Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_9/V16NO995.TXT

Text File | 1993-08-13 | 36KB | 841 lines

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
    "[e-mail]", and (un)subscription requests of the form
    "Subscribe Space <your name>" to one of these addresses: listserv@uga
    (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle
    (THENET), or [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 19:34:00 BST
From: [e-mail]
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                    [e-mail]
the Politically Correct     Greybook:  [e-mail]
=======================================================================

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 18:42:51 GMT
From: Luke Plaizier <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X launch
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] 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
                                   [e-mail]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

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

Date: 6 Aug 1993 17:23:07 GMT
From: Keith Nicewarner <[e-mail]>
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: [e-mail]
CII 8015               |    Telephone: [phone]
Troy, NY 12180-3590           |          Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 20:02:45 BST
From: [e-mail]
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                    [e-mail]
the Politically Correct     Greybook:  [e-mail]
=======================================================================

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

Date: 6 Aug 1993 17:53 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (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         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     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 <[e-mail]>
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
[phone], 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: [phone]
     FAX: [phone]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
marsapp.gif

PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE [phone]

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         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     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 <[e-mail]>
Subject: NASA's planned project management changes
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <23s4m9$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] 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<sp>

>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.

  -- >                  [e-mail]                        < --

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 16:53:56 GMT
From: "[u]Phillip Potts" <[e-mail]>
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                                       /
     /     [e-mail]                                                                      /
    /                                                                                                       /
   /              LWMA SII 1898 - 1998                                                      /
  /----------------------------------------------------/

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

Date: 6 Aug 93 14:54:05 GMT
From: "R.E. Wiersbe" <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Inquisition (The Usenet edition)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mary Shafer) writes:
>On Fri, 6 Aug 1993 02:01:53 GMT, [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) said:
>
>Phil> [e-mail] (Ward Paul) writes:
>
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (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    [e-mail]

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

Date: 6 Aug 93 16:14:11 GMT
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
Subject: The magic of pi
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (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 <[e-mail]>
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
                                   [e-mail]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

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

Date: 6 Aug 93 16:27:41 GMT
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
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 <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (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         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     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
------------------------------