gjl@ihwpt.UUCP (g licitis) (02/05/86)
While discussing the shuttle over the weekend a question came up concerning Vandenburg launches. Does anyone know if the launches are retrograde launches. It seems that if they launch the shuttle the same as they do from Florida that the SRBs are going to land somewhere in Nevada or Arizona. The same seems to be true if they do polar launches. Any launch east or north will mean that the shuttle will be in boost phase over land and populated areas. If this is the case it seems that the next shuttle accident could be much more devistating than this one. Am I missing something here or is this just another case of military intelligence. :-) Gunars Licitis AT&T Bell Labs Naperville Il.
agparghi@watnot.UUCP (Amit Parghi) (02/07/86)
> While discussing the shuttle over the weekend a question came up >concerning Vandenburg launches. Does anyone know if the launches >are retrograde launches. It seems that if they launch the shuttle >the same as they do from Florida that the SRBs are going to land >somewhere in Nevada or Arizona. The same seems to be true if they >do polar launches. Any launch east or north will mean that the >shuttle will be in boost phase over land and populated areas. If >this is the case it seems that the next shuttle accident could be >much more devistating than this one. Am I missing something here >or is this just another case of military intelligence. :-) > Gunars Licitis I seem to remember reading in _The Space Shuttle_ (a NASA publication) that the Vandenberg launches were to be done over the Pacific, in a west/northwest direction (roughly). Actual ranges for the angles from north were given, but I don't have the book with me. - Amit -- Amit PARGHI St Jerome's College, WATERLOO, Ontario, N2L 3G3, Canada. UUCP: {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,clyde,utzoo}!watmath!watnot!agparghi CSNET: agparghi%watnot@waterloo.CSNET ARPA: agparghi%watnot%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.ARPA BITNET: agparghi@WATDCSU.BITNET
lmc@cisden.UUCP (Lyle McElhaney) (02/08/86)
> While discussing the shuttle over the weekend a question came up > concerning Vandenburg launches. Does anyone know if the launches > are retrograde launches. The whole idea in using Vandenburg is that launches into *polar* orbit could be done over water. I can't imagine a use for a retrograde orbit; it would not cover any features that are not covered by a normal Kennedy SC orbit, and it would cost a whole lot in weight-to-orbit. As far as I know, Vandenburg will not be making any launches that do not fly over water; therefore it will be only useful for highly-inclined orbits. Lyle McElhaney ...hao!cisden!lmc
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (02/08/86)
> ... Does anyone know if the launches > are retrograde launches. It seems that if they launch the shuttle > the same as they do from Florida that the SRBs are going to land > somewhere in Nevada or Arizona. The same seems to be true if they > do polar launches. Any launch east or north will mean that the > shuttle will be in boost phase over land and populated areas... You missed one direction, the one they actually use: south. South of Vandenberg there are a few little islands in an awful lot of empty ocean. There is no "retrograde" for a precisely polar orbit, since half of each orbit is northbound and the other half is southbound. Actually many Vandenberg launches are slightly retrograde, with the angle to the equator being something like 97 degrees. Given the right orbital altitude, this results in an orbit that is "sun-synchronous": it is fixed in space with relation to the Earth-Sun axis, so the satellite always passes over the equator at the same local time. This is a major asset for weather and remote-sensing satellites which would like consistent sun angles from one pass to the next. (I guess I'd better elaborate on how a sun-synchronous orbit works, or somebody will surely claim it can't because orbital planes are fixed and a sun-synchronous orbit's plane has to rotate as the Earth circles the Sun. The Earth is not a perfect sphere, and therefore does not behave precisely as a gravitational point mass. So all those nice perfect ellipses we learned about in physics class are only approximations to a more complicated truth. The gravitational effect of Earth's equatorial bulge "drags" the plane of a near-polar orbit around slowly. By picking the right combination of orbital inclination and altitude, the dragging is exactly 360 degrees per year.) -- Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry
inc@fluke.UUCP (Gary Benson) (02/12/86)
> > While discussing the shuttle over the weekend a question came up > > concerning Vandenburg launches. Does anyone know if the launches > > are retrograde launches. > > The whole idea in using Vandenburg is that launches into *polar* orbit > could be done over water. I can't imagine a use for a retrograde orbit; So? Because you can't imagine a use, does that mean there are none? I have followed your recent group of postings with interest, and appreciate someone knowledgeable taking the time to place factual postings here. However, now that the question has been raised, I wonder if other net-columbians can think of any uses for retrograde orbit? I imagined these: a) Say you wanted to view a lot of different locations frequently but couldn't afford to view them all continuously. A retrograde orbit would put you over the locations more frequently than any other kind. (Cheap spy or SDI system.) b) Say you wanted to measure the speed of rotation of the earth in a new way (like to verify the number predicted or calculated by other methods). Two satellites going in precisely opposite orbits could do some pretty fancy timing things...
mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR) (02/14/86)
In article <754@tpvax.fluke.UUCP> inc@fluke.UUCP (Gary Benson) writes: > >However, now that the question has been raised, I wonder if other >net-columbians can think of any uses for retrograde orbit? I imagined these: > >a) Say you wanted to view a lot of different locations frequently but >couldn't afford to view them all continuously. A retrograde orbit would put >you over the locations more frequently than any other kind. (Cheap spy >or SDI system.) > >b) Say you wanted to measure the speed of rotation of the earth in a new way >(like to verify the number predicted or calculated by other methods). Two >satellites going in precisely opposite orbits could do some pretty fancy >timing things... Correct me if I'm wrong (did I really need to say that? :-)), but isn't a retrograde orbit a little like driving down the freeway the wrong way? And isn't the "freeway" getting to look like rush hour? I would think a fragmentation grenade in retrograde orbit would be a interesting concept in anti-sattelite warfare. But then, I suppose you would want more accuracy than the random chance that would provide, besides, you'd have to teach all the little frags how to distinguish between good satellites and bad ones. Ahhh.. but maybe a terrorist government... --MKR
ems@amdahl.UUCP (ems) (02/18/86)
In article <754@tpvax.fluke.UUCP>, inc@fluke.UUCP (Gary Benson) writes: > > > While discussing the shuttle over the weekend a question came up > > > concerning Vandenburg launches. Does anyone know if the launches > > > are retrograde launches. > > > > The whole idea in using Vandenburg is that launches into *polar* orbit > > could be done over water. I can't imagine a use for a retrograde orbit; > ... > However, now that the question has been raised, I wonder if other > net-columbians can think of any uses for retrograde orbit? I imagined these: > ( 'a' and 'b' suggestions deleted ) How about a 'c' suggestion: What happens if your satelite is in a regular orbit and my satelite is in a retrograde orbit... One heck of a lot of energy there when they hit. I am sure the military uses are clear. -- E. Michael Smith ...!{hplabs,ihnp4,amd,nsc}!amdahl!ems This is the obligatory disclaimer of everything.
holloway@drivax.UUCP (Bruce Holloway) (02/19/86)
In article <2802@amdahl.UUCP> ems@amdahl.UUCP (ems) writes: >How about a 'c' suggestion: What happens if your satelite is in a >regular orbit and my satelite is in a retrograde orbit... One heck of >a lot of energy there when they hit. I am sure the military uses >are clear. >-- >E. Michael Smith ...!{hplabs,ihnp4,amd,nsc}!amdahl!ems > Sounds like a really expensive way to shoot down a satellite. They're probably working on it now. -- Bruce Holloway Digital Research, Inc. 60 Garden Court Monterey, CA 93942 ....!ucbvax!hplabs!amdahl!drivax!holloway (I'm not THAT Bruce Holloway, I'm the other one.)