🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <24071@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, labc-4da@web-2f.berkeley.edu (Bob Heiney) writes:
> Here's my two cents about shuttle media coverage:  it's awful!
> 
> ....  I don't have access to NASA select, and would love
> to just listen to all the countdown and ascent audio, but I can never
> hear it because some network anchor is always blabbing on about some
> meaningless point.
> 
>.,...  The ET is *not* a motor, it's a tank,
> Mr. Jennings.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Bob Heiney                         "And in the end, the love you            |
> | labc-4da@rosebud.Berkeley.edu       take is equal to the love you make."    |
> |                                                     -- The Beatles          |
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I agree.  Dan Rather talked about the separation of the solid fuel
*tanks*.  (Did he also talk about the liquid fuel booster, too, or
did I see Jennings while trying desperately to find CAPCOM audio?)
Maybe if we used recombinant DNA technology on them, we could produce
an anchor who knew what he was talking about?  Nah...  ;-)

Oh- I noticed that CNN, especially during the scrubbed launch attempt,
had their commentators shut up during the last 2 or 3 minutes or so.  Very
nice.  Even one of the free-TV networks had a quiet anchor.  I would
so much rather listen to Launch Control than some anchor who knows
nothing about the shuttle try to talk intelligently about the shuttle.

-Jeff Goldader
Univ. of Washington Depts. of Astronomy and Physics
jeffg@blake.acs.washington.edu
jeffg@uw-beaver!blake.UUCP

DISCLAIMER:  The University of Washington is not responsible for the
content of the above message.  They don't want my opinions, anyway.