Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!botter!vuecon!MorsinAc
From: MorsinAc@econ.vu.nl (Triple A)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: TDRS-C means never having to say LOS?
Summary: How about TDRS-E/F? (was:Re:TDRS-C means never having to say LOS?)
Message-ID: <233@vuecon.econ.vu.nl>
Date: 28 Oct 88 05:51:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: vuecon.233
References: <6732@dasys1.UUCP> <1934@kalliope.rice.edu>
Organization: VU Economics, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Lines: 13

In article <1934@kalliope.rice.edu>, phil@titan.rice.edu (William LeFebvre) writes:
> The configuration NASA is shooting for is to have C and D fully
> operational on opposite sides of the globe and have A lingering around as
> a spare.  Three satellites are not needed for full coverage.  

That was about it for TDRS-C/D, but when checking the launch schedule,
I discovered they planned to get some more TDRS's up there (TDRS-E/F).
So my question is, what are they supposed to do if we already got two
fully operational ones (and a spare) up there? Are they to replace the
old ones or what?

                     A. Morsink - Vrije Universiteit/Free University
                                  AMSTERDAM (yes it's in Holland)