From: Malcolm Carlock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 16:42
I was shocked to learn Saturday that NASA had not a mechanism to
adequately
inspect the exterior of the shuttles for damage before the return to
earth. The reasons given seem to imply that NASA's ability for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 9:42 PM + on 1/19/03, Malcolm Carlock wrote:
I must admit it also seems very strange that the shuttle couldn't
have been examined while docked to the ISS.
It wasn't docked there.
It was in a completely different orbit, and higher up to
Our messages crossed in the mail, but there's this bit here...
At 7:18 PM -0800 on 2/3/03, Tim May wrote:
Two crewmen
were prepared to to an EVA to fix dislodged cargo/hatch doors, as on
every flight to date. The other crew could have transferred in their
pressure suits.
Ah. Forgot about
On Monday, February 3, 2003, at 06:17 PM, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
Flying another shuttle to them while people were still alive would
have been impossible, of course, so much for a reusable space-truck
on a rapid turnaround, and, even if it wasn't, I don't think they
even have an airlock aboard
From: Malcolm Carlock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 16:42
I was shocked to learn Saturday that NASA had not a mechanism to
adequately
inspect the exterior of the shuttles for damage before the return to
earth. The reasons given seem to imply that NASA's ability for
2, 2003 8:27:06 PM US/Pacific
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
Subject: Say goodbye to the ISS
Received: by sphinx (mbox tcmay) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31
1998/05/13) Sun Feb 2 20:40:39 2003)
Received: from psmtp.com (exprod5mx6.postini.com [64.75.1.146]) by
sphinx.got.net (8.12.2
I was shocked to learn Saturday that NASA had not a mechanism to
adequately
inspect the exterior of the shuttles for damage before the return to
earth. The reasons given seem to imply that NASA's ability for EVAs was
very limited and did not generally include on most flight the possibility
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 9:42 PM + on 1/19/03, Malcolm Carlock wrote:
I must admit it also seems very strange that the shuttle couldn't
have been examined while docked to the ISS.
It wasn't docked there.
It was in a completely different orbit, and higher up to
On Monday, February 3, 2003, at 06:17 PM, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
Flying another shuttle to them while people were still alive would
have been impossible, of course, so much for a reusable space-truck
on a rapid turnaround, and, even if it wasn't, I don't think they
even have an airlock aboard
Our messages crossed in the mail, but there's this bit here...
At 7:18 PM -0800 on 2/3/03, Tim May wrote:
Two crewmen
were prepared to to an EVA to fix dislodged cargo/hatch doors, as on
every flight to date. The other crew could have transferred in their
pressure suits.
Ah. Forgot about
At 8:27 PM -0800 2/2/03, Steve Schear wrote:
As some friends in the U.S. space program had privately predicted, and the
New York Times is today reporting, unless the problem with the Shuttle can
be quickly identified and convincingly rectified to worried legislators,
the International Space
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 08:27:06PM -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
I can't imagine that it would be so difficult to construct a small,
remotely-controlled, gyro stabilized, tethered probe that would be carried
on all shuttle missions and could be deployed from the cargo bay to closely
inspect
2, 2003 8:27:06 PM US/Pacific
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
Subject: Say goodbye to the ISS
Received: by sphinx (mbox tcmay) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31
1998/05/13) Sun Feb 2 20:40:39 2003)
Received: from psmtp.com (exprod5mx6.postini.com [64.75.1.146]) by
sphinx.got.net (8.12.2
I was shocked to learn Saturday that NASA had not a mechanism to
adequately
inspect the exterior of the shuttles for damage before the return to
earth. The reasons given seem to imply that NASA's ability for EVAs was
very limited and did not generally include on most flight the possibility
As some friends in the U.S. space program had privately predicted, and the
New York Times is today reporting, unless the problem with the Shuttle can
be quickly identified and convincingly rectified to worried legislators,
the International Space Station may have to be moth balled and the NASA
(I am replying to the CP list, but suppressing the name of the poster.
He/she sent his/her comments to a recipient list suppressed private
distribution. If people send me comments, don't expect to me to just
take them in silence. I will, however, suppress the author unless and
until too many
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 08:27:06PM -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
I can't imagine that it would be so difficult to construct a small,
remotely-controlled, gyro stabilized, tethered probe that would be carried
on all shuttle missions and could be deployed from the cargo bay to closely
inspect
At 8:27 PM -0800 2/2/03, Steve Schear wrote:
As some friends in the U.S. space program had privately predicted, and the
New York Times is today reporting, unless the problem with the Shuttle can
be quickly identified and convincingly rectified to worried legislators,
the International Space
received the message:
From: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun Feb 2, 2003 8:27:06 PM US/Pacific
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
Subject: Say goodbye to the ISS
Received: by sphinx (mbox tcmay) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31
1998/05/13) Sun Feb 2 20:40:39 2003)
Received: from psmtp.com
19 matches
Mail list logo
