Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site vger.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!vger!al
From: al@vger.UUCP ( Informatix)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: STS EXPLOSION TODAY
Message-ID: <321@vger.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-Jan-86 03:38:14 EST
Article-I.D.: vger.321
Posted: Fri Jan 31 03:38:14 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Feb-86 21:01:09 EST
References: <8601282025.AA07409@s1-b.arpa>
Organization: UC Santa Cruz, CIS Dept.
Lines: 16
Summary: NASA's safety consciousness is NECESSARY - and not quite enough!

In article <8601282025.AA07409@s1-b.arpa>, Rem@IMSSS writes:
> In addition to obvious badness:
>  (1) TDRS lost, so we won't be having the around-the-clock tracking of
>    space missions like we were hoping to have;
>  (2) Our STS capacity is now down to 60%. Originally we needed 5 orbiters,
>    However this may be moot if they spend two
>    years analyzing everything before doing anything.

This echos the sentiment frequently expressed on the net that NASA is too
careful.  As the Challenger disaster shows, NASA is not quite careful
enough.  If it takes two years to do the analysis, then they should take
it.  Five if necessary.  I doubt that it will take more than a few months
to determine the cause of the problem, fixing it may be another story.  In
any case, I hope that those of you who think NASA should take chances are
happy - they took enough chances to have a major accident and the space
program has suffered a serious setback as a result.