Date: Wed, 5 May 93 07:06:04 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #529 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Wed, 5 May 93 Volume 16 : Issue 529 Today's Topics: ASTRONAUTS---What does weightlessness feel like? Communication satellite station Drag-free satellites HST Servicing Mission large accelerations revisited Magellan Update - 04/30/93 Mars Observer Update #2 - 04/30/93 Mars Observer Update #2 - 05/03/93 Teflon Development. The Mars Face. (I know, I know . . .) Transportation Question, REF: JSC Tours! Voyager funding (was Re: April Air and Space Articles.) Will NASA's Mars Observer Image the Fa Will NASA's Mars Observer Image the Face on Mars? (3 msgs) 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: Tue, 4 May 1993 17:09:30 GMT From: Mark Littlefield Subject: ASTRONAUTS---What does weightlessness feel like? Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro In article <1993Apr29.121501@is.morgan.com>, jlieb@is.morgan.com (Jerry Liebelson) writes: |> I understand the when one is in orbit, the inward force of gravity at |> one's center of mass is exactly balanced by the outward centrifugal |> force from the orbiting motion, resulting in weightlessness. |> |> I want to know what weightlessness actually FEELS like. For example, is |> there a constant sensation of falling? And what is the motion sickness |> that some astronauts occasionally experience? |> |> Please reply only if you are either a former or current astronaut, or |> someone who has had this discussion first-hand with an astronaut. |> Thanks! |> |> -- |> Jerry Liebelson |> jlieb@is.morgan.com |> 73477.2740@compuserve.com I am not an astronaut but I have had some experience in zero gravity. I have flown with an experiment on NASAs KC-135 parabolic aircraft (zero gravity laboratory). There is no real sensation associated with weightlessness itself, as far as I could tell. Any sensations were overwealmed by the transition from 2 G to 0 G. This is VERY disconcerting. You must be careful not to move your head during this stage because it tends to trigger vertigo (I found out the hard way, dispite warnings about it). This feeling is somewhat like the sensation felt at the top of a roller-coaster, but about an order of magnitude stronger. If you can avoid the vertigo, the actual 0 G portion is quite comfortable. The only real problems I had were controlling my position. Most of the time I had at least one hand occupied holding on to something and trying to control my position. mark -- ===================================================================== Mark L. Littlefield Intelligent Systems Department internet: mll@aio.jsc.nasa.gov USsnail: Lockheed Engineering and Sciences 2400 Nasa Rd 1 / MC C-19 Houston, TX 77058-3711 ==================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 1993 16:18 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Communication satellite station Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993May3.214634.24899@noao.edu>, elowitz@noao.edu (Mark Elowitz) writes... >Does anyone know if NASA has explored the possibility of placing >a communication relay satellite stations in highly elliptical >orbits in the Jovian and Saturnian systems. This would provide >a communication platform for future planetary probes sent to these >planets. The orbiting communication relay satellite station >could be equiped with very large antennas, allowing high bit >rates to transmitted back to earth from future planetary probes. >It was also eliminate the need for large bulky antennas to be >placed on the probes. The planetary probe would utilize the >communication relay satellite once it has been placed into >its proper orbital tour. The idea of an orbiting relay satellite is not really feasible unless you send several spacecraft within a small time frame. You also have to consider radiation environment, particularly around Jupiter, which will tend to shorten the life span of a spacecraft. Galileo has been radiation hardened and will orbit Jupiter for two years, but is still expected to succumb to the radiation belts before running out of propellant. A orbiting relay satellite is being considered for the MESUR mission to send back the data at a higher rate from the 16 Mars landers. >Also, has anyone explored the possibility of transmitting >telemetry back to earth via laser or are the power constraints >too large. Laser communications is definitely being looked into. Galileo performed some laser tests last December during the Earth flyby. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Once a year, go someplace /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you've never been before. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 93 07:34:27 PST From: thomsonal@cpva.saic.com Subject: Drag-free satellites Newsgroups: sci.space isaackuo@pepto-bismol.berkeley.edu (Isaac Kuo), U.C. Berkeley Math. Department. says: >I can see how the Earth may be lumpy in the sense of it's oblateness, but that >does not "rotate", in the sense that it does not result in a changing >gravitational field. I can see how the lunar tides add a slight oblateness >off axis, but of course it rotates with the moon rather than with the Earth's >rotation, and is the way in which Earth's rotational energy is transferred >(slowly) to energy in the moon's orbit. The field is "generated" by mass, which is not distributed symmetrically wrt the axis of the Earth's rotation. As the mass is carried around by the Earth's rotation, the field goes with it, and so varies wrt a point in inertial space. As for the question of how a satellite can exchange energy with a rotating, lumpy gravitational field, here is a toy problem you can run through your favorite numerical integrator to get some physical insight into what's going on. Imagine a rotating planet with a spherically symmetrical distribution of mass, plus one point mass on the equator (a mountain). Place a satellite in low circular orbit over the equator and with its direction of revolution in the same direction as the direction of rotation of the planet. At time T0 let the satellite be 180 degrees away from the equatorial point mass. Plot out the total energy of the satellite over several hundred orbits. Increment the initial altitude of the orbit and repeat many times. Make a 3-axis plot of energy, time after T0, and initial altitude. >I am therefore curious: What lumpiness to the Earth's gravitational field >rotates along with Earth? For example, over what longitude is the >field the strongest? By how much is this greater than the weakest longitude? There is, to coin a phrase, a vast literature on the topic of the figure of the Earth and the details of its gravitational field. This is not something I'm professionally involved in, so I would suggest a visit to your local geophysikers to get a recommended reading list. The references below are just random items grabbed off my NASA bibliographic CD- ROM. *********************************************************************** KEY: N92-22852 # SRC: Bologna Univ. (Italy). UTL: Earth physics: State-of-the-art and main issues AUT: (AA)ZERBINI, S. PRM: In ESA, Report of the Earth Observation User Consultation Meeting p 220-225 PDT: 91/10/00 LNG: ENGLISH ABS: The state of the art and main issues concerning Earth physics are discussed. Many geophysical processes result from the interaction of the various parts of the Earth system, the solid Earth, the atmosphere, the oceans, the liquid core and the solid inner core which exchange energy and angular momentum among themselves. Study of these phenomena on a global or on a local scale provides substantial insight into the properties of the Earth itself. The phenomena associated with the geoid are the rotation about its axis of spin (or its time derivative), the polar motion (mutation and precession), tides, temporal variations in its mass distribution, and its geopotential. These are caused by the deformation of the solid Earth and by the exchanges of angular momentum both between the solid and fluid parts with extraterrestrial bodies. Space geodesy will contribute in a substantial way to understanding of the long term dynamics of the Earth, such as the relative motions between the major tectonic plates, the deformation in active tectonic zones and stress accumulation and release on large faults. The possible contribution of space techniques to research in this field is discussed and recommendations for spaceborne instrumentation are given. KEY: N90-20523*# SRC: Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN. CSS: Dept. of Physics. UTL: Modeling of the Earth's gravity field using the New Global Earth Model (NEWGEM) AUT: (AA)KIM, YEONG E. (AB)BRASWELL, W. DANNY PAA: (AB)(Nichols Research Corp., Huntsville, AL.) PRM: In Ohio State Univ., Progress in the Determination of the Earth's Gravity Field p 39-42 PDT: 89/06/00 ABS: Traditionally, the global gravity field was described by representations based on the spherical harmonics (SH) expansion of the geopotential. The SH expansion coefficients were determined by fitting the Earth's gravity data as measured by many different methods including the use of artificial satellites. As gravity data have accumulated with increasingly better accuracies, more of the higher order SH expansion coefficients were determined. The SH representation is useful for describing the gravity field exterior to the Earth but is theoretically invalid on the Earth's surface and in the Earth's interior. A new global Earth model (NEWGEM) (KIM, 1987 and 1988a) was recently proposed to provide a unified description of the Earth's gravity field inside, on, and outside the Earth's surface using the Earth's mass density profile as deduced from seismic studies, elevation and bathymetric information, and local and global gravity data. Using NEWGEM, it is possible to determine the constraints on the mass distribution of the Earth imposed by gravity, topography, and seismic data. NEWGEM is useful in investigating a variety of geophysical phenomena. It is currently being utilized to develop a geophysical interpretation of Kaula's rule. The zeroth order NEWGEM is being used to numerically integrate spherical harmonic expansion coefficients and simultaneously determine the contribution of each layer in the model to a given coefficient. The numerically determined SH expansion coefficients are also being used to test the validity of SH expansions at the surface of the Earth by comparing the resulting SH expansion gravity model with exact calculations of the gravity at the Earth's surface. ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 1993 17:54:03 GMT From: grungy Subject: HST Servicing Mission Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993May2.164716.1@stsci.edu>, zellner@stsci.edu wrote: >[things deleted] > I understand that the EVA suits are one of the hardest things to > keep clean. On the HST deploy mission, we were "extra" careful about cleaning the SSAs (Space Suit Assemblies) before we shipped them. We then double-bagged the components in clean-room-level (100,000) anti-stat plastic, and the bagged items went in the shipping containers. The shipping containers are opened in the "white room" at the pad the components are hand carried through the main hatch into the crew compartment. Techs then hang the EMUs (Extravehicular Mobility Units) in the airlock. Other pesky details: our "clean room" at Boeing Aerospace is really only a "controlled work area", and even that description is pretty much a joke. There's a substantial amount of dust in that room, what with bored technicians making desultory attempts at wiping surfaces and vacuuming the floors. Most did only enough to get QA to certify the room for that day - and QA's level of concern varied with their mood. (It's a pretty safe bet that no one has serviced the vacuum cleaners since I left two years ago, other than replacing the HEPA filter - and I had to force them to schedule that.). The white room at the pad didn't look as clean as our "clean room". There were studies done before the deploy mission to see how much particulate matter the suits *generated*. The specific results never got back to us in the lab, but we were under the impression that it wasn't a problem. bcnu - John Gladu - former EVA suit tech Systems Support Center -- Baylor College of Medicine INTERNET: jgladu@bcm.tmc.edu | VOICE: (713)798-7370 US MAIL: One Baylor Plaza, Houston, Texas 77030 .opinions expressed are just that.obviously. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 May 1993 17:20:29 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: large accelerations revisited Newsgroups: sci.space In henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article wohlmuth@cehpx10 (Walter Wohlmuth) writes: >>Why can't an aircraft be designed so that the pilot can always be >>maintained in a upright position, perpendicular to the plane of >>acceleration? ... >Actually, for high accelerations you want the pilot perpendicular to >the acceleration vector. (This may be what Walter meant.) >It's not impossible -- there has been work with things like auto-reclining >seats that might be considered a first approximation -- but it creates >problems, notably restricting the pilot's view. (The nifty display >technologies that Walter mentions are nowhere near equalling the human >eye for practical combat flying.) Not to mention making the helmet heavier. If these things were *that* good, the thing to do would be to leave the pilot on the ground in a simulator and let him/her fly via remote control, thereby removing the human limitations entirely (communications security, reliability, and bandwidth are all probably not good enough for this, even if the sensors were (which they aren't). -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 1993 15:52 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Magellan Update - 04/30/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary Forwarded from Doug Griffith, Magellan Project Manager MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT April 30, 1993 1. The Magellan spacecraft continues to operate normally, gathering gravity data to plot the density variations of Venus in the mid-latitudes. 2. Gyro A1 began to show increase in motor current and bias error last weekend. On Monday, gyro B1 was powered up, and after a day of verifying its performance, a gyro swap was commanded. P.S. Sunday, 5/2/93, noon update: Due to additional increases in Gyro A1 motor currents over the weekend, personnel were called in to turn Gyro A1 off at 10:30 A.M. PDT on Sunday, 5/2/93. Magellan continues to operate nominally on the minimum required two gyros, that now being the A2 and B1 pair. However, problems have now been experienced with the other redundant gyros, the A1 and B2 pair. 3. A three-day interteam operations simulation of aerobraking was conducted this week. It successfully demonstrated the readiness of the Magellan Flight Team for the Transition Experiment which will start May 25th. 4. Yesterday an aerobraking atmospheric test was successfully conducted in which the spacecraft is maneuvered to the attitude for the drag pass during the Transition Experiment. 5. At the NASA Award Ceremony on Friday, April 30, several present and former Magellan team members were honored: Phil Allin, Nick Climes, Anne-Marie Krause, Steve Ogle, Jon Osoro, Gene Reiz, Ellen Stofan, Linda (Granata) Welz; from Hughes, Bob Mullen, Howard Nussbaum; from Martin Marietta: Owen Short, Kenny Starnes. 6. A second aerobraking atmospheric test will be conducted Monday, May 3. 7. On Tuesday, May 4, Magellan will celebrate its 4th operational year since launch. 8. On Thursday, May 6, Magellan will celebrate its 1000th day of Venus orbital operations. At 9:33 AM PDT (the time of Venus Orbit Insertion), Magellan will have completed 7374.378 orbits. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Once a year, go someplace /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you've never been before. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 May 1993 16:10:52 GMT From: Eric H Seale Subject: Mars Observer Update #2 - 04/30/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > MARS OBSERVER MISSION STATUS > April 30, 1993 > The Mars Observer spacecraft switched to an automatic fault >protection mode, called "contingency mode," at approximately 1:30 >a.m. Pacific Daylight Time on Thursday, April 29.... >Preliminary indications suggest that the spacecraft lost inertial >reference to the sun, which triggered the fault protection mode. > The incident, which last occurred on April 9, 1993, is >understood and not considered serious. No hardware problems were >involved and the spacecraft performed perfectly in switching to >contingency mode. Any indications yet as to how/why the spacecraft lost the sun? Eric Seale seale@pogo.den.mmc.com ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 1993 16:19 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Mars Observer Update #2 - 05/03/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary Forwarded from: PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE JET PROPULSION LABORATORY CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011 MARS OBSERVER MISSION STATUS May 3, 1993 The Mars Observer spacecraft was returned to normal cruise mode at 3:15 p.m. Friday, April 30, 1993, after spending about 38 hours in a fault protection mode known as "contingency mode." In contingency mode, the spacecraft automatically switches from the high-gain to the low-gain antenna and repositions itself to a more favorable orientation toward the sun. No hardware problems were involved in the incident and the spacecraft performed perfectly in switching to contingency mode. JPL's flight engineering team will continue to study the problem until an adequate software fix can be designed and uplinked. Today Mars Observer is about 21 million kilometers (13 million miles) from Mars and about 209 million kilometers (130 million miles) from Earth. The spacecraft is traveling at a velocity of about 7,200 kilometers per hour (4,500 miles per hour) with respect to Mars. ##### ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Once a year, go someplace /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you've never been before. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 May 1993 16:44:56 GMT From: "todd d. colvard" Subject: Teflon Development. Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro,sci.materials In article <1993Apr30.070155.119676@zeus.calpoly.edu>, jgreen@trumpet.calpoly.edu (James Thomas Green) writes: >hausner@qucis.queensu.ca (Alejo Hausner) Pontificated: >> >>Sorry to split hairs, but I just read in "The making of the atomic >>bomb"(*) that teflon was developed during world war 2. A sealant was >>needed for the tubing in which uranium hexafluoride passed as it was >>gradually enriched by difussion. UF6 is very corrosive, and some very >>inert yet flexible material was needed for the seals. >> >To split a split hair, I believe that teflon (-CF4- monomer) was >"discovered" by accident when someone I don't remember >found what he thought was a liquid (or gas?) had turned to a >solid... > >It just happend to fit the bill for the above use... > >I'm crossposting to sci.materials so perhaps someone in the know >might elaborate... > > >/~~~(-: James T. Green :-)~~~~(-: jgreen@oboe.calpoly.edu :-)~~~\ >| "I know you believe you understand what it is that you | >| think I said. But I am not sure that you realize that | >| what I said is not what I meant." | > Teflon? Did somebody ask something about Teflon? We know a little bit about that stuff around here. What was the origional question? If I can't answer it (likely, since I'm a computer guy; not a fluoropolymer guy), I can easily find someone who can. The above excerpts are more or less correct: Lining for the pipes at the Oak Ridge UF6 diffusion facility was the first commercial application of Teflon. It was discovered by something of an accident. Dr. Plunket was working on CFCs. A technician by the name of Jack Rebok cut open a "clogged" TFE cylinder, found the stuff, and noticed that no solvent would touch it. cheers, **************************************************************** Todd D. Colvard | colvard@esvax.dnet.dupont.com | Sure, I speak for Dupont. [NOT!] (302) 695-4846 | **************************************************************** If we knew what we were doing.......... it wouldn't be research! ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 1993 15:57:45 GMT From: William F Brown Subject: The Mars Face. (I know, I know . . .) Newsgroups: sci.space (learing throat noise) Ladies and Gentlemen, Hopefully of science. Did you ever stop to think that that "pile of dirt" has some very unique erosion history to it? I saw two features on it (and a lot of surounding structures) that I would really like to find out the cause of. There are two lines, not at right angles, but close, that are strait to within one or two pixels (43 meters per pixel) along a distance of about 1.8 Km. Also, there are some very flat areas up a ways on these structures. They kind of remind me of mesas out west, but mesas dont have mile long strait lines, and they arent multi-level! I what to know how these babies were formed! Sensational stuff or not, I want the real science done. Bill (wfbrown@wpi.wpi.edu) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 May 1993 15:01:32 GMT From: Mary Shafer Subject: Transportation Question, REF: JSC Tours! Newsgroups: sci.space On Tue, 4 May 1993 13:08:50 GMT, bruce@idsssd.UUCP (Bruce T. Harvey) said: Bruce> In article <1993May4.035819.26243@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, Bruce> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes: > btw- I hate to have to ask this, but does anyone know if the JSC > buildings are wheelchair accessable? Bruce> My wife and I were just there in April. Although I am still Bruce> using the old-fashioned low-tech locomotion (bipedal) and don't Bruce> see the world from your point of view, I do recall wheel chair Bruce> access to all the buildings both at the 'display' center Bruce> (movies, exhibits, lunchroom) and at JSC across the way. Bruce> As far as I recall, it is as accessible as any building complex Bruce> I've seen. JSC itself (not the Visitor Center--we've never been there and I don't know anything about it) is wheelchair-accessible. My husband, who is in a wheelchair, has been there many times (he's Dryden's Senior Staff Scientist and is on the OEX team, the Moon/Mars Red Team, and the Access to Space team, so he's spent a lot of time at JSC) and never had any real difficulty with wheelchair access. I should point out that many of the buildings at JSC are not open to people on the public tour. An example is Bldg 4, where the astronauts have their offices. Some of these buildings just have signs and some have actual guards. The latter is pretty obvious, but you should keep your eyes open for the former. -- Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov Of course I don't speak for NASA "A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all." Unknown US fighter pilot ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 93 11:35:54 -0600 From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey Subject: Voyager funding (was Re: April Air and Space Articles.) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <4MAY199303492955@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > By the way, the Voyagers > are funded through the year 2019. What exactly do you mean by this, Ron? Congress appropriates money once a year for about a year, to first order. Perhaps you mean that mission operations are planned to continue for Voyager, and [JPL?][Office of Space Science?] intends to stick this into their budget request every year until 2019. Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey | "Enough marshmallows Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory | will kill you Bitnet: HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET | if properly placed." Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV | --John Alexander, leader of SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS | "disabling technologies" [*Aviation Week*, 7 Dec 1992, p. 50] | research, Los Alamos ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 May 1993 17:13:38 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: Will NASA's Mars Observer Image the Fa Newsgroups: sci.space In <1993May4.135953.25192@mksol.dseg.ti.com> a193522@dseg.ti.com (Michael Murphy 462-) writes: >schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) writes: >> Settle the Face question? Hardly. 95% of people who care already realize >> that it's a pile of dirt showing no intelligent modification. >Well now Richard, I didn't know you knew everything. The "face" is probably a pile >of dirt coupled with some nice shadowing effects, but not definitely. It is too bad >you obviously have a great interest in science but already succomb to turning theories >into fact without much evidence. At least Ron Baalke at JPL is not as close-minded. >..Your welcome, Ron. I thought that this was all pretty settled, actually, and that it *is* definite that it is just a pile of dirt with some nice shadowing effects. I think there's a picture of the same area with different lighting and the thing looks nothing like a face. It's not even bilaterally symmetrical. In fact, I seem to recall that one of the things that makes it look so 'face-like' in the photo (one of the eyes?) is actually an artifact -- a product of the imaging process rather than anything that is really there, like a pixel dropout, for example. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: 03 May 93 17:46:34 From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org Subject: Will NASA's Mars Observer Image the Face on Mars? Newsgroups: sci.space Actually, what Goldin said at the Los Angeles Town Meeting is that information from Mars Observer would be made available to the public in the same manner as earlier probes, such as Voyager. He did not mention whether the area around the "Face" would be targeted by Mars Observer, and it is still entirely likely that the Face will *not* be imaged. --- Maximus 2.01wb ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 May 1993 16:56:48 GMT From: "John S. Neff" Subject: Will NASA's Mars Observer Image the Face on Mars? Newsgroups: sci.space In article <10451888@ofa123.fidonet.org> David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org writes: >From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org >Subject: Re: Will NASA's Mars Observer Image the Face on Mars? >Date: 03 May 93 17:46:34 >Actually, what Goldin said at the Los Angeles Town Meeting is that information >from Mars Observer would be made available to the public in the same manner as >earlier probes, such as Voyager. He did not mention whether the area around >the "Face" would be targeted by Mars Observer, and it is still entirely likely >that the Face will *not* be imaged. > >--- Maximus 2.01wb This was discussed several months ago. The matter was cleared up by Ron Baalke and you should take a look at what he said if it is still available. If I recall correctly the area will be targeted, but it may take a while because the Mars Observer cameras have a rather small field of view, and they have to wait until the geometry, lighting, and atmospheric transparency are favorable before that can take pictures. ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 1993 18:12 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Will NASA's Mars Observer Image the Face on Mars? Newsgroups: sci.space In article <10451888@ofa123.fidonet.org>, David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org writes... >Actually, what Goldin said at the Los Angeles Town Meeting is that information >from Mars Observer would be made available to the public in the same manner as >earlier probes, such as Voyager. He did not mention whether the area around >the "Face" would be targeted by Mars Observer, and it is still entirely likely >that the Face will *not* be imaged. > I've confirmed with the Prinicipal Investigator of the Mars Observer Camera that the face will be imaged with the high resolution camera. The high resolution camera has a very small field of view of about 0.44 degrees or 3 km, and can examine areas at 1.5 meters/pixel resolution. Because of the small field of view, it is rather difficult to aim the camera at specific targets, but intermediate resolution images (~0.5km/pixel resolution) will be acquired simultaneously with the high res images. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Once a year, go someplace /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you've never been before. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | ------------------------------ id aa24835; 4 May 93 13:21:49 EDT To: bb-sci-space@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Newsgroups: sci.space Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!csc.ti.com!tilde.csc.ti.com!mksol!lvdc20!a193522 From: Michael Murphy 462- Subject: Re: Will NASA's Mars Observer Image the Fa Message-Id: <1993May4.135953.25192@mksol.dseg.ti.com> Sender: Usenet News Nntp-Posting-Host: s0405.dseg.ti.com Reply-To: a193522@dseg.ti.com Organization: Texas Instruments References: Date: Tue, 4 May 1993 13:59:53 GMT Lines: 14 Source-Info: Sender is really news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) writes: > Settle the Face question? Hardly. 95% of people who care already realize > that it's a pile of dirt showing no intelligent modification. Well now Richard, I didn't know you knew everything. The "face" is probably a pile of dirt coupled with some nice shadowing effects, but not definitely. It is too bad you obviously have a great interest in science but already succomb to turning theories into fact without much evidence. At least Ron Baalke at JPL is not as close-minded. ..Your welcome, Ron. Michael Murphy ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 529 ------------------------------