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!cbosgd!hplabs!tektronix!tekred!joels
From: joels@tekred.UUCP (Joel Swank)
Newsgroups: net.columbia,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Value of Astronauts vs. Shuttle Orbiters
Message-ID: <483@tekred.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Mar-86 13:50:29 EST
Article-I.D.: tekred.483
Posted: Fri Mar 28 13:50:29 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 30-Mar-86 03:15:50 EST
References: <9696@ucla-cs.ARPA> <588@qantel.UUCP> <2593@genat.UUCP> <669@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 16
Xref: watmath net.columbia:2732 net.philosophy:4760

>      The fact that a new Shuttle Orbiter costs about $1.7 billion , given
> aerospace labor rates, implys 9,300 employee-years of effort.  This equates to 
> 234 working lifetimes.  This is how many human lives are consumed in the
> construction of an orbiter.  If I were given the awful choice of having to
> waste the human lives spent building an Orbiter, or waste the lives of the
> crew, I would have to decide for the Orbiter.
> 
>      Dani Eder/Advanced Space Transportation/Boeing/ssc-vax!eder

       This is an invalid comparison. The 234 lifetimes spent building the
Orbiter were not wasted, no matter what happens to the Orbiter. (At least
I don't think they were. Ask those involved if they feel their lives were
wasted.)

Joel Swank
Tektronix, Redmond, Oregon