Dr J R Stockton wrote:

In sci.space.policy message PNKdncn3GZP5_lLKnZ2dnUU7-QXNnZ2d@earthlink.
com, Tue, 6 Sep 2016 20:46:28, "Greg (Strider) Moore" mooregr@deleteth
isgreenms.com posted:

"JF Mezei" wrote in message news:57cf445c$0$15716$c3e8da3$9deca2c3@new
s.astraweb.com...

I can understand that they don't want rockets flying over populated
areas in case they blow up.

However, at what altitude does this restriction end ?

Basically... at the point if your payload and rocket becomes purely
ballistic it won't crash on someone.

That cannot always have been the case - I recall seeing a Shuttle and
its Tank passing independently over North London. Premature MECO could
have resulted in the Tank landing there, and the Shuttle ending up at
Heathrow.


No, I don't think it could. The external tank is a big, low density,
draggy thing. I think they came to the conclusion that it would break
up and burn regardless, which is probably why the FTS was removed from
the tank on later flights.


--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world."
-- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden