"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
...
On 29 Jul 2005 05:02:42 -0700
"Double-A" wrote:


Ray Vingnutte wrote:
http://www.spacedaily.com/2005/05072....0w7fp0e2.html



I find it odd that if damage had/has occurred that would warrant a
rescue mission then how can you possibly even consider launching the
Atlantis shuttle. Surely you are then running the risk of just
compounding the problem by possibly having two damaged shuttles in
orbit.

And anyway, what would be the need to launch a second shuttle any
way, they can stay on the ISS for quite some time and come back via
Soyuz.


I'm sure they don't want to launch the Antlantis now. But if the
Discovery were severly damaged, and the Russians won't give the crew a
ride for free, and the law says we can't pay them, then what other
choice would there be?

Double-A

Well the Russians would do it, if the question of cost comes into it
they could argue about that after.

I think what is becoming clear the shuttle should never have been
launched in the first place, two and a half years and loads of money
spent and what have they achieved?, nothing it look like. They are back
to where they were two and a half years ago.

it's where they have been for 20 years. It seems they have been flying the shuttles with foam
falling off the fueltanks since day 1. Pure luck that it never went wrong until that one
time.....