[Man of the Right]

It would have been a stretch.

Prior to the accident, NASA was hard-pressed to launch a total of 4-5 times a year with four craft. Normally, mission training takes years and launch preparation takes two to three months. Moreover, there's no equipment for effecting a Shuttle-Shuttle evacuation, no one is trained to do it, and the majority of astronauts have absolutely no training for leaving the spacecraft. If it were known that re-entry was impossible shortly after launch, NASA would have been under great political pressure to try a high-risk rescue. The outcome would have been an Apollo 13 national high or a Desert One national low involving more deaths and possibly the loss of another Shuttle. Given the lack of preparation, the latter was statistically more likely than the former.

[bvw]

So NASA gave up. Didn't even try.

That, Kevin, is your "pathological risk aversion" in action. Who are the real cowards?

[john316]

Given the lack of preparation...

That is blatantly incorrect. Each mission is layed out and significant training takes place. Every thing is tested and re-tested, then "broken" during simulations to test limits and scenarios. I think it very irresponsible for folks whom have never even see the "level B" or "level C" data requirements for one of these missions or haven't the faintest idea of how robust the testing, verification, validation, and certification procedures can be spouting garbage.

/rant off