ISS name
Phillip Clark (psclark@dircon.co.uk)
Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:24:50 +0000 (GMT)
On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, Allan Cook wrote:
> I disagree. Mir went up as Mir. Zarya went up as paft of the ISS.
Sorry, but 1986-017A Mir was always planned as the first component of the
modular "Mir Complex" space station which evolved with five other modules
being added on to it, and it was always intended for that role.
In the same way 1998-067A Zarya was always the first component of the
modular International Space Station which will evolve with more than
forty other modules being added to it and it has always been intended for
that role.
There is no difference in the situations other than one of scale and the
fact that some of the ISS modules will be built outside the US.
But, from the logic already set with the Mir Complex, ISS should be known
as the Zarya Complex. The situations are identical, whether people in
the US or elsewhere like it or not ! :-) If you wanted a US-friendly
name then a US module should have been launched first ! :-) :-)
However, before this becomes a subject for flaming, I am not seriously
suggesting that the ISS should be called Zarya: I just call it ISS which
is the official name.
Phillip Clark
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip S Clark 25 Redfern Avenue
Molniya Space Consultancy Whitton
Compiler/Publisher, Worldwide Satellite Launches Middx TW4 5NA
U.K.
Specialist in "space archeology" - the older and more obscure the more
interesting it is !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------