Shay.Walters@p6.f12.n376.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Shay Walters) (01/29/90)
In message <1287@ispi.UUCP> jbayer@ispi.UUCP (Jonathan Bayer) writes: > $ KSC SHUTTLE STATUS REPORT - FRIDAY, JAN. 26, 1990 > $ STS-31 SOLID ROCKET BOOSTERS - VAB > This probably has been asked before, but: > Since the Vandenburg Airforce Base Shuttle Launching Facility has > been shut down, how come there is still activity going on there? This has probably been answered before, but: Try "Vehicle Assembly Building"... > jbayer@ispi.COM Roselle Park, NJ 07204 ^^ Oh - now I understand! :-) -- -- Shay Walters == ...!usceast!uscacm!12.6!Shay.Walters
dave@fps.com (Dave Smith) (01/30/90)
In article <1990Jan28.012831.19765@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <1287@ispi.UUCP> jbayer@ispi.UUCP (Jonathan Bayer) writes: >>$ KSC SHUTTLE STATUS REPORT - FRIDAY, JAN. 26, 1990 >>$ STS-31 SOLID ROCKET BOOSTERS - VAB >>Since the Vandenburg Airforce Base Shuttle Launching Facility has been shut >>down, how come there is still activity going on there? > >Note the header line saying "KSC". VAB is the Vehicle Assembly Building, at >KSC. Vandenberg is abbreviated VAFB, as I recall. This brings a question to mind. Did they build another VAB size building at Vandenburg, or were they depending on the usually dry weather down here and planning to assemble in the open? -- David L. Smith FPS Computing, San Diego ucsd!celerity!dave or dave@fps.com "I'm trying to think, but nothing happens!" - Curly Howard
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (01/31/90)
In article <6534@celit.fps.com> dave@fps.com (Dave Smith) writes: >This brings a question to mind. Did they build another VAB size building >at Vandenburg, or were they depending on the usually dry weather down here >and planning to assemble in the open? I think the Vandenberg shuttle setup planned to use a scheme similar to what they use for expendables: assembly on the pad, rather than in a separate building. The VAB system really performs better only if launch rate is seriously high. KSC was designed around a possible ultimate Saturn launch rate of 50+ per year, back when rockets were smaller and dreams were larger. It would never have been done that way if planners had known how low the launch rate would be in the end. On-pad assembly doesn't preclude weather protection, although major operations like adding another piece to the stack would probably have to be done only in favorable weather. -- 1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu