Randall Clague wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 12:03:01 -0800, Adrian Tymes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>("You're under arrest because you didn't have a launch license from
>>NASA." "NASA doesn't issue launch licenses! That's the FAA!" "We'll
>>let the courts decide that. In the mean time, we're impounding your
>>vehicle. You're liable if we mishandle it and the explosion injures
>>anyone.")
>
> This would not happen. NASA reps frequently tell Rick Tumlinson
> (rather plaintively, last one I heard) (and futilely, since they're
> talking to Rick, to whom NASA's talk is beyond cheap), "We're not a
> regulatory agency!"
>
> Even if AST found you in violation, and FAA issued an injunction
> forbidding you to fly, the cops (likely sheriff's deputies, though
> they could be Federal marshals, or even TSA officers) would not
> impound your vehicle. They'd just lock up your mission control
> trailer and post a guard on it.
I sincerely hope you're right. But I have had experience with police
getting overenthusiastic and vastly overstepping their legal authority
in the past, and signs are that the current heads of the federal police
are encouraging such activities by example. Such that they might try to
do the arrest even if NASA's head himself objects (to the arrest, not to
us), if there is even the slightest sign or confusion that some aspect
of NASA (or NASA's contractors) might be inconvenienced.
>>To the ISS's orbit, anyway, whether or not NASA lets us actually dock
>>with the ISS. ("Someone paid us to put a tracking satellite within easy
>>EVA distance of the ISS. Why? Dunno, but we could as easily have put
>>supplies there for the ISS crew to grab. So long as we're not actually
>>touching the ISS, it ain't NASA's property.")
>
> There's a problem with this, too. One of the required sections in a
> launch license application is a collision avoidance analysis in which
> you prove you won't (meaning, prove you can't) come within 200 km of a
> mannable object in orbit. That would include ISS, Soyuz, and Shuttle.
> I'd include Progress just to be conservative: while it's never been
> manned, it's probably mannable in an emergency.
>
> So you can't deliver stuff to anywhere near ISS without NASA's
> permission.
Okay, then, deliver to somewhere over 200 km behind the ISS in its
orbit, far enough away to avoid this. Getting from there to the ISS
wouldn't be hard in theory, and those who matter would likely understand
that permission was the only thing preventing it from being tested in
practice. The important thing is to demonstrate on-orbit delivery with
a given reference point. Maybe even have a mock, unmanned, ISS effigy
delivered to said coordinates, then rendevous with that. (ISS effigy
just for the visual impact.)
_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
