sw@whuts.ATT.COM (WARMINK) (01/16/89)
Perhaps I'm missing something, but why are the STS flight numbers not sequential? Historical reasons? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ There are lies, damned lies | Stuart Warmink, Interface Systems and statistics... | <att!>whuts!sw Whippany NJ USA -----------> My opinions are not necessarily those of my employer <-----------
sjeyasin@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk (swaraj jeyasingh) (01/18/89)
From article <5273@whuts.ATT.COM>, by sw@whuts.ATT.COM (WARMINK): > Perhaps I'm missing something, but why are the STS flight numbers not sequential? > Historical reasons? > -- They are not really. They only turn out that way ! What I guess happens is that missions, payloads and crews are assigned a STS number well in advance and that is then fixed. But the designated launch date may slip (due to any number of reasons) or be moved forward. Rather than resdesignate numbers, the mission is simply moved. Hence the STS *mission* numbers appear as non-sequential *flight* numbers. If you think that's confusing, remember what it was like pre-Challenger! i.e STS-51L ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "All opinions expressed ...etc ..etc " Swaraj Jeyasingh (sjeyasin@axion.bt.co.uk) (0473 - 646082) British Telecom Research Labs Ipswich IP5 7RE UK