Kim, I'm not sure what you mean. What do missing ships have to do with safety? NASA always claimed that even in an emergency, there would be nearly a two week turn around (at best) between shuttle launches.

Even if they had 10 ships the danger would be (has been) the same.

Barney

----- Original Message -----

From: Kim Hyatt

To: 'Utah Astronomy'

Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:29 AM

Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Hubble (Again)

Remember, NASA is now missing two of its original fleet of space shuttles. The dangers have increased.

-----Original Message-----
From: B. Bettilyon [mailto:aaah@sisna.com]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:21 AM
To: utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Hubble (Again)

IMHO, this is a bunch crap! NASA has become impotent. They already serviced the Hubble once.(or is it twice?). Does this mean it was too dangerous to do last time around, but they said "What the hell, let's risk some lives just for fun?" Or are they just looking for a way to kill the program so as to have more money to dump down the Moon Base rat hole?

Barney B.

FROM PATRICK'S NEWS:

The verdict seems final: NASA says it is just too risky for shuttle astronauts
to fix the Hubble Space Telescope, which means an early death for the world's
premier astronomical eye in the sky.

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters20040208_145.html

_______________________________________________
Utah-Astronomy mailing list
Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com