View Single Post
  #46  
Old November 30th 11, 02:48 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history
Jorge R. Frank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,089
Default Plotting A New Course for NASA

On 11/29/2011 12:26 PM, Matt Wiser wrote:
On Nov 29, 3:07 am, bob wrote:
He did by authorizing ET-122 be restored from Katrina damage and using
ET-138 on an actual flight and not held in reserve for a rescue
flight. The only remaining complete, flightworthy tank is ET-94, the
last Light Weight Tank, heavier than the Super Light Weight Tanks
(ET-96 and up, ET-95 was never built, neither was ET-7) used for Space
Station missions, and thus not really suitable for Station work.


I believe there were 3 more in the works (I'd have to wiki/google it but my
browser is acting up right now.)


And ET-94 was usable, just limited the payload. Which for post construction
flights was less of an issue.


Brian


nasa stated publically the chance of a lost vehicle and crew was like
30% if it continued flying.

no one wanted to see another orbiter destroyed, and another flight
crew lost.......

the problem wasnt ending the shuttle program.

the problem was the **** poor political driven replacement choice.

if nasa had choosen to put a new capsule on top of a expendable atlas
or delta, and we would of been flying by now.


And this from someone who wants to end HSF? Btw, Bobbert, Orion wasn't
going to be flight-ready under CxP until 2013 under their original
plan, and not until 2015 under the final CxP plans. Again, being
naive, technologically ignorant, politically ignorant, and
disregarding anything that clashes with your fantasies won't get you
anywhere.


It depends on when the choice was made. If Griffin had chosen in 2005 to
design CEV to be flown on existing vehicles, and not develop Ares I, CEV
would probably be close to flight test by now.