Re: Atlantis? other problems?
- From: Brian Thorn <bthorn64@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:28:48 -0500
On 18 Aug 2005 13:36:37 GMT, "Jorge R. Frank" <jrfrank@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>Originally both 121 and 115 were on Atlantis. This forced a turnaroud
>constraint between the two flights, which was not a problem for the current
>launch dates (9/05 and 2/06) due to the relative lack of daylight launch
>opportunities during the winter. But now that they're both in the spring of
>2006, they need to be on different orbiters. NASA wants to keep 115 and 117
>on Atlantis because they're performance-critical and Atlantis is ever-so-
>slightly lighter than Discovery (they'd prefer Endeavour, the lightest, but
>it's in OMM). So 121 goes to Discovery.
Pietrobon's site shows 117 on Endeavour. That true? And even if
Atlantis was scheduled for 117 pre-PAL Ramp, will the delays push 117
out enough for Endeavour to take over?
Brian
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Atlantis? other problems?
- From: Andrew Lotosky
- Re: Atlantis? other problems?
- From: Jorge R. Frank
- Re: Atlantis? other problems?
- References:
- Atlantis? other problems?
- From: Brian Gaff
- Re: Atlantis? other problems?
- From: Jorge R. Frank
- Atlantis? other problems?
- Prev by Date: Re: Endeavour Butchered
- Next by Date: Re: Endeavour Butchered
- Previous by thread: Re: Atlantis? other problems?
- Next by thread: Re: Atlantis? other problems?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|