morse@leadsv.UUCP (Terry Morse) (01/07/86)
> Very true. Depending on which rumor mill you listen to, an alternative > explanation for the failure of Seasat 1 is that somebody discovered it was > able to detect the slight disturbances of the ocean surface caused by > missile-carrying submarines underneath. > I have always heard that Seasat died due to a single point of failure in its linkage from the solar panels to the batteries. I think that is called a design flaw in aerospace jargon. Translated, that means to start looking for another line of work. Of course, this is my opinion only and not that of my employer. -- Terry Morse (408)743-1487 { ihnp4!amdcad!cae780 } | { allegra!sun!sunncal } !leadsv!morse
eugene@ames.UUCP (Eugene Miya) (01/10/86)
This did not belong in net.research. > > Very true. What was true? didn't see the original posting. please send to me. > > able to detect the slight disturbances of the ocean surface caused by > > missile-carrying submarines underneath. This was advanced years before Seasat flew and there is some basis to believe that at some frequency you can do this, but the processing time for the SAR (Synthetic Aperature Radar) is far from real time (at best two weeks). > I have always heard that Seasat died due to a single point of failure in > its linkage from the solar panels to the batteries. I think that is called > a design flaw in aerospace jargon. Translated, that means to start looking > for another line of work. > > Of course, this is my opinion only and not that of my employer. > -- > > Terry Morse (408)743-1487 > { ihnp4!amdcad!cae780 } | { allegra!sun!sunncal } !leadsv!morse I left Terry's disclaimer in because that is VERY true. Seasat was launched on June 26, 1978 at about 6 pm. Right after we left VAFB, the SAR team went to celebrate the launch, and three birthdays (mine was the 26th as a matter of fact). 99 days later the thing died. A Congressional investigation into the $90 million spent turned blame to two groups of people. The believed "cause" was the failure of an insulating slip ring on the Agena bus which carried the radar and 8 other instruments. Lockheed who made the bus ($50M) was cited for shoddy workmanship: they had "grown lax" about their boosters. JPL scientists were cited to be poor inspectors over the engineers. It was not a design flaw but a Q/A problem. It was around this time, I had my first lay-off from Venus Orbital Imaging Radar [VOIR]. No Seasat-followons currently planned but the basis of the mission was proposed in 1964. BTW, the followon: SIR [Shuttle Imaging Radar] -[AB] can be seen sitting in the cargo bay in the IMAX shuttle movies with "JPL" clearly visible. Other things: we were worried about the deployment of the Seasat radar antenna because it never successfully deployed in earth gravity, it was not designed to, thank God when it did deploy! From the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: --eugene miya NASA Ames Research Center {hplabs,ihnp4,dual,hao,decwrl,allegra}!ames!aurora!eugene emiya@ames-vmsb.ARPA