Ron Parise wrote: > At 15:14 04/29/98 -0500, Buehrer, Arthur E. wrote: > > >Yes...I read about this a few days ago. I'm shocked!!! I know it's a bit > >aged and space can be a harsh environment in many ways, but in a > >somewhat loose comparison I would not run a '87 volvo off a cliff that > >was in running condition just because the starter was sticking and it > >leaked radiator fluid. Can't they just leave it as a rescue station or > >supply store? Seems like such a waste. Sounds political!!! > > Actually not Art. It takes a lot of money and resources to keep a vehicle > like Mir in orbit, powered, and under control. After next year the Russian > Space Agency will (we hope) be diverting its support to the International > Space Station. If Mir were just abandoned in orbit, its orbit will decay > rapidly. Without power, attitude control, and propulsion there would be no > way to predict (or control!) where the 'big pieces' would land. By > de-orbiting the station in a controlled manner they can choose a nice big > empty spot in the middle of the Pacific and avoid everybodies house. > > Ron, wa4sir As long as, the space station, this time, is really, really, really going to happen. And, I was figuring on at least one more big redesign and postponement -- though I don't know anything. You know, maybe P3D is just par for the course in terms of launch delays and problems. Hmm, is there going to be ham radio on the new space station? Is anyone on the list involved with this? What's it called now, Alpha or something? Is it going to have a Russian or American call sign? Hmm.