ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) (11/09/90)
A quick question...why is it that the vast majority (all but one, if my memory serves) of Department of Defense shuttle missions are aboard Atlantis? I suppose it could be attributed to coincidence; the shuttles are supposed to be pretty much identical, after all. Still, I have to wonder. -- Matthew DeLuca Georgia Institute of Technology Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, Office of Information Technology for they are subtle, and quick to anger. Internet: ccoprmd@prism.gatech.edu
gregc@cimage.com (Greg Cronau) (11/12/90)
In article <16716@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: > > A quick question...why is it that the vast majority (all but one, >if my memory serves) of Department of Defense shuttle missions are aboard >Atlantis? I suppose it could be attributed to coincidence; the shuttles >are supposed to be pretty much identical, after all. Still, I have to >wonder. > If memory serves me right, back when the Air Force was going to have their own pads at Vandenberg, they were going to get 2 of the shuttles, all their own, all of the time. Atlantis was one of those, and I seem to remember that Discovery was the other one, but it may have been an unbuilt 5th. shuttle that would have been the Air Force's second one. I remember being peeved at the time about the fact that a shuttle named "Discovery" was going to be used for secret military operations and not scientific missions. But anyway, I believe that Atlantis is always used for the DOD missions because that is what it was built for. gregc@cimage.com
mvk@pawl.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) (11/12/90)
In article <1990Nov11.204720.16330@cimage.com> gregc@dgsi.UUCP (Greg Cronau/10000) writes: >In article <16716@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: >> >> A quick question...why is it that the vast majority (all but one, >>if my memory serves) of Department of Defense shuttle missions are aboard >>Atlantis? I suppose it could be attributed to coincidence; the shuttles >>are supposed to be pretty much identical, after all. Still, I have to >>wonder. I believe this is just coincidence. While this particular mission might need Atlantis, I think DoD missions in general do not require Atlantis. Of the five (including STS-38) DoD missions since the accident, 3 are on Atlantis. STS-28 used Columbia in Aug 89, and STS-33 used Discovery in Nov 89. Columbia is the Long Duration orbiter, and Discovery for some reason can lift the most. But for the most part they are interchangeable. Perhaps we should ask the expert....Henry? Michael Kent mvk@pawl.rpi.edu
EAO102@psuvm.psu.edu (11/12/90)
Anyone have any info on the up and coming Space Shuttle Endeavor, the one to replace the Challenger?
hintzman@hplred.HP.COM (Jeff Hintzman) (11/13/90)
/ hplred:sci.space.shuttle / mvk@pawl.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) / 6:37 pm Nov 11, 1990 / >> I suppose it could be attributed to coincidence; the shuttles >>are supposed to be pretty much identical, after all. Still, I have to >>wonder. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the shuttles are not identical. Discovery and Atlantis are newer than Columbia and thus have some "improvements" that Columbia does not have, the most significant of these being that the newer shuttles are lighter in weight, and thus able to lift slightly heavier payloads. I remember reading that the HST could not be launched on Columbia because it was so heavy that it would be close to or over Columbia's maximum payload. Or I could be wrong. Jeff Hintzman HP Labs
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (11/13/90)
In article <16716@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: > A quick question...why is it that the vast majority (all but one, >if my memory serves) of Department of Defense shuttle missions are aboard >Atlantis? ... There are currently only three operational orbiters. Columbia is older and heavier than the other two, which reduces its payload, so weight-critical mission usually fly on Discovery or Atlantis. I think the use of Atlantis rather than Discovery really is coincidence. There was once talk of "blue shuttles", with some of the orbiters dedicated to military missions, but that never materialized. -- "I don't *want* to be normal!" | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology "Not to worry." | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
cole@SAMSON.phys.virginia.edu (11/14/90)
In article <1990Nov13.040534.10476@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <16716@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: >> A quick question...why is it that the vast majority (all but one, >>if my memory serves) of Department of Defense shuttle missions are aboard >>Atlantis? ... > >...I think the use of Atlantis >rather than Discovery really is coincidence. There was once talk of "blue >shuttles", with some of the orbiters dedicated to military missions, but >that never materialized. It is my understanding that only the Atlantis permits encrypted air-to-ground communications (as well as telmetry) to prevent the Soviets (and nosy American ham radio operators) from listening in. Occasionally, however, unscrambled conversation has been picked up on VHF by amateurs during DoD missions. ===================================================== Cole Smith (lcs1h@virginia) Physics Dept. University of Virginia Charlottesville =====================================================
jmaynard@thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu (Jay Maynard) (11/14/90)
In article <0093FABA.72DFD840@SAMSON.PHYS.VIRGINIA.EDU> cole@SAMSON.phys.virginia.edu writes: >It is my understanding that only the Atlantis permits encrypted air-to-ground >communications (as well as telmetry) to prevent the Soviets (and nosy >American ham radio operators) from listening in. Occasionally, however, >unscrambled conversation has been picked up on VHF by amateurs during >DoD missions. ARGH! Please don't assume someone's a ham just because they play with radios. Other people out there use scanners and wide-coverage receivers, too. -- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can jmaynard@thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu | adequately be explained by stupidity. "With design like this, who needs bugs?" - Boyd Roberts
rjg@umnstat.uucp (Robert J. Granvin) (11/14/90)
In article <4317@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu (Jay Maynard) writes: >ARGH! >Please don't assume someone's a ham just because they play with radios. >Other people out there use scanners and wide-coverage receivers, too. Which helps lead directly into a likely Commonly-Asked-Question for sci.space... What are the common frequencies used during shuttle missions? (So us nosy Americans can listen in... :-) Robert J. Granvin E/Mail: rjg@umnstat.stat.umn.edu User Services Specialist AT&T: +1 612 625 9224 School of Statistics University of Minnesota
cole@SAMSON.phys.virginia.edu (11/15/90)
In article <1990Nov14.155614.24391@cs.umn.edu>, rjg@umnstat.uucp (Robert J. Granvin) writes: > >What are the common frequencies used during shuttle missions? (So us >nosy Americans can listen in... :-) Perhaps someone else (Ron Parise, WA4SIR?) can repost the shuttle frequencies. Not often noted, however, is the fact that WA3NAN at the Goddard Amateur Radio Club rebroadcasts Shuttle air-to-ground audio on shortwave frequencies 3860,7185,14295 kHz single sideband. Not DoD missions, of course. Other radio clubs on the west coast also perform this service.