Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V12_5/V12_561.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-06-28 | 18KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/UbF5N8i00VcJMBFk5O>;
          Fri, 16 Nov 1990 16:12:42 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 1990 16:12:05 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #561

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 12 : Issue 561

Today's Topics:
              Ulysses Update - 11/13/90
              Galileo Update - 11/14/90
               Magellan photos
        request orbitary mechanics/ tracking programs
             Re: LNLL Inflatable Stations
            Re: sci.space or talk.origins?
            Re: Magellan Update - 11/12/90
              Magellan Update - 11/14/90
 Re: sci.space or talk.origins? (was Re: Creationists and Moon Dust)
               Re: New Shuttle Engines

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  [e-mail].  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription notices,
  should be sent to [e-mail], or, if urgent, to
             [e-mail]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 14 Nov 90 21:59:53 GMT
From: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Ulysses Update - 11/13/90


                     ULYSSES MISSION STATUS
                        November 13, 1990

     Today, the Ulysses spacecraft is about 22 million miles from
Earth, traveling at a heliocentric velocity of about 86,000 miles per
hour.  Switch-ons of science instruments will conclude this
week as the last of the nine experiments onboard the Ulysses
spacecraft are activated.

     On Wednesday, November 14, the Heliospheric Instrument
for Spectra, Composition and Anisotropy at Low Energies (HISCALE)
will be turned on.  On Friday and Saturday, November 16-17,
various segments of the final science experiment, the Solar-Wind
Plasma instrument, will be activated.  Both of these instruments
study ions in the solar wind streaming away from the Sun.

     In other spacecraft activities, today a pair of
maneuvers were being performed with the craft's thrusters which
will point the large dish of Ulysses's high-gain antenna more
closely at Earth.  Also today, the X-band radio transmitter has
been turned on.  Tentatively the spacecraft on November 15 will
begin transmitting its data to Earth with the X-band transmitter
through the high-gain antenna; until now it has sent radio
telemetry with its S-band transmitter.  X band is at a higher
frequency and permits data to be sent at faster rates.

     Ground controllers have continued to study a slight
wobble which has been noticed in the spinning spacecraft since
the deployment of its axial boom nine days ago.  The motion --
just under 1/2 degree from side to side -- does not affect
spacecraft operations or radio communication.  The mission team
nonetheless was considering possible corrective action.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

------------------------------

Date: 14 Nov 90 16:32:50 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Galileo Update - 11/14/90


                          GALILEO STATUS REPORT
                            November 14, 1990

     Yesterday, the Galileo spacecraft successfully executed the TCM-7
(Trajectory Course Maneuver 7) with a slight overburn imparting a delta
velocity of about 1.26 m/sec.  The thruster burns were completed in two
segments, with the first segment occuring while being tracked by the
Australia 70 meter station, and the second segment with the Spain 70
meter station.

     Today, the PPR (Photopolarimiter Radiometer) science instrument will be
powered on.  Tomorrow, two delta DOR (Differential One-way Ranging) navigation
activities are scheduled using the 70 meter antennas pairs at
Goldstone/Australia and Goldstone/Spain.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Nov 90 08:56:35 EST
From: "S. K. Whiteman" <@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU:[e-mail]>
Subject: Magellan photos

FYI:
     Scientific American, in their December 1990 issue, has published
6 Magellan pictures, 1 altimetry image, and 1 three-dimensional image.

------------------------------

Date: 14 Nov 90 20:17:46 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!mailer.cc.fsu.edu!prism!dali.gatech.edu![e-mail]  (Mike Gourlay)
Subject: request orbitary mechanics/ tracking programs

Hello,

    Over the past year or two, I've seen postings about various shuttle and/or
satellite tracking  programs.  I've kept plenty of those messages, but
most  of my info is
out of date;  When I went to anonymous ftp from those sites,  either the
site was no
longer anon ftp, had moved its files to another archive site, or
something.

    I would like to compile a list of programs which track the trajectory
of a
satellite, rocket,  space station, or the shuttle.  After I compile the
list, I'll post it to here.
Please send me whatever info you have about any such programs.  Give me
info like
a description of the program, its name, author, where I can get it,
sites where such programs live and thrive, or whatever you know.  Also,
if you know what language
it's in (if the source is available), what machines the code will run
on, whether it
requires graphics, or it just gives numbers, or both.  I am particularly
interested in programs which take into account the oblateness of the
earth, friction from debris in low orbits, or related articles in
journals about simulations taking those higher order approximations into
effect.

    Thanks in advance.

    Please send your replies to:
         [e-mail],
        [e-mail],
        [e-mail],
        [e-mail],
        ...uunet!gatech.edu!penguin!mike
        ...uunet!gatech.edu!prism!gt5431b

    or whichever address your mailer most easily recognizes.

------------------------------

Date: 15 Nov 90 02:37:56 GMT
From: ubc-cs!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!IRO.UMontreal.CA!matrox!uvm-gen!kira![e-mail]  (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: LNLL Inflatable Stations


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Charles Radley) writes:
>
>13140
>Article 13140 (72 more) in sci.space:
>
>>Since LLNL is a large lightweight structure [...]

Obviously some strange usage of the word "lightweight" that I wasn't
previously aware of...

[Sorry, I couldn't resist.]

-GAWollman

------------------------------

Date: 14 Nov 90 20:26:31 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!stdb.jhuapl.edu![e-mail]  (Jim Meritt)
Subject: Re: sci.space or talk.origins?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
}In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes...
}
}[a bunch of stuff that belongs in e-mail...and I would have responded
}there if my mailer could reach the original poster...]
}
}>I've got to ask what a creationist with this unscientific attitude is doing
}>in a sci group or for that matter receiving my tax dollars at a public
}>scientific institution.
}
}Doing my job.  Which is all you should be concerned with.

The primary problem (as that with SciAmer) is not just what the
individual may or may not do, but what organizations will do with
a representatives holding the stated opinions.  Creationist's
organizations have a tendency to say that their views are validated
solely due to the position of one of their representatives.
An irrelevant statement, but it gets made anyway.  A PR nightmare
for SciAmer...


Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily
represent those opinions of this or any other organization.  The facts,
however, simply are and do not "belong" to anyone.
                  [e-mail]  - or - meritt%aplvm.BITNET

------------------------------

Date: 14 Nov 90 16:16:07 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu![e-mail]  (Perry G Ramsey)
Subject: Re: Magellan Update - 11/12/90

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:
> >                         MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT
> >                           November 12, 1990
> >
> >      The Magellan spacecraft performance is nominal.   The spacecraft
> > successfully accepted commands on Friday, November 9, resuming mapping on
> > orbit 787 at 4:07 am PST on Saturday, November 10.  One STARCAL (star
> > calibration) occurs every orbit and 1 DESAT (desaturation of the reaction
> > wheels) every 4th orbit.  16 STARCALS and 4 DESATS have been done since
> > mapping resumed.
> >
> >      A sequence patch to disable solar array control during mapping has
> > prevented the spacecraft vibration from recurring.  Track 1 of tape recorder B
> > was successfully played back on November 9.  It contains the results of
> > STARCALS performed during Superior Conjunction.
> >       ___    _____     ___
> >      /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
> >      | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
> >   ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
> >  /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
> >  |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |
> What's the JPL/NASA going to do with the Magellan probe when it's done mapping
> Venus?
>
> Kevin
There are a lot of things Magellan can do after the first mapping pass

1)  Finish mapping.  The conjunction gap leaves a vertical hole in the map.
Another Venus year will be needed to fill that in.

2)  Map it again.  Getting views from two locations gives stereo views, which
is useful in determining topography.

3)  Map the south pole.  It is not currently being mapped.

4)  Work on gravity anomalies.  They can tell a lot about the density
distribution of the planet by tracking the spacecraft while it orbits.
This works best when the spacecraft is close to the planet,
but pointing the high gain antenna at the earth.  The trouble is that
for mapping, you want the antenna pointing toward Venus at closest approach.
If someday it is decided that there is enough mapping data,
(or perhaps the SAR dies but the transmitter continues)
this mode could be selected.

That's just what I know.  Maybe there's more.


Perry G. Ramsey           Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
[e-mail]   Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN USA
[e-mail]    Congress thinks that if you have nine women pregnant
              simultaneously, you can get one baby in one month.

--
Perry G. Ramsey           Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
[e-mail]   Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN USA
[e-mail]    Congress thinks that if you have nine women pregnant
              simultaneously, you can get one baby in one month.

------------------------------

Date: 14 Nov 90 22:04:42 GMT
From: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Magellan Update - 11/14/90


                      MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT
                        November 14, 1990

     The Magellan spacecraft is now in its 31st mapping orbit since radar
mapping was resumed last Saturday, November 10.  All systems are nominal
and six of the seven star calibrations in the past 24 hours were fully
successful.

     Yesterday, the software patch to control the solar panel positions with
ephemeris tables was sent to the spacecraft.

     Further analysis of radar data from tape recorder track A4 now indicates
that it does show the progressive degradation that was seen on track 2.
Although the error rate causes only moderate image degradation, data
management stategies to avoid these tracks are now being studied.

     Other analyses disclosed that the SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) sampling
window is not being accurately centered on the part of the signal echo
corresponding the the center of the SAR antenna beam.  This problem may be
caused by an error in the estimated time of periapsis or some other timing
error.  The problem may cause minor to moderate image quality degradation,
depending on whether the SAR processor can compensate for the effective
pointing error.  The problem is being investigated.

     Two bursts of radar data in each of several consecutive orbits have
exhibited abnormal amplitude characteristics.  This problem is considered
minor because it affects less than 0.1% of the data from each orbit.  This
anomaly was confirmed by the occurance of two bright patches in the test
image swaths of orbit #796.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

------------------------------

Date: 14 Nov 90 19:56:15 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]  (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: sci.space or talk.origins? (was Re: Creationists and Moon Dust)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Larry Wall) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>:
>: In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>: >This is coming from the point of view of a "creationist" who doesn't
>: >care how old the world is, or the mechanism by which it was made: only
>: >who started the mechanism.  Some folks do believe that.  Be careful not
>: >to assume all folks are the same.  And if you want to flame me, kindly
>: >do it e-mail.  The flames don't belong here either.
>:
>: I've got to ask what a creationist with this unscientific attitude is doing
>: in a sci group or for that matter receiving my tax dollars at a public
>: scientific institution. Don't you belong in a Monastary sir? I've
>: got no quarrel with someone who might say God created the big bang, now
>: let's work out the science from there. But someone who says God created
>: the Universe and then declares that that is all that counts and disavows any
>: interest in working out the science can't claim to be a scientist or be
>: trusted to do scientific work.
>
>Hmmm...
>
>Could it perhaps be that you've misread Gary's article?  I read the "doesn't

I think you mean lvron's article.

>care" as an assertion of open-mindedness on the means, not lack of interest.
>As such, there is nothing there inconsistent with a scientific attitude, apart
>from any emotional baggage you wish to attach to the word "creationist",
>which, after all, he did put into quotes to tell you it wasn't being used in
>the ordinary sense.
>
>While we're on the subject of being in touch with reality, you shouldn't
>assume that everyone who works at a scientific institution is a scientist,
>either.  (I think there are more secretaries than scientists at JPL.  Which
>is not to say that the rest of us aren't keenly interested in science...)
>Using such an assumption as the basis of a quasi-diatribe is not in the
>best interests of net harmony.

Ok, I probably over-reacted to what may have been merely an unclear choice
of words on the original posters part. Sorry net.

Gary

------------------------------

Date: 14 Nov 90 06:27:18 GMT
From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: New Shuttle Engines

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fraering Philip) writes:
>HS>in an expendable launcher.  The Hughes/Boeing Jarvis proposal also used
>HS>expendable SSMEs, after they tried very hard to come up with a viable
>HS>scheme for reviving the F-1 and J-2 and couldn't make it work.  The SSME
>HS>is just too expensive to be a good expendable engine, though.
>
>I was under the impression that the reason Jarvis was not built,
>in either 'incarnation,' was because of political reasons...

Well, sort of.  The fundamental problem was the lack of customers.
Hughes/Boeing was perfectly happy to foot the development bill, given
enough "launch customers" [pun unintentional] to justify it.  But the
government wasn't interested, in the end.

A contributing factor, probably, was excessive reliance on shuttle
technology that was under the political control of people who weren't
keen on the idea.  Even the original F-1/J-2 concept used tankage based
on the shuttle ET.
--
"I don't *want* to be normal!"         | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
"Not to worry."                        |  [e-mail]   utzoo!henry

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V12 #561
*******************