DOCSLIB.ORG

Sounding Rocket Working Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sounding Rocket Working Group Sounding Rocket Working Group 21 January 2014 The attached documents contain technical data within the definition of the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, and are subject to the export control laws of the U.S. Government. Transfer of this data by any means to a foreign person, whether in the U.S. or abroad, without an export license or other approval from the U.S. Department of State, is prohibited. Similarly, publication or other release into the public domain constitutes an export and is not authorized, except as approved by the cognizant U.S. government department or agency. NSRP Briefing Outline • Programmatics - Eberspeaker/Schafer SRPO NSROC • Schedule Adherence - Eberspeaker • Success Criteria Guidelines - Ransone • Anomaly Status - Rosanova • Motors & Vehicle Systems - Brodell/Hesh/Hunter Surplus Peprgrine Brants Orioles FTS Caster • Annual Report & PI Questionnaire - Eberspeaker • Educational Activities - Eberspeaker/Koehler • Range Status - Ransone Wallops Pker WSMR Kwajalein Norway Australia • Technology Development - Rosanova / NSROC 2 SRPO Programmatic Eberspeaker The attached documents contain technical data within the definition of the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, and are subject to the export control laws of the U.S. Government. Transfer of this data by any means to a foreign person, whether in the U.S. or abroad, without an export license or other approval from the U.S. Department of State, is prohibited. Similarly, publication or other release into the public domain constitutes an export and is not authorized, except as approved by the cognizant U.S. government department or agency. June SRWG Findings 1. Strong Concern Regarding Program Vitality (Letter sent to NASA HQ) • The SRPO appreciates the support… 2. Establishing Kwajalein and Woomera as “Routine” Rocket Ranges • “Routine” may not be exactly the right term. – The SRPO plans to return to Kwajalein periodically and intends to minimize cost by regulating the campaign complexity and number of flights so that intrinsic assets can be used. – A Woomera campaign is under early stages of development and the SRPO plans to minimize costs by minimizing the need for mobile support assets. – Status on these elements are provided in the Launch Ranges Section. 3. Success Criteria Guidelines and Examples • The development of these guidelines is ongoing. The concepts are explored in the Success Criteria Guidelines section. 4. Continued Development of Recovery Systems • Concepts to enable high energy recovery are being assessed. It is a complex issue that involves hardware development, software tool development, and operational considerations. Status of the efforts is provided in the Technology Development section. 4 Missions Flown Since Last SRWG • Core Science • Technology & Risk Mitigation – 21.140 / Pfaff / Daytime Dynamo –None • Success – 41.090 / Pfaff / Daytime Dynamo • Education • Success – 41.106 / Koehler / RockOn – 36.239 / Korendyke / • Success – 46.005 / Koehler / RockSat – 36.290 / Woods / EVE • Success • Reimbursable – 36.294 / McCammon / –None • Success Note: in some cases – 36.296 / McCandliss / Ison success noted is based • Success on preliminary PI report – 36.261 / Clark / VESPR • Success FY12/13 40 consecutive FY13 –19 flights successful flights 5 FY13 Completed Missions Mission Launch Site PI Project Comments Date 1 36.255 S Nov 2 WSMR Krucker FOXSI Success - 2 36.260 G Nov 21 WSMR Cook M101 Imager Success - S-19 joint broke on landing (fall over). Mirror mount damage. 3 36.283 H Dec 13 WSMR Galeazzi DXL Success - Dual side looking doors. Brant MK1 had combustion instability 4 41.107 T Jan 29 WFF West Lithium Test Flight Success Launched within 5 minute window as required. Both releases observed. 5 49.001 E Feb 2 PFRR Rowland VISIONS Success First flight of Talos-Terrier-Oriole-Nihka. Vehicle flew within ~1 sigma. 6 41.104 TFeb 15 WSMR Rosanova Uplink Exercise Success Uplink command test + 20 Mb/s test 7 36.269 S April 9 WSMR Rabin Success First flight of Gate approach. Benign winds & no issue with gate 8 36.271 GApril 21 WSMR France Success No issue with winds or gate 9 41.100 R April Kwaj Caton Success – flew 5 sigma low 10 41.102 R April Kwaj Caton Success – Flew TBD sigma low 11 46.001 E April Kwaj Kudeki EVEX Success – Flew low 12 45.005 E April Kwaj Kudeki EVEX Success – Flew low 13 36.268 G May 10 WSMR McCandliss FORTISS #1 Success – No Gate issue. Scattered light impacted science 6 FY13 Completed Missions Mission Launc Site PI Project Comments h Date 14 40.030 G June 4 WFF Bock Success - First telescope flown on BBXII. 11 targets observed 15 41.106 Edu June 20 WFF Koehler RockOn VI Success 16 41.090 E June 24 WFF Pfaff Daytime Dynamo 17 21.140 E June 24 WFF Pfaff Daytime Dynamo Investigating ACS gas leak on upleg and impact on science data 18 36.239 S Aug 8 WSMR Korendyke Success 19 46.005 Edu Aug 13 WFF Koehler RockSat‐X III Success FY14 Completed Missions Mission Launc Site PI Project Comments h Date 1 36.290 SOct 21 WSMR Woods EVE Success 2 36.294 H Nov 1 WSMR McCammon Success. No filter icing. Combustion Instability at T+30 sec. Gate approach worked well 3 36.296 G Nov 20 WSMR McCandliss FORTIS Success. Launched 1 day late due to sealing issue with experiment butterfly valve 4 36.261 G Nov 26 WSMR Clarke VESPR Success. Launched 1 day late due to sealing issue with experiment butterfly valve 7 CY14 Planning Manifest 8 CY15 Planning Manifest 9 Flight Rates Year Core Reimbursable Total 2005 11 8 Target 19 2006 8 14 Target 22 Restoration 0 2007 18 18 2008 12 4Target + 1 Sci/Tech 17 Budget 2009 13 5Target + 3 Sci/Tech 21 2010 13 5Target + 1 Tech 19 2011 12 1 Target 13 2012 20 1 Tech 21 Upgrades 2013 17 2 Sci 19 WSMR ‐ Target missions are low complexity ‐ Sci/Tech reimbursable missions are generally medium to high complexity 10 Flight Rate 11 Mission Initiation Conferences FY 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 MICS 20 18 31 13 14 24 18 15 21 12 18 Flights Initiated 35 30 25 20 Held 15 MICs 10 5 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 FIscal Year Includes core and reimbursable missions 12 Schedule Adherence Eberspeaker 21 January 2014 The attached documents contain technical data within the definition of the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, and are subject to the export control laws of the U.S. Government. Transfer of this data by any means to a foreign person, whether in the U.S. or abroad, without an export license or other approval from the U.S. Department of State, is prohibited. Similarly, publication or other release into the public domain constitutes an export and is not authorized, except as approved by the cognizant U.S. government department or agency. Schedule Adherence • SRWG Concerns / Comments Experiment teams and NSROC should demonstrate that they are on schedule before certain milestones occur • Response: – The SRPO concurs, but this does not help prevent milestones from slipping – which then cascade to impact other milestones. Slips should be implemented “without blame” • Concern: Do not implement automatic “go to the end of the line” approach • Response: – The SRPO understands that “go to the end of the line” can be a problematic solution. As usual, the SRPO will attempt to find a logical launch slot for delayed missions, but teams must understand that optimum dates may not be available. – Slips must be identified as early as possible to allow efficient integration of the project schedule into the overall program workflow Financial penalties will be counterproductive • Concern: Delays are often due to technical issues and lean budgets and withholding funding would tend to aggravate the situation. • Response: – The SRPO capitulates on this aspect. However, science teams should not hold any expectation that funding augmentations will be available to cover mission slips and impact on funding can not be ruled out in extreme cases. 20 Schedule Adherence • SRWG Concerns / Comments Schedule Credibility Review will be counterproductive • Concern: Sounds “formal” and could be time consuming and costly. Suggest implementing less formal “Benchmark Reviews” prior to CDR, Integration, and Launch Operations • Response: – More “reviews” won’t solve the problem. – The program needs to anticipate schedule issues as early as possible so resources can be applied to them before the impact snowballs (i.e. gets us into a situation where overtime is needed during integration when maximum resources are involved, or when field operations are underway). – The SCR was intended to be a “oops, we blew it - where do we go from here” assessment (i.e. is there any real hope of meeting launch date, is science so critical that we need to invest resources to meet schedule, will a delay require more funding, etc.). HQ would be involved since science criticality, R&A budget, and impact on other missions may be involved. 21 Schedule Adherence • SRWG Concerns / Comments Missions are proposed as “success oriented” projects and no funding is available for “slack”. Exhaustive schedule planning (similar to a satellite program) does not appear feasible. • Response: – Exhaustive schedule planning is not envisioned. – The SRPO feels that achievable delivery schedules (both on science and NSROC side) can be developed which provide some definable schedule contingency. Consumption of this contingency will serve as a gauge of the status of the project. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec MIC DR T&E MRR Field Ops Instument A (New design) ‐ Design ‐ Fabrication (schedule uncertainty item) ‐ Pre Integration Vacuum Test Instument B (semi‐Clone of existing ) ‐ Design Modifications ‐ Fabrication ‐ Pre integration Deployment Test Attitude Control ‐ Analysis ‐ Integration Prep ‐ Prelim Airbearing ‐ Final Airbearing TM ‐ Design (schedule uncertainty item) ‐ Mechanical Fabrication ‐ Electrical Wiring ‐ Bench Tests ‐ Experiment A Handshake Tests (@ WFF) 22 Schedule Adherence Implementation • Mission Managers are now collecting more detailed PI milestones and coordinating milestones/activities The effort has resulted in planned delays of premature activities such as Design Reviews, allowing for more efficient work effort.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Suborbital Platforms and Range Services (SPARS)
    Suborbital Capabilities for Science & Technology Small Missions Workshop @ Johns Hopkins University June 10, 2019 Mike Hitch, Giovanni Rosanova Goddard Space Introduction Flight Center AGENDAWASP OPIS ▪ Purpose ▪ History & Importance of Suborbital Carriers to Science ▪ Suborbital Platforms ▪ Sounding Rockets ▪ Balloons (brief) ▪ Aircraft ▪ SmallSats ▪ WFF Engineering ▪ Q & A P-3 Maintenance 12-Jun-19 Competition Sensitive – Do Not Distribute 2 Goddard Space Purpose of the Meeting Flight Center Define theWASP OPISutility of Suborbital Carriers & “Small” Missions ▪ Sounding rockets, balloons and aircraft (manned and unmanned) provide a unique capability to scientists and engineers to: ▪ Allow PIs to enhance and advance technology readiness levels of instruments and components for very low relative cost ▪ Provide PIs actual science flight opportunities as a “piggy-back” on a planned mission flight at low relative cost ▪ Increase experience for young and mid-career scientists and engineers by allowing them to get their “feet wet” on a suborbital mission prior to tackling the much larger and more complex orbital endeavors ▪ The Suborbital/Smallsat Platforms And Range Services (SPARS) Line Of Business (LOB) can facilitate prospective PIs with taking advantage of potential suborbital flight opportunities P-3 Maintenance 12-Jun-19 Competition Sensitive – Do Not Distribute 3 Goddard Space Value of Suborbital Research – What’s Different? Flight Center WASP OPIS Different Risk/Mission Assurance Strategy • Payloads are recovered and refurbished. • Re-flights are inexpensive (<$1M for a balloon or sounding rocket vs >$10M - 100M for a ELV) • Instrumentation can be simple and have a large science impact! • Frequent flight opportunities (e.g. “piggyback”) • Development of precursor instrument concepts and mature TRLs • While Suborbital missions fully comply with all Agency Safety policies, the program is designed to take Higher Programmatic Risk – Lower cost – Faster migration of new technology – Smaller more focused efforts, enable Tiger Team/incubator experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • Sounding Rockets 2017 Annual Report
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA Sounding Rockets Annual Report 2017 particle energy measurements. Where once five or six free flying subpayloads were possible, now twenty or more are feasible. Astrophysicists are always wanting to collect more photons to enhance scientific return. This dictates a need for either larger diameter payloads to accommodate larger mirrors, or longer obser- vation times – and usually both. Astrophysics missions have, to a large extent, been limited to flying from White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico due to the requirement to recover the instruments for re-flight. Longer flights require higher apogees, which gener- ally dictate the need for ranges with larger impact areas. Larger launch ranges usually require flight over the ocean. The program is developing new water recovery technologies to enable such missions at a cost that is commensurate with the low-cost nature of the program. The new system includes a hydrodynamic wedge to reduce impact loads and sealed sections to protect the science instruments and expensive support systems such as telemetry and attitude control systems. The trick is, each of these systems needs to have some sort of exposure to the outside environment during the scientific data period, yet be sealed when they impact the ocean. While ocean recovery has been done for essentially the entire life of the program, it has involved relatively basic systems that offered few Phil Eberspeaker from the Chief Message engineering challenges. Now telescopes, telemetry systems, attitude Chief, Sounding Rockets Program Office controls systems, and even the recovery systems themselves need to be protected so they can be reflow on future missions.
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Modelling and Simulation of a 100 Km Hybrid Sounding Rocket
    PERFORMANCE MODELLING AND SIMULATION OF A 100 KM HYBRID SOUNDING ROCKET Fiona Kay Leverone Submitted in fulfilment of the academic requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering, College of Agriculture, Engineering and Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal Supervisor: Mr Michael Brooks Co-Supervisor: Mr Jean-François Pitot de la Beaujardiere Co-Supervisor: Prof Lance Roberts December 2013 2. DECLARATION 1 - PLAGIARISM I, Fiona Leverone, declare that 1. The research reported in this thesis, except where otherwise indicated, is my original research. 2. This thesis has not been submitted for any degree or examination at any other university. 3. This thesis does not contain other persons’ data, pictures, graphs or other information, unless specifically acknowledged as being sourced from other persons. 4. This thesis does not contain other persons’ writing, unless specifically acknowledged as being sourced from other researchers. Where other written sources have been quoted, then: a. Their words have been re-written but the general information attributed to them has been referenced b. Where their exact words have been used, then their writing has been placed inside quotation marks, and referenced. 5. This thesis does not contain text, graphics or tables copied and pasted from the Internet, unless specifically acknowledged, and the source being detailed in the thesis and in the References sections. Signed ________________________ Date ___________ Miss Fiona Leverone As the candidate’s supervisor I have approved this dissertation for submission. Signed ________________________ Date ___________ Mr. Michael Brooks As the candidates co-supervisor I have approved this dissertation for submission. Signed ________________________ Date ___________ Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • What's Inside... in Brief
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration What’s inside... 2 Features 5 Integration and Testing 4 1 3 2 2015 6 Picture Place 7 Other News 8 Schedule & Miscellanea Sounding Rockets Program Office 46.012 UO Koehler - RockSat-X was succesfully launched In Brief... from Wallops Island on August 12, 2015. The new Black Brant Mk 4 vehicle will fly for the first time in October 2015 from Wallops Island. The payload carries several technology test experi- ments and instruments. Payload teams are preparing for the coming Norway campaign. Two rockets will be launched from Andoya with the launch window opening on November 27. The Multiple User Suborbital Instru- ment Carrier (MUSIC) payload will be launched from Wallops Island in Oc- tober on a Terrier-Improved Malemute rocket. The sounding rockets program will cel- ebrate 45-years at Wallops on Novem- ber 30, 2015. More on page 7. A very busy flight schedule is in prog- ress. The Sounding Rockets Program has 11 missions on schedule during the Students from Hawaii with their experiment after the successful flight. period September through November. The 46.012 UO RockSat-X mission was launched from Wallops Island, VA on Au- Three have been successfully complet- gust 12, 2015. RockSat-X is the most advanced of three student flight programs ed and eight remain. managed by Colorado Space Grant Consortium and supported by NASA. RockSat- X provides participating University faculty and students an opportunity to build, RockSat-X continued... test and fly an experiment of their own University Of Hawaii Community College design onboard a Terrier-Improved System University of Nebraska Lincoln (UNL) Malemute sounding rocket and in- Project Imua The experiment from the University of cludes full featured sounding rocket The primary mission goal for Project Nebraska Lincoln compared buoyant support systems, such as telemetry, Imua is to encourage UHCC students to convection on the ground in the pres- attitude control and recovery.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Planes and Space Tourism: the Industry and the Regulation of Its Safety
    Space Planes and Space Tourism: The Industry and the Regulation of its Safety A Research Study Prepared by Dr. Joseph N. Pelton Director, Space & Advanced Communications Research Institute George Washington University George Washington University SACRI Research Study 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary…………………………………………………… p 4-14 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………….. p 16-26 2.0 Methodology…………………………………………………………………….. p 26-28 3.0 Background and History……………………………………………………….. p 28-34 4.0 US Regulations and Government Programs………………………………….. p 34-35 4.1 NASA’s Legislative Mandate and the New Space Vision………….……. p 35-36 4.2 NASA Safety Practices in Comparison to the FAA……….…………….. p 36-37 4.3 New US Legislation to Regulate and Control Private Space Ventures… p 37 4.3.1 Status of Legislation and Pending FAA Draft Regulations……….. p 37-38 4.3.2 The New Role of Prizes in Space Development…………………….. p 38-40 4.3.3 Implications of Private Space Ventures…………………………….. p 41-42 4.4 International Efforts to Regulate Private Space Systems………………… p 42 4.4.1 International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety… p 42-43 4.4.2 The International Telecommunications Union (ITU)…………….. p 43-44 4.4.3 The Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS).. p 44 4.4.4 The European Aviation Safety Agency…………………………….. p 44-45 4.4.5 Review of International Treaties Involving Space………………… p 45 4.4.6 The ICAO -The Best Way Forward for International Regulation.. p 45-47 5.0 Key Efforts to Estimate the Size of a Private Space Tourism Business……… p 47 5.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Desind Finding
    NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE ARCHIVES Herbert Stephen Desind Collection Accession No. 1997-0014 NASM 9A00657 National Air and Space Museum Smithsonian Institution Washington, DC Brian D. Nicklas © Smithsonian Institution, 2003 NASM Archives Desind Collection 1997-0014 Herbert Stephen Desind Collection 109 Cubic Feet, 305 Boxes Biographical Note Herbert Stephen Desind was a Washington, DC area native born on January 15, 1945, raised in Silver Spring, Maryland and educated at the University of Maryland. He obtained his BA degree in Communications at Maryland in 1967, and began working in the local public schools as a science teacher. At the time of his death, in October 1992, he was a high school teacher and a freelance writer/lecturer on spaceflight. Desind also was an avid model rocketeer, specializing in using the Estes Cineroc, a model rocket with an 8mm movie camera mounted in the nose. To many members of the National Association of Rocketry (NAR), he was known as “Mr. Cineroc.” His extensive requests worldwide for information and photographs of rocketry programs even led to a visit from FBI agents who asked him about the nature of his activities. Mr. Desind used the collection to support his writings in NAR publications, and his building scale model rockets for NAR competitions. Desind also used the material in the classroom, and in promoting model rocket clubs to foster an interest in spaceflight among his students. Desind entered the NASA Teacher in Space program in 1985, but it is not clear how far along his submission rose in the selection process. He was not a semi-finalist, although he had a strong application.
    [Show full text]
  • Sounding Rocket - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Page 1 of 4
    Sounding rocket - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 1 of 4 Sounding rocket From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Sounding rockets) A sounding rocket, sometimes called a research rocket, is an instrument-carrying rocket designed to take measurements and perform scientific experiments during its sub-orbital flight. The origin of the term comes from nautical vocabulary, where to sound is to throw a weighted line from a ship into the water, to gauge the water's depth. Sounding in the rocket context is equivalent to taking a measurement.[1] The rockets are used to carry instruments from 50 to 1,500 kilometers[2] above the surface of the Earth, the altitude generally between weather balloons and satellites (the maximum altitude for balloons is about 40km and the minimum for satellites is approximately 120km).[3] Certain sounding rockets, such as the Black Brant X and XII, have an apogee between 1,000 and 1,500 kilometers; the maximum apogee of their class. Sounding rockets [1] often use military surplus rocket motors. NASA routinely flies A Black Brant XII being launched the Terrier Mk 70 boosted Improved Orion lofting 270–450 from Wallops Flight Facility. kilogram payloads into the exoatmospheric region between 100 and 200 kilometers.[4] Contents ■ 1 Design ■ 2 Advantages ■ 3 Research applications ■ 4 Operators and Programmes ■ 5 Other Uses ■ 6 See also ■ 7 References ■ 8 External links Design A common sounding rocket consists of a solid-fuel rocket motor and a science payload.[1] The freefall part of the flight is an elliptic trajectory with vertical major axis allowing the payload to appear to hover near its apogee.[3] The average flight time is less than 30 minutes, usually between five and 20 minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Seguranca.Pdf
    INPE-11476-RPQ/777 SEGURANÇA NO MANUSEIO DE FOGUETE Adauto Gouveia Motta INPE São José dos Campos 2004 SUMÁRIO LISTA DE FIGURAS .................................................................. v LISTA DE TABELAS .................................................................. vii MAIS ALGUMAS CONSIDERAÇÕES ............................................. ix INTRODUÇÃO .......................................................................... 01 CAPÍTULO 1 ............................................................................ 03 1.1 – A Busca ......................................................................... 03 1.2 – Plano de segurança de terra ............................................. 07 1.3 – Plano de segurança de vôo ............................................... 10 CAPÍTULO 2 – MOTOR FOGUETE ................................................ 15 2.1 – Propelentes sólidos .......................................................... 16 2.2 – Propelentes líquidos ......................................................... 19 2.3 – Foguetes híbridos ............................................................ 21 CAPÍTULO 3 – EXPLOSIVOS ...................................................... 23 3.1 – Explosivos como meio de propulsão .................................. 23 3.2 – Principais características dos explosivos ............................. 23 3.2.1 – Sensibilidade à iniciação por impacto .............................. 24 3.2.2 – Sensibilidade à iniciação por fricção ................................ 24 3.2.3 – Sensibilidade
    [Show full text]
  • MORABA Sounding Rocket Launch Vehicles
    MORABA Sounding Rocket Launch Vehicles Mobile Rocket Base German Aerospace Center Sounding Rocket Launch Vehicles 1.1. Introduction The research vehicles offered by MORABA have been used by a wide spectrum of payloads, differing in mass, complexity and transport requirements. In order to serve the needs of any payload and transport requirement, MORABA relies on a large portfolio of rocket motors that it uses in single stage as well as stacked configurations. MORABA constantly strives to enhance the portfolio of active rocket motors in order to improve its transport capacities or replace systems that run out of stock. Although the developments in liquid, gelled and hybrid propulsion are closely followed, the high power density, operational simplicity and safety of solid rocket motors have led to their exclusive use by MORABA so far. A large portion of the active portfolio is formed by motors with military heritage. These motors are conceded to MORABA or its partners from governments that tear down a fraction of their armory. As usually these motors have exceeded their shelf life, inspection and re-lifing efforts become necessary. Many successful missions prove the flight worthiness of these motors which are not least attractive due to their competitive price. The second group of the portfolio is made up by motors available from third parties. Here, MORABA is constantly evaluating potential candidates. A longstanding cooperation with the Brazilian Department of Aerospace Science and Technology (DCTA) has led to frequent use of its S31 and S30 rocket motor stages. At current, MORABA is also developing a solid motor stage with Bayern Chemie GmbH and acquiring some units of Magellan’s Black Brant V.
    [Show full text]
  • Esa S -291 TR 9 Ooom — G*? A
    O esa s -291 TR 9 ooom — g*? a Proceedings of the Ninth ESA/PAC Symposium jointly organised by the Deutsche Forschungsanstalt furLuft- und Raumfahrt and the European Space Agency and held at Lahnstein, Federal Republic of Germany, on 3 - 7 April 1989. BMFT TO PREPARE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY esa sp-291 25 YEARS OF EUROPEAN COOPERATION IN SPACE June 1989 25 ANS DE COOPERATION SPATIALE EUROPEENNE POUR PREPARER LE 21EME SIECLE European Rocket and Balloon Programmes and Related Research* Proceedings of the Ninth ESA/PAC 89- Symposium jointly organised by the Deutsche Forschungsanstalt fur Luft- und Raumfahrt and the European Space Agency. and held at Lahnstein, Federal Republic of Germany, on 3 - 7 April 1989. european space agency / agence spatiale européenne 8-10, rue Mario-Nikis, 75738 PARIS CEDEX 15, France PROGRAMME COMMITTEE Chairman Dr. D. Huguenin, Mr. W.R. Burke, Observatoire de Genève, EPD/ESTEC, Professor U. von Zahn, Switzerland Noordwijk, Physikalisch Institut, The Netherlands University of Bonn, Dr. J.P. Jegou, FRG Centre National d'Etudes Mr. [. Stevenson, Spatiales, ESA/HQ, Members Paris, Paris, France France Dr. A. Brekke, University of Tromse, Mr. O. Rôhrig, Mr. L. Jansson, Norway Deutsche Forschungsanstalt fur ESA/HQ, Luft- und Raumfahrt, Paris, Dr. L. Eliasson, PT-TN, France Institute of Space Physics, Linder Hôhe, Kiruna, KoIn, Sweden FRG COLOPHON Proceedings published ESA Publications Division and distributed by ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands compiled by W.R. Burke printed in The Netherlands Cover by C. Haakman Price code E3 International Standard Serial Number ISSN 0379 - 6566 International Standard Book Number ISBN 92-9092-006-8 Copyright © 1988 by European Space Agency Ill CONTENTS Session 1: National Reports Chairman: M.
    [Show full text]
  • Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, Coastal Plain Resource Assessment" and Legislative Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS)
    Comments from State and Local Governments (S) Page State of Alaska ................................................................................................. S- 1 Alaska State Legislature (Rep. Sam Cotten)................................................. 16 Arctic Village Council ....................................................................................... 17 California Department of Fish and Game ..................................................... 18 City of Kaktovik................................................................................................ 19 Massachusetts Department of Fisheries, Wildlife & Environmental Law Enforcement ................................................................. 20 North Slope Borough ...................................................................................... 22 University of Alaska, Geophysical Institute................................................... 37 Venetie Village................................................................................................... 41 I '; STEVE COWPER, GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE P.O. BOX AW OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811-0165 PHONE: (907) 465-3562 OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE NORTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE 431 NORTH FRANKLIN 2600 DENALI STREET 675 SEVENTH A VENUE P.O. BOX AW, SUITE 101 SUITE 700 STATION H JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811-0165 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503-2798 FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99701-4596 PHONE: (907) 465-3562 PHONE.· (907)
    [Show full text]
  • Our First Quarter Century of Achievement ... Just the Beginning I
    NASA Press Kit National Aeronautics and 251hAnniversary October 1983 Space Administration 1958-1983 >\ Our First Quarter Century of Achievement ... Just the Beginning i RELEASE ND: 83-132 September 1983 NOTE TO EDITORS : NASA is observing its 25th anniversary. The space agency opened for business on Oct. 1, 1958. The information attached sumnarizes what has been achieved in these 25 years. It was prepared as an aid to broadcasters, writers and editors who need historical, statistical and chronological material. Those needing further information may call or write: NASA Headquarters, Code LFD-10, News and Information Branch, Washington, D. C. 20546; 202/755-8370. Photographs to illustrate any of this material may be obtained by calling or writing: NASA Headquarters, Code LFD-10, Photo and Motion Pictures, Washington, D. C. 20546; 202/755-8366. bQy#qt&*&Mary G. itzpatrick Acting Chief, News and Information Branch Public Affairs Division Cover Art Top row, left to right: ffComnandDestruct Center," 1967, Artist Paul Calle, left; ?'View from Mimas," 1981, features on a Saturnian satellite, by Artist Ron Miller, center; ftP1umes,*tSTS- 4 launch, Artist Chet Jezierski,right; aeronautical research mural, Artist Bob McCall, 1977, on display at the Visitors Center at Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, Calif. iii OUR FIRST QUARTER CENTER OF ACHIEVEMENT A-1 -3 SPACE FLIGHT B-1 - 19 SPACE SCIENCE c-1 - 20 SPACE APPLICATIQNS D-1 - 12 AERONAUTICS E-1 - 10 TRACKING AND DATA ACQUISITION F-1 - 5 INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS G-1 - 5 TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION H-1 - 5 NASA INSTALLATIONS 1-1 - 9 NASA LAUNCH RECORD J-1 - 49 ASTRONAUTS K-1 - 13 FINE ARTS PRQGRAM L-1 - 7 S IGN I F ICANT QUOTAT IONS frl-1 - 4 NASA ADvIINISTRATORS N-1 - 7 SELECTED NASA PHOTOGRAPHS 0-1 - 12 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]