Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site smeagol.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!sdcrdcf!oberon!smeagol!kwan
From: kwan@smeagol.UUCP (Richard Kwan)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: rescue capability
Message-ID: <611@smeagol.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Feb-86 20:04:07 EST
Article-I.D.: smeagol.611
Posted: Wed Feb 19 20:04:07 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Feb-86 07:31:47 EST
References: <8602170318.AA25485@s1-b.arpa> <8602181610.AA02089@mitre-bedford.ARPA>
Organization: Spacecraft Data Systems, JPL, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 25

In <8602181610.AA02089@mitre-bedford.ARPA>, C. Byrnes writes:
>   I'm surprised the US and USSR don't have a treaty that would
> encourage an observation/rescue capability for the first few flights
> of new spacecraft...

I thought that was the point of the Apollo/Soyuz docking exercise
way back when.  Granted, having done it once is different from having
a treaty to ensure active maintanance of that capability.  However,
with multiple orbiters, perhaps we have some home-grown capability to
do the same.

Some questions:
    1.	Does the shuttle orbiter utilize the same docking collar
	specifications as Apollo?
    2.	Was much thought given to the possibility of a stranded shuttle?
	I presume launching a second shuttle was an option, although
	that would mean that a rendevous vehicle is ready to go while
	another is actually sitting on the pad.

-- 
		Rick Kwan
		JPL Spacecraft Data Systems
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"...jumpin' into hyperspace ain't like dustin' crops, boy."  H. Solo
--------------------------------------------------------------------