Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!b.gp.cs.cmu.edu!Ralf.Brown@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
From: Ralf.Brown@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: USSR's Progress 40 performs interesting operations at Mir
Message-ID: <241672a2@ralf>
Date: 9 Mar 89 12:48:34 GMT
Sender: ralf@b.gp.cs.cmu.edu
Lines: 19
In-Reply-To: <330@electro.UUCP>

In article <330@electro.UUCP>, ignac@electro.UUCP (Ignac Kolenko) writes:
}also, why can't the u.s. send up a duplicate of Skylab?? like, if they
}did it once, why can't they do it again?? imagine, there would be no need
}to re-engineer a new space station, since they already had one design that
}appeared to work correctly. and according to the above quoted article,
}the u.s. would have the largest space station in orbit again!!! :-)

Except we'd first have to re-engineer the Saturn V*, which is not too easy,
as was discussed in detail here a while ago.  Also, I think the addition of
the next expansion module to Mir will bring its volume up over the volume of
Skylab (if it isn't already).

[*] Skylab was a modified upper stage of a Saturn V, outfitted with life
support, etc.
--
UUCP: {ucbvax,harvard}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf -=-=-=- Voice: (412) 268-3053 (school)
ARPA: ralf@cs.cmu.edu  BIT: ralf%cs.cmu.edu@CMUCCVMA  FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/31
			Disclaimer? I claimed something?
	You cannot achieve the impossible without attempting the absurd.