On Sunday, March 2, 2003, at 12:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't realize Atlantis was that close. Using it was clearly the bestcheck out <http://www.msnbc.com/news/878887.asp>
option, and using an updated tank, not really that risky, all things
considered. This begins to look very dark indeed.
When I first heard the argument that there was no way to save the astronauts I was skeptical, but absent a clear plan, willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the "experts." No longer. I've come to believe that rescue was possible, and the defeatist attitude coming from certain quarters is simple lack of imagination and/or balls. It's possible that inspection would have given ambiguous results, sufficiently so that reentry was a reasonable option. What is clearly false is the assertion made by some that given damage certain to cause loss of the orbiter on reentry, the death of the crew would have been unavoidable. It's interesting that the people most strongly banging the drum of fatalism are those closest to the shuttle program, while the innovative ideas for how to save the crew are coming from outsiders. Jim Oberg echoes your idea about ICBMs, which once it's pointed out is clearly a smart option.
......Andrew
_______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
