Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tekred.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!tekred!joels
From: joels@tekred.UUCP (Joel Swank)
Newsgroups: net.columbia
Subject: Re: SRB burn-through, related questions
Message-ID: <443@tekred.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 7-Feb-86 16:21:20 EST
Article-I.D.: tekred.443
Posted: Fri Feb  7 16:21:20 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Feb-86 04:06:04 EST
References: <13900009@hpfcla.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 15

> 2.  Why doesn't NASA have ground-based observers with telescopes who are
>     enabled to call an abort?  I'm surprised, especially that the plume
>     apparently was completely unknown until the film was developed.

According to testimony by Sally Ride at the hearing by the President's
Commission investigating the 51L mishap:

No abort can even be contemplated until after SRB separation at about
2:10 after launch. After that time they have a procedure called RTLS 
(Return To Launch Site) that has never been tried. Even this procedure 
will only work under a strict set of curcumstanses, one of them being 
the availablity of at least one of the main engines.

Joel Swank
Tektronix, Redmond Oregon