Aug 9 1991
From The Space Library
The Washington Post reported on growing congressional hesitations about supporting NASA's Mission to Planet Earth program. Legislators recently realized the mission would cost almost as much as the Space Station although it would carry only robots, not people. The Senate recommended cutting $50 million from the administration's 1992 Earth Observing System (EOS) budget request. The EOS, which would involve a series of large, sophisticated satellites, is to be the centerpiece of the mission. The House cut $145 million from the proposed budget request. Meanwhile, a panel of aerospace experts is reviewing the EOS engineering design and posing difficult questions. (W Post, Aug 9/91)
According to the Washington Times, Eosat, based in Lanham, Maryland, a joint venture of Hughes Aircraft Company and General Electric Company, defeated its competitor and gained the contract for distributing images from the new Soviet Almaz satellite. (W Times, Aug 9/91)
The New York Times cited a report by Jean O. Dickey, a geodesist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, and Raymond Hide, a geophysicist at Oxford, published in the journal Science. They analyzed the rotation of the earth, which is fitfully and almost imperceptibly slowing. More accurate measurements than in the past were possible by bouncing laser signals off quartz reflectors left on the moon by Apollo astronauts. (NY Times, Aug 9/91)
Several media articles dealt with attempts to rescue spacecraft Galileo's mission. The Los Angeles Times described Galileo's flight, which was functioning perfectly toward Jupiter, apart from its malfunctioning antenna. Engineers sought both by heating and cooling the craft to unstick the antenna. The New York Times reported in detail on efforts by engineers at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, operated by the California Institute of Technology for NASA, to free the antenna, thus salvaging the mission. If efforts failed, Galileo would be unable to communicate discoveries to scientists because the craft's small antennas could not transmit recorded pictures until returning to the vicinity of Earth. The third attempt to fix the antenna was pronounced a failure on August 20. Other possible courses of action were discussed. (LA Times, Aug 9/91; NY Times, Aug 12/91; AP, Aug 12/91; W Times, Aug 13/91; W Post, Aug 13/91; USA Today, Aug 13/91; AP, Aug 13/91; AP, Aug 20/91; UPI, Aug 20/91; NY Times, Aug 21/91; P Inq, Aug 21/91; B Sun, Aug 21/91; UPI, Aug 21/91; AP, Aug 28/91)
The Antelope Valley Press quoted John W. Young, special assistant for engineering, operations, and safety at NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, as saying that for NASA to land Shuttles at Kennedy Space Center instead of Edwards Air Force Base in California posed an increased risk. Although the Florida landing saved NASA the cost of ferrying a Shuttle back from California and the five to seven days involved, Florida weather was more problematic. Furthermore, Edwards had more runway alternatives whereas Kennedy had only one. John E. Pike, space policy analyst for the Federation of American Scientists, said NASA should wait on Florida landings till all Shuttles were equipped with drag chutes to slow them down. (Antelope Valley Press, Aug 9/91)
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
