May 13 1975
From The Space Library
RobertG (Talk | contribs)
(New page: The Air Force Systems Command reported that researchers at the Air Force Avionics Laboratory were testing fiber optics-thin strands of glass that transmit light-to transmit avionic signals...)
Newer edit →
Current revision
The Air Force Systems Command reported that researchers at the Air Force Avionics Laboratory were testing fiber optics-thin strands of glass that transmit light-to transmit avionic signals from one point to another in an aircraft. Fiber-optics data transfer began with an electronic signal that was converted into light by a transducer; the light traveled through glass strands and was reconverted at the other end into electrical signals, with minimal loss of energy. AFSC quoted Avionics Lab researchers as saying that, unlike the usual copper wire, fiber optics were unaffected by static from nearby electrical equipment and were immune to lightning, nuclear radiation, electrical sparking, fires, and grounding problems. Because extensive lab testing was nearly complete, the next step would be a low-cost flight-test program, perhaps on a remotely piloted vehicle (RPV).
The Avionics Lab also had awarded contracts to develop passive optical couplers, a fiber-optics data bus, and a wideband fiber-optics system that would handle large data rates. The proposed Air Force Advanced Development Program could put a total fiber-optics system on manned and unmanned aerospace vehicles by 1980. (AFSC Release 01P 087.75)
Communications Satellite Corp. Chairman Joseph H. McConnell told a stockholders' meeting that ComSatCorp was finalizing a contract with Exxon Corp. for five shipboard terminals for use with ComSatCorp's Marisat maritime communications satellite scheduled for launch in summer 1975. McConnell also said that ComSatCorp had agreed to lease one shipboard terminal to Seagap, an oil exploration consortium led by Phillips Petroleum Co. Marisat would make available, for the first time, reliable voice, data, teletype, and facsimile communications to ships at sea and to offshore drilling rigs. McConnell said that the success of the Marisat program would depend on the Navy's use of the system and on ComSatCorp's ability to develop a substantial market in the commercial shipping industry. (Snider, W Star, 14 May 75, Fl)
13 -14 May: More than 500 representatives from government, industry, and universities attended a 2-day conference at Lewis Research Center to review progress in aerospace propulsion. Aviation Week and Space Technology reported that high-speed performance was no longer the top priority among the propulsion researchers, emphasis having switched to quiet, clean, and fuel-conserving engines. Presentations and panel discussions included aircraft noise-reduction technology, fuel-conservative engine technology, upper-atmosphere pollution-measurement programs, and engine systems and component technology.
LeRC's John B. Whitlow reported that new technology generated by NASA's supersonic cruise airplane research (SCAR) would develop an engine far different from the afterburning supersonic turbojet that was to have powered the first U.S. supersonic transport. A potential new engine might be a duct-burning turbofan with features such as a variable-geometry fan that allowed the engine to move as much as possible between straight turbojet and straight turbofan operational cycles. Other objectives for future NASA-developed SST propulsion systems included a 7400-km range with outstanding economy at speeds from mach 2.2 to mach 2.7, good subsonic cruise characteristics, good hold endurance and economy, and low takeoff noise.
Whitlow stressed that, because of noise limitations, future SSTs would not be straight turbojets, and SCAR researchers were concentrating on low-bypass-ratio turbofans. As bypass ratio also affects engine weight, fuel consumption, drag, and cost-effective performance, no single bypass ratio of a conventional engine could meet all desired goals simultaneously. Thus SCAR researchers were developing variable-cycle engine technology that could tailor the bypass ratio and perhaps the fan/pressure ratio for optimum performance. Candidate engines included a mini-bypass turbojet, a variable-bypass supersonic turbofan, a duct-burning turbofan, and a rear-valve variable-cycle engine. (LeRC Release 75-19; Yaffee, Av Wk, 14 July 75,46-49)
13-20 May. The second in a series of flight simulations between flight controllers and Apollo-Soyuz Test Project crew members in Houston and Moscow was completed in preparation for the July mission. The first of the three simulations scheduled for the session began at 6:20 am CDT 13 May, 1 hr before Soyuz launch time, and continued for 25.5 hr into the simulated mission. With both Soviet and U.S. crewmen participating in simulators in their respective countries and control centers fully manned, the Apollo and Soyuz spacecraft were "launched" and put through various maneuvers. Communications between the two control centers included voice, teletype, datafax, and TV. During the simulation, a technical problem prevented observers in Houston from hearing the two Soviet cosmonauts; NASA officials said later that that problem should not happen during a real flight. No other major problems were reported.
A second simulation begun at 6:30 am CDT 15 May and continuing for 56 hr rehearsed Apollo-Soyuz rendezvous, docking, crew transfers, and undocking and final separation. A third simulation, begun at 6:30 am CDT 19 May, was cancelled when the command module simulator in Houston did not work properly. The simulation, a 9-hr rehearsal of rendezvous and docking, was successfully completed 20 May.
Final simulations by Houston and Moscow control centers and crewmen were scheduled. for 30 June and 1 July. (NASA Release 75-141; Tass, FBIS-Sov, 16 May 75, U1; Ezell et al., The Partnership: A History of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, 285; UPI, NYT, 14 May 75, 69)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
