Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble
From: HAESSIG Frédéric Pierre Tamatoa (fhaessig_at_wanadoo.fr)
Date: 08/16/04
- Next message: HAESSIG Frédéric Pierre Tamatoa: "Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble"
- Previous message: Jeff Findley: "Re: Whose fault is it? (Was Re: Crash for Armidillo)"
- In reply to: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble"
- Next in thread: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble"
- Reply: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:49:14 +0200
Paul F. Dietz <dietz@dls.net> a écrit dans le message :
zZmdnfhyB9NpYILcRVn-pg@dls.net...
> HAESSIG Frédéric Pierre Tamatoa wrote:
>
> >>It's also not worthwhile to launch a robot mission solely for the
purpose
> >>of deorbiting the telescope.
> >
> >
> > Why? If the purpose is controled deorbitation, as opposed as a risk of
> > crashing it on NYC?
>
> The risk of HST crashing on NYC is zero.
True. The same, however, cannot be said about Miami, or Mexico city, or Rio.
>
> The risk of HST crashing somewhere and killing someone is about .001.
> It's idiotic public policy to spend (say) $100 M to prevent 1/1000th
> of a death.
And to spend 100M to prevent a 1E-6 chance to kill 10,000 people?
What price a human life?
- Next message: HAESSIG Frédéric Pierre Tamatoa: "Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble"
- Previous message: Jeff Findley: "Re: Whose fault is it? (Was Re: Crash for Armidillo)"
- In reply to: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble"
- Next in thread: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble"
- Reply: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Probably Stupid Idea for Saving Hubble"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|