination orbit in the INITIAL space station plans.
More platforms are intended to be added as the station develops.  The
only reason the platforms are lumped in with the station is that they
share the same stablization and power technologies, and so the
platforms may very well be used to test for the station.
				Tim