View Single Post
  #6  
Old January 2nd 06, 06:25 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NYT Editorial: NASA's Predicament

On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:31:03 -0500, John Doe wrote:

When americans found Apollo V1.0 to be limited, they set out to build a
vehicle that could do mo The shuttle.


Well, you know Mezei, Apollo wasn't that limited. Let's see, it did low
Earth orbit operations, went to the Moon for a bunch of landings,
rendezvous'd and docked with the USSR Soyuz, launched a space station of
considerable size and capability in a single launch, did an emergency major
repair of a space station, did ferry operations of crews to a space station,
provided CRV capabilities for a space station, and had emergency launch and
rescue capabilities for on-orbit operations (although that particular
feature was never used). And there were no shortage of studies showing
feasibility for use in asteroid and Mars missions.

Now, I don't know about you Professor, but while limited, I've seen worse
programs.

Perhaps you can explain the lack of limits and what happens to the Shuttle's
wings when it returns from the Moon? Or from a Mars mission?

Hope you had a great New Year!

--
rk, Just an OldEngineer
"The number of people having any connection with the project must be
restricted in an almost vicious manner. Use a small number of good people."
-- Kelly Johnson in Skunk Works