Xref: utzoo sci.space:6978 sci.space.shuttle:1206
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uflorida!novavax!proxftl!greg
From: greg@proxftl.UUCP (Gregory N. Hullender)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Unmanned w/old SRBs (was Re: space news from July 11 AW&ST)
Message-ID: <740@proxftl.UUCP>
Date: 12 Sep 88 13:01:46 GMT
References: <1988Aug16.040406.5434@utzoo.uucp> <6137@dasys1.UUCP> <1988Aug29.172104.10823@utzoo.uucp> <6185@dasys1.UUCP> <1988Sep7.212736.6080@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: greg@proxftl.UUCP (Gregory N. Hullender)
Organization: Proximity Technology, Ft. Lauderdale
Lines: 17

In article <1988Sep7.212736.6080@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
[responding to a poster's concern about shuttle safety]
>Then, as I said, we must send them to the Smithsonian at once.  No matter
>how careful you are, you cannot fly them without taking risks.  If we keep
>on flying them, even just our present little fleet, losses are inevitable.

There is no question that there are risks.  Nasa certainly doesn't claim
that there are none.  The concern is over what risk is acceptable.  A great
number of serious shuttle defects were addressed over the last two and a
half years.  Also, the policy of launch! launch! launch! (damn the
torpedoes! never mind that O-ring!) has finally been laid to rest --
unfortunately together with the Challanger and the remains of its crew.
-- 
		Greg Hullender  uflorida!novavax!proxftl!greg
		3511 NE 22nd Ave / Fort Lauderdale, FL 33308

	    My opinions are not necessarily those of my employer.