🚀 go-pugleaf

>A few years ago I saw some figures on the amount of overtime needed to
>process a Shuttle. It was horendous. Adding more Shuttles will just tax
>the groundcrew even more. Adding staff to eliminate this bottleneck will
>only increase costs.
>
  They've gained alot of experience in a few years... like twenty
  more launches under the belt... Overtime has come way down since
  Return-to-flight, but I haven't the figures to offer you proof.

>Your assuming that orbiter availability is the only bottleneck.

  And your assuming they can't do any better than they are now.

>I'm sure they could add one or two flights a year. But so what? all that
>means is that instead of spending three times what we need we are 'only'
>spending 2.75 times what we need to. I don't consider that much of a
>victory.

  You contradict yourself in this paragraph, Allen. A two flights per year
  increase in the 8-per-year schedule is a 25% increase. I can't think of
  any private firm, as you normally cite, which would not want a 25%
  increase in output. Titan and Ariane would be thrilled with it. It could
  make or break DC-1. But for Shuttle its meaningless? Come on...
 
  You seem to have two sets of measuring systems at work. One which you
  use for DC, Titan, Delta et al, and one which you use for Shuttle.
 
 -Brian

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian S. Thorn                                    "If ignorance is bliss,
BrianT@cup.portal.com                               this must be heaven."
                                                -Diane Chambers, "Cheers"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------