Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: When does the official name change?
Message-ID: <1989Nov23.164417.27352@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <Nov.18.22.31.35.1989.20918@hardees.rutgers.edu> <7036@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <2394@cbnewsj.ATT.COM> <1989Nov21.051136.18065@utzoo.uucp> <5315@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 89 16:44:17 GMT

In article <5315@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> bruno@sdcc10.ucsd.edu (Bruce W. Mohler) writes:
> > ... Edwards is the
> > primary landing site for the foreseeable future.
>
>Why don't they launch from Edwards as well then?

Life would be simpler if they could.  Apart from historical complications
(all the heavy launch facilities are at KSC), the problem is that the range-
safety people want to see several hundred kilometers, at least, of ocean or
uninhabited land downrange of a launch site.  Edwards and related sites
simply can't meet that requirement.  That's why missile testing moved from
White Sands (in New Mexico) to Cape Canaveral in the first place.  NASA
considered various other sites when deciding where the heavy-launch base
for spaceflight should be, but the physics of the situation make it very
desirable to launch eastward from as near the equator as possible, and
the Cape already had a lot of the infrastructure needed.
-- 
A bit of tolerance is worth a  |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
megabyte of flaming.           | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
