Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site ssc-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!fluke!ssc-vax!eder
From: eder@ssc-vax.UUCP (Dani Eder)
Newsgroups: net.columbia,net.philosophy
Subject: Value of Astronauts vs. Shuttle Orbiters
Message-ID: <669@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 27-Mar-86 12:50:09 EST
Article-I.D.: ssc-vax.669
Posted: Thu Mar 27 12:50:09 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 1-Apr-86 05:18:28 EST
References: <9696@ucla-cs.ARPA> <588@qantel.UUCP> <2593@genat.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Boeing Aerospace Co., Seattle, WA
Lines: 29
Xref: watmath net.columbia:2745 net.philosophy:4796

>>>The point is, that orbiters, though expensive are REPLACEABLE:  Life, human
>>>or otherwise, is not.  If the crew were not important, the orbiter would be
>>>unmanned, would it not?  The contribution of the crew is unique, not to be
>>>replaceable by computers or remote control.  The orbiter is *not* unique,
>>>only the crew is.  The fact that human lives, an irreplaceable resource,  are
>>>used at all and thus placed at risk proves the value of their input to the
>>>mission.  Should they not, therefore be more important to save than the 
>>>orbiter is?  
[interveneing reply deleted]
> Yes, making another human being is less expensive than making a new shuttle
> BUT that new life cannot be an exact replacement for the life that was taken.
> Because each human mind is unique and different from any other such mind.
> The primary point I am trying to make is that a life is more important
> than a machine is.
> 					The Phoenix
> 					(Neither Bright, Dark, nor Young)
     In the first message quoted above, you say that human lives are an
irreplaceable resource.  You also say in the second quoted message that 
making a human being is less expensive than making a new shuttle.  I agree
with you on both points, but not necessarily in the way you might think.

     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