rnoe@urbana.mcd.mot.com (Roger Noe) (02/03/90)
This followup has been cross-posted from rec.arts.startrek to sci.space.shuttle with further followups directed to rec.arts.startrek. In article <16595@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>, mathews@sybil (Ryan D Mathews) writes: > For about ten years now, I've wanted to share with someone the > thoughts that went through my head when I learned about naming the > "first" Space Shuttle the Enterprise. This is what I thought: > > "You IDIOTS!! You utterly incompetant, moronic BOZOS!! YOU NAMED THE > WRONG $#@%ING SHIP!!!!" > > Folks, the Enterprise was a TEST VEHICLE! It NEVER WENT INTO SPACE! > It's NEVER GOING TO! Why the hell couldn't you gung-ho trekkies, > trekkers, trekoids, and treknerds have waited for the real thing? I > mean, naming the first spaceship the Enterprise is a neat idea... SO > WHY DIDN'T YOU DO THAT?? > > It's the Columbia that should be named the Enterprise. If those > weiners had held their horses, the Enterprise would still be in the > news today; Columbia is still going up regularly. But instead, the > glorious Enterprise collects dust in a museum. For about ten years now, I've wanted to share with someone the thoughts that went through my head when I heard someone express the ideas quoted above. This is what I thought: "You IDIOT!! You utterly incompetent, moronic BOZO!! THEY NAMED THE RIGHT $#@%ING SHIP, AT THE TIME IT WAS NAMED!!!!" Ryan, the Enterprise was NOT intended to remain a TEST VEHICLE! It WAS SUPPOSED TO GO INTO SPACE! This was a specific question which was raised at the time, and NASA's officially stated position then was that OV-101 (what we now call Enterprise) was indeed planned for regular Earth-orbit missions following the approach and landing tests (ALT) in which that orbiter vehicle was first carried, then later released by the Boeing 747 shuttle carrier aircraft. Only after OV-101, 102, and 103 were named Enterprise, Columbia, and Discovery did Rockwell International and NASA engineers decide the following: 1. Enterprise would cost more to refurbish for flight status following ALT than previously estimated. 2. Structural Test Article 099 (STA-099), which had NOT been planned for space missions, was in better shape than expected and could be made ready for those missions at a cost much lower than previously estimated. Therefore they named STA-099 Challenger, refitted it for flight, and left Enterprise to work for launch pad fit tests, structural tests, and eventually occupy the place of highest honor in the National Air and Space Museum. I believe that NASA was being entirely forthright in stating that they intended for OV-101 to make it into orbit and not STA-099. Therefore the Great Space Shuttle Naming Campaign did the right thing at the right time, since the alternative would most likely have resulted in NOT ONE of the orbiters being named Enterprise. (That name did not appear on NASA's list of preferred names. The GSSN Campaign specifically asked for the first shuttle to be sent into space to be named Enterprise.) The result was disappointing, but certainly not a blunder on anyone's part, and not really a tragedy, either. Challenger literally took Enterprise's place in the shuttle fleet. Would you have preferred that the first space shuttle to disintegrate, to fail to return from its mission, killing its entire crew to have been named Enterprise rather than Challenger? Instead, Enterprise is a permanent monument for all to see. Unlike its namesake in Star Trek III, the shuttle Enterprise is invulnerable. It was the first shuttle to FLY. Challenger is no more, and people easily confuse Columbia, Discovery, Atlantis (and one day also Endeavour), but Enterprise shares its special position of glory with none of them. How can one be dissatisfied with that? The mocking tone with which I began this response is only partly meant to be taken in jest. In the future, it would be wiser to collect information first by asking a simple question than to haul off and call people names. It's not so much that I mind myself and a few hundred respected friends being called idiots and utterly incompetent, moronic bozos--if the epithets are deserved, that's one thing. No, the offensive aspect to the posting was that you didn't know anything about what you were writing! If I have misstated anything (chronology, whatever) above, I apologize in advance. Those events occurred what seems so long ago that I'm not certain I got every detail right. But the salient points are all present and correct. I'm confident if I missed anything, no matter how small, this will be followed up by someone else. -- Roger Noe Motorola Microcomputer Division, Urbana Design Center Phone: 217 384-8536 1101 East University Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801 USA Internet: rnoe@urbana.mcd.mot.com UUCPnet: uiucuxc!udc!rnoe Latitude/Longitude: 40:06:55 N./88:11:40 W.