Re: Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- From: "Jeff Findley" <jeff.findley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 10:28:40 -0400
"Paul F. Dietz" <dietz@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ZY6dnQ9k79MRkSnfRVn-2A@xxxxxxxxxx
> Andrew Lotosky wrote:
>
> > Well, then if the system was completly risk-free people would just
> > complain that we spent too much on it.
>
> We're making that complaint even now, so this is a safe
> prediction.
>
> The problem with the shuttle is not that it is risky.
> The problem is that it is uneconomical. If shuttle
> were a factor of ten cheaper to launch, but no safer,
> it would be worth keeping around. If it were a factor
> of ten safer, but no cheaper, it would not be.
Exactly. Safety is a good excuse to end the program by 2010, just as safety
was a good excuse for the USAF to pull out of the shuttle program and
abandon the notion of launching shuttles from Vandenburg. The nice thing
about the safety excuse is that the voting public doesn't question that
excuse, especially since both excuses came shortly after losing a shuttle
and its crew.
Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.
.
- References:
- Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- From: ed kyle
- Re: Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- From: Rick Nelson
- Re: Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- From: Jeff Findley
- Re: Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- From: Rusty
- Re: Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- From: Andrew Lotosky
- Re: Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- From: Paul F. Dietz
- Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- Prev by Date: Sorry for the multipke posts
- Next by Date: Re: "President Must Answer to Downing Street Memo"
- Previous by thread: Re: Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- Next by thread: Re: Space Shuttle Folly of Our AgeThe space shuttle.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
