🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec28.180732.2643@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

   I am happy to compare DC (or existing expendables) to Shuttle. No matter
   what rules you pick, Shuttle looses.

Pah. Assume the first and third manned DC flights crash and burn,
the first in a hard landing after abort-to-orbit due to two engines
failing. Guidance fails to correct the asymmetric thrust and it swipes
some structures, the fuel tanks and bay collapses completely after 
unexpectedly high vibration weakens the crumple-zones and the crew
dies, two firefighters on the ground die when some trapped LH2 vapour
explodes. The second flight is successful but the third goes
drastically off course during ascent and nosedives into an apartment
building 600 miles from the launch site - investigation reveals a
subcontractor delivered sub-spec parts causing a foobar hardware
failure and software errors caused the thrust compensation to be
in the exact opposite direction, the pilots were knocked unconscious 
when a piece of metal failed under the vibrations and hit them
on the head. McD goes bankrupt and the SSTO program is hit by
lawsuits from relatives of victims, Rifkin and Nader which are not
resolved (in McD's favour, less $800M compensation to victims) until
2017.
	Them's the rules... who wins?


|  Steinn Sigurdsson	|I saw two shooting stars last night		|
|  Lick Observatory	|I wished on them but they were only satellites	|
| steinly@lick.ucsc.edu |Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?		|
| "standard disclaimer"	|I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care - B.B. 1983	|