Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!psuvax1!burdvax!sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim
From: tim@ism780c.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Crew Escape Mechanisms
Message-ID: <8045@ism780c.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 24-Nov-87 20:32:44 EST
Article-I.D.: ism780c.8045
Posted: Tue Nov 24 20:32:44 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Nov-87 12:47:47 EST
References: <843@alliant.Alliant.COM> <1842@phred.UUCP>
Reply-To: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith)
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica CA
Lines: 22

In article <1842@phred.UUCP> petej@phred.UUCP (Pete Jarvis) writes:
< stack after the SRB's have burned out, but before reaching orbit. There
< is no possible escape during the first 2 minutes of ascent because of the
< loads on the vehicle. The rocket escape system, in short, will propel each

Since the Challenger crew survived the explosion, doesn't that indicate
that there is a possible escape mechanism for the first two minutes?  For
instance, put a parachute on the crew compartment, and when there is an
emergency, you blow up the external tank.  The crew compartment then
descends back to the ocean.

Ok, this is a little crazy, but is there anything wrong with it at a
fundamental level?

By the way, did NASA ever release the autopsy reports?  How many crew
members did survive the explosion?  How serious were their injuries
before they hit the water?
-- 
Tim Smith, Knowledgian					tim@ism780c.isc.com
"and if I ever lose my eyes, if my colours all run dry,
 yes, if I ever lose my eyes, oh if...
 I won't have to cry no more"