Jul 23 1985
From The Space Library
RobertG (Talk | contribs)
(New page: NASA announced that John O'Brien, currently NASA deputy general counsel, was appointed effective August 4 NASA general counsel, succeeding S. Neil Hosenball who was retiring. O'Brien bega...)
Newer edit →
Current revision
NASA announced that John O'Brien, currently NASA deputy general counsel, was appointed effective August 4 NASA general counsel, succeeding S. Neil Hosenball who was retiring.
O'Brien began his career in 1962 with NASA at the Launch Operations Center, later Kennedy Space Center (KSC), during the Mercury Program. He then served as chief counsel of the KSC and assistant general counsel for procurement matters at NASA Headquarters.
He received an A.B. degree from Niagara University and his J.D. degree from Georgetown University. After joining NASA, O'Brien was designated a Princeton Fellow in Public Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, and in 1976 received the NASA Exceptional Service Medal. (NASA Release 85-108)
President Reagan nominated Anthony Calio, who served at NASA for 16 years, to be administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Washington Post reported. Pending confirmation of the nomination by the U.S. Senate, Calio, who was deputy administrator of NOAA, would replace John Bryne. (W Post, July 23/85, A13)
In its postlaunch report dated July 23, 1986, NASA announced that it had launched on September 9, 1980, GOES-D (subsequently designated GOES-4) from KSC by a Delta 3914 launch vehicle. The GOES (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite) satellites provided near-continuous high-quality day and night observations of earth and its environment, including cloud cover; weather; proton, electron, and solar X-ray fluxes; and magnetic fields.
During placement of GOES-4 and its apogee boost motor (ABM) into transfer orbit, NASA observed lower than expected temperatures for the ABM and decided to fire the motor at second apogee in lieu of the nominal third apogee. Performance of the ABM was nominal and resulted in placement of the spacecraft in desired drift orbit. GOES-4 arrived September 20, 1980, on-station at the 98° west longitude checkout position. On February 26, 1981, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) moved GOES-4 to the GOES-west operational position at 135° west longitude, replacing the ailing GOES-3 spacecraft. NASA modified the ABM thermal design for follow-on spacecraft to avoid recurrence of the low temperature problem.
On May 22, 1981, NASA launched GOES-E (subsequently designated GOES-5) from KSC on the Delta 3914. Spacecraft performance during transfer orbit maneuvers was nominal, and NASA fired the ABM on the third apogee of the transfer orbit. GOES-5 arrived on-station June 5, 1981, at the predetermined checkout position of 85° west longitude. On August 5, 1981, NOAA placed GOES-5 at 75° west longitude where it became the operational GOES-east satellite.
An additional mission objective for both GOES-4 and 5 was demonstration and assessment of the temperature and moisture soundings from the VISSR Atmospheric Sounder (VAS); Goddard Space Flight Center initiated a VAS demonstration project to achieve this objective. In 1981 the VAS demonstration project conducted a ground truth field experiment that provided four days of simultaneous, high-density ground-based observations and satellite data. This data showed VAS to be a versatile and valuable instrument with potential applications beyond the severe local storm discipline. Some of these additional areas included hurricane and tropical cyclone research, cloud climatology, and diagnosis of moisture patterns and upper-air circulation. As a result of the VAS demonstration project, NOAA made provision for geosynchronous soundings a requirement for the next generation of GOES satellites.
Under a 1973 basic agreement, NASA had the responsibility under NOAA reimbursable funding to design, engineer, procure, and launch polar and geosynchronous weather satellites to implement the U.S.'s operational meteorological satellite program. After on-orbit checkout, NASA handed over the spacecraft to NOAA for routine operations. (NASA MOR E-612-80-02 [post-launch] July 23/85, E-612-81-03 [postlaunch] July 23/85)
Astronauts James Van Hoften and Dr. William Fisher said at a Johnson Space Center news conference that they would attempt to activate the Syncom satellite deployed in April from the Space Shuttle, the Washington Post reported. Although the satellite was loaded with rocket fuel, the astronauts said they didn't think their mission was any more dangerous than the two other rescue missions by astronauts in the previous two years. Because the satellite was "armed," (in the position in which it was ready to fire its engines), the danger was great if the engines ignited accidentally while the astronauts were working.
However, the astronauts indicated the hardest part of their upcoming mission was its awkwardness, not the danger. They said they would attempt the rescue on the seventh day of the August 24 Space Shuttle 51-I mission with the orbiter Discovery. Van Hoften would stand in foot restraints at the end of the Space Shuttle's 50-foot-long mechanical arm 35 feet below the satellite to affix a capture bar to the side of the satellite, then force the satellite to come to a standstill from its once-a-minute spin.
Fisher, standing in temporary foot restraints fixed to the side of Discovery's cargo bay, would put two plugs on either side of the arming switch to prevent the satellite from accidentally turning itself on.
Then, standing on opposite sides of the satellite, the astronauts would bypass the satellite's electronics so that flight directors on the ground could begin to command it from earth. NASA gave the operation a 50-50 chance of succeeding. (W Post, July 23/85, A2)
NASA announced that in a two-and-one-half-year effort costing $15 million it had lengthened and improved its Aircraft Landing Dynamics Facility at Langley Research Center.
The track, used to test aircraft wheels, tires, and landing gear, used a high-pressure water jet system to propel the test carriage along the rail/track system where researchers conducted experiments under simulated runway conditions. Track testing options included choosing between concrete or asphalt runway surfaces and among a full range of weather-related surface conditions, including dry, damp, or flooded runways or slush- or ice-covered surfaces. Even before the expansion, NASA believed the track to be the only facility in the world capable of testing full-size aircraft landing gear systems under closely controlled conditions simulating takeoffs and landings.
Lengthening the track to more than one-half mile increased the facility's maximum test speed from 120 to 250 mph and made possible, for the first time, simulated landing tests of all modern aircraft and the Space Shuttle. Other facility improvements included a higher capacity water jet system and a newly designed high-speed test carriage. The improved catapult system produced a 1.7-million-lb. thrust on the carriage, resulting in a 17-g (gravity force) acceleration that pushed the carriage in only 400 feet from zero to 250 mph in two seconds, and the new carriage had a 20-by-40-foot test bay to accommodate larger test articles. NASA used ten thousand gallons of water in maximum speed run.
Initial research at the modified facility would study the cornering forces and spin-up characteristics of the Space Shuttle main gear tire, which spun up from zero to landing speeds almost instantly at touchdown. NASA would mount a tire-wheel-brake assembly on the carriage for tests of tire wear and applied loads and would run these first tests on the facility's existing smooth concrete surface. Later runs would require the touchdown area of the track altered to simulate the roughness and grooving of the Space Shuttle runway at Kennedy Space Center. NASA would then paint smooth the relatively rough runway to determine the best KSC runway characteristics to lessen Space Shuttle tire wear.
Later tests would include a variety of aircraft landing hardware tests, averaging about 75 to 100 runs each. NASA estimated the facility could accomplish 300 runs a year with as many as six a day during the height of a test program. One test program, for example, would compare the performance of radial tires, not commonly used on aircraft, to that of conventional bias ply tires. NASA would run these tests in conjunction with a Federal Aviation Administration/NASA program to gather information on runway surface traction.
NASA had scheduled over the next several years test programs that included track tests to develop a data based for the National Tire Modeling Program, an analytical computer model to aid in design of new tires, and a tire failure study. (NASA Release 85-109)
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
