pete@stc.co.uk (02/18/86)
Summary: Expires: Sender: Followup-To: Distribution: Keywords: Xref: ukc net.space:2013 net.columbia:866 net.followup:2110 Xpath: ukc eagle In article <479@ecn-pc.UUCP> wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes: >In article <805@bute.tcom.stc.co.uk> pete@stc.UUCP (Peter Kendell) writes: >> >> Oh dear. > > I didn't know people still said that in public. Self-restraint. Think what I _might_ have said. >> >> 2: Why should the USA and the USSR have it all their own way >> in space? > > I give up, why? I certainly never said they should. By arrogantly sneering at another's efforts you strongly implied it. > since the Challenger malfunctioned. This probe is designed to go out There are times when NASAese produces a sick feeling. I suppose 'malfunctioned' is a pretty cool expression, right? > Lots of interesting information about Tempel 2/asteroid Fly-by Great. The unmanned space program has always been more scientifically useful than manned missions and I personally find them more inspiring. I hope this mission is a success. If it happens. > And now, a message to our French speaking viewers: Well, I can _read_ French. It was a generous message. It's just a pity that you didn't say all that before. > If I recall correctly, the Apollo One Crew did not die "live on TV," and > the conscience of the nation was still raised. The hard times that Betty Grissom had to go through to get decent compensation for the loss of her husband in that disaster are too well known to need repeating here. The recent acrimonous discussion prompted by Felix Ingrand's posting has pointed up two things: 1: There is a difference between the American Way and that followed by other nations. Don't try to grade them. In particular, you may as well condemn another's religion as his way of life - it's just as helpful! 2: Many people in Europe are resentful of the self-advertising style of American technology. There is a political row in this country right now about American companies buying into the UK (Sikorsky/Westland and GM/ Land Rover). Not all of us want to be the loudest kid on the block. Why not come over to Europe and see for yourself? Better still, come by Concorde!!! -- Peter Kendell <pete@stc.UUCP> ...!mcvax!ukc!stc!pete `When your achievements match your expectations, it's time to move on.'
ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank) (02/22/86)
> Peter Kendell <pete@stc.UUCP> > 2: Why should the USA and the USSR have it all their own way > in space? > No one country has a monopoly in space exploration. Any country with the intelect, resources, resolve, dedication, desire and money can explore space. If a country doesn't have most of these, than the closet they'll get to space is their nearest TV set when they watch the launch of another country's rocket. The bottom line here is: If you can, do it, if not, make some popcorn, sit back, and watch. ray
david@dcl-cs.UUCP (David Coffield) (02/26/86)
In article <15528@rochester.UUCP> ray@rochester.UUCP writes: > No one country has a monopoly in space exploration. Any country with the >intelect, resources, resolve, dedication, desire and money can explore space. >If a country doesn't have most of these, than the closet they'll get to space >is their nearest TV set when they watch the launch of another country's rocket. >The bottom line here is: If you can, do it, if not, make some popcorn, >sit back, and watch. Another bottom line is: If you can spell, post articles, if you can't, sit back and watch.