[sci.space.shuttle] Atlantis orbit

wats@scicom.alphacdc.com (Bruce Watson) (11/15/88)

For kenny@m.cs.uiuc.edu (couldn't find path): Yes, 160 n.mi. and
an inclination of 57 degs and circular.

After calculating the orbit of Atlantis for the 4? day mission
I forgot that I would have the orbit of the payload for
the remainder of its lifetime.  

Last I heard, the launch time will be between 3:30 and 6:30 EST.
I didn't get the launch date.

wats@scicom.alphacdc.com (Bruce Watson) (11/17/88)

It occurred to me that the Spysat to the launched from Atlantis
may be going into geostationary orbit.  From there it would see
latituds to abs(81.3deg), although tangentially.  This wouldn't
be as important for electronic surveillence as it would be for
optical.

mcdowell@cfa250.harvard.edu (Jonathan McDowell) (11/17/88)

From article <1150@scicom.alphacdc.com>, by wats@scicom.alphacdc.com (Bruce Watson):
> It occurred to me that the Spysat to the launched from Atlantis
> may be going into geostationary orbit.  

That's not what it's rumoured to be designed for. All the large optical
recon craft go into LEO, the KH-9 at about 100-200 km and the KH-11
at about 300-500 km. I would bet the KH-12 will be about 400 km
so it will last a long time without using too much fuel.

BTW, Dec 1 has been announced as the new target.

Jonathan McDowell

jlo@elan.UUCP (Jeff Lo) (11/18/88)

In article <1162@cfa237.cfa250.harvard.edu> mcdowell@cfa250.harvard.edu (Jonathan McDowell) writes:
>From article <1150@scicom.alphacdc.com>, by wats@scicom.alphacdc.com (Bruce Watson):
>> It occurred to me that the Spysat to the launched from Atlantis
>> may be going into geostationary orbit.  
>
>That's not what it's rumoured to be designed for. All the large optical
>recon craft go into LEO, the KH-9 at about 100-200 km and the KH-11
>at about 300-500 km. I would bet the KH-12 will be about 400 km
>so it will last a long time without using too much fuel.

I've read that the main reason that causes the spysats consume so
much fuel is having to dip down low to get high-res images and then
to go back to a higher orbit where there is not the problem of
atmospheric drag.

I also thought that one of the major advantages of the KH-12 over it's
predecessors is that it is designed to be refueled in orbit by the
shuttle so that fuel shouldn't be as much of a problem.
-- 
Jeff Lo
..!{ames,hplabs,uunet}!elan!jlo
Elan Computer Group, Inc.
(415) 322-2450

jwm@stdc.jhuapl.edu (Jim Meritt) (11/18/88)

In article <1146@scicom.alphacdc.com> wats@scicom.alphacdc.com (Bruce Watson) writes:
}
}For kenny@m.cs.uiuc.edu (couldn't find path): Yes, 160 n.mi. and
}an inclination of 57 degs and circular.
}
}After calculating the orbit of Atlantis for the 4? day mission
}I forgot that I would have the orbit of the payload for
}the remainder of its lifetime.  

Only if it does not have it's own booster, an item which would not
suprise me in the least, inasmuch as that is a rather poor orbit, I
believe, for an intell satellite.

}Last I heard, the launch time will be between 3:30 and 6:30 EST.
}I didn't get the launch date.

1 Dec, I think...

dave@viper.Lynx.MN.Org (David Messer) (11/18/88)

In article <1150@scicom.alphacdc.com> wats@scicom.alphacdc.com (Bruce Watson) writes:
 >
 >It occurred to me that the Spysat to the launched from Atlantis
 >may be going into geostationary orbit.  From there it would see
 >latituds to abs(81.3deg), although tangentially.  This wouldn't
 >be as important for electronic surveillence as it would be for
 >optical.

It is probably a KH-12 (it seems to be an open secret).  The
KH-12 is basically a huge telescope and would be used from
low-earth orbit to get the best data.
-- 
_____________________________________________________________________________
   __                     _ _ _              David Messer - Lynx Data Systems
  /  )              /    ' ) ) )                 dave@Lynx.MN.Org  -or-
 /  / __. , __o  __/      / / / _  _   _   _  __     ...{amdahl,hpda}!bungia!
/__/_(_/|_\\/ <__(_/_     / ' (_</_/_)_/_)_</_/ (_                 viper!dave

nobody@tekecs.TEK.COM (-for inetd server command) (11/22/88)

In article <381@elan.UUCP> jlo@elan.UUCP (Jeff Lo) writes:
>I also thought that one of the major advantages of the KH-12 over it's
>predecessors is that it is designed to be refueled in orbit by the
>shuttle so that fuel shouldn't be as much of a problem.

It seems to me that if the U.S. shuttle can refuel the spysat,
then the Soviet shuttle could retrieve it.  I don't suppose the
Pentagon would look too favorably on that, though...

Kendall Auel				   ^ ^
					  /O O\
Tektronix, Inc.				  | V |
Information Display Group		/  """  \
Interactive Technologies Division	/ """"" \
(kendalla@pooter.GWD.TEK.COM)		 /|\ /|\

g-hollin@rocky.cs.wisc.edu.CS.WISC.EDU (Jeff Hollingsworth) (11/23/88)

In article <10655@tekecs.TEK.COM> kendalla@pooter.UUCP (Kendall Auel) writes:
>In article <381@elan.UUCP> jlo@elan.UUCP (Jeff Lo) writes:
>>I also thought that one of the major advantages of the KH-12 over it's
>>predecessors is that it is designed to be refueled in orbit by the
>>shuttle so that fuel shouldn't be as much of a problem.
>
>It seems to me that if the U.S. shuttle can refuel the spysat,
>then the Soviet shuttle could retrieve it.  I don't suppose the
>Pentagon would look too favorably on that, though...
>

I assume they would only bring the spysay down to shuttle level orbit when
it needed fuel.  After all, it takes two to tango, and I think the spysat's 
owners would do there best to keep it out of the Soviet shuttle's path.

On a slighlty different note, does anybody remember the rummors (about 6 months
to a year ago) that the KH-12 project had been killed?



Jeff Hollingsworth
hollings@rocky.CS.WISC.EDU

tif@cpe.UUCP (11/23/88)

Written  1:27 pm  Nov 21, 1988 by tekecs.UUCP!nobody in cpe:sci.space.shuttle
>In article <381@elan.UUCP> jlo@elan.UUCP (Jeff Lo) writes:
>>I also thought that one of the major advantages of the KH-12 over it's
>>predecessors is that it is designed to be refueled in orbit by the
>>shuttle so that fuel shouldn't be as much of a problem.
>It seems to me that if the U.S. shuttle can refuel the spysat,
>then the Soviet shuttle could retrieve it.  I don't suppose the
>Pentagon would look too favorably on that, though...

There has been discussion of this satellite's maneuvering to a lower
orbit to take a picture than moving back up.  Perhaps the satellite
could normally be inaccessible, yet come down for a rendezvous at
a lower orbit.  (The idea being it wouldn't come down for just anybody.)

			Paul Chamberlain
			Computer Product Engineering, Tandy Corp.
			bellcore!motown!sys1!cpe!tif

dave@viper.Lynx.MN.Org (David Messer) (11/25/88)

In article <10655@tekecs.TEK.COM> kendalla@pooter.UUCP (Kendall Auel) writes:
 >
 >It seems to me that if the U.S. shuttle can refuel the spysat,
 >then the Soviet shuttle could retrieve it.  I don't suppose the
 >Pentagon would look too favorably on that, though...

I doubt that the Soviets would like it too much either -- when the
self-destruct mechanism takes out their brand-new shuttle.

Just speculation of course...
-- 
_____________________________________________________________________________
   __                     _ _ _              David Messer - Lynx Data Systems
  /  )              /    ' ) ) )                 dave@Lynx.MN.Org  -or-
 /  / __. , __o  __/      / / / _  _   _   _  __     ...{amdahl,hpda}!bungia!
/__/_(_/|_\\/ <__(_/_     / ' (_</_/_)_/_)_</_/ (_                 viper!dave