On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 11:11:08 -0400, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:


We only need one pad to keep Shuttle flying, if so desired. If we
change course and go with DIRECT, we'll need to modify Pad B anyway.
If we change course and go with Delta or Atlas, Pad B is irrelevant.

If part of the output of the committee is a recommendation to keep flying
shuttle for several more years (unlikely, but possible), then having only
one shuttle pad is a nuisance.

No it isn't. NASA flew 9 missions off one pad in one year (1985). Even
if the Shuttle is extended, we'll like see a flight rate only 1/3 of
that.

It might be fine, unless something goes
wrong with the pad (more fire brick liberation, and etc.)

Something (brick liberation) already went wrong with the only pad
we're actually flying from. It didn't cause any delays. At current and
proposed (extended) flight rates, it would take something really big
to cause a scheduling mess, something so big would probably end the
program anyway.

and as long as any
new shuttle missions always fly to ISS.

Not really. NASA seriously considered the single-pad option for
125/400 after the delay from October to May. The main reason they
stuck with dual-pad was because Ares 1X was way behind schedule
anyway. It complicates things, but it is doable.


Brian