[net.space] Columbia NOT Benched!

REM@MIT-MC@sri-unix.UUCP (09/23/83)

From:  Robert Elton Maas <REM @ MIT-MC>

I don't quite understand the problem with finding missions for the
Columbia. First of all, does it make any difference to some mission
which particular orbiter it flies on? I thought the orbiters were
supposed to be essentially identical. So why not just put the next
mission on the next available orbiter? Second, as I understand it, STS
is about three years behind schedule. Why can't they just speed up
launches and drift back towards the original schedule? Most companies
wanting to put up satellites, thinking of switching to Arianne et al
because STS is delayed so very long, would be glad to have an earlier
launch, wouldn't they? Once things are moving faster, companies
contemplating reserving a launch way down the road will be encouraged
by the chance of a launch not quite as far down the road, and
reservations should start piling in.

If I'm mistaken, would somebody please explain why we have to scrounge
around for missions for Columbia instead of just moving ahead with the
already-scheduled missions in an obvious way? (The suggestion I'm
replying to did involve already-scheduled missions, but it sounded
like it was easier said than done for some unknown reason.)