Am 21 Jul 2004 19:23:57 GMT schrieb "Andrew Gray":

In a study of orbital debris I have at home, it shows a graph of the
statistically expected number of window replacements - due to impact
pitting, I believe - against the orbital attitude of the Orbiter.
(tail-first getting less damage than nose-first, for example). It
comments that flight rules require that, all other factors (mission
requirements, say) considered, the attitude should be planned to
minimise window damage.

Is there plans to develop a similar rule regarding RCC "exposure", or is
the expected flux low enough that attitude isn't a significant factor?

Even if "they" wanted to make such a rule - it wouldn't be necessary
to be invented, simply because the RCC panels point to the same
general direction as the orbiter's windows. So all flight rules caused
by window impact pitting possibility are also valid for RCC pitting
prevention. So no further action is necessary for that...

cu, ZiLi aka HKZL (Heinrich Zinndorf-Linker)
--
"Abusus non tollit usum" - Latin: Abuse is no argument against proper use.

mailto: http://zili.de