Jun 6 1978
From The Space Library
RobertG (Talk | contribs)
(New page: Although the U.S. had planned to begin talks with the USSR June 7 on killer-satellite control, the Carter Administration had not clarified its own stance toward antisatellite systems, The ...)
Newer edit →
Current revision
Although the U.S. had planned to begin talks with the USSR June 7 on killer-satellite control, the Carter Administration had not clarified its own stance toward antisatellite systems, The Washington Star reported. The administration had asked the Soviets what they wanted to consider in the 10 days of Helsinki talks described as exploratory, partly as a guide to its own approach. The Kremlin had greeted coolly an earlier Carter proposal to ban antisatellite weapons, which it had been testing since 1967. As Defense Secretary Harold Brown said in Oct. 1977, the USSR already had missiles that could knock down U.S. reconnaissance satellites. The U.S. had studied killer-satellite possibilities for yr without moving to develop them; when the USSR intensified its testing 2yr ago, U.S. interest increased, and officials opposed entering into an agreement that might hinder U.S. efforts to catch up with the Soviets.
On March 30, 1977, Carter announced that the U.S. and the USSR would establish a study group to "develop an agreement whereby we might forgo the development of a capability of destroying satellite observations vehicles, so that we can have an assured way to watch the Soviets [and] they can have an assured way of watching us from satellites" (the principal means of detecting noncompliance with strategic arms-control limitations). Yet, according to Brown's statement, Oct. 1977 was already too late for both sides to give up killer-satellite development. The Navy had been interested in killer-satellite capability because the USSR had begun to use ocean-surveillance satellites to locate American ships. The USSR had also tried to use satellites to detect submerged submarines, making missile-carrying submarines vulnerable and offering a threat to the undersea leg of the U.S. triad of nuclear deterrence. (W Star, June 6/78, A-4)
The British Interplanetary Society's journal Spaceflight reported that NASA had developed a lunar- and planetary-sciences teaching aid, using actual samples of lunar material encased in a clear plastic disk, to educate both the earth-science student through the Aerospace Education Program and the museum visitor through the NASA exhibits program. The hand-held aid would permit looking' at, or viewing through a microscope, both sides of a sample. Under an 8yr program for lunar- and planetary-science education, colleges had been able to borrow thin section microscope slides of lunar material along with a teaching manual, and museums and fairs could display several dozen prepared lunar samples in cases. But until now, NASA had directed no program toward the secondary school earth-science student.
The new school-use program which included a film on lunar science, the sample disk, workbook material, slides, and an audio cassette) would require considerable interaction between teacher and class. Student reaction to the museum program, which included a shorter sound-slide presentation and the disk, had been highly favorable. NASA expected to test museum-visitor reaction later in 1978 and to use about 2/31b of lunar materials to make 140 lunar-sample disks available for use in both programs. Apollo astronauts had brought back 843.51b of lunar material during lunar explorations in the late 1960s and early 1970s. (Sf, June 6/78,218)
In recognition of the energy shortage and the need to conserve fuel, the Natl. Aeronautic Association announced it had established a new national aviation-record category for competition among U.S. airlines, Efficiency on a Commercial Air Route. NAA had administered for a number of yr the category Speed on a Commercial Air Route, which had proved popular with airlines and airline pilots. This category would continue, in conjunction with the new category, to measure efficiency over a route by the amount of fuel used according to the mileage and number of passengers carried. The measurement would result in an efficiency-index number, and the highest number over a given route would hold that particular record. To maintain equity, five categories had been based on maximum gross aircraft weight, and one open category would include all aircraft. (NAA newsletter, June 6/78)
Spaceflight reported that British aerospace engineers had completed a study that might lead to construction in space of a huge power station capable of generating an electrical output equal to 5 to 10 power stations on earth. Britain's BAe Dynamics Group, the European company most experienced in assembling space-solar arrays, had done a 6mo study under ESA contract of solar arrays to provide extra power for the European Spacelab and space platforms, as well as for a space power station. A pilot-unit space platform designed to operate in a low-earth or geostationary orbit would supply 1 to 2megawatts, as precursor of a power station in geostationary orbit with a power output of 5 to 10 gigawatts (5000 to 10 000 megawatts). Europe had already demonstrated it was capable of significant contributions to large space power-plant technological development. (Sf, June 6/78, 219)
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
