Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- From: fairwater@xxxxxxxxx (Derek Lyons)
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:13:46 GMT
John Doe <jdoe@xxxxxxx> wrote:
I tend to agree that 10Gs is pretty severe and that this is not the
"mild inconvenience" we are led to believe. It is a shame that we don't
hear so much about the investigation.
NASA has a history of not holding the Russian's toes to the fire, that
is when they are not actively conspiring with them to overlook and/or
hide safety problems.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
.
- References:
- Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- From: John Doe
- Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- From: Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
- Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- From: John Doe
- Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- From: Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
- Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- From: John Doe
- Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- Prev by Date: Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- Next by Date: Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- Previous by thread: Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- Next by thread: Re: Expedition 16 lands 260 miles and 20 minutes past target?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|