Gentlefolk, With the caveat that it's still early in the investigation, I've taken a stab at anticipating some of what might eventually be done in response to the disaster. Some of these, I realize, will be a politically unpalatable goring of sacred cows within NASA and perhaps wishful thinking. Omitted, for lack of information so far, are any highly technical recommendations with respect to tile adhesion, etc. (Also omitted are any security measures. However, in the back of my mind is the possibility of a small bomb planted in the left wheel well. Not only were we flying an Israeli astronaut, but one who'd taken part in the preemptive Israeli bombing of an Iraqi reactor some time ago. The bomb could have been placed there months ago, waiting for vacuum to arm it and acceleration to trigger it. The biggest argument against such sabotage at this time is only that nobody has taken credit for it.) Anyway, some of these are going to seem draconian, but government's tendency is to underreact to warnings and overreact to events:
A. Conserve remaining shuttles. 1. Experiments that can be done on the ISS, should be done on the ISS. No more shuttle-only science flights. 2. Use the ISS to get more space time per launch with longer stays and larger crews on the ISS. 3. Increase use of Russian ferry assets. B. Improve Shuttle operational safety. 1. Fly the Shuttle only to the ISS. 2. Implement full visual inspection of Shuttles before reentry with contingency plans for ISS repair of tile damage. 3. (If cold proves contributor to launch debris impact damage) Plan no Shuttle launches for Jan-Feb. Increase minimum launch temperature. 4. Look at shallower Sanger-type one-skip reentry glide path with abort-to-orbit capability. C. Design changes to shuttle. 1. Spectra fiber net glued over ET on Shuttle side. 2. Bellycam (a rear pointed diamond-window blister the size of shoe box under the nose, perhaps on the nose landing gear door). 3. Add the ability to transfer of OMS propellant from shuttle to shuttle, or from tanks to Shuttle, while in orbit (to go with abort to orbit capability). D. Major effort to quickly develop alternative astronaut space access systems. Do all three of these; 1 should be doable in less than a year. Proceeding on 2 and 3 should result in one largely reusable system that should be available in two years. 1. Interim: Revive/modernize the Apollo capsule and mate it with Atlas IV and/or ArianeV and/or Russian boosters. Note: it wouldn't need a moon-mission sized service module. 2. Complete DCX development. (Start from existing baseline, KISS, use Castors if needed) 3. Complete Roton development. (Start from existing baseline, KISS, use Castors if needed) F. Funding reductions to free up money. 1. End air-breathing space efforts (NASA and Military) (too expensive and theoretically unsound). 2. End all air breathing hypersonic/supersonic transport efforts (no market). 3. End all military "aerospace plane" efforts. (need can be deferred) 4. Postpone robotic space exploration launches until cheaper launch vehicles and more capable upper stages are available (except the orbital dynamics-constrained Pluto mission). --Best, Gerald _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
