Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!think!ames!sdcsvax!sdcc6!calmasd!jnp
From: jnp@calmasd.GE.COM (John Pantone)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
Subject: Re: Things aint so bad
Message-ID: <2396@calmasd.GE.COM>
Date: Fri, 18-Sep-87 14:28:35 EDT
Article-I.D.: calmasd.2396
Posted: Fri Sep 18 14:28:35 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 20-Sep-87 15:26:47 EDT
References: <13312@amdahl.amdahl.com>, <7973@think.UUCP> <8561@utzoo.UUCP>, <477@eplrx7.UUCP>
Organization: G.E.- Calma R&D, San Diego, CA
Lines: 17
Summary: Am I the only one?
Xref: mnetor sci.space.shuttle:345 sci.space:3004

(Lawrence Dziegielewski) writes:
>> ...stuff about our dormant shuttle...

> No kidding.  And I beleive there's good reasons for it.  But when it flies
> again,  we'll see regular shuttle launches and a VERY reliable system.
> 

Am I the only one in the world that thinks that this is BUNK!

We had a VERY RELIABLE shuttle.  It blew up - AND WE KNOW WHY! If we avoid
that condition (freezing the poor O-rings before launch) it would remain
reliable.  By re-designing it we now have an unknown system -LESS RELIABLE 
NOT MORE!
-- 
These opinions are solely mine and in no way reflect those of my employer.  
John M. Pantone @ GE/Calma R&D, Data Management Group, San Diego
...{ucbvax|decvax}!sdcsvax!calmasd!jnp          jnp@calmang biblich