Schauble@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA (02/07/84)
As I follow the (poor) news stories here, the missing satelite has been
located in an orbit very like that of the shittle. Correct?
Is there a good reason why they don't just go back and pick it up??
PaulREM%MIT-MC@sri-unix.UUCP (02/14/84)
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM @ MIT-MC>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 84 03:36 EST
From: Schauble@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
As I follow the (poor) news stories here, the missing satelite has been
located in an orbit [corrected: with perigee near the STS orbit;
and both satellites, not just one]
Is there a good reason why they don't just go back and pick it up??
At perigee, the satellites are traveling much faster than STS (enough to
drive them up a couple hundred miles higher at apogee), while at apogee
the satellites are too high up. I doubt it's feasible to fetch it back
this mission, but with suitable planning and a "space bicicle" it may
be possible to snarf both satellites some later mission, at least I
hope. If that mission were done, it would really prove the use of the
manned STS as contrasted with unmanned Arianne and Atlas/Saturn/...