🚀 go-pugleaf

I just checked all the recent SPACE Digests and see no mention of "Pegasus"
in the ones since #347. The following was from #344, and inspires a query
(below). I've seen absolutely nothing in local media on the results of the
test and would have been surprised to have seen anything, actually. Info
on things like this *should* be posted to SPACE; people can't expect to
get info on such things out of the general media these days. So was it
a successful test?

>Date: 13 Dec 89 19:45:10 GMT
>From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Peter E. Yee)
>Subject: NASA Headline News for 12/13/89 (Forwarded)
>
>Preparations are underway for the second captive flight of the 
>Pegasus air launched space booster Thursday morning.  During the 
>flight a NASA B-52 will carry the 50-foot long winged booster to 
>an altitude of 41,000 feet over the Pacific Ocean 50 miles off 
>the California coast.  If all goes well...the first flight test 
>of the Pegasus will be as early as mid-January.  The booster will 
>carry a DoD and a NASA experimental payload.

Now, my query: assuming this test goes [went] OK, why is the plan to
wait until another month passes before doing it for-real? I get the
impression for the above and other net postings that this is a final
test -- everything is set up like the real launch, except they just
don't hit the "start" button. The live payload is on-board, the fuel
and consumables are all loaded, etc. The only difference is that they
then fly back to base with the vehicle still attached to the B-52.
Am I wrong on this? [If I am, then cancel this query.]

Certainly, if there are problems, they need to take whatever time is
necessary to fix whatever might have been discovered in this test. But,
if everything works OK, why wait a month? Why not then go up in a day or
two and do it for real? What's the purpose of forcing a month's delay in
any case?

Regards, Will