Dan C wrote:

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:00:31 -0500, Duane Bozarth wrote:

My intent was the reverse...because it is one of four redundant
systems in a backup system, this particular sensor isn't all that
important...

Your intent (and you) are wrong.

How can you demonstrate that other than personal belief? I do not
believe I am wrong based on what NASA said in the news conference that I
saw and their announced decision to fly w/o it...if you have factual
information you can reference that shows an error in what I have said,
I'd be happy to reconsider.

You'll be happy to reconsider what, exactly?

Whatever you can show that shows that my assessment of the function of
the sensor in question was in error...

That the sensor isn't
important? If it wasn't, why was the mission scrubbed two weeks ago?

Because it came up during countdown and the failure was unexplained and
they were unable to either explain it or fix it in time...

Also, the sensor was working this morning, there was no "decision to fly
without it".

Actually if you watched the press conference last night, you will have
seen them say they were planning on doing just that. At least one of
the three major networks featured the "story" on both their 6 (5 Central
) and 11 o'clock news that NASA was going to "break their own
rules"...of course, it was presented as a major bureaucratic blunder
by a breathless news-babe who had absolutely no clue as to what she was
reading...

... Discovery is now in space, let's just leave it at that.

Well, you're the one who claimed I was wrong--I'm simply asking you
provide a factual basis for that claim...