🚀 go-pugleaf

DA>>Under the terms of the Launch Services Purchase Act, NASA is prohibit
DA>>from orbiting non-shuttle-specific payloads. Therefore,
DA>>using the shuttle to orbit Soyuz spacecraft contravenes the LSPA.
>
EH>Why do you assert that it is not STS specific, since the final design 
EH>not yet established?  For example, the design might require a full
EH>load of fuel/oxidizer to do safe deorbit and landing, so it would need
EH>to be docked without using the propulsion system by placing it with th
EH>RMS on the Shuttle. 

The final design of Soyuz was established in 1965 by Sergei Korolyov. 
There have been modifications since. Soyuz is not a Shuttle specific
payload. Any attempt to call a Soyuz a shuttle-specific payload falls
under sophistry.

EH>>However, several U.S. commercial vendors can supply launchers that
EH>>can easily orbit a Soyuz for a more reasonable price than the shuttle
EH>>a nice side benefit, this would create a second means of access to sp
EH>>in the US, in case the shuttle fleet is grounded. 
EH>
EH>The cost to orbit might be cheaper by commercial carrier, depending on
EH>how you do the accounting.  As we have seen here, the entire governmen
EH>uses different procedures for figuring the "cost" of something.  If th
EH>STS fleet is grounded, the only impact aside from STS-specific ops wou
EH>be on Freedom.  This might or might not be critical.

Since Freedom and shuttle will be the only manned space activities in 
this country, grounding of the shuttle would mean the end of manned space
here. This might or might not be critical, depending on your point of
view.

___ WinQwk 2.0b#0

--- Maximus 2.01wb