Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from corsica.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Sun, 30 Jul 89 05:18:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sun, 30 Jul 89 05:18:03 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #569 SPACE Digest Volume 9 : Issue 569 Today's Topics: Science observations selected for NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope (Forwarded) Re: Apollo 8, 9, and 10 Re: Apollo-11 lunar experiment still useful after 20 years (Forwarded) Re: Apollo 8, 9, and 10 Re: Kuiper Airborne Observatory Re: Apollo 8, 9, and 10 and Apollo books Re: Apollo Ascent Modules Re: Apollo Ascent Modules ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 19 Jul 89 17:50:22 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Science observations selected for NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope (Forwarded) Paula Clegget-Haleim Headquarters, Washington, D.C. July 19, 1989 Ray Villard Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, Md. RELEASE: 89-121 SCIENCE OBSERVATIONS SELECTED FOR NASA/ESA HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE The Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, Md., has completed selection of the first science observation proposals from the astronomy community to be carried out using the NASA/European Space Agency (ESA) Hubble Space TelescopeMd The Hubble Space Telescope (HST), scheduled for launch in March 1990, is the first major international optical telescope to be permanently stationed in low-Earth orbit. Capable of viewing the universe with a tenfold greater resolution than ground based observatories, the HST has a tremendous potential for fundamental scientific breakthroughs in astronomy. Observing opportunities on the powerful space facility are open to the worldwide astronomical community. "It is exciting to see the many excellant proposals and to think of the scientific discoveries that will soon emerge when the Hubble Space Telescope uncovers the mysteries of fundamental scientific questions," says Neta Bahcall, Head of the institute's Science Programs Selection Office. The selected observations will make use of HST's unique capabilities to study a wide variety of astronomical objects, from nearby planets to the horizon of the visible universe. The observations should help to dramatically improve current understanding of the size, structure and evolution of the universe. Among the accepted proposals are plans to search for black holes in neighboring galaxies, to survey the dense cores of globular star clusters, to better see the most distant galaxies in the universe, to probe the mysterious core of the Milky Way galaxy and to search for neutron stars that may trigger bizarre gamma-ray bursts. The 162 proposals were accepted following an intensive scientific peer review of 556 proposals submitted by astronomers from 30 countries. Approximately 20 percent of the proposals were from member nations of the European Space Agency, a joint partner with NASA on the HST project. The HST is such a powerful, new resource for optical astronomy, that observing time was heavily oversubscribed. During the first 12-month observing cycle, 11,000 hours of observing time were requested, with only 1200 hours available. The average length of an accepted observation is 10 hours. "Unfortunately, because of the high oversubscription rate, many excellent proposals could not be accommodated," says Bahcall. "We expect that the available observing time will be somewhat larger in the second cycle, due to a higher anticipated HST observing efficiency and a lower fraction of time committed to guaranteed time observers (GTO)." When HST is launched, it will undergo a 7 month check-out and instrument calibration period. During that time some of the first science observations will be made by the GTOs. They are the astronomers on the six teams which developed HST instrumentation, as well those astronomers who contributed to the design of the 12-ton observatory. General observer proposals will begin 7 months after launch and most will be completed within a 12-month period, though a few key projects will be extended over 3 years. Slightly more than half of HST's observing time for the first year of operation will be available for general observers. The remainder of the observing time will be used by the GTO's. To utilize every moment of observing time and hence maximize efficiency, HST is "over-booked" with accepted general observer proposals by a ratio of 3:1. One hundred eight accepted proposals are high priority and represent 90 percent of HST observing time. The remaining 54 supplemental proposals essentially "fly standby." They will only be executed if appropriate scheduling opportunities arise. Sixty-two scientists including 10 from ESA member nations participated in the proposal review and selection process. The scientists were divided into six peer-review panels which covered sub-disciplines in astronomy such as solar system, stellar astrophysics, stellar populations, interstellar medium, galaxies and clusters, quasars and active galactic nuclei. Each proposal was judged primarily for scientific importance. Other selection criteria took into account such factors as the technical feasibility of the proposal and an observer's need for the unique capabilities of HST. The ranked lists of proposals assembled by the various panels were then reviewed by a cross-discipline Time Allocation Committee (TAC). Space Telescope Science Institute Director Riccardo Giacconi made the final selection based upon a review of the TAC's recommended list of proposals. The proposals now will go through a phase II process where the guest observers will specify the technical details of their observations. The proposals then will be checked for technical feasibility, such as availability of guide stars required to aim the telescope in space and other possible problems. At the conclusion of phase II this fall, a catalog of approved observations will be made available. The Space Telescope Science Institute is operated for NASA under a contract with the Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md., by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. The institute is located on the Johns Hopkins University campus in Baltimore, Md. ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 89 20:56:11 GMT From: ames.arc.nasa.gov!mike@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Mike Smithwick) Subject: Re: Apollo 8, 9, and 10 In article <4481acbf.b097@shadow.engin.umich.edu> tyg@caen.engin.umich.edu (Tom Galloway) writes: >In article <1989Jul19.005449.3163@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: <> There was some discussion about whether Apollo 10 was really needed; why <> get to within 10 miles of the lunar surface and then go home? But a lot <> of people felt that an all-up test, including a real lunar-orbit rendezvous, <> was a good idea before landing. What finally settled the matter was that <> Apollo 10's LM was overweight and could not have flown a complete landing <> mission. < tyg tyg@caen.engin.umich.edu Problem is, what would you have done once you reached the surface? Apollo 10 carried no proper EVA equipment, no scientific packages. All the crew could have done was to land, lookaround and leave (assuming they could have taken off). They probably had some emergency portable oxygen system in the case they had to perform an EVA in order to get back to the CM due to a docking malfunction. As I remember, Tom Stafford was himself asked if Apollo 10 should have been the landing, and he said no, the LM needed further testing. *** mike (still looking for a publisher) smithwick *** "Los Angeles : Where neon goes to die" [disclaimer : nope, I don't work for NASA, I take full blame for my ideas] ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 89 21:36:15 GMT From: cwjcc!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!csri.toronto.edu!wayne@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Wayne Hayes) Subject: Re: Apollo-11 lunar experiment still useful after 20 years (Forwarded) In article <28736@ames.arc.nasa.gov> yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) writes: > Once the laser beam hits a reflector, scientists at the >observatories use sensitive filtering and amplification equipment >to detect the return signal. The reflected light is too weak to >be seen with the human eye, but under good conditions, one photon >-- the fundamental particle of light -- will be received every >few seconds. Is this right? I would think that many more than that would get back. Besides, if you only got one back every few seconds, it would be useless for the accuracy of timing needed to calculate the moons distance with "unprecedented accuracy". -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Open the pod bay doors, HAL." "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that." Wayne Hayes INTERNET: wayne@csri.toronto.edu CompuServe: 72401,3525 ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 89 05:03:00 GMT From: mailrus!caen.engin.umich.edu!tyg@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Tom Galloway) Subject: Re: Apollo 8, 9, and 10 In article <1989Jul19.005449.3163@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: > There was some discussion about whether Apollo 10 was really needed; why > get to within 10 miles of the lunar surface and then go home? But a lot > of people felt that an all-up test, including a real lunar-orbit rendezvous, > was a good idea before landing. What finally settled the matter was that > Apollo 10's LM was overweight and could not have flown a complete landing > mission. The last was probably a good thing. I remember as a kid thinking that if I was on 10's flight, I would have gotten some printouts before leaving of what information would be needed to land and revendevous later, and gone ahead and landed. So what if I would've been court-martialed....Just imagine what the temptation would have been like if a landing and return had been possible. tyg tyg@caen.engin.umich.edu ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 89 12:49:31 GMT From: b.gp.cs.cmu.edu!Ralf.Brown%B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU@pt.cs.cmu.edu Subject: Re: Kuiper Airborne Observatory In article <150@cfa.HARVARD.EDU>, willner@cfa.HARVARD.EDU (Steve Willner) wrote: }Just a tiny correction. The KAO is entirely operated by NASA - no NSF }or other agency involvement whatever. The next-generation airborne }observatory (SOFIA - Stratospheric Observatory For Infrared Astronomy) }will be a joint project of NASA and the West German space agency. }(BMFT, I think, though darned if I know what the initials stand for.) ^^^^ I'm pretty sure it's "Bundesministerium fuer Forschung und Technologie" (Ministry of Research and Technology). -- UUCP: {ucbvax,harvard}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf -=-=-=-=- Voice: (412) 268-3053 (school) ARPA: ralf@cs.cmu.edu BIT: ralf%cs.cmu.edu@CMUCCVMA FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/46 FAX: available on request Disclaimer? I claimed something? PROGRAM n. A magic spell cast over a computer allowing it to turn one's input into error messages. tr.v. To engage in a pastime similar to banging one's head against a wall, but with fewer opportunies for reward. -- from a flyer advertising for _Inside_Turbo_Pascal_ ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 89 17:25:02 GMT From: asuvax!enuxha!kluksdah@handies.ucar.edu (Norman C. Kluksdahl) Subject: Re: Apollo 8, 9, and 10 and Apollo books In article <30095@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, bwood@janus.uucp (Blake Philip Wood) writes: > For a long time Apollo 12 was to have been the first moon landing, but > the successes of the earlier flights allowed NASA to move it up to > Apollo 11. Cunningham states that the smart money within NASA (and > there were bets made) was placed on Charles Conrad to do the first > moonwalk. As it turned out, Conrad made the third moonwalk on Apollo 12. > Also read "Carrying the Fire" by Mike Collins. According to Collins, the schedule was for Conrad to command Apollo 11. That was screwed up when Collins, then scheduled to fly on Apollo 8, was taken off the flight list because of a medical problem in his spinal column. His backup flew on 8, and the successive schedule was perturbed. As a result, Conrad was bumped back from commanding 11 to commanding 12. Also as a result, Collins was assigned to 11 after he recovered from surgery. Good book. In this time of nostalgia, "Carrying the Fire" is another good book to read. ********************************************************************** Norman Kluksdahl Arizona State University ..ncar!noao!asuvax!enuxha!kluksdah alternate: kluksdah@enuxc1.eas.asu.edu standard disclaimer implied ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 89 23:11:25 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@g.ms.uky.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Apollo Ascent Modules In article <1480@xn.LL.MIT.EDU> wjc@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Bill Chiarchiaro) writes: >I checked the NASA Satellite Situation Report, Vol. 28, No. 4, Dec. >31, 1988 for non-booster Apollo items still in orbit... Does it state the basis for assuming this hardware is still in orbit? I greatly doubt that it is possible to track the things in lunar orbit; that's difficult even in Clarke orbit unless there's a transponder aboard. >Glaringly absent, however, was any listing of the Apollo 13 LM. >According to one text I have, that LM was never staged (the ascent and >descent stages were kept together) and was jettisoned 18,000 km from >earth. Right. It went into the Pacific as the CM reentered. There wasn't any alternative, since the LM was needed to maneuver the CM into a proper reentry trajectory with the SM dead. -- $10 million equals 18 PM | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology (Pentagon-Minutes). -Tom Neff | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 89 16:40:05 GMT From: wjc@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Bill Chiarchiaro) Subject: Re: Apollo Ascent Modules I checked the NASA Satellite Situation Report, Vol. 28, No. 4, Dec. 31, 1988 for non-booster Apollo items still in orbit. Here's what I found: Int'l Desig. Catalog # Name Orbit Mission 1969 043C 3948 LM/DESCENT Selenocentric Apollo 10 1969 043D 3949 LM/ASCENT Heliocentric Apollo 10 1969 059C 4041 LUNAR MODULE Selenocentric Apollo 11 1971 063D 5377 SUBSATELLITE Selenocentric Apollo 15 1972 031C 6005 LUNAR MODULE Selenocentric Apollo 16 The LMs from Apollos 5 (unmanned, earth-orbit test of LM-1), 9, 12, 14, 15, and 17 were all listed as decayed (actually, only the ascent stages were mentioned for 12, 14, 15, and 17). Glaringly absent, however, was any listing of the Apollo 13 LM. According to one text I have, that LM was never staged (the ascent and descent stages were kept together) and was jettisoned 18,000 km from earth. Notes on Apollo 9 and Apollo 10: As has recently been stated, Apollo 10 was the mission that was essentially a lunar dry-run of the Apollo 11 landing. We must be careful, though, in saying that its LM "descended" to within some distance of the lunar surface. Early in the mission planning, an abort from powered descent was considered, but was passed up in favor of a mission that emulated a landing in every regard except for powered descent and subsequent takeoff from the lunar surface. With Young in the CSM (Charlie Brown), Cernan and Stafford in the LM (Snoopy) performed a DOI (descent orbit insertion). This orbit had a perilune of about 15 km above the mean lunar surface -- this was their closest approach to the surface. It was from such an orbit that later LMs began their powered descents. The ascent and descent staging occured, but I don't remember at which point. Also, I believe the descent engine as well as the ascent engine was used for orbital manuevers. Cernan and Stafford spent 8 hours in the LM. Later, upon ground command, the ascent stage expended all its fuel and was put into a heliocentric orbit. One of the other forgotten Apollo mission was 9 -- the earth-orbit test of the LM. Scott stayed with the CSM (Gumdrop) and McDivitt and Schweickart spent 6 hr 20 min in the LM (Spider). They achieved a maximum separation of 185 km and did perform ascent/descent staging. Bill Chiarchiaro N1CPK wjc@xn.ll.mit.edu ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V9 #569 *******************