DOCSLIB.ORG

LX200-ACF Instruction Manual

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
LX200-ACF Instruction Manual LX-200ACF_0308_REV2.qxd 3/26/09 3:23 PM Page 1 Instruction Manual 8", 10", 12", 14", 16" LX200®-ACF Advanced Coma-Free Telescopes with GPS and AutoStar® II Hand Controller 27 Hubble, Irvine, California 92618 (800) 626-3233 www.meade.com LX-200ACF_0308_REV2.qxd 3/26/09 3:23 PM Page 2 WARNING! Never use a Meade® LX200®-ACF Telescope to look at the Sun! Looking at or near the Sun will cause instant and irreversible damage to your eye. Eye damage is often painless, so there is no warning to the observer that damage has occurred until it is too late. Do not point the telescope at or near the Sun. Do not look through the telescope or viewfinder as it is moving. Children should always have adult supervision while observing. LX-200ACF_0308_REV2.qxd 3/26/09 3:23 PM Page 3 CONTENTS Quick-Start Guide .......................................................... 4 How to Attach the Tripod to the Telescope .................... 4 Battery Safety Instructions Telescope Features ...................................................... 7 ® • Always purchase the correct size and AutoStar II Features ......................................................10 grade of battery most suitable for the Getting Started ..............................................................13 intended use. Parts Listing ..............................................................13 How to Assemble Your Telescope ............................13 • Always replace the whole set of batteries Choosing an Eyepiece..............................................15 at one time, taking care not to mix old and Mounting and Adjusting the Viewfinder ....................16 new ones, or batteries of different types. Observing ......................................................................17 • Clean the battery contacts and also those Observing by Moving the Telescope Manually ........17 of the device prior to battery installation. Terrestrial Observing ................................................17 Observing Using AutoStar II’s Arrow Keys................17 • Ensure the batteries are installed correctly Focusing the Eyepiece with the Microfocuser ..........18 with regard to polarity (+ and -). Slew Speeds ............................................................18 • Remove batteries from equipment which Observe the Moon, Astronomical Observing ..........19 is not to be used for an extended period of To Track an Object Automatically..............................19 time. Moving Through AutoStar II’s Menus ..................19 • Remove used batteries promptly. Automatic Alignment............................................19 Observe a Star Using Automatic Tracking ..........21 • Never attempt to recharge primary Go To Saturn ............................................................21 batteries as this may cause leakage, fire, Using the Guided Tour..............................................21 or explosion. Basic AutoStar II Operation............................................23 • Never short-circuit batteries as this may AutoStar II Navigation Exercise ................................23 lead to high temperatures, leakage, or Navigating AutoStar II ..............................................24 explosion. AutoStar II Menus ........................................................25 Menu Tree ................................................................25 • Never heat batteries in order to revive Object Menu ............................................................26 them. Event Menu ..............................................................27 • Remember to switch off devices after use. Glossary Menu, Utilities Menu ..................................28 • Keep batteries out of the reach of children; Setup Menu ..............................................................29 small batteries may be ingested. Hot Button Menus ....................................................32 Advanced AutoStar II Features ......................................33 • Seek medical advice immediately if a Adding Observing Sites ............................................33 battery has been swallowed. Creating User Objects ..............................................34 Observing Satellites, Landmarks ..............................35 Identify ......................................................................36 16" LX200®-ACF Users: See APPENDIX F, Browse ......................................................................37 page 65, for features unique to the 16" Alternate Alt/Az Alignment Methods..........................38 model. Initialize AutoStar II (for Alternate Alignments) ........38 Easy (Two-Star) Alignment ......................................38 Two-Star Alt/Az Alignment ........................................39 14" LX200®-ACF Users: See APPENDIX G, To Set the Home Position Manually ....................39 page 69, for features unique to the 14" One-Star Alt/Az Alignment ........................................39 model. Periodic Error Correction ..........................................40 Photography ..................................................................41 Optional Accessories ......................................................44 ® The name “Meade”, the Meade logo, LX200 and Autostar Maintenance, Collimation ..............................................47 are trademarks registered with the U.S. Patent and Contacting Customer Support ........................................49 Trademark Office and in principal countries throughout the Specifications ................................................................50 world. Specifications subject to change without notice. Appendix A: Equatorial (Polar) Alignment ......................53 Patents: Appendix B: Latitude Chart ............................................58 US 7,092,156 Appendix C: How to Create Your Own Guided Tour......59 US 7,079,317 Appendix D: Training the Drive ......................................63 US 6,304,376 Appendix E: The Moon Menu ........................................64 US 6,392,799 Appendix F: 16" LX200-ACF Features ..........................65 US 6,563,636 Appendix G: 14" LX200-ACF Features ..........................69 D 422,610 Patent Pending. Appendix H: De-rotator and Microfocuser Assembly ....70 Appendix I: Smart Mount................................................71 © 2009 Meade Instruments Corporation. Appendix J: Previous Tripod Model Setup ....................73 Basic Astronomy ............................................................74 LX-200ACF_0308_REV2.qxd 3/26/09 3:23 PM Page 4 QUICK-START GUIDE It is recommended that you attach the supplied tripod to the LX200-ACF for observing. Perform the telescope and 1 8 2 AutoStar II setup indoors in the light so that you become familiar with the parts and operation before moving the telescope outside into the dark for observing. The setup is the same for the standard and giant field tripods. 3 NOTE: The LX200-ACF 8", 10", 12" and 14" models are equipped with Series 4000 26mm Super Plössl eyepiece 4 and a 1.25" Diagonal. The LX200 ACF 16" model is (1) Tripod Head equipped with Series 5000 26mm 5-element Super Plössl (2) Threaded Rod (3) Tension Knob eyepiece, 2" Diagonal and the Zero Image-Shift (4) Spreader Bar Microfocuser. (5) Leg Lock Knobs 7 The Field Tripod is supplied as a completely assembled (6) Extension Strut unit, except for the spreader bar (Fig. A, 4). For visual (7) Tension Hub 6 observations and short exposure astro-imaging, the drive (8) Attachment Nuts and Spring (not base of the telescope’s fork mount is attached directly to visible) the field tripod. The telescope in this way is mounted in an “Altazimuth” (“Altitude-Azimuth”, or “vertical-horizontal”) format. 5 CAUTION: “Firm feel” tightening is sufficient; over- tightening may strip the threads or damage the tripod Fig. A: Field Tripod with legs extended. and results in no additional strength. Fig. C: Remove 2 nuts and spring from threaded rod. Leave the washer on the rod. flat side Fig. B: Extend the tripod legs out. ᕡ How to Attach the Tripod to the Telescope Assembly. After removing the field tripod from its shipping carton, stand the tripod vertically, with the tripod feet down and with the tripod still fully collapsed. Grasp two of the tripod legs and, with the full weight of the tripod on the third leg, gently pull the legs apart to a fully open position (Fig. B). Fig. D: Slide spreader over threaded rod. Note The spreader bar (Fig. A, 4) has been removed for the washer on the rod. shipment. Unscrew the attachment nuts and spring from the spreader bar’s threaded rod (Fig. A, 2). Leave the washer on the bar. See Fig. C. Slide the spring into the hole on top of the tripod head (Fig. A, 1). Slide the spreader bar onto the threaded rod on top of the washer that is already on the threaded rod. Position the spreader bar with the flat side facing upward (Fig. D). Slide the threaded rod back through the tripod head from underneath and through the spring. Rethread the first attachment nut over the threaded rod as far down as it will go. Then thread the second nut until it is on top of the first Fig. E, 2: Thread the first nut nut. Push the rod up higher from underneath to make it as far down as it will go. Then easier to attach the nuts. See Fig. E, 1 and E, 2. Fig. E, 1: Insert spring into thread the second nut down hole on top of tripod head. onto the first nut. - 4 - LX-200ACF_0308_REV2.qxd 3/26/09 3:23 PM Page 5 Move the spreader bar so that the 3 arms of the spreader bar are lined up with the 3 tripod legs. Place the entire telescope
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Detecting, Tracking and Imaging Space Debris
    r bulletin 109 — february 2002 Detecting, Tracking and Imaging Space Debris D. Mehrholz, L. Leushacke FGAN Research Institute for High-Frequency Physics and Radar Techniques, Wachtberg, Germany W. Flury, R. Jehn, H. Klinkrad, M. Landgraf European Space Operations Centre (ESOC), Darmstadt, Germany Earth’s space-debris environment tracked, with estimates for the number of Today’s man-made space-debris environment objects larger than 1 cm ranging from 100 000 has been created by the space activities to 200 000. that have taken place since Sputnik’s launch in 1957. There have been more than 4000 The sources of this debris are normal launch rocket launches since then, as well as many operations (Fig. 2), certain operations in space, other related debris-generating occurrences fragmentations as a result of explosions and such as more than 150 in-orbit fragmentation collisions in space, firings of satellite solid- events. rocket motors, material ageing effects, and leaking thermal-control systems. Solid-rocket Among the more than 8700 objects larger than 10 cm in Earth orbits, motors use aluminium as a catalyst (about 15% only about 6% are operational satellites and the remainder is space by mass) and when burning they emit debris. Europe currently has no operational space surveillance aluminium-oxide particles typically 1 to 10 system, but a powerful radar facility for the detection and tracking of microns in size. In addition, centimetre-sized space debris and the imaging of space objects is available in the form objects are formed by metallic aluminium melts, of the 34 m dish radar at the Research Establishment for Applied called ‘slag’.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Greatest Projects and Their Engineers - VII
    America's Greatest Projects and Their Engineers - VII Course No: B05-005 Credit: 5 PDH Dominic Perrotta, P.E. Continuing Education and Development, Inc. 22 Stonewall Court Woodcliff Lake, NJ 076 77 P: (877) 322-5800 [email protected] America’s Greatest Projects & Their Engineers-Vol. VII The Apollo Project-Part 1 Preparing for Space Travel to the Moon Table of Contents I. Tragedy and Death Before the First Apollo Flight A. The Three Lives that Were Lost B. Investigation, Findings & Recommendations II. Beginning of the Man on the Moon Concept A. Plans to Land on the Moon B. Design Considerations and Decisions 1. Rockets – Launch Vehicles 2. Command/Service Module 3. Lunar Module III. NASA’s Objectives A. Unmanned Missions B. Manned Missions IV. Early Missions V. Apollo 7 Ready – First Manned Apollo Mission VI. Apollo 8 - Orbiting the Moon 1 I. Tragedy and Death Before the First Apollo Flight Everything seemed to be going well for the Apollo Project, the third in a series of space projects by the United States intended to place an American astronaut on the Moon before the end of the 1960’s decade. Apollo 1, known at that time as AS (Apollo Saturn)-204 would be the first manned spaceflight of the Apollo program, and would launch a few months after the flight of Gemini 12, which had occurred on 11 November 1966. Although Gemini 12 was a short duration flight, Pilot Buzz Aldrin had performed three extensive EVA’s (Extra Vehicular Activities), proving that Astronauts could work for long periods of time outside the spacecraft.
    [Show full text]
  • Lunar Sourcebook : a User's Guide to the Moon
    4 LUNAR SURFACE PROCESSES Friedrich Hörz, Richard Grieve, Grant Heiken, Paul Spudis, and Alan Binder The Moon’s surface is not affected by atmosphere, encounters with each other and with larger planets water, or life, the three major agents for altering throughout the lifetime of the solar system. These terrestrial surfaces. In addition, the lunar surface has orbital alterations are generally minor, but they not been shaped by recent geological activity, because ensure that, over geological periods, collisions with the lunar crust and mantle have been relatively cold other bodies will occur. and rigid throughout most of geological time. When such a collision happens, two outcomes are Convective internal mass transport, which dominates possible. If “target” and “projectile” are of comparable the dynamic Earth, is therefore largely absent on the size, collisional fragmentation and annihilation Moon, and so are the geological effects of such occurs, producing a large number of much smaller internal motions—volcanism, uplift, faulting, and fragments. If the target object is very large compared subduction—that both create and destroy surfaces on to the projectile, it behaves as an “infinite halfspace,” Earth. The great contrast between the ancient, stable and the result is an impact crater in the target body. Moon and the active, dynamic Earth is most clearly For collisions in the asteroid belt, many of the shown by the ages of their surfaces. Nearly 80% of the resulting collisional fragments or crater ejecta escape entire solid surface of Earth is <200 m.y. old. In the gravitational field of the impacted object; many of contrast, >99% of the lunar surface formed more than these fragments are then further perturbed into 3 b.y.
    [Show full text]
  • Slope - Geologic Age Relationships in Complex Lunar Craters C
    49th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2018 (LPI Contrib. No. 2083) 2399.pdf SLOPE - GEOLOGIC AGE RELATIONSHIPS IN COMPLEX LUNAR CRATERS C. Rojas1, P. Mahanti1, M. S. Robinson1, LROC Team1, 1LROC Science Operation Center, School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona ([email protected]) Table 1: List of complex craters. *Copernican craters Introduction: Impact events leading to formation Crater D (km) Model Age (Ga) Lon Lat of basins and large craters dominate the early history Moore F* 24 0.041∓0.012 [8] 37.30 185.0 of the Moon [1] leading to kilometer scale topographic Wiener F* 30 0.017∓0.002 149.9740.90 variations on the lunar surface, with smaller crater [2], Klute W* 31 0.090∓0.007 216.7037.98 progressively introducing higher frequency topography. Necho* 37 0.080∓0.024 [8] 123.3 –5.3 Crater wall slopes represent most of the overall topo- Aristarchus* 40 0.175∓0.0095 312.5 23.7 graphic variation since many locations on the Moon are Jackson* 71 0.147∓0.038 [9] 196.7 22.1 craters. While impact events lead to the formation of McLaughlin 75 3.7∓0.1 [10] 267.1747.01 steep slopes [3], they are also primarily responsible for Pitiscus 80 3.8∓0.1 [10] 30.57 -50.61 landform degradation [4]. During crater formation, tar- Al-Biruni 80 3.8∓0.1 [10] 92.62 18.09 get properties and processes controlling structural sta- La Pérouse 80 3.6∓0.1 [10] -10.66 76.18 bility limit maximum slopes [4].
    [Show full text]
  • South Pole-Aitken Basin
    Feasibility Assessment of All Science Concepts within South Pole-Aitken Basin INTRODUCTION While most of the NRC 2007 Science Concepts can be investigated across the Moon, this chapter will focus on specifically how they can be addressed in the South Pole-Aitken Basin (SPA). SPA is potentially the largest impact crater in the Solar System (Stuart-Alexander, 1978), and covers most of the central southern farside (see Fig. 8.1). SPA is both topographically and compositionally distinct from the rest of the Moon, as well as potentially being the oldest identifiable structure on the surface (e.g., Jolliff et al., 2003). Determining the age of SPA was explicitly cited by the National Research Council (2007) as their second priority out of 35 goals. A major finding of our study is that nearly all science goals can be addressed within SPA. As the lunar south pole has many engineering advantages over other locations (e.g., areas with enhanced illumination and little temperature variation, hydrogen deposits), it has been proposed as a site for a future human lunar outpost. If this were to be the case, SPA would be the closest major geologic feature, and thus the primary target for long-distance traverses from the outpost. Clark et al. (2008) described four long traverses from the center of SPA going to Olivine Hill (Pieters et al., 2001), Oppenheimer Basin, Mare Ingenii, and Schrödinger Basin, with a stop at the South Pole. This chapter will identify other potential sites for future exploration across SPA, highlighting sites with both great scientific potential and proximity to the lunar South Pole.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Peaks in Lunar Craters : Morphology and Morphometry
    CENTRAL PEAKS IN LUNAR CRATERS : MORPHOLOGY AND MORPHOMETRY. Wendy Hale and James W. Head, Dept. of Geological Sciences, Erown University, Provi- dence, R I 02912. Central peaks are an important structural and morphological feature of fresb craters on the Moon. Previous work has established their occurrence as a function of fresh crater size (100% in craters with diameters >35 km), 1 their relationship to substrate type (more frequent occurrence in mare craters than in highland craters below%35 ki lometers),' thei r abundance as a function of crater type,' that peak height is directly proportional to crater diameter (h = .006 D~,~.'~),~"and that a transition from central peak craters to cen- tral peak basins to peak ring basins occurs at d iameters between 150-250 km.4'5 A1 though virtua l l y a l l workers agree that central peaks are related to ~hcsurrounding impact crater in origin, there is uncertainty about the rode of formation, with some associating peak formation with the gravity-induced fa; ure of the transient cavity during the modification stage of the cratering event, 6 a7d others proposing that central uplift begins during the excavation stag', initiated by high stresses associated with shock and rarefaction waves ccnc~ntratedin the sub-impact p~int.~'~Relati~nships between central peak hsicjht and crater diameter,3 and the diameters of transition to central peak zna peak-ring basins on different planets4 have been cited as evidence favor- ing the latter view. The purpose of the present study is to examine central peak regions in fresh lunar craters in order to I ) define a relationship be- tlween diameter of central peaks, and crater rim crest and floor diameter, 2) characterize their morphology, 3) provide a stronger basis for comparison of central peaks to peak rings in lunar basins, and 4) assess the effects of degradation.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Sexual Abuse Claims in Chapter 11 Cases of Boy Scouts of America
    Summary of Sexual Abuse Claims in Chapter 11 Cases of Boy Scouts of America There are approximately 101,135sexual abuse claims filed. Of those claims, the Tort Claimants’ Committee estimates that there are approximately 83,807 unique claims if the amended and superseded and multiple claims filed on account of the same survivor are removed. The summary of sexual abuse claims below uses the set of 83,807 of claim for purposes of claims summary below.1 The Tort Claimants’ Committee has broken down the sexual abuse claims in various categories for the purpose of disclosing where and when the sexual abuse claims arose and the identity of certain of the parties that are implicated in the alleged sexual abuse. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a chart that shows the sexual abuse claims broken down by the year in which they first arose. Please note that there approximately 10,500 claims did not provide a date for when the sexual abuse occurred. As a result, those claims have not been assigned a year in which the abuse first arose. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a chart that shows the claims broken down by the state or jurisdiction in which they arose. Please note there are approximately 7,186 claims that did not provide a location of abuse. Those claims are reflected by YY or ZZ in the codes used to identify the applicable state or jurisdiction. Those claims have not been assigned a state or other jurisdiction. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a chart that shows the claims broken down by the Local Council implicated in the sexual abuse.
    [Show full text]
  • Results of the Tenth Saturn I Launch Vehicle Test Flight SA-10, MPR-SAT-FE-66-11, July 14, 1966
    HUNTSVILLE ALABAMA U N MPR-SAT-FE-66-i t J (Supersedes MPR-SAT-65-14) July 14, 1966 X69-75421 (ACCE$$}0_IN_) ./BER) " (THRU) _; <k/ ,ooo_, o (NASA'CR OR T__) (CATEGORYI _. AVAILABLE TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND CONTRACTORS ONLY RESULTSOFTHETENTHSATURN, LAUNCHVEHICLE [u] .C,_BsTfIc_o _ c_a_ _£Sk "+ , / +. _ ,+1 -: • 1_ ,t:_ 'v- Sc_e_t;*; SATURN FLIGHT EVALUATION WORKING GROUP GROUP-4 _/ Down_r_W_L3y_rvats; Declasf_ars. %, L " \ ',., ". MSFC - Fo_m 774 (Rev Ma_ 1_66) C • _, SECURITY NOTE This document contains irrformation affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Law, Title 18, U.S.C. , Sec- tions 793 and 794 as amended. The revelation ol its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. MPR-SAT-FE-66-11 RESULTS OF TIIE TENTH SATURN I LAUNCII VEIIICLE TEST FLIGHT SA-IO By Saturn Flight Evaluation Working Group George C. Marshall Space Flight Center AI3STIIA CT This report presents the results of the early engi- neering evaluation of the SA-10 test flight. Sixth of the Block II series, SA-i0 was the fifth Saturn vehicle to car W an Apollo boilerplate (BP-9) payload and the third in a series to carry a Pegasus payload (Pegasus C). The performance of each major vehicle system is discussed with special emphasis on malfunctions and deviations. This test flightof SA-10 was the tenth consecutive success for the Saturn I vehicles and marks the end el the Saturn I program This was the third flight test of the Pegasus meteoroid technology satellite, the third flight test to utilize the iterative guidance mode, the fourth flight test utilizing the ST-f24 guidance system forboth stages, andthe fifth flight test to dem- onstrate the closed loop performance of the path guidance during S-IV burn.
    [Show full text]
  • THE EARLY APOLLO PROGRAM Project Apollo Was an American Space Project Which Landed People on the Moon and Brought Them Safely Back to Earth
    AIAA AEROSPACE M ICRO-LESSON Easily digestible Aerospace Principles revealed for K-12 Students and Educators. These lessons will be sent on a bi-weekly basis and allow grade-level focused learning. - AIAA STEM K-12 Committee. THE EARLY APOLLO PROGRAM Project Apollo was an American space project which landed people on the Moon and brought them safely back to Earth. Most people know about Apollo 1, in which three astronauts lost their lives in a fire during a countdown rehearsal, and about Apollo 8, which flew to the Moon, orbited around it, and returned to Earth. Just about everybody knows about Apollo 11, which first landed astronauts on the Moon. But what happened in between these missions? This lesson explores the lesser-known but still essential building blocks of the later missions’ success. Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS): ● Discipline: Engineering Design ● Crosscutting Concept: Systems and System Models ● Science & Engineering Practice: Constructing Explanations and Designing Solutions GRADES K-2 K-2-ETS1-1. Ask questions, make observations, and gather information about a situation people want to change to define a simple problem that can be solved through the development of a new or improved object or tool. NASA engineers knew that Apollo astronauts would need special training to succeed in their missions to the moon, but how could they train under conditions similar to those the crew would encounter? One answer was to send them to places with barren areas and volcanic features that were like what they expected to find on the lunar surface. The astronauts received geology training as well as practicing maneuvers in their spacesuits and driving a replica of the GRADES K-2 (CONTINUED) lunar rover vehicle.
    [Show full text]
  • Ages of Large Lunar Impact Craters and Implications for Bombardment During the Moon’S Middle Age ⇑ Michelle R
    Icarus 225 (2013) 325–341 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Icarus journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/icarus Ages of large lunar impact craters and implications for bombardment during the Moon’s middle age ⇑ Michelle R. Kirchoff , Clark R. Chapman, Simone Marchi, Kristen M. Curtis, Brian Enke, William F. Bottke Southwest Research Institute, 1050 Walnut Street, Suite 300, Boulder, CO 80302, United States article info abstract Article history: Standard lunar chronologies, based on combining lunar sample radiometric ages with impact crater den- Received 20 October 2012 sities of inferred associated units, have lately been questioned about the robustness of their interpreta- Revised 28 February 2013 tions of the temporal dependance of the lunar impact flux. In particular, there has been increasing focus Accepted 10 March 2013 on the ‘‘middle age’’ of lunar bombardment, from the end of the Late Heavy Bombardment (3.8 Ga) until Available online 1 April 2013 comparatively recent times (1 Ga). To gain a better understanding of impact flux in this time period, we determined and analyzed the cratering ages of selected terrains on the Moon. We required distinct ter- Keywords: rains with random locations and areas large enough to achieve good statistics for the small, superposed Moon, Surface crater size–frequency distributions to be compiled. Therefore, we selected 40 lunar craters with diameter Cratering Impact processes 90 km and determined the model ages of their floors by measuring the density of superposed craters using the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Wide Angle Camera mosaic. Absolute model ages were computed using the Model Production Function of Marchi et al.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA News 01 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, D.C
    NASA News 01 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, D.C. 20546 AC 202 755-8370 (0 3 For Release: o *[J£ Bill Pomeroy 00 c« Headquarters, Washington, D.C, 3 P. M., WEDNESDAY, Dfn (Phone: 202/755-8370) October 10, 1979 in ^ Ken Atchison 0 Headquarters, Washington, D.C, (Phone: 202/755-2497) a RELEASE NO: 79-126 a PEGASUS 2 REENTRY EXPECTED IN NOVEMBER w The Pegasus 2 spacecraft assembly, launched by NASA in 1965, is expected to reenter the Earth's atmosphere on or about Nov. 5, according to notification given NASA by the North American Air Defense Command. The command compiles information on satellite payloads, rocket bodies and other orbiting pieces that could survive the friction and heat of reentry and impact on Earth. Pegasus 2, launched May 25, 1965, was used to gather micrometeoroid data for use in the design of spacecraft. -more- -2- It was one of three such spacecraft, all launched in 1965. Pegasus 1 reentered Sept. 17, 1978, over Africa and Pegasus 3 reentered Aug. 4, 1969, over the Pacific Ocean. The Pegasus 2 assembly weighs about 10,430 kilograms (23,000 pounds) and is 21 meters (70 feet) long. The space- craft itself weighs about 1,450 kg (3,200 lb.). It is attached to the empty S-IV stage and the instrument unit of the Saturn I launch vehicle. None of the sections has any radioactive nuclear power sources or materials aboard. It is estimated that approximately 9,705 kg (21,400 lb.) of orbital hardware will be destroyed by reentry heating.
    [Show full text]
  • The Space Mission at Kwajalein
    THE SPACE MISSION AT KWAJALEIN The Space Mission at Kwajalein Timothy D. Hall, Gary F. Duff, and Linda J. Maciel The United States has leveraged the Reagan The Reagan Test Site (RTS), located on Kwajalein Atoll in the central western Test Site’s suite of instrumentation radars and » Pacific, has been a missile testing facility its unique location on the Kwajalein Atoll to for the United States government since the enhance space surveillance and to conduct early 1960s. Lincoln Laboratory has provided technical space launches. Lincoln Laboratory’s technical leadership for RTS from the very beginning, with Labo- ratory staff serving assignments there continuously since leadership at the site and its connection to May 1962 [1]. Over the past few decades, the RTS suite the greater Department of Defense space of instrumentation radars has contributed significantly to community have been instrumental in the U.S. space surveillance and space launch activities. The space-object identification (SOI) enterprise success of programs to detect space launches, was motivated by early data collected with the Advanced to catalog deep-space objects, and to provide Research Projects Agency (ARPA)-Lincoln C-band exquisite radar imagery of satellites. Observables Radar (ALCOR), the first high-power, wide- band radar. Today, RTS sensors continue to provide radar imagery of satellites to the intelligence community. Since the early 1980s, RTS radars have provided critical data on the early phases of space launches out of Asia. RTS also supports the Space Surveillance Network’s (SSN) catalog-maintenance mission with radar data on high-priority near-Earth satellites and deep-space satellites, including geosynchronous satellites that are not visible from the other two deep-space radar sites, the Millstone Hill radar in Westford, Massachusetts, and Globus II in Norway.
    [Show full text]