Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 16:54:34 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> Cc: Larry Sica <lomion@mac.com>, "f.johan.beisser" <jan@caustic.org>, John Martinez <rolnif@mac.com>, barbish@a1poweruser.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: oh my god the nasa shuttle blewup Message-ID: <3E3F0F4A.3A531CE9@mindspring.com> References: <C276E97B-3781-11D7-B48B-000393A335A2@mac.com> <3E3EB480.87EE0356@mindspring.com> <a05200f15ba64b06de6ac@[10.0.1.2]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brad Knowles wrote: > > This is unlikely to remain true in the future. With this most > > recent loss, the U.S. has lost 25% of it's heavy lift capability, > > and if you include the Challenger, it has lost 40% of the designed > > total heavy lift capability. > > Columbia wasn't doing any heavy life for the ISS. As the oldest > shuttle in the fleet, it couldn't carry enough cargo to do the job. > Instead, it was taking on the other missions that it could do and > freeing up the other vehicles to do more heavy lift. > > That's still a loss in heavy lift capacity (due to increased > competition), but a less direct one. The U.S. heavy lift capability is all shuttle; even if the Russians were lifting all the really heavy components (they were), the shuttle represents the U.S. capability. The Delta that supposedly has a huge capacity measures that capacity to LEO, not GEO, and it's capacity to GEO is tiny. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E3F0F4A.3A531CE9>