baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) (11/06/90)
In article <1990Nov3.050407.1642@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <4680@cvl.umd.edu> herve@cvl.UUCP (Jean-Yves Herve') writes: >>There is just one little thing that bugs me: how come the Galileo are given >>with funny units only, while the Ulysses report have both metric and funny >>units? > >Probably because Ulysses is a European project and hence the European >audience is being considered. Unless I miss my guess, the numbers from >JPL et al are metric, and the NASA PR people are translating them for the >Great Unwashed... but for mostly-European projects they are constrained >to also supply civilized units. Ulysses is a joint mission between NASA and the European Space Agency, so the units are given in both miles and the funny metric units :-). ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| | | | | __ \ /| | | | Ron Baalke | baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |___ Jet Propulsion Lab | baalke@jems.jpl.nasa.gov /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| M/S 301-355 | |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ Pasadena, CA 91109 |
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (11/07/90)
In article <1990Nov5.184601.9529@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@mars.UUCP (Ron Baalke) writes: >>Probably because Ulysses is a European project ... > >Ulysses is a joint mission between NASA and the European Space Agency... Oh yes, I forgot. When a project is done by NASA with modest ESA involvement, it's a US project (e.g. HST), but when it's done by ESA with modest NASA involvement, it's a joint project. :-) :-) ISPM would have been a joint project. Ulysses is a European project with minor NASA participation. -- "I don't *want* to be normal!" | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology "Not to worry." | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
p515dfi@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Daniel Fischer) (11/07/90)
In article <1990Nov3.050407.1642@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <4680@cvl.umd.edu> herve@cvl.UUCP (Jean-Yves Herve') writes: >>There is just one little thing that bugs me: how come the Galileo are given >>with funny units only, while the Ulysses report have both metric and funny >>units? >Probably because Ulysses is a European project and hence the European >audience is being considered. [...] But then again, Galileo is an American-German bilateral project, and I can assure you that we here are metric. The strange obsession of American aerospace activists (officials and journalists alike, esp. Av'Leak's!) with ancient unit systems definitely does *not* clarify issues, even for the U.S. audience. Just think of a) the conversion precision problem: how many figures of a 'mile' number are significant? The 1.609...-factor connecting it with metric units causes many writers to provide their mile-values with a ridiculous pseudo- precision (a topic discussed in sci.space many times...). And b) the fact that km, mile and nautical mile are all of the same order of magnitude, esp. ml. & nm. which also sound so similar, frequently causes confusion: when a space expert tells you a satellite is at '400 miles' altitude, you can never be sure whether he is talking about ordinary miles or nautical miles (and skipping the 'nautical' because it's sooo obvious). [I am aware that the topic must have been discussed on the net and in journals countless times before - recall the 'no metric units on Fred'-saga? - but obviously it *has* to be repeated :-< ]
baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) (11/08/90)
In article <1990Nov6.162730.6424@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <1990Nov5.184601.9529@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@mars.UUCP (Ron Baalke) writes: >>>Probably because Ulysses is a European project ... >> >>Ulysses is a joint mission between NASA and the European Space Agency... > >Oh yes, I forgot. When a project is done by NASA with modest ESA involvement, >it's a US project (e.g. HST), but when it's done by ESA with modest NASA >involvement, it's a joint project. :-) :-) > >ISPM would have been a joint project. Ulysses is a European project with >minor NASA participation. >-- Here is NASA's contributions to the Ulysses mission: o Launch vehicle and launch facilities o Power Source (RTG) o Tracking of the spacecraft using the Deep Space Network o 50% of the experiments on board the spacecraft o Use of JPL's Control Center NASA's participation with Ulysses is much more than minor. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| | | | | __ \ /| | | | Ron Baalke | baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |___ Jet Propulsion Lab | baalke@jems.jpl.nasa.gov /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| M/S 301-355 | |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ Pasadena, CA 91109 |
p515dfi@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Daniel Fischer) (11/12/90)
<1990Nov6.162730.6424@zoo.toronto.edu> <1990Nov7.163527.1466@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> Reply-To: p515dfi@mpirbn.UUCP (Daniel Fischer) Organization: Max-Planck-Institut fuer Radioastronomie, Bonn In article <1990Nov7.163527.1466@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@mars.UUCP (Ron Baalke) writes: >In article <1990Nov6.162730.6424@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >> [...] Ulysses is a European project with minor NASA participation. >Here is NASA's contributions to the Ulysses mission: [ list deleted ] >NASA's participation with Ulysses is much more than minor. And even more notable: this contribution is exactly what the ESA/NASA Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in 1979 had called for. Although these MoUs do not have the legal status of a contract, at least this one has survived all the earthquakes of the project! I wonder whether the MoU regarding the Space Station will have the same fate in the end...