From: strider@acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore)
Subject: Re: ACRV/Soyuz P # of Passengers
Organization: The Voice of Fate
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 15:37:49 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.215925.29881@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>In article <_kbyx3j@rpi.edu> strider@acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug14.152325.29323@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>>>In article <h-aym4#@rpi.edu> strider@acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore) writes:
>>>
>>>>	Soyuz is great, Soyuz is God, Soyuz can carry ONE passenger.  The
>>>>other two occupants must be qualified as pilots.
>>>
>>>>	The Shuttle is lousy, the shuttle is the eater of money, the shuttle
>>>>can carry 5 passengers (or more).  
>>>
>>>I would like to see a source for this. The Soviets tended to prefer automated
>>>hardware and didn't let their crew do much if they could avoid it. There
>>>shouldn't be too much trouble qualifying crews.
>>>
>>
>>	Source? Look at any Soyuz flight.  If it were so easy, I'd think that
>>the CIS would be willing to fly TWo paying passengers, rather than one.
>>Also, looking at I believe the last 4 or so missions I recall 2 were done
>>with manually docking.  Finally, recall Mercury and the Capsule passengers?
>>Oh, excuse me, the ASTRONAUTS who fought to have flight control.  Trying
>>to convince NASA and/or its astronauts to sit in a capsule while it flies
>>without I think would be harder than convincing Congress of your ideas.
>>
>>>But I point out that if in fact you are correct, this is still a problem
>>>for Shuttle. Soyuz WILL be the ACRV. Congress isn't going to fund anything
>>>else.
>>>
>>	This was my fault, the subject is misleading.  As ACRV I do believe
>>that Soyuz has its merits.  As a method for exchanging crews, I have serious
>>doubts.  And you haven't made an argument yet.  Just some simple handwaving
>>about how easy it would be to qualify crews and that it would all be done
>>automatically.
>>	Heck, the shuttle can fly automatically except for landing gear
>>deployment (and that will change soon).  Why bother flying with a 
>>Commander AND a pilot.  Heck, dumpt them and you have 7 or more passengers.
>>
	As has been pointed out by several sources now, I am in error on
yhe number of passengers that Soyuz can carry.  As any good debater should
do at this point, I concede the point to Allen.  Soyuz would be able to
recrew the station with the number of flights he claims.
>>
>>>   Allen
>>>-- 
>>>+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>>>| Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they     |
>>>|  aws@iti.org     |  put a man on the Moon?"                               |
>>>+----------------------252 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
>>
>>
>>-- 
>><------------------------------------------------------------------------->
>>Greg d. Moore                  |  Strider@acm.rpi.edu
>>Green Mountain Software        |  "All that is gold does not glitter."  
>>Carpe Diem                     | 
>
>
>-- 
>+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>| Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they     |
>|  aws@iti.org     |  put a man on the Moon?"                               |
>+----------------------251 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+


-- 
<------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Greg d. Moore                  |  Strider@acm.rpi.edu
Green Mountain Software        |  "All that is gold does not glitter."  
Carpe Diem                     |