Space Digest Sat, 7 Aug 93 Volume 16 : Issue 995 Today's Topics: 6 million parts... DC-X launch Exploding Heads Future War? Ideas! Mars Observer's First Photo Mars Observer GIF Image NASA's planned project management changes Support the Shuttle The Inquisition (The Usenet edition) The magic of pi TITAN II First Stage - HYPERGOLIC!!? WFPC-2 Installation into HST Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 19:34:00 BST From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk Subject: 6 million parts... > Seems to me that I heard that this was actually said by one of the > Mercury astronauts during an interview on a Florida radio station and > went something like, "You are sitting out there on top of one of the > most complex, powerful things ever put together, and you know that all > 6 million parts were let to the lowest bidder. How would *you* feel?" > Not a legend. It is quoted on the To The Moon record set by Time/Life, circa 1970. -- ======================================================================= Give generously to the Dale M. Amon, Libertarian Anarchist Betty Ford Home for amon@cs.qub.ac.uk the Politically Correct Greybook: amon%cs.qub.ac.uk@andrew.cmu.edu ======================================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 18:42:51 GMT From: Luke Plaizier Subject: DC-X launch Newsgroups: sci.space aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: >In article <35282dea@ofa123.fidonet.org> David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org writes: >>I'm still not sure of the exact launch date, however. MacDac is now sayings >>its going to be the second week of August. >I got my second invitation letter yesterday so it is coming soon. They will >soon have a phone number to call with the latest. (They should make it >a 900 number; they could collect enough to pay for the SX-2 :-)). >My sources are saying Aug. 9 for the stability test and the 20TH for >the public flight. If any of you could possibly video-tape the launch, there are quite a number of us here in Australia that wopuld pay money to get a copy. We have access to NTSC-PAL conversion facilities, so we would do all the work. If anyone is willing to do this, then please email and let me know! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Luke Plaizier - Entomological Toxophilist Extraordinaire Editor - Newcastle Space Frontier Society UPDATE Moderator - SPACE TRIVIA LIST lukpla@scorch.apana.org.au =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 1993 17:23:07 GMT From: Keith Nicewarner Subject: Exploding Heads Newsgroups: sci.space OK, could someone please back me up on this: A person's head will *not* explode in the vacuum of space, nor will the rest of his/her body, nor will the eyes pop out of their sockets. There is simply not enough pressure behind the eye sockets to push them out (in spite of Hollywood's attempts to keep the public as ignorant and as gullible as they are...). A person would most likely die of an extreme case of the bends (from rapid decompression). I'm tired of arguing with my naive friends, and am lacking any hard evidence/numbers. For instance, I would imagine that the pressure differential between 1 atmosphere and empty space is about the same as that experienced by a diver under 32 ft of water (if I recall correctly), right? I've never seen a diver's head explode when he surfaced. Any hard evidence would be appreciated; for instance, has anyone thrown an animal out the airlock of the Space Shuttle (or something along those lines...)? (I'm sure the animal lovers would have a fit if they did... especially if it was a cute furry animal.) Thanks. Keith Nicewarner -- Center for Intelligent Robotic Systems for Space Exploration (CIRSSE) Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute | Internet: nicewarn@ral.rpi.edu CII 8015 | Telephone: (518) 276-2973 Troy, NY 12180-3590 | Fax: (518) 276-8715 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 20:02:45 BST From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk Subject: Future War? Ideas! > Weapons of choice for maximum nastiness are biowar and gragu > (grey-goo: omnivourous nanotechnology.) Biowar would require that we > capture one of the slimedevils for experimentation. Gragu will not be > practical for about twenty years, even with a crash development > program. But since the trip to their planet will probably take that > long anyway, we could send the necessary designs to the ship in > transit, and have it fabricated in time to wipe out the whole civilian > population of the planet. > And I for one would heartily back the automatic death penalty for anyone taking part or authorizing, or assisting in the construction of such a gross abuse of nanotechnology. I would word it such that the guilty parties identities would be advertised world wide and that a large bounty would be paid by the United Nations (or other) for the confirmed death of each one of them. This is too serious a danger to be developed, or even to be contemplated to be developed. The danger is so great that the hand of every human (or other sentient) should be raised against any who would consider it. Since I have been involved in thinking about these subjects from day one (check the credits on Engines of Creation) I have had more time than most to worry about the possibilities. I would have ZERO compunction about killing a person(?) who took part in such a horror. And I'm one who doesn't even particularly like shooting rats. I don't think that we should even in literature make the creation of horrors anything but a horror. This stuff makes nukes look like flint tipped arrows. Just have a nightmare about it tonight: the entire ecosphere of a planet, with billions of entities being eaten alive, literally dissolved, screaming in a final moment of agony. Anyone involved in such a project would have to be considered a monster. -- ======================================================================= Give generously to the Dale M. Amon, Libertarian Anarchist Betty Ford Home for amon@cs.qub.ac.uk the Politically Correct Greybook: amon%cs.qub.ac.uk@andrew.cmu.edu ======================================================================= ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 1993 17:53 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary In article <6AUG199308485175@vx.cis.umn.edu>, soc1070@vx.cis.umn.edu (Tim Harincar) writes... > >Just what is the format of images when they're sent down? Is it a custom >graphics/compression routine designed for spacecraft, or a dirivative of >a more common format? The images from JPL images are generally stored in VICAR format, which is the format developed by the Image Processing Lab at JPL. The images are not compressed. Also, note that the scientists have proprietary rights to the science data for one year. They may release the images before that at their own discretion. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | When given a choice between /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | two exciting things, choose |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | the one you haven't tried. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 1993 17:48 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Mars Observer GIF Image Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary ========================== MARS OBSERVER GIF IMAGE August 6, 1993 ========================== The first image taken by the Mars Observer spacecraft of Mars is now available at the JPL Public Information access site in GIF format. This image is courtesy of the Public Information Office at JPL and was scanned in from a photograph and is not the raw digital data. Also, note that the image is in GIF89a format, so make sure your display software supports this particular format (as opposed to the older GIF87a format). The caption file accompanying the image is appended at the end of this message, as well as being embedded in the image itself. The image is available by dialup modem at +1 (818) 354-1333, up to 9600 bps, parameters N-8-1, or by using anonymous ftp to: ftp: jplinfo.jpl.nasa.gov (137.78.104.2) user: anonymous cd: news (will be moved to the images directory in 30 days) files: marsapp.gif *****IMPORTANT***** Note that the JPL ftp site now has a new name and IP number: jplinfo.jpl.nasa.gov (137.78.104.2) *****IMPORTANT***** Photographic prints of these images can be ordered from Newell Color Lab listed below. Refer to the P number associated with the images when ordering. Newell Color Lab 221 N. Westmoreland Avenue Los Angeles CA 90064 Telephone: (213) 380-2980 FAX: (213) 739-6984 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ marsapp.gif PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE JET PROPULSION LABORATORY CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011 PHOTO CAPTION August 6, 1993 P-42748 Mars Observer #1 Photograph of the planet Mars taken at 8:52 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time on July 26 by the high resolution, narrow-angle telescope of the Mars Observer Camera. At that time, the Mars Observer spacecraft was 5.8 million kilometers (3.6 million miles) and 28 days from its encounter with Mars. The resolution in this image is approximately 21.5 km (13.4 mi) per picture element and Mars, roughly 6,800 km (4,200 miles) in diameter, is about 315 picture elements across. North is to the top of the image; the south pole is near the bottom but in shadow. The sunrise line (terminator) stretches across the morning hemisphere from lower right to upper left. At this distance from Mars, only bright and dark markings resulting from variations in the amount and thickness of dust and sand are visible. Toward the bottom of the picture is a bright, roughly circular area called Hellas, an impact basin 2,000 km (1,250 mi) across. The dark area in the center of the frame is Syrtis Major, a region of volcanic plains and dark sand dunes. At the top of the photograph is Nilosyrtis, an area of buttes, mesas and box canyons reminiscent of the deserts of the southwest United States. Launched on Sept. 25, 1992, Mars Observer will enter Mars orbit on Tuesday, Aug. 24, at about 1:30 p.m. PDT. In-orbit engineering checkout of the camera is scheduled to begin Sept. 16. The camera and six other investigations begin mapping operations from a circular orbit just 400 km (248 mi) above the surface on Nov. 22. The Mars Observer Camera was developed by and is operated under contract to Jet Propulsion Laboratory by an industry/university team led by Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, Calif. ##### ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | When given a choice between /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | two exciting things, choose |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | the one you haven't tried. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 1993 15:35:32 GMT From: Doug Mohney Subject: NASA's planned project management changes Newsgroups: sci.space In article <23s4m9$d7q@access.digex.net>, prb@access.digex.net (Pat) writes: >In article <23rgbaINN7eu@mojo.eng.umd.edu> sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes: >|No, read it again. They have the right to REVISE at will. Termination is dealt >|with in the separate clause below. >Contracts, can't be revised at will. DoD doesn't say, we know you >promised to deliver typewriters for $300/each, but we want >M1 tanks, so cough up them at $300 each. No Pat, but DoD can choose to to request accelleration/decelleration of deliverables and thereby be a royal pain in the ass about it. >What DoD does is use their right to terminate a contract to open >a contract for re-negotiation as needed. Oh, that's convenient. Don't you think? Not exactly an engendering of good will, eh? >|Including stationing their own employees on site to monitor all goings on? > >To participate in pesticide free programs, often inspectors will >be at farms on a regular basis. the USDA inspection program for tuna, >involves the participating firms (Starkist i.e.) paying for the >inspectors who stand around and stamp the cans. Not exactly a standard industry practice, however. >As i pointed out, in the movie business, auditors will routinely >show up to count tickets and heads in the theaters. Oh right. Guess what, there's a difference between box-office sales receipts and building things. This example is off-the-wall. >|Hardly. Even the TQM prayer groups don't go to the monitoring extremes >|which the government does... and that was before TQM became hip :) >I am pretty sure, GM for the Saturn program, puts GM employees into the >subcontractors plants to monitor process and production. No they don't. There's some on-site inspection, a laying out of specs, and a basic incentive clause: Meet high levels of quality and you'll get most of our business. If you don't, we'll take our contract somewhere else. Failure to supply materials which don't meet up to spec result in a yankola. This is the same way in which Moto does business. They dont' have the resources to put people hovering over every aspect; sure, they'll gladly send you out some consultants for a couple of days to give you advice to get your stuff together, but otherwise, you either meet the necessary requirements for materials or you're screwed. >|>So do every other business in the world. All contracts carry an >|>implied social and economic policy in them. >|I realize this is your typical socialistic garbage, but you're wrong. >I realize you like to call people names and deride their ideas rather >then admit that you may be wrong. You must have had a bad life doug. Pat, this is funny coming from someone who descibed me and Fred as "unrepentant cold warriors." :) >Examine a contract, it is an promise for a consideration. Sounds like a beer commericial for Anheiser-Busch >All contracts must conform to public policy, ie no contracts for >prostitution or slavery. Right there is some social policy. You're doing a contortionist stretch there El Pat-o. The U.S. government mandates a certain amount of its purchases goes to minority, women-owned, and small businesses to promote the growth and development of those business. THIS is social and economy policy making on a significant scale. All contracts must conform to the law of the land, but the scale and impact are two different things. If I choose, I do not have to buy from Joe Schmoe Computers just because my purchase size is below $25K. >The contract is awarded by some mechanism. ( Right there is your >socio-economic policy) Contracts in private industry may be awarded in whatever fashion the purchase chooses. I could choose to buy from my brother-in-law. Certainly that's a SOCIAL policy of the individual, but not really an economic one per say. >i.e. GM has their approved vendors list. if you aren't on that list, >you will never be allowed to bid. Right? Do you think that might >include a social policy? Nope. GM decides to buy from the best quality vendor at a certain price. That's economics. Not social policy. >Contracts may go to the perceived best quality vendor, that's an economic/ >social policy. Perceived? It's usually based on more than perceived. Usually based on any number of issues of the business, none of which have to do with alleged social decision-making. >I realize in your world, there is no such thing as policy, but >there are more things in the world then are dreamt of in your philosophy. Pat, your mud here is pretty thick. Are you planning to make an adobe house with it? >|There's nothing "social" in that. It's money and greed. Why else are most >|companies building products overseas? Not for the good of the United States, >|but cuz it's CHEAPER. >And is that not a social and economic policy? Build the product >in the cheapest manner. It's an economic business decision made by a corporate firm to max profits, not an overriding "policy" to direct the course and direction of a national economy. > Reaganism is a social policy. Oh it's not very nice, but it is a policy. Oh yes, you were about due to kick "Reaganism." When you can't do anything else, blame your problem on someone else. >|> ATT, IBM, and the >|>fortune 500 usually have policies to help small and disadvantaged >|>business too. >| >|Only because it suits their public image and because they are required by >|law to have a certain percentage of small/disadvantaged businesses on-board >|in various government contract work, due to the SBA act. > >Does it matter why? Yes, Pat. The entity making those decisions is the Federal Government, not the individual corporations which will work in their OWN interests first, last, and (nearly) always. You IMPLY that said corporations would be nice guys just cuz.. and it isn't so. Government applies the "mandate" of policy. Not the corporation. >|Sure, but if DoD decides to revise the contract, you're screwed regardless. >And same thing in the private sector. >See how in construction, companies are killing each other. > >builders are getting hosed by the clients. they may have a negotiated rate >for services, only to be told, that the rate is changing. You can't tell DoD to screw themselves as easily as you can go find another builder. >And It doesn't matter how many lawyers the feds have, i've participated >on numerous winning claims. Plus, if they lose the claim, they have >to pay your court costs. That assumes you don't go bankrupt in court first. >I'd rather do business witht he DoD then Herbert Haft any day. Herb Haft turned on his own family. That's a cute saying. Why don't you compare DoD with one of the other Fortune 500 and see what you come up with? >>No, actually, it's not. It's made out of old 8" gun tubes and designed >>to blow up underground bunkers. Made from scratch. Good stuff. > >Works well, of course, if the bunker is full of civilians >and not Command staff, that's a whole nother problem. Pat, you bitch out about administration and policy being different, then you turn around and throw some more mud in the mix by doing the SAME THING. Did your tongue hit both sides of your mouth at once? >>What happens if the one vehicle dies? They don't have a lot of spares sitting >>around. I'd call that significant risk, hm? > >Well, they either fix it, or they build another one. >the second one is a lot cheaper. Except there's no money laying around to do that. It doesn't grow on trees either. There's one, and if it's broke, the project is screwed. >Besides DC-X is already 50% successful. it's already demonstrated rapid turnaround >and servicing *groan* BMDO is not running around claiming it is 50% successful; you're being lame here. What is the PRIMARY objective? C'mon Pat... you can do it... >>Well Pat, you seem suddenly Risk Adverse for someone so adament to launching >>SSF in a higher inclination because it'll be "tougher." > >Understanding why they wouldn't make their logistics problems >200% more difficult is far different from advocating a far more >productive Space station. > >Different OV's will reduce productivity in the STS program. >A different station orbit will increase productivity. Since we're engaging in mental fantasy, sure. Newer OVs would INCREASE productivity in the long run because: A) Older craft (Columbia) could be retired, thereby resulting overall cheaper costs to maintain the systems (less frequent inspections, simplified parts flow) B) More flexability in the manifest because the newer OVs would not be restricted as are the older ones. C) More likely you'd get the bird off the ground in the first shot because you don't have geezing old parts. >How many RFP's do you read? I read any where between 20- 100 >in a year. Wow all that reading and a fruitful time posting to every newsgroup under the sun :) I haven't counted them recently. I'd say somewhere around your lower bound, depending on the year and how much time I have for other things in life. Did you want to compare penis length next? >>>If you bring drugs to the office, you must share them. >> >>So what do you think would happen if the government goes back and looks at that >>particular policy? Do you think that Uncle Sam will think that's cute and >>continue to hand them money? > >No-one from the government is tasked to enforce this policy. Heh. If you fail to disclose that your people are druggies, the Feds get upset. Do I have to dig out some more paper work for this to quote? >and besides, they won the contract, i doubt the contracting officers >give a damn. They might not, their competitors would. And I guarantee the contracts offers would if The Media(TM) or some conservative senator got up and started belting away at it on the Hill... Your political sensitivity is ... touching... >when i read how some of the RFP'sa re written, i figure at least half >of them are on drugs. Lord knows you post to sci.space with a buzz on... January 1993 - John Scully embraces Bill Clinton. July 1993 - Apple Computer lays off 2500 workers, posts $188 million dollar loss. -- > SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU < -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 16:53:56 GMT From: "[u]Phillip Potts" Subject: Support the Shuttle Newsgroups: sci.space >Please quit bashing the Shuttle. And for Pete's sake, stop singing >the praises of Russian equipment. If I hear one more comment >about how we should scrap our stuff and buy from them.....Anyway, >do a little comparison before you do AMEN. It's about time someone added some positive to this negative track. /----------------------------------------------------/ / Phillip M. Potts Loral Data Systems / / potts@lds.loral.com / / / / LWMA SII 1898 - 1998 / /----------------------------------------------------/ ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 93 14:54:05 GMT From: "R.E. Wiersbe" Subject: The Inquisition (The Usenet edition) Newsgroups: sci.space In article shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes: >On Fri, 6 Aug 1993 02:01:53 GMT, pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu (Phil G. Fraering) said: > >Phil> ward@agamit.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il (Ward Paul) writes: > >>In article <52926@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> hshen@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (S.H.) >>writes: > >What is your backgroud? >Who do you speak for ? > >What >>do you do besides writing posters ? > >>Gee, no one told me the inquisition had started again. > >Phil> Same here. I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition. > >Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! >-- Our weapon is Fear! Fear and Surprise! Our two main weapons are Fear, and Surprise, and Ruthless Efficiency! Our three main weapons are Fear, Surprise, Ruthless Efficiency, and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope! Our four weapons are Fear....I'll come in again.............. Bob Wiersbe AT&T Bell Labs hrbob@ixstar.ih.att.com ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 93 16:14:11 GMT From: "S.H." Subject: The magic of pi Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.space In article <1993Aug6.152039.6687W@lumina.edb.tih.no> ketil@edb.tih.no writes: >In article <1993Aug6.115754.21192@nomina.lu.se>, magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson) writes: |>Now IBM historicans got into it, to try to trace how the incorrect pi |>encoding had made its way into the library. The 3080 library was unmodified |>from the 370 series version, which was essentially unmodified from the 360 |>series version, all with the same incorrect pi bit pattern. But the 360 |>version was a recoding of a 7090 routine, which also used the same bit |>pattern. (I don't know the numeric formats of the 7090 - there may have been |>exponent adjustments etc. in the conversion, but the error was the same.) |>From the 7090 it was traced back to 709, and some say the 704 too... |>The true origin of the incorrect pi was never found, but it is so far back |>that it is 99% probable that some programmer way back then made a |>binary digitization of pi by hand, not by series expansion on a computer... | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Absolutly true!!!! |>If you are not certain wether to believe a story or not, here in Norway |>we use to say, "Well, if it isn't true, it certainly is a great lie". |>I suspect that this story qualifies as such, but I would truly enjoy |>if someone can confirm it. This is not a fun story! I have one TOOOOO >Ketil Holly S. | " The whole thing was `programmed', very claver, | Very sophisticated..... " | ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 18:57:19 GMT From: Luke Plaizier Subject: TITAN II First Stage - HYPERGOLIC!!? Newsgroups: sci.space I've done a bit of searching and cannot either deny or verify this particular question, so here it is dumped on the net.... Was the first stage, or any of the stages for that matter, of the TITAN II launch vehicle (Gemini etc) Hypergolic? I have a picture in the book 'LIFE IN SPACE' on page 93 that says 'Titan's hypergolic propellants simplified prelaunch procedures,'. I'd tend to believe it, since TITAN II was designed as an ICBM, but can anyone verify this? It's not real important, just a bit of trivia I was toying with .... =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Luke Plaizier - Entomological Toxophilist Extraordinaire Editor - Newcastle Space Frontier Society UPDATE Moderator - SPACE TRIVIA LIST lukpla@scorch.apana.org.au =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 93 16:27:41 GMT From: "S.H." Subject: WFPC-2 Installation into HST Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.math What kind of mission are you doing ? Below is your message: ===================================================================== In article <5AUG199318052296@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: >From the "JPL Universe" ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ??? July 16, 1993 Putting WF/PC-2 in place may require the hands of a surgeon By Diane Ainsworth What will it take to slide a 280-kilogram (620-pound), wedge-shaped camera into the side of NASA's orbiting Hubble Space Telescope without so much as bumping an edge of the instrument? NASA thinks it may take the hands of a surgeon. So Story Musgrave, a surgeon by training and payload commander on STS-61 -- the first Hubble telescope servicing mission -- has been practicing, along with four other crew members, in a 12-meter-deep (40-foot-deep) water tank at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. The tank simulates the weightlessness of space. "Working in the water tank, and in the Weightless Environment Training Facility at Johnson Space Center, we are learning things like reach and visibility," Musgrave told members of the press at a recent Hubble Space Telescope News Writers Workshop in Baltimore. "We are learning the right kinds of positions we will use in the work sites on orbit, how to work in spacesuits and how to restrain objects in zero G." Musgrave and his colleagues were halfway through a three-week water training session at Marshall Space Flight Center when he took time out to give the press an astronaut's perspective on the upcoming December 1993 Hubble Space Telescope servicing mission via remote satellite link from Huntsville. The 57-year-old veteran of four space flights, who had recently suffered frostbite on several fingertips during a training session, didn't flinch when the inevitable question -- would the crew be able to fix everything -- came up. "It's a bunch of hard work, but I think we're going to get the whole thing done," he declared enthusiastically. "People should remember that during the lunar program, we were working on the moon eight hours a day, three days in a row," he said. "During this mission, we will be working (out in space) six hours every other day." The Space Shuttle Endeavour is scheduled to rendezvous with and capture the Hubble Space Telescope during STS-61, tentatively set for launch at 4:30 a.m. Eastern Standard Time on Dec. 2. Astronauts will retrieve the 13.1-meter-long (43-foot-long) orbiting telescope on the third day of the mission. Once the telescope has been captured by the shuttle's 15-meter (50-foot) mechanical arm, it will be secured upright in the cargo bay for servicing. One-hundred-and-seventy-one tools, ranging from simple tote bags to sophisticated, battery-operated power tools, have been prepared to assist the astronauts in the repair mission. Working in pairs on alternating days, four of the seven crew members -- Musgrave and mission specialists Jeffery Hoffman, Thomas Akers and Kathryn Thornton -- will be spacewalking a record five days of the mission and, perhaps, as many as seven days. Each spacewalk will last from five to eight hours, depending on how long the oxygen supplies last. Three priorities on STS-61 have been identified as crucial to the success of the mission: replacing the telescope's two 12-meter (39-foot) solar panels; replacing the Wide-Field/Planetary Camera; and installing the Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement, known as COSTAR. Musgrave said the crew has been working with a full-scale training version of the camera to learn how to delicately remove the cover of the pickoff mirror, which points out from the tip of the camera, before the instrument is guided like a giant drawer into the side of the telescope. "You are about this far away from the mirror," he said, extending his arm about 30 centimeters (12 inches) in front of his face, "and you've got the optics of an incredibly important instrument, probably one of the most important instruments ever flown. It has to be protected, it cannot be touched at all, and you have to give it the most tender loving care of all until it is inserted into the telescope." The astronauts have learned from water training that the Wide-Field/Planetary Camera will have to be handed off to one astronaut, who will be holding onto the side of the telescope from his or her partner, who will be standing on the shuttle's robot arm. "We discovered that the person on the arm will not have the visibility to slide the camera into the side of the telescope," Musgrave said. "Keep in mind that we are wearing big helmets and visors that limit our sight, how much we can turn our heads and where we can put our eyeballs." Two extra days have been built into the 11-day mission to give the astronauts a day off and to allow for contingencies -- anything that might go awry or require research from the ground. "If we find that we're running behind in some task or running ahead of schedule, we will be able to move on to other tasks," Musgrave said. "We are being trained to accommodate surprises, changes in the flight plan, things that may interrupt or delay our activities." The crew will begin its daily spacewalks on the day following telescope capture, Dec. 5, said Milt Heflin, flight director for the first servicing mission. The first extravehicular activity (EVA) will involve replacing three backup gyros that are used to point and track the telescope and preparing the solar arrays for deployment, Heflin said. The second EVA will be devoted to replacing the solar arrays, followed on the next EVA day by replacement of the Wide-Field/Planetary Camera. The fourth EVA will be used to remove the 220-kilogram (487-pound), telephone booth-sized High Speed Photometer and replace it with the 272-kilogram (600-pound) COSTAR. All of the science instruments will be returned to Earth to determine how well they weathered the space environment. NASA is considering a follow-up mission nine to 12 months after STS-61 if all of the repairs are not completed. Although Musgrave said he'd "jump at it" to be one of the returning astronauts, he also voiced his confidence that the STS-61 crew would be able to accomplish its mission regardless of the surprises or setbacks. "In my 26 years with NASA, I have never seen such a detailed, energetic approach to trying to identify all of the surprises, to look ahead to all of the possibilities, all of the contingencies that might happen during the mission," he said. "But this is not your local garage ... this is spaceflight, this is one of the most ambitious things we have ever attempted. It's a drama, and it's going to have to be played out." ### ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | When given a choice between /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | two exciting things, choose |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | the one you haven't tried. ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 995 ------------------------------