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 abili
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
-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 b
> 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
disguise the sender.
>
>
> The full headers below are how I 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
> Rec
aders below are how I 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
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 Sta
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
(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
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
11 matches
Mail list logo
