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?? Paul
REM%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/...