eem@jc3b21.UUCP (Emery E. Mandel) (02/23/86)
An article on the net about a month ago explained that the first digit of a launch name (61-C for instance) represented the fiscal year in which the mission was launched. My question is: Why was the Columbia mission named 61-C while the Challenger mission was named 51-L? To me, it seems as though they're going backwards. (No pun intended in light of the accident.) Can someone "in the know" answer this for me? Thanks in advance. Emery Mandel ------------ "Gee, it's warm down here in FLORIDA."
hammen@puff.UUCP (Zaphod Beeblebrox) (02/27/86)
In article <167@jc3b21.UUCP>, eem@jc3b21.UUCP (Emery E. Mandel) writes: > An article on the net about a month ago explained > that the first digit of a launch name (61-C for > instance) represented the fiscal year in which > the mission was launched. My question is: Why > was the Columbia mission named 61-C while the > Challenger mission was named 51-L? To me, it > seems as though they're going backwards. (No > pun intended in light of the accident.) > > Can someone "in the know" answer this for me? > Thanks in advance. > > Emery Mandel > ------------ > "Gee, it's warm down here in FLORIDA." The reason that the launch was 51-L, for 1985, is that the funding for the flight was initially approved for the 1885 fiscal year. The Columbia mission was financed from the 1986 budget, hence the 61-whatever designation. Robert J. Hammen U. of Wisc. CS Dept. U. of Wisc. Plasma Physics Dept. Manta Software Corp. {seismo, allegra, ihnp4}!uwvax!puff!hammen !gumby!hammen hammen@gumby.wisc.edu hammen@puff.wisc.edu
kenner@acf4.UUCP (Richard Kenner) (02/28/86)
The mission names are assigned based on the ORIGINALLY MANIFESTED dates. When the schedule slips (or missions change order), the names are not changed. 51L is the 12th mission SCHEDULED for launch from KSC during fiscal year 1985 (Oct 1984 - Sept. 1985).
polish@garfield.columbia.edu (Nathaniel Polish) (03/01/86)
The numbers are for when the mission was started. The naming convention comes from the naming of commercial satalite launches where the number is from the year the contact was signed. They do this so that they have some why to talk about a mission from the outset.
holloway@drivax.UUCP (Bruce Holloway) (03/03/86)
> .... is that the funding > for the flight was initially approved for the 1885 fiscal year. ^^^^ Talk about looking ahead! -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Whatever I write are not the opinions or policies of Digital Research, Inc.,| |and probably won't be in the foreseeable future. | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Bruce Holloway ....!ucbvax!hplabs!amdahl!drivax!holloway (I'm not THAT Bruce Holloway, I'm the other one.)