Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ucf-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!mcnc!duke!ucf-cs!giles
From: giles@ucf-cs.UUCP (Bruce Giles)
Newsgroups: net.columbia
Subject: Re: Shuttle "self-destruct system?"
Message-ID: <1359@ucf-cs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 2-Jul-84 06:47:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucf-cs.1359
Posted: Mon Jul  2 06:47:54 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 3-Jul-84 04:32:35 EDT
References: <134@wnuxb.UUCP>
Organization: University of Central Florida
Lines: 22

>>  Today's Chicago Tribune (Tues., 6/26) has an article about the 
>>  replacement of Discovery's backup computer, described as costing 
>>  $1.2 million, and weighing 57 tons.  No wonder it won't fly.

Remind me to NEVER read the *Chicago Tribune*.  The local news had 
pictures of NASA techs removing the computer and putting another one
instead.  One technician was able to carry the thing.  So unless NASA
has found a way of stuffing a box approximately 100 x 75 x 50 (cm)
with 57 tons of stuff, and stuffing techs with 80 tons of wheaties,
I rather distrust the paper.

P.S. Perhaps they were thinking of ENIAC?  I work with IBM 3082s, and
I doubt they weigh more than five of tons each, including drum, hundred
disks, etc....   What would a Discovery need with the equivalent of 50
IBM 3082s for?  (10 mainframes/backup * 5 on-board computers).


ave discordia				going bump in the night ...
bruce giles

{decvax, duke}!ucf-cs!giles		university of central florida
giles.ucf-cs@Rand-Relay			orlando, florida 32816