DOCSLIB.ORG

An Evaluation of a Passively Cooled Cylindrical Spectrometer Array in Lunar Orbit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Evaluation of a Passively Cooled Cylindrical Spectrometer Array in Lunar Orbit AN EVALUATION OF A PASSIVELY COOLED CYLINDRICAL SPECTROMETER ARRAY IN LUNAR ORBIT by JASON WAGGONER A THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Engineering in The Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering to The School of Graduate Studies of The University of Alabama in Huntsville HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA 2014 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It cannot be understated how much I have benefitted from the assistance, attention and insight provided by a great deal of people. I always begin by thanking my God who gives me strength and wisdom only to be followed by my patient wife and children. Second, my thesis committee (in particular the chair and advisor) has been unbelievably patient and instructive. As this thesis pushed me in areas in which I have very little experience, my colleagues at work have demonstrated time and again why I am proud to be associated with such wonderful people and competent members of the scientific community. In no particular order of preference I list below the names of those individuals. Brain O’Connor Greg Schunk Deborah Hernandez Shawn Breeding John Sharp Jim Duffy Ron Hunt Patrick Hull Ken Kittredge Jeff Farmer I would also like to mention my immediate supervisors at NASA who allowed me great lee way and were understanding as I completed this thesis. Cynthia Ferguson Chris Coppens Tony Lavoie v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... VI LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... VIII LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... IX CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Approach ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Historical Lunar Missions ....................................................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................ 15 CASE STUDY .............................................................................................................................................. 15 Mission Background ............................................................................................................................. 15 System Design ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Constraints ........................................................................................................................................... 19 Array Cylinder Sizing ............................................................................................................................ 24 Trial Mission Design Summary ............................................................................................................. 31 CHAPTER THREE ........................................................................................................ 33 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 33 Analysis Setup ...................................................................................................................................... 33 Analysis Cases ...................................................................................................................................... 40 Models ................................................................................................................................................. 49 CHAPTER FOUR ........................................................................................................... 61 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................... 61 vi Results .................................................................................................................................................. 61 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 70 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 73 THERMAL SOFTWARE OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................ 76 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Figure 1 LOCO Cylindrical Sensor Array Concept ............................................................ 5 Figure 2 Pioneer Lunar Probe (Pioneer 3 2013) ................................................................. 9 Figure 3 Ranger 9.............................................................................................................. 10 Figure 4 Lunar Prospector ................................................................................................ 12 Figure 5 LRO Instrumentation .......................................................................................... 13 Figure 6 Architecture Nomenclature ................................................................................ 19 Figure 7 Ball Aerospace Mission Concept Study Summaries .......................................... 21 Figure 8 3D Single Row Structure Model for an Array Cylinder 3.4m in Diameter ....... 27 Figure 9 Machined Orthogrid Pockets .............................................................................. 28 Figure 10 Radiation Case Schematic ................................................................................ 36 Figure 11 Array Mass Calculation from Individual Rows................................................ 40 Figure 12 Analysis Cases Progression Summary ............................................................. 42 Figure 13 Orientation of Sun in Relation to Moon ........................................................... 51 Figure 14 Array Coordinate System ................................................................................. 52 Figure 15 Thermal Model Features................................................................................... 55 Figure 16 Model Surfaces Viewed from Top ................................................................... 56 Figure 17 Model Surfaces Viewed from Bottom .............................................................. 57 Figure 18 Close-Up of Radiation Model .......................................................................... 57 Figure 19 Model Orbit Example and Coordinate Systems ............................................... 58 Figure 20 Thermal Load Map ........................................................................................... 60 viii LIST OF TABLES Table Page Table 1 Lunar Missions Reviewed ..................................................................................... 7 Table 2 Launch Vehicle Fairing Geometry Constraints ................................................... 22 Table 3 Sensor Module Charateristics .............................................................................. 22 Table 4 Mission Parameters .............................................................................................. 23 Table 5 Cylinder Mass Summary for Maximum Diameters ............................................. 29 Table 6 Cylinder Mass Summary 1.0 m and 2.2 m .......................................................... 29 Table 7 Generic Analysis Case Parameter Table .............................................................. 38 Table 8 Total Row Mass (kg) Per Cylinder Diameter ...................................................... 41 Table 9 Baseline Conduction and Radiation Cases – 4.6 m ............................................. 43 Table 10 Baseline Conduction and Radiation Cases – 3.4 m ........................................... 43 Table 11 Sensor Module Energy Conduction and Radiation Analysis Cases – 4.6 m ..... 44 Table 12 Sensor Module Energy Conduction and Radiation Analysis Cases – 3.4 m ..... 44 Table 13 Orbit Beta Angle Conduction and Radiation Cases – 4.6 m ............................. 45 Table 14 Orbit Altitude Conduction and Radiation Cases – 4.6 m .................................. 45 Table 15 Orbit Beta Angle Conduction and Radiation Cases – 3.4 m ............................. 45 Table 16 Orbit Altitude Conduction and Radiation Cases – 3.4 m .................................. 46 Table 17 Dimension Conduction and Radiation Cases – 3.4 m ....................................... 47 Table 18 Dimension Conduction and Radiation Cases – 2.2 m ....................................... 47 Table 19 Dimension Conduction and Radiation Cases – 1.0 m ....................................... 47 Table 20 No Disk Cases – 4.6 m....................................................................................... 48 Table
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mission to Jupiter
    This book attempts to convey the creativity, Project A History of the Galileo Jupiter: To Mission The Galileo mission to Jupiter explored leadership, and vision that were necessary for the an exciting new frontier, had a major impact mission’s success. It is a book about dedicated people on planetary science, and provided invaluable and their scientific and engineering achievements. lessons for the design of spacecraft. This The Galileo mission faced many significant problems. mission amassed so many scientific firsts and Some of the most brilliant accomplishments and key discoveries that it can truly be called one of “work-arounds” of the Galileo staff occurred the most impressive feats of exploration of the precisely when these challenges arose. Throughout 20th century. In the words of John Casani, the the mission, engineers and scientists found ways to original project manager of the mission, “Galileo keep the spacecraft operational from a distance of was a way of demonstrating . just what U.S. nearly half a billion miles, enabling one of the most technology was capable of doing.” An engineer impressive voyages of scientific discovery. on the Galileo team expressed more personal * * * * * sentiments when she said, “I had never been a Michael Meltzer is an environmental part of something with such great scope . To scientist who has been writing about science know that the whole world was watching and and technology for nearly 30 years. His books hoping with us that this would work. We were and articles have investigated topics that include doing something for all mankind.” designing solar houses, preventing pollution in When Galileo lifted off from Kennedy electroplating shops, catching salmon with sonar and Space Center on 18 October 1989, it began an radar, and developing a sensor for examining Space interplanetary voyage that took it to Venus, to Michael Meltzer Michael Shuttle engines.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Iowa Instruments in Space
    University of Iowa Instruments in Space A-D13-089-5 Wind Van Allen Probes Cluster Mercury Earth Venus Mars Express HaloSat MMS Geotail Mars Voyager 2 Neptune Uranus Juno Pluto Jupiter Saturn Voyager 1 Spaceflight instruments designed and built at the University of Iowa in the Department of Physics & Astronomy (1958-2019) Explorer 1 1958 Feb. 1 OGO 4 1967 July 28 Juno * 2011 Aug. 5 Launch Date Launch Date Launch Date Spacecraft Spacecraft Spacecraft Explorer 3 (U1T9)58 Mar. 26 Injun 5 1(U9T68) Aug. 8 (UT) ExpEloxrpelro r1e r 4 1915985 8F eJbu.l y1 26 OEGxOpl o4rer 41 (IMP-5) 19697 Juunlye 2 281 Juno * 2011 Aug. 5 Explorer 2 (launch failure) 1958 Mar. 5 OGO 5 1968 Mar. 4 Van Allen Probe A * 2012 Aug. 30 ExpPloiorenre 3er 1 1915985 8M Oarc. t2. 611 InEjuxnp lo5rer 45 (SSS) 197618 NAouvg.. 186 Van Allen Probe B * 2012 Aug. 30 ExpPloiorenre 4er 2 1915985 8Ju Nlyo 2v.6 8 EUxpKlo 4r e(rA 4ri1el -(4IM) P-5) 197619 DJuenc.e 1 211 Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission / 1 * 2015 Mar. 12 ExpPloiorenre 5e r 3 (launch failure) 1915985 8A uDge.c 2. 46 EPxpiolonreeerr 4130 (IMP- 6) 19721 Maarr.. 313 HMEaRgCnIe CtousbpeShaetr i(cF oMxu-1ltDis scaatelell itMe)i ssion / 2 * 2021081 J5a nM. a1r2. 12 PionPeioenr e1er 4 1915985 9O cMt.a 1r.1 3 EExpxlpolorerer r4 457 ( S(IMSSP)-7) 19721 SNeopvt.. 1263 HMaalogSnaett oCsupbhee Sriact eMlluitlet i*scale Mission / 3 * 2021081 M5a My a2r1. 12 Pioneer 2 1958 Nov. 8 UK 4 (Ariel-4) 1971 Dec. 11 Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission / 4 * 2015 Mar.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Summaries
    TIROS 8 12/21/63 Delta-22 TIROS-H (A-53) 17B S National Aeronautics and TIROS 9 1/22/65 Delta-28 TIROS-I (A-54) 17A S Space Administration TIROS Operational 2TIROS 10 7/1/65 Delta-32 OT-1 17B S John F. Kennedy Space Center 2ESSA 1 2/3/66 Delta-36 OT-3 (TOS) 17A S Information Summaries 2 2 ESSA 2 2/28/66 Delta-37 OT-2 (TOS) 17B S 2ESSA 3 10/2/66 2Delta-41 TOS-A 1SLC-2E S PMS 031 (KSC) OSO (Orbiting Solar Observatories) Lunar and Planetary 2ESSA 4 1/26/67 2Delta-45 TOS-B 1SLC-2E S June 1999 OSO 1 3/7/62 Delta-8 OSO-A (S-16) 17A S 2ESSA 5 4/20/67 2Delta-48 TOS-C 1SLC-2E S OSO 2 2/3/65 Delta-29 OSO-B2 (S-17) 17B S Mission Launch Launch Payload Launch 2ESSA 6 11/10/67 2Delta-54 TOS-D 1SLC-2E S OSO 8/25/65 Delta-33 OSO-C 17B U Name Date Vehicle Code Pad Results 2ESSA 7 8/16/68 2Delta-58 TOS-E 1SLC-2E S OSO 3 3/8/67 Delta-46 OSO-E1 17A S 2ESSA 8 12/15/68 2Delta-62 TOS-F 1SLC-2E S OSO 4 10/18/67 Delta-53 OSO-D 17B S PIONEER (Lunar) 2ESSA 9 2/26/69 2Delta-67 TOS-G 17B S OSO 5 1/22/69 Delta-64 OSO-F 17B S Pioneer 1 10/11/58 Thor-Able-1 –– 17A U Major NASA 2 1 OSO 6/PAC 8/9/69 Delta-72 OSO-G/PAC 17A S Pioneer 2 11/8/58 Thor-Able-2 –– 17A U IMPROVED TIROS OPERATIONAL 2 1 OSO 7/TETR 3 9/29/71 Delta-85 OSO-H/TETR-D 17A S Pioneer 3 12/6/58 Juno II AM-11 –– 5 U 3ITOS 1/OSCAR 5 1/23/70 2Delta-76 1TIROS-M/OSCAR 1SLC-2W S 2 OSO 8 6/21/75 Delta-112 OSO-1 17B S Pioneer 4 3/3/59 Juno II AM-14 –– 5 S 3NOAA 1 12/11/70 2Delta-81 ITOS-A 1SLC-2W S Launches Pioneer 11/26/59 Atlas-Able-1 –– 14 U 3ITOS 10/21/71 2Delta-86 ITOS-B 1SLC-2E U OGO (Orbiting Geophysical
    [Show full text]
  • Space Weather Impacts on Satellites at Different Orbits
    Space Weather impacts on satellites at different orbits ! Outline! Prelude" ! Orbits" ! Different types of SWx effects on satellites" ! Satellite anomalies from the recent March 2012 SWx events! Yihua Zheng" June 10, 2013" SW REDI" Internal Use Only" Please do not distribute" 1 1st satellite launched into space" The world's first artificial satellite, the Sputnik 1, was launched by the Soviet Union in 1957. " marking the start of the Space Age" 4 October, 1957! International Geophysical Year: 1957" 2" Space dog - Laika" the occupant of the Soviet spacecraft Sputnik 2 that was launched into outer space on November 3, 1957" Paving the way for human missions" 3" Explorer I – 1st U.S. Satellite" •! Explorer 1, was launched into Earth's orbit on a Jupiter C missile from Cape Canaveral, Florida, on January 31, 1958 - Inner belt" 4" Discovery of the outer Van Allen RB! Pioneer 3 (launched 6 December 1958) and Explorer IV (launched July 26, 1958) both carried instruments designed and built by Dr. Van Allen. These spacecraft provided Van Allen additional data that led to discovery of a second radiation belt" 5 Van Allen Probes – more than half- century later" 6 Orbits" 7" orbits" GEO" Yellow: MEO" Green-dash-dotted line: GPS" Cyan: LEO" Red dotted line: ISS" 8" orbits" 9" Orbits" •! A low Earth orbit (LEO) is generally defined as an orbit below an altitude of 2,000 km. Given the rapid orbital decay of objects below approximately 200 km, the commonly accepted definition for LEO is between 160– 2,000 km (100–1,240 miles) above the Earth's surface." •! Medium Earth orbit (MEO), sometimes called intermediate circular orbit (ICO), is the region of space around the Earth above low Earth orbit (altitude of 2,000 kilometres (1,243 mi)) and below geostationary orbit (altitude of 35,786 km (22,236 mi)).
    [Show full text]
  • Design Principles for Robust Grasping in Unstructured Environments
    Design Principles for Robust Grasping in Unstructured Environments A thesis presented by Aaron Michael Dollar to The Division of Engineering and Applied Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of Engineering Sciences Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts October 25, 2006 © 2006 Aaron Michael Dollar All rights reserved. Robert D. Howe Aaron Michael Dollar Thesis Advisor Author Design Principles for Robust Grasping in Unstructured Environments Abstract Grasping in unstructured environments is one of the most challenging issues currently facing robotics. The inherent uncertainty about the properties of the target object and its surroundings makes the use of traditional robot hands, which typically involve complex mechanisms, sensing suites, and control, difficult and impractical. In this dissertation I investigate how the challenges associated with grasping under uncertainty can be addressed by careful mechanical design of robot hands. In particular, I examine the role of three characteristics of hand design as they affect performance: passive mechanical compliance, adaptability (or underactuation), and durability. I present design optimization studies in which the kinematic structure, compliance configuration, and joint coupling are varied in order to determine the effect on the allowable error in positioning that results in a successful grasp, while keeping contact forces low. I then describe the manufacture of a prototype hand created using a particularly durable process called polymer-based Shape Deposition Manufacturing (SDM). This process allows fragile sensing and actuation components to be embedded in tough polymers, as well as the creation of heterogeneous parts, eliminating the need for fasteners and seams that are iii often the cause of failure.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: a Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 | Asifa
    dsc_cover (Converted)-1 8/6/02 10:33 AM Page 1 Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: A Chronology ofDeep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 |Asif A.Siddiqi National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA SP-2002-4524 A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958–2000 Asif A. Siddiqi NASA SP-2002-4524 Monographs in Aerospace History Number 24 dsc_cover (Converted)-1 8/6/02 10:33 AM Page 2 Cover photo: A montage of planetary images taken by Mariner 10, the Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter, Voyager 1, and Voyager 2, all managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Included (from top to bottom) are images of Mercury, Venus, Earth (and Moon), Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. The inner planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth and its Moon, and Mars) and the outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) are roughly to scale to each other. NASA SP-2002-4524 Deep Space Chronicle A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958–2000 ASIF A. SIDDIQI Monographs in Aerospace History Number 24 June 2002 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of External Relations NASA History Office Washington, DC 20546-0001 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Siddiqi, Asif A., 1966­ Deep space chronicle: a chronology of deep space and planetary probes, 1958-2000 / by Asif A. Siddiqi. p.cm. – (Monographs in aerospace history; no. 24) (NASA SP; 2002-4524) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Space flight—History—20th century. I. Title. II. Series. III. NASA SP; 4524 TL 790.S53 2002 629.4’1’0904—dc21 2001044012 Table of Contents Foreword by Roger D.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA and Planetary Exploration
    **EU5 Chap 2(263-300) 2/20/03 1:16 PM Page 263 Chapter Two NASA and Planetary Exploration by Amy Paige Snyder Prelude to NASA’s Planetary Exploration Program Four and a half billion years ago, a rotating cloud of gaseous and dusty material on the fringes of the Milky Way galaxy flattened into a disk, forming a star from the inner- most matter. Collisions among dust particles orbiting the newly-formed star, which humans call the Sun, formed kilometer-sized bodies called planetesimals which in turn aggregated to form the present-day planets.1 On the third planet from the Sun, several billions of years of evolution gave rise to a species of living beings equipped with the intel- lectual capacity to speculate about the nature of the heavens above them. Long before the era of interplanetary travel using robotic spacecraft, Greeks observing the night skies with their eyes alone noticed that five objects above failed to move with the other pinpoints of light, and thus named them planets, for “wan- derers.”2 For the next six thousand years, humans living in regions of the Mediterranean and Europe strove to make sense of the physical characteristics of the enigmatic planets.3 Building on the work of the Babylonians, Chaldeans, and Hellenistic Greeks who had developed mathematical methods to predict planetary motion, Claudius Ptolemy of Alexandria put forth a theory in the second century A.D. that the planets moved in small circles, or epicycles, around a larger circle centered on Earth.4 Only partially explaining the planets’ motions, this theory dominated until Nicolaus Copernicus of present-day Poland became dissatisfied with the inadequacies of epicycle theory in the mid-sixteenth century; a more logical explanation of the observed motions, he found, was to consider the Sun the pivot of planetary orbits.5 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Mission Overview the Pioneer Mission Set the Stage for U.S. Space
    Mission Overview The Pioneer mission set the stage for U.S. space exploration. Pioneer 1 was the first manmade object to escape the Earth's gravitational field. Later Pioneer 4 was the first spacecraft to fly to the moon, Pioneer 10 was the first to Jupiter, Pioneer 11 was the first to Saturn and Pioneer 12 was the first U.S. spacecraft to orbit another planet, Venus. The following table summarizes the Pioneer spacecraft and scientific objectives of the Pioneer mission. Name Launch Mission Status (as of 1998) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Pioneer 1 1958-10-11 Moon Reached altitude of 72765 miles Pioneer 2 1958-11-08 Moon Reached altitude of 963 miles Pioneer 3 1958-12-02 Moon Reached altitude of 63580 miles Pioneer 4 1959-03-03 Moon Passed by moon into solar orbit Pioneer 5 1960-03-11 Solar Orbit Entered solar orbit Pioneer 6 1965-12-16 Solar Orbit Still operating Pioneer 7 1966-08-17 Solar Orbit Still operating Pioneer 8 1967-12-13 Solar Orbit Still operating Pioneer 9 1967-11-08 Solar Orbit Signal lost in 1983 Pioneer E 1969-08-07 Solar Orbit Launch failure Pioneer10 1972-03-02 Jupiter Communication terminated 1998 Pioneer11 1972-03-02 Jupiter/Saturn Communication terminated 1997 Pioneer12 1978-05-20 Venus Entered Venus atmos. 1992-10-08 The focus of this document is on Pioneer Venus (12), the last spacecraft in a mission of firsts in space exploration. Probe Separation: Pioneer Venus separated into two spacecraft on Aug 8, 1978: an Orbiter (PVO) and a Multiprobe. The latter was separated into five separate vehicles near Venus.
    [Show full text]
  • UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The Effectiveness of EMIC Wave-Driven Relativistic Electron Pitch Angle Scattering in Outer Radiation Belt Depletion Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6sg911bj Author Adair, Lydia Publication Date 2021 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles The Effectiveness of EMIC Wave-Driven Relativistic Electron Pitch Angle Scattering in Outer Radiation Belt Depletion A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Geophysics and Space Physics by Lydia Alexandra Adair 2021 c Copyright by Lydia Alexandra Adair 2021 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION The Effectiveness of EMIC Wave-Driven Relativistic Electron Pitch Angle Scattering in Outer Radiation Belt Depletion by Lydia Alexandra Adair Doctor of Philosophy in Geophysics and Space Physics University of California, Los Angeles, 2021 Professor Vassilis Angelopoulos, Chair The dynamic variability of Earth's outer radiation belt is due to the competition among various particle transport, acceleration, and loss processes. The following dissertation inves- tigates electron resonance with Electromagnetic Ion Cyclotron (EMIC) waves as a potentially dominant mechanism driving relativistic electron loss from the radiation belts. EMIC waves have been previously studied as contributors to relativistic electron flux depletion. However, assumed limitations on the pitch angle and energy ranges within which scattering takes place leave uncertainties regarding the capability of the mechanism to explain sudden loss of core electron populations of the outer radiation belt. By introducing new methods to analyze EMIC wave-driven scattering signatures and relativistic electron precipitation events through a multi-point observation approach, this dissertation reveals the effectiveness of EMIC waves to drive losses of outer radiation belt electrons with a new resolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Dataset of Post Stamps on Rocket and Satellite (1957-1959)
    第69卷 增刊 地 理 学 报 Vol.69, Supplement 2014年8月 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA August, 2014 Dataset of post stamps on rocket and satellite (1957-1959) LIU Chuang (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China) Abstract: The launching of rocket and satellite was one of the major tasks of International Geophysical Year (IGY). The first of Russia satellite named Sputnik 1 was successful launched on 4 October 1957, which is recognized as a milestone for a new era - a space age. Besides the satellites of Sputnik 1, 2 and 3, Luna 1, 2 and 3 from Russia, the Explorer 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, Vanguard 1, 2, 3, Pioneer 1,2,3, 4, Discoverer 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8 and Score from USA were successful launched from 1957-1959 in IGY (The Rocket and Satellite task was extended for implementation for one more year in 1959 than that of tasks else from 1957-1958). For celebrating and commemorating the great achievements in human history, 23 countries in the world issued post stamps during IGY, the first three years of the space era. The collection of post stamps consisted of 349 pieces from 23 countries are archived in LIN Chao Geomuseum (www.geomuseum.cn), The dataset consisted of 349 .jpg files for all of archived stamps and one table file which is the list of the collections. The code, image, date issued, country issued, contributor and descriptions are listed at the table items. Keywords: rocket; satellites; post stamps; dataset; IGY; 1957-1959 DOI: 10.11821/dlxb2014S005 Citation: LIU Chuang.
    [Show full text]
  • Spaceport News John F
    Feb. 24, 2014 Vol. 54, No. 4 Spaceport News John F. Kennedy Space Center - America’s gateway to the universe Orion recovery tests done off Cali coast By Linda Herridge which to practice recovering the Hill, assistant deputy associate a dive to simulate Orion’s Spaceport News Orion crew module, one para- administrator for exploration descent through the atmosphere chute and a forward bay cover, systems development at NASA and splashdown, as Johnson bout a hundred miles off which keeps Orion’s parachutes Headquarters in Washington. confirmed tracking and cleared the coast of San Diego, in A safe until being jettisoned, “The Orion testing work we do the airspace. Helicopters were the Pacific Ocean, a U.S. Navy just before the parachutes are is helping us work toward send- stationed in the air to observe ship’s well deck filled with needed. ing humans to deep space.” the “Orion capsule” during water as underway recovery Several of the objectives were descent, as they would be during operations began Feb. 18 on a During the testing, the tether test version of NASA’s Orion lines were unable to support accomplished before the remain- an actual retrieval mission. crew module, tethered inside, the tension caused by crew ing tests were called off. Mike Generale, the Orion to prepare for its first mission, module motion that was driven NASA and the U.S. Navy recovery operations manager Exploration Flight Test-1, in by wave turbulence in the well were able to successfully re- and test director at Kennedy September. deck of the ship.
    [Show full text]
  • Dsc Pub Edited
    Deep Space Chronicle: 1958–2000 1958 1) TX-8-6 solid propellant motor would fire to Able 1 / “Pioneer 0” insert the vehicle into orbit around the Moon. Nation: U.S. (1) Altitude would have been 29,000 kilometers Objective(s): lunar orbit with an optimal lifetime of about two weeks. Spacecraft: Able 1 The actual mission, however, lasted only 77 Spacecraft Mass: 38 kg seconds after the Thor first stage exploded at Mission Design and Management: USAF / BMD 15.2 kilometers altitude. The upper stages hit Launch Vehicle: Thor-Able 1 (Thor no. 127) the Atlantic about 123 seconds later. Launch Date and Time: 17 August 1958 / 12:18 UT Investigators concluded that the accident had Launch Site: ETR / launch complex 17A been caused by a turbopump gearbox failure. Scientific Instruments: The mission has been retroactively known as 1) magnetometer “Pioneer 0.” 2) micrometeoroid detector 3) temperature sensors 2) 4) infrared camera no name / [Luna] Results: This mission was the first of two U.S. Nation: USSR (1) Air Force (USAF) launches to the Moon and Objective(s): lunar impact the first attempted deep space launch by any Spacecraft: Ye-1 (no. 1) country. The Able 1 spacecraft, a squat, con- Spacecraft Mass: c. 360 kg (with upper stage) ical, fiberglass structure, carried a crude Mission Design and Management: OKB-1 infrared TV scanner. This device was a simple Launch Vehicle: 8K72 (no. B1-3) thermal radiation device comprising a small Launch Date and Time: 23 September 1958 / parabolic mirror for focusing reflected light 09:03:23 UT from the lunar surface onto a cell that would Launch Site: NIIP-5 / launch site 1 transmit voltage proportional to the light it Scientific Instruments: received.
    [Show full text]