Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!brahms!desj
From: desj@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: net.columbia,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Escape tower for shuttle orbiter?
Message-ID: <12610@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Sun, 23-Mar-86 22:24:02 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12610
Posted: Sun Mar 23 22:24:02 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Mar-86 03:46:07 EST
References: <9696@ucla-cs.ARPA> <588@qantel.UUCP> <2593@genat.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: desj@brahms.UUCP (David desJardins)
Distribution: net
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 12
Keywords: life vs. megabucks
Xref: watmath net.columbia:2695 net.philosophy:4610

In article <2593@genat.UUCP> phoenix@genat.UUCP () writes:
>For example, John Doe gets into a traffic-accident in his Farrarri.  To save
>his life, the car must be cut open, aka *destroyed*.  Because it is an
>expensive car that will be damaged, does this mean we leave John Doe to
>die while we save the sportscar?

   I have not touched on this kind of a trade-off, because I don't see any
real situation where we would have to make a choice between saving the
shuttle orbiter *or* the crew.  But, *if* this choice were necessary, it
seems clear to save the orbiter.

   -- David desJardins