Greg_d._Moore@mts.rpi.edu (Commander Krugannal) (02/02/90)
Point well taken Henry about the Agena going up first. It
seems though that the idea would still be feasible even in that
case. We did it 25 years ago, I think we could still do it
today. (In fact, let's keep it simple, and use Agena again!)
On one of the Gemini flights though didn't they end up
launching a alternate docking mechanism. (I think this was the
same incident know as the "Angry Alligotor")
Greg_d._Moore@mts.rpi.eduhenry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (02/04/90)
In article <10556.1206.forumexp@mts.rpi.edu> Greg_d._Moore@mts.rpi.edu (Commander Krugannal) writes: > Point well taken Henry about the Agena going up first. It > seems though that the idea would still be feasible even in that > case. We did it 25 years ago, I think we could still do it > today... Yeah, it would make a lot of sense. Apart from the anti-expendable politics within NASA, I can't see any problem with it. It baffles me that the people planning things like Mars sample-return missions are obviously greatly inconvenienced by limited launch weights, and yet won't consider in-orbit assembly. > On one of the Gemini flights though didn't they end up > launching a alternate docking mechanism. (I think this was the > same incident know as the "Angry Alligotor") Yes, the Agena they originally put up ran out of on-orbit lifetime due to repeated Gemini launch delays. The cobbled-together docking test vehicle that replaced it went up fine, except that its nose shroud did not release properly. (The astronauts wanted to try an EVA to remove it, but Mission Control vetoed that.) -- 1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
moe@nuchat.UUCP (Norman C. Kluksdahl) (02/04/90)
In article <1990Feb3.205522.22047@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >> On one of the Gemini flights though didn't they end up >> launching a alternate docking mechanism. (I think this was the >> same incident know as the "Angry Alligotor") > >Yes, the Agena they originally put up ran out of on-orbit lifetime due >to repeated Gemini launch delays. The cobbled-together docking test The Augmented Target Docking Adapter, aka the 'angry aligator'. Gemini IX. The thing was thrown together after the Atlas-Agena failed. It did not make it to orbit, due to a fault in the Atlas, which caused the sustainer engine to gimbal to one extreme. Telemetry from the Atlas-Agena lasted only a few (fifteen or fewer) minutes. Ref: David Baker, History of Manned Spaceflight. If you don't have it, get it. (Sorry, Henry :-) ) ===================================================================== Norman Kluksdahl ...!nuchat!moe
nickw@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Nick Watkins) (02/06/90)
In article <10556.1206.forumexp@mts.rpi.edu> Greg_d._Moore@mts.rpi.edu (Commander Krugannal) writes: > > today. (In fact, let's keep it simple, and use Agena again!) I fear you'd have to restart the (closed) Agena production line. Last Agena was several years ago. Nick -- Nick Watkins, Space & Plasma Physics Group, School of Mathematical & Physical Sciences, Univ. of Sussex, Brighton, E.Sussex, BN1 9QH, ENGLAND JANET: nickw@syma.sussex.ac.uk BITNET: nickw%syma.sussex.ac.uk@uk.ac
petej@phred.UUCP (Pete Jarvis) (02/07/90)
In article <10556.1206.forumexp@mts.rpi.edu> Greg_d._Moore@mts.rpi.edu (Commander Krugannal) writes: > On one of the Gemini flights though didn't they end up > launching a alternate docking mechanism. (I think this was the > same incident know as the "Angry Alligotor") Same docking mechanism as all the others, except the shroud did not fully separate and fall away as it was supposed to. Peter Jarvis........Physio-Control