[sci.astro] Galileo Update - 11/02/90

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...