henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (12/17/90)
In article <559@newave.UUCP> john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes: >Now here is the $10 question that I have been pondering: were the problems >in Astro caused because Astro was designed as a human-operated device, or >were we very lucky that humans were in space to salvage a mission that >would have failed from the start if it were designed as an unmanned probe? Although I have been known to take sides on this issue :-), my gut reaction, without knowing all the fussy details, is that Astro is not a good case for either side. Had it been an unmanned mission, it would probably have been designed somewhat differently, and it is quite possible that much of what was eventually accomplished by the astronauts could have been done from the ground instead. I don't believe the astronauts did much actual hardware repair, which is the part that is seriously hard to do from the ground. On the other hand, I don't think their presence contributed to the problems. The use of a reusable vehicle with a limited life in orbit certainly added a great deal of time pressure, however. -- "The average pointer, statistically, |Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology points somewhere in X." -Hugh Redelmeier| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry