Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!agate!bionet!apple!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!bbn!bbn.com!jallred
From: jallred@bbn.com (John Allred)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Toughness of Boeing craft
Message-ID: <31974@bbn.COM>
Date: 8 Nov 88 00:20:55 GMT
References: <2137@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu> <5590@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> <794@hadron.UUCP> <4995@cadnetix.COM> <1543@banzai-inst.sw.mcc.com>
Sender: news@bbn.COM
Reply-To: jallred@hellcat.BBN.COM (John Allred)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 17

In article <1543@banzai-inst.sw.mcc.com> wex@banzai-inst.sw.mcc.com (Alan Wexelblat) writes:
>
>The WWII-era Boeing B-17 was legendary for the amount of damage it could
>absorb and still keep flying.  Pilots flew them with one engine (of four),
>put them into vertical climbs & dives and got away with it, etc.
>
>Since this is sci.space.shuttle, the question is then: why isn't Boeing
>building our shuttles?

They weren't the lowest bidder.  Can you imagine the confidence that
evokes from the astronauts?  ("Hey, Herb, we're riding something that was
designed, built, and repaired by the lowest bidder.  Great!").
____
John Allred
BBN Systems and Technologies Corp.
(jallred@bbn.com)

A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.