[net.space] Grabbing Lost Satellites

weems%umass-cs%CSNet-Relay@sri-unix.UUCP (02/10/84)

From:  Charles Weems <weems%umass-cs@CSNet-Relay>

It's not as simple as just grabbing them any old place you can get ahold
of them and pulling them back into the payload bay of the shuttle.
The satellites are purposely spun up to a fairly high rotation rate
(I saw the figure 50 RPM quoted in one article).  The problem is that
you must grab onto them at a point on the spin axis and gradually slow
them down before they can be brought into the bay.  A sudden stop would
destroy the satellite.  This requires that there be something to grab
onto at only one of two points.  One of those points is at the "top" of
the satellite where antennas and such are deployed.  Grabbing onto
something here would probably do a great deal of damage.  On the other
end is the point that the PAM connects -- but nobody knows for sure now
just what is there.  Mangled booster pieces?  Another problem is that
most of these satellites are programmed to fully deploy antennas and
booms and such some fixed time after the burn.  This way even if things
don't quite go right (an understatement in this case) the satellite
can start transmitting and trying to pick up corrective orders from
the ground.  How much volume does a fully deployed communications
satellite take up?  Can it fit back into the shuttle without "breaking
pieces off"?  If not, it will have to be brought home for repairs,
thus requiring a total of three shuttle launches to get it into orbit
(not to mention the cost of all of the repairs, testing, reconfiguring
for launch and strapping on another PAM).  Then there is the problem
of getting the shuttle into the "difficult" orbits that the satellites
are in -- and it really must be able to match the orbit closely
because the time required to hook on and spin down will probably be
several orbital periods long.  All in all, it's easier to collect the
insurance.

A note on Solar Max -- it is also true that Solar Max is spinning like
Westar and Palapa-B.  Solar Max, however, was DESIGNED to be serviced
by the shuttle.  It was known that it would be in an orbit reachable
by the shuttle and in an uncharacteristic fit of forethought its
designers built a special adapter into one end of it that will allow
the suttle to grab on easily and spin it down for service (and back up
for redeployment).  Because these communications satellites were
intended to operate at geosynchronous orbit, beyond the range of the
shuttle, it was considered a waste of weight to put shuttle servicing
adapters on them just in case something unlikely (such as what happened)
occurred.  We all have 20-20 hindsight now.

chip weems

richard@sequent.UUCP (02/13/84)

The groups that lost Westar and the Indo sattelite can't just "claim"
the insurance money.  If you had a minor fender-bender and decided to
scrap the car, would you're insurance pay up?

As I understand it, insurance for each sattelite was spread over several
underwriters, Lloyd's of London being the central agency.  If the
insurers determine that the sattelites can be salvaged for less than
the replacement cost, they will only pay for the salvage effort.  If, after
the attempt, it has failed, they then have to pay replacement.

I'm hoping that Lloyds and whoever decide to get NASA to salvage the 
things - if they can, it'll be a great way of turning bad luck into
a selling point.  The insurers might want to see how NASA does with
Solar Max before they decide.  But if the sattelites can be recovered,
it would probably be worth it to bring 'em down and send 'em back up,
since replacement is over $100 Meg,  and would have to include another
launch anyway.

Good Luck, NASA!

			from the confused and bleeding fingertips of
				...!sequent!richard