Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!tness7!texbell!merch!cpe!tif
From: tif@cpe.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: shuttle landing sites
Message-ID: <6400012@cpe>
Date: 13 Oct 88 17:09:00 GMT
References: <1990@kalliope.rice.edu>
Lines: 19
Nf-ID: #R:kalliope.rice.edu:1990:cpe:6400012:000:856
Nf-From: cpe.UUCP!tif    Oct 13 12:09:00 1988


Written 10:08 am  Oct 12, 1988 by titan.UUCP!phil in cpe:sci.space.shuttle
>In article <1988Oct10.224026.12802@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp writes:
>>of Florida is, in some ways, a lousy place for a spaceport.  The weather
>Other differences that matter:  KSC is a paved strip, Edwards is a
>(softer) dry lake bed.  KSC is much much shorter than Edwards.  KSC has
>nothing but swamp to either side of the strip, Edwards has more lake bed
>(important if you miss).  Basically, there is much more room for error
>when you land at Edwards.  ...

You have good (and I'm sure valid) points but I just gotta say something
about this...

You talk about Edwards having lots of lake bed to hit, haven't we been
within inches of the intended landing spot every time?

			Paul Chamberlain
			Computer Product Engineering, Tandy Corp.
			{convex,killer}!ninja!cpe!tif