DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools Planetary Constants See Tables A1 and A2. © Springer International Publishing AG 2018 395 A.P. Rossi, S. van Gasselt (eds.), Planetary Geology, Springer Praxis Books, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-65179-8 396 Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools Table A1 Bulk parameters for planets, dwarf planets and selected satellites Polar Equatorial Inverse Magnetic Atmospheric Mass radius radius flattening Density Gravity field pressure 24 3 2 Discovery Moons m [10 kg] rp [km] re [km] 1/f [–] [kg/m ] g [m/s ] B [T] p [bar] Planets Mercury prehistoric 0 0:330 2439:7 2439:7 – 5427 3:710 3.0107 1014 Venus prehistoric 0 4:868 6051:8 6051:8 – 5243 8:870 – 92 Earth prehistoric 1 5:972 6356:8 6378:1 298:253 5514 9:810 2.4105 1.014 Mars prehistoric 2 0:642 3376:2 3396:2 169:894 3933 3:710 – 0.006 Jupiter prehistoric 67 1898:190 66854:0 71492:0 15:41 1326 24:790 4.3104 > 1000 Saturn prehistoric 62 568:340 54364:0 60268:0 10:21 687 10:440 2.2105 > 1000 Uranus 1781 27 86:813 24973:0 25559:0 43:62 1271 8:870 2.3105 > 1000 Neptune 1846 14 102:413 24341:0 24764:0 58:54 1638 11:150 1.4105 > 1000 Dwarf m [1021 kg] planets (134340) 1930 5 13:030 1187:0 1187:0 – 1860 0:620 – 1109 Pluto (1) Ceres 1801 0 0:939 473:0 473:0 – 2161 0:280 – – (136199) 2005 1 16:600 1163:0 1163:0 – 2520 0:820 – – Eris (136472) 2005 1 < 4:400 715:0 715:0 20:00 1400 0:500 – 4–12109 Makemake 739:0 739:0 3200 (136108) 2004 2 4:010 620:0 620:0 – (min) 0:630 – – Haumea 2600 Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools 397 Satellites m [1021 kg] Earth’s moon prehistoric 73:456 1736:0 1738:1 827.67 3344 1.620 1.0 107 1 107 Phobos 1877 10.6591015 11:3 11:3 – 1876 0.006 – – (Mars I) Deimos 1877 1.4761015 6:2 6:2 – 1471 0.003 – – (Mars II) Io (Jupiter I) 1610 89:319 1821:6 1821:6 – 3528 1.796 – – Europa 1610 47:998 1560:8 1560:8 – 3013 1.314 1.2107 1012 (Jupiter II) Ganymede 1610 148:190 2634:1 2634:1 – 1936 1.428 1.20107 – (Jupiter III) Callisto 1610 107:598 2410:3 2410:3 – 1834 1.235 7.51012 (Jupiter IV) Mimas 1789 0:037 198:2 198:2 – 1148 0.064 – – (Saturn I) Enceladus 1789 0:108 252:1 252:1 – 1609 0.113 – trace (Saturn II) Tethys 1684 0:617 531:1 531:1 – 984 0.146 – – (Saturn III) Dione 1684 1:095 561:4 561:4 – 1478 0.232 – – (Saturn IV) Rhea 1672 2:307 763:8 763:8 – 1.236 0.264 – – (Saturn V) Titan 1655 134:500 2575:0 2575:0 – 1880 1.350 – 1.47 (Saturn VI) Iapetus 1671 1:806 734:5 734:5 – 1088 0.223 – – (Saturn VIII) 398 Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools Table A2 Orbital and axis parameters for planets, dwarf planets and selected satellites Orbit period Periapsis Apoapsis Semi major axis Orbit eccentricity Rotation period Orbit inclination Axis obliquity T [d] q [106 km] Q [106 km] a [106 km] [–] P [h] i [˚] " [˚] Planets Mercury 88:0 46:00 69:82 57:91 0:206 1407:60 7:00 0.03 Venus 224:7 107:48 108:94 108:21 0:007 5832:60 2:64 177.36 Earth 365:3 147:09 152:10 149:60 0:017 23:93 0:00 23.44 Mars 687:0 206:62 249:23 227:93 0:094 24:62 1:85 25.19 Jupiter 4332:6 740:52 816:62 778:57 0:049 9:93 1:30 3.13 Saturn 10759:2 1352:55 1514:50 1433:53 0:057 10:66 2:49 26.73 Uranus 30685:4 2741:30 3003:62 2872:46 0:046 17:24 0:77 97.77 Neptune 60189:0 4444:45 4545:67 4495:06 0:011 16:11 1:77 28.32 Dwarf planets (134340) Pluto 90:6 4436:82 7375:93 5906:38 0:249 153:29 17:16 57.47 (1) Ceres 1681:63 382:62 445:41 414:02 0:076 9:07 10:59 4.00 (136199) Eris 203830:0 5723:00 14602:00 10162:50 0:441 25:90 44:04 ? (136472) 112897:0 5772:98 7904:75 6838:87 0:156 7:77 29:01 ? Makemake (136108) 103774:0 5228:74 7701:75 6465:25 0:191 3:92 28:19 ? Haumea Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools 399 Satellites q [103 km] a [103 km] To plane Earth’s moon 27:32 362:60 405:40 384:00 0:055 27.32 5:15 6:69 Phobos (Mars I) 0:32 9:23 9:52 9:38 0:015 synchronous 1:09 0:00 Deimos (Mars II) 1:26 23:46 23:47 23:46 0:000 synchronous 0:93 0:00 Io (Jupiter I) 1:77 420:00 423:40 421:70 0:004 synchronous 0:05 Europa (Jupiter II) 3:55 664:86 676:94 670:90 0:009 synchronous 0:47 0:10 Ganymede (Jupiter III) 7:15 1069:20 1071:60 1070:40 0:001 synchronous 0:20 0:33 Callisto (Jupiter IV) 16:69 1869:00 1897:00 1883:00 0:007 synchronous 0:19 0:00 Mimas (Saturn I) 0:94 181:90 189:18 185:54 0:020 synchronous 1:57 0:00 Enceladus (Saturn II) 1:37 236:92 239:16 238:04 0:005 synchronous 0:02 0:00 Tethys (Saturn III) 1:89 294:62 294:62 294:62 0:000 synchronous 1:12 0:00 Dione (Saturn IV) 2:74 376:57 378:23 377:30 0:002 synchronous 0:02 0:00 Rhea (Saturn V) 4:52 526:51 527:57 527:04 0:001 synchronous 0:35 0:00 Titan (Saturn VI) 15:95 1186:15 1257:51 1221:83 0:029 synchronous 0:33 1:94 Iapetus (Saturn VIII) 79:32 3460:60 3662:00 3561:30 0:028 synchronous 15:47 0:00 400 Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools Planetary Exploration Missions A complete list of planetary exploration missions is provided in Table A3.Mostof those missions are focused on an individual target body (e.g. Mars), several are cov- ering multiple ones (e.g. Cassini-Huygens to the Saturn system, or Clementine to the Moon and asteroid 1620 Geographos). In the majority of cases also disciplines other than Geology are covered by missions’ science objectives and their experiments. Data and Tools Planetary Geology, with the notable exception of the study of Meteorites or returned samples by either robots or humans, is largely based on remotely collected data. Those data have historically been shared within large communities in a relatively open fashion. Even during the Cold War, cooperation was active across US and Soviet scientists involved in planetary exploration. Nowadays, planetary data are hosted and curated in dedicated archives that make available to anyone a range of science data products: from raw to calibrated, derived data (often described as higher-level data)(TableA4, as well as outreach products based on those, e.g. NASA Planetary Photojournal.1 The Planetary Data System (PDS) stands both for (1) the standards used in archiving planetary data (used also beyond NASA, that first developed them), (2) the organisation responsible of distributing and preserving data according to those standards, as well as (3) the distributed archives physically hosting those data. Please note that data provided in this appendix might have a lifetime shorter than that of a book. Most agency and government URLs are likely to be available indefinitely or suitably redirected, though. Please refer, for an updated view, to the GitHubrepository.2 We also suggest to monitor resource collections, listed below, maintained by long-term archives, such as NASA PDSand ESA PSA or any other provider associated to the IPDA Code for introductory data handling of planetary data is available on the book’s companion free GitHub repository. 1http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov. 2https://github.com/openplanetary/planetarygeology-book. Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools 401 Table A3 Planetary missions until the end of 2016 (source: NASA NSSDC) Launch date Nation Mission name Notes Target 1959-01-02 USSR Luna 1 Flyby Moon 1959-03-03 USA Pioneer 4 Flyby Moon 1959-09-12 USSR Luna 2 Impact Moon 1959-10-04 USSR Luna 3 Probe Moon 1960-10-10 USSR Marsnik 1 Mars Flyby (Failure) Mars 1960-10-14 USSR Marsnik 2 Mars Flyby (Failure) Mar 1961-02-04 USSR Sputnik 7 Venus Impact (Failure) Venus 1961-02-12 USSR Venera 1 Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1961-08-23 USA Ranger 1 Test Flight (Failure) Moon 1961-11-18 USA Ranger 2 Test Flight (Failure) Moon 1962-01-26 USA Ranger 3 Impact (Failure) Moon 1962-04-23 USA Ranger 4 Impact Moon 1962-08-25 USSR Sputnik 19 Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1962-08-27 USA Mariner 2 Venus Flyby Venus 1962-09-01 USSR Sputnik 20 Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1962-09-12 USSR Sputnik 21 Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1962-10-18 USA Ranger 5 Impact (Failure) Moon 1962-10-24 USSR Sputnik 22 Attempted Mars Flyby Mars 1962-11-01 USSR Mars 1 Mars Flyby (Failure) Mars 1962-11-04 USSR Sputnik 24 Attempted Mars Lander Mars 1963-04-02 USSR Luna 4 Flyby Moon 1963-11-11 USSR Cosmos 21 Test Flight (Failure) Venus 1964-01-30 USA Ranger 6 Impact Moon 1964-02-19 USSR Venera 1964A Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1964-03-01 USSR Venera 1964B Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1964-03-27 USSR Cosmos 27 Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1964-04-02 USSR Zond 1 Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1964-07-28 USA Ranger 7 Impact Moon 1964-11-05 USA Mariner 3 Attempted Mars Flyby Mars 1964-11-28 USA Mariner 4 Mars Flyby Mars 1964-11-30 USSR Zond 2 Mars Flyby (Contact Lost) Mars 1965-02-17 USA Ranger 8 Impact Moon 1965-03-21 USA Ranger 9 Impact Moon 1965-05-09 USSR Luna 5 Impact Moon 1965-06-08 USSR Luna 6 Attempted Lander Moon 1965-07-18 USSR Zond 3 Lunar Flyby—Mars Test Vehicle Mars 1965-07-18 USSR Zond 3 Flyby Moon 1965-10-04 USSR Luna 7 Impact Moon 1965-11-12 USSR Venera 2 Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus (continued) 402 Appendix: Planetary Facts, Data and Tools Table A3 (continued) Launch date Nation Mission name Notes Target 1965-11-16 USSR Venera 3 Venus Lander (Failure) Venus 1965-11-23 USSR Cosmos 96 Attempted Venus Lander? Venus 1965-11-23 USSR Venera 1965A Venus Flyby (Failure) Venus 1965-12-03 USSR Luna 8 Impact Moon 1966-01-31 USSR Luna 9 Lander Moon 1966-03-31 USSR Luna 10 Orbiter Moon 1966-05-30 USA Surveyor 1 Lander Moon 1966-08-10 USA Lunar Orbiter 1 Orbiter Moon 1966-08-24 USSR Luna 11 Orbiter Moon 1966-09-20 USA Surveyor 2 Lander (Failure) Moon 1966-10-22 USSR Luna 12 Orbiter Moon 1966-11-06 USA Lunar Orbiter 2 Orbiter Moon 1966-12-21 USSR Luna 13 Lander Moon 1967-02-04 USA Lunar Orbiter 3 Orbiter Moon 1967-04-17 USA Surveyor 3 Lander Moon 1967-05-08 USA Lunar Orbiter 4 Orbiter Moon 1967-06-12
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Space Impact of the Euro Crisis 50 Years After Mariner 2: Exploration at a Crossroads
    0827_SPN_DOM_00_019_00 (READ ONLY) 8/24/2012 11:39 AM Page 19 www.spacenews.com SPACENEWS 19 August27, 2012 TheSpaceImpact of the Euro Crisis < ROBBIN LAIRD and HARALD MALMGREN > he European sovereign debt crisis Europe will now be challenged in the ing to hide the reality of European bank of the savings of millions of European is not simply abump in historical form of rollbacks of the many inter- weaknesses. The main reason is that eu- citizens. Tprogress; it is the end of aperiod twined strands of integration, fraying rozone economies are far more bank- European leaders are also attempt- of historyand acritical point in Euro- what has been an intricate but incom- dependent than economies like those in ing to initiate amore comprehensive fis- pean and global transition in the 21st plete tapestry. It is questionable whether the United States or United Kingdom, cal union, with new decision-making century. Europe will be able to prevent stalling of where substantial nonbank financing al- mechanisms that transfer sovereignty in The confluence of several trend lines the integration process in the face of ternatives exist for the corporate sector. parallel with the new banking union. We — the unification of Germany,the end widening gaps among the interests of In the eurozone, banks are the fi- do not believe that any of the eurozone of the Soviet Union, the collapse of the each nation and even within each nation. nancial markets; in the U.S., banks are governments are ready for such apoliti- Berlin Wall, the expansion of NATO, Since the birth of the euro, the but one segment of amultifaceted fi- cal transition in which citizens in each the expansion of the European Union French and Germans were in the lead in nancial market.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring 2018 Undergraduate Law Journal
    SPRING 2018 UNDERGRADUATE LAW JOURNAL The Final Frontier: Evolution of Space Law in a Global Society By: Garett Faulkender and Stephan Schneider Introduction “Space: the final frontier!” These are the famous introductory words spoken by William Shatner on every episode of Star Trek. This science-fiction TV show has gained a cult-following with its premise as a futuristic Space odyssey. Originally released in 1966, many saw the portrayed future filled with Space-travel, inter-planetary commerce and politics, and futuristic technology as merely a dream. However, today we are starting to explore this frontier. “We are entering an exciting era in [S]pace where we expect more advances in the next few decades than throughout human history.”1 Bank of America/Merrill Lynch has predicted that the Space industry will grow to over $2.7 trillion over the next three decades. Its report said, “a new raft of drivers is pushing the ‘Space Age 2.0’”.2 Indeed, this market has seen start-up investments in the range of $16 billion,3 helping fund impressive new companies like Virgin Galactic and SpaceX. There is certainly a market as Virgin Galactic says more than 600 customers have registered for a $250,000 suborbital trip, including Leonardo DiCaprio, Katy Perry, Ashton Kutcher, and physicist Stephen Hawking.4 Although Space-tourism is the exciting face of a future in Space, the Space industry has far more to offer. According to the Satellite Industries 1 Michael Sheetz, The Space Industry Will Be Worth Nearly $3 Trillion in 30 Years, Bank of America Predicts, CNBC, (last updated Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • Gnc 2021 Abstract Book
    GNC 2021 ABSTRACT BOOK Contents GNC Posters ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Poster 01: A Software Defined Radio Galileo and GPS SW receiver for real-time on-board Navigation for space missions ................................................................................................................................................. 7 Poster 02: JUICE Navigation camera design .................................................................................................... 9 Poster 03: PRESENTATION AND PERFORMANCES OF MULTI-CONSTELLATION GNSS ORBITAL NAVIGATION LIBRARY BOLERO ........................................................................................................................................... 10 Poster 05: EROSS Project - GNC architecture design for autonomous robotic On-Orbit Servicing .............. 12 Poster 06: Performance assessment of a multispectral sensor for relative navigation ............................... 14 Poster 07: Validation of Astrix 1090A IMU for interplanetary and landing missions ................................... 16 Poster 08: High Performance Control System Architecture with an Output Regulation Theory-based Controller and Two-Stage Optimal Observer for the Fine Pointing of Large Scientific Satellites ................. 18 Poster 09: Development of High-Precision GPSR Applicable to GEO and GTO-to-GEO Transfer ................. 20 Poster 10: P4COM: ESA Pointing Error Engineering
    [Show full text]
  • JUICE Red Book
    ESA/SRE(2014)1 September 2014 JUICE JUpiter ICy moons Explorer Exploring the emergence of habitable worlds around gas giants Definition Study Report European Space Agency 1 This page left intentionally blank 2 Mission Description Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer Key science goals The emergence of habitable worlds around gas giants Characterise Ganymede, Europa and Callisto as planetary objects and potential habitats Explore the Jupiter system as an archetype for gas giants Payload Ten instruments Laser Altimeter Radio Science Experiment Ice Penetrating Radar Visible-Infrared Hyperspectral Imaging Spectrometer Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrograph Imaging System Magnetometer Particle Package Submillimetre Wave Instrument Radio and Plasma Wave Instrument Overall mission profile 06/2022 - Launch by Ariane-5 ECA + EVEE Cruise 01/2030 - Jupiter orbit insertion Jupiter tour Transfer to Callisto (11 months) Europa phase: 2 Europa and 3 Callisto flybys (1 month) Jupiter High Latitude Phase: 9 Callisto flybys (9 months) Transfer to Ganymede (11 months) 09/2032 – Ganymede orbit insertion Ganymede tour Elliptical and high altitude circular phases (5 months) Low altitude (500 km) circular orbit (4 months) 06/2033 – End of nominal mission Spacecraft 3-axis stabilised Power: solar panels: ~900 W HGA: ~3 m, body fixed X and Ka bands Downlink ≥ 1.4 Gbit/day High Δv capability (2700 m/s) Radiation tolerance: 50 krad at equipment level Dry mass: ~1800 kg Ground TM stations ESTRAC network Key mission drivers Radiation tolerance and technology Power budget and solar arrays challenges Mass budget Responsibilities ESA: manufacturing, launch, operations of the spacecraft and data archiving PI Teams: science payload provision, operations, and data analysis 3 Foreword The JUICE (JUpiter ICy moon Explorer) mission, selected by ESA in May 2012 to be the first large mission within the Cosmic Vision Program 2015–2025, will provide the most comprehensive exploration to date of the Jovian system in all its complexity, with particular emphasis on Ganymede as a planetary body and potential habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • Jjmonl 1402.Pmd
    alactic Observer GJohn J. McCarthy Observatory Volume 7, No. 2 February 2014 Beneath the Clouds: An in-depth look at Jupiter's wacky weather machine. See inside, pages 6 and 20. The John J. McCarthy Observatory Galactic Observer New Milford High School Editorial Committee 388 Danbury Road Managing Editor New Milford, CT 06776 Bill Cloutier Phone/Voice: (860) 210-4117 Production & Design Phone/Fax: (860) 354-1595 www.mccarthyobservatory.org Allan Ostergren Website Development JJMO Staff Marc Polansky It is through their efforts that the McCarthy Observatory Technical Support has established itself as a significant educational and Bob Lambert recreational resource within the western Connecticut Dr. Parker Moreland community. Steve Barone Jim Johnstone Colin Campbell Carly KleinStern Dennis Cartolano Bob Lambert Mike Chiarella Roger Moore Route Jeff Chodak Parker Moreland, PhD Bill Cloutier Allan Ostergren Cecilia Dietrich Marc Polansky Dirk Feather Joe Privitera Randy Fender Monty Robson Randy Finden Don Ross John Gebauer Gene Schilling Elaine Green Katie Shusdock Tina Hartzell Jon Wallace Tom Heydenburg Paul Woodell Amy Ziffer In This Issue OUT THE WINDOW ON YOUR LEFT .................................... 4 JUPITER AND ITS MOONS ................................................ 20 SCHILLER TO HANSTEEN .................................................. 5 TRANSIT OF THE JUPITER'S RED SPOT .............................. 17 LRO IMAGES CHANG'E 3 LANDING SITE ........................... 6 SUNRISE AND SUNSET ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1: Venus Missions
    Appendix 1: Venus Missions Sputnik 7 (USSR) Launch 02/04/1961 First attempted Venus atmosphere craft; upper stage failed to leave Earth orbit Venera 1 (USSR) Launch 02/12/1961 First attempted flyby; contact lost en route Mariner 1 (US) Launch 07/22/1961 Attempted flyby; launch failure Sputnik 19 (USSR) Launch 08/25/1962 Attempted flyby, stranded in Earth orbit Mariner 2 (US) Launch 08/27/1962 First successful Venus flyby Sputnik 20 (USSR) Launch 09/01/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Sputnik 21 (USSR) Launch 09/12/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Cosmos 21 (USSR) Launch 11/11/1963 Possible Venera engineering test flight or attempted flyby Venera 1964A (USSR) Launch 02/19/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Venera 1964B (USSR) Launch 03/01/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Cosmos 27 (USSR) Launch 03/27/1964 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Zond 1 (USSR) Launch 04/02/1964 Venus flyby, contact lost May 14; flyby July 14 Venera 2 (USSR) Launch 11/12/1965 Venus flyby, contact lost en route Venera 3 (USSR) Launch 11/16/1965 Venus lander, contact lost en route, first Venus impact March 1, 1966 Cosmos 96 (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Possible attempted landing, craft fragmented in Earth orbit Venera 1965A (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Flyby attempt (launch failure) Venera 4 (USSR) Launch 06/12/1967 Successful atmospheric probe, arrived at Venus 10/18/1967 Mariner 5 (US) Launch 06/14/1967 Successful flyby 10/19/1967 Cosmos 167 (USSR) Launch 06/17/1967 Attempted atmospheric probe, stranded in Earth orbit Venera 5 (USSR) Launch 01/05/1969 Returned atmospheric data for 53 min on 05/16/1969 M.
    [Show full text]
  • Alactic Observer Gjohn J
    alactic Observer GJohn J. McCarthy Observatory Volume 5, No. 2 February 2012 Belly of the Beast At the center of the Milky Way galaxy, a gas cloud is on a perilous journey into a supermassive black hole. As the cloud stretches and accelerates, it gives away the location of its silent predator. For more information , see page 9 inside, or go to http://www.nasa.gov/ centers/goddard/news/topstory/2008/ blackhole_slumber.html. Credit: NASA/CXC/MIT/Frederick K. Baganoff et al. The John J. McCarthy Observatory Galactic Observvvererer New Milford High School Editorial Committee 388 Danbury Road Managing Editor New Milford, CT 06776 Bill Cloutier Phone/Voice: (860) 210-4117 Production & Design Phone/Fax: (860) 354-1595 Allan Ostergren www.mccarthyobservatory.org Website Development John Gebauer JJMO Staff Marc Polansky It is through their efforts that the McCarthy Observatory has Josh Reynolds established itself as a significant educational and recreational Technical Support resource within the western Connecticut community. Bob Lambert Steve Barone Allan Ostergren Dr. Parker Moreland Colin Campbell Cecilia Page Dennis Cartolano Joe Privitera Mike Chiarella Bruno Ranchy Jeff Chodak Josh Reynolds Route Bill Cloutier Barbara Richards Charles Copple Monty Robson Randy Fender Don Ross John Gebauer Ned Sheehey Elaine Green Gene Schilling Tina Hartzell Diana Shervinskie Tom Heydenburg Katie Shusdock Phil Imbrogno Jon Wallace Bob Lambert Bob Willaum Dr. Parker Moreland Paul Woodell Amy Ziffer In This Issue THE YEAR OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM ................................ 4 SUNRISE AND SUNSET .................................................. 11 OUT THE WINDOW ON YOUR LEFT ............................... 5 ASTRONOMICAL AND HISTORICAL EVENTS ...................... 11 FRA MAURA ................................................................ 5 REFERENCES ON DISTANCES .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mariner to Mercury, Venus and Mars
    NASA Facts National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA 91109 Mariner to Mercury, Venus and Mars Between 1962 and late 1973, NASA’s Jet carry a host of scientific instruments. Some of the Propulsion Laboratory designed and built 10 space- instruments, such as cameras, would need to be point- craft named Mariner to explore the inner solar system ed at the target body it was studying. Other instru- -- visiting the planets Venus, Mars and Mercury for ments were non-directional and studied phenomena the first time, and returning to Venus and Mars for such as magnetic fields and charged particles. JPL additional close observations. The final mission in the engineers proposed to make the Mariners “three-axis- series, Mariner 10, flew past Venus before going on to stabilized,” meaning that unlike other space probes encounter Mercury, after which it returned to Mercury they would not spin. for a total of three flybys. The next-to-last, Mariner Each of the Mariner projects was designed to have 9, became the first ever to orbit another planet when two spacecraft launched on separate rockets, in case it rached Mars for about a year of mapping and mea- of difficulties with the nearly untried launch vehicles. surement. Mariner 1, Mariner 3, and Mariner 8 were in fact lost The Mariners were all relatively small robotic during launch, but their backups were successful. No explorers, each launched on an Atlas rocket with Mariners were lost in later flight to their destination either an Agena or Centaur upper-stage booster, and planets or before completing their scientific missions.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading Practice Quiz List Report Page 1 Accelerated Reader®: Thursday, 05/20/10, 09:41 AM
    Reading Practice Quiz List Report Page 1 Accelerated Reader®: Thursday, 05/20/10, 09:41 AM Holden Elementary School Reading Practice Quizzes Int. Book Point Fiction/ Quiz No. Title Author Level Level Value Language Nonfiction 661 The 18th Emergency Betsy Byars MG 4.1 3.0 English Fiction 7351 20,000 Baseball Cards Under the Sea Jon Buller LG 2.6 0.5 English Fiction 11592 2095 Jon Scieszka MG 4.8 2.0 English Fiction 6201 213 Valentines Barbara Cohen LG 3.1 2.0 English Fiction 30629 26 Fairmount Avenue Tomie De Paola LG 4.4 1.0 English Nonfiction 166 4B Goes Wild Jamie Gilson MG 5.2 5.0 English Fiction 9001 The 500 Hats of Bartholomew CubbinsDr. Seuss LG 3.9 1.0 English Fiction 413 The 89th Kitten Eleanor Nilsson MG 4.3 2.0 English Fiction 11151 Abe Lincoln's Hat Martha Brenner LG 2.6 0.5 English Nonfiction 61248 Abe Lincoln: The Boy Who Loved BooksKay Winters LG 3.6 0.5 English Nonfiction 101 Abel's Island William Steig MG 6.2 3.0 English Fiction 13701 Abigail Adams: Girl of Colonial Days Jean Brown Wagoner MG 4.2 3.0 English Nonfiction 9751 Abiyoyo Pete Seeger LG 2.8 0.5 English Fiction 907 Abraham Lincoln Ingri & Edgar d'Aulaire 4.0 1.0 English 31812 Abraham Lincoln (Pebble Books) Lola M. Schaefer LG 1.5 0.5 English Nonfiction 102785 Abraham Lincoln: Sixteenth President Mike Venezia LG 5.9 0.5 English Nonfiction 6001 Ace: The Very Important Pig Dick King-Smith LG 5.0 3.0 English Fiction 102 Across Five Aprils Irene Hunt MG 8.9 11.0 English Fiction 7201 Across the Stream Mirra Ginsburg LG 1.2 0.5 English Fiction 17602 Across the Wide and Lonesome Prairie:Kristiana The Oregon Gregory Trail Diary..
    [Show full text]
  • Photographs Written Historical and Descriptive
    CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, MISSILE ASSEMBLY HAER FL-8-B BUILDING AE HAER FL-8-B (John F. Kennedy Space Center, Hanger AE) Cape Canaveral Brevard County Florida PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 100 Alabama St. NW Atlanta, GA 30303 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, MISSILE ASSEMBLY BUILDING AE (Hangar AE) HAER NO. FL-8-B Location: Hangar Road, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Industrial Area, Brevard County, Florida. USGS Cape Canaveral, Florida, Quadrangle. Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates: E 540610 N 3151547, Zone 17, NAD 1983. Date of Construction: 1959 Present Owner: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Present Use: Home to NASA’s Launch Services Program (LSP) and the Launch Vehicle Data Center (LVDC). The LVDC allows engineers to monitor telemetry data during unmanned rocket launches. Significance: Missile Assembly Building AE, commonly called Hangar AE, is nationally significant as the telemetry station for NASA KSC’s unmanned Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) program. Since 1961, the building has been the principal facility for monitoring telemetry communications data during ELV launches and until 1995 it processed scientifically significant ELV satellite payloads. Still in operation, Hangar AE is essential to the continuing mission and success of NASA’s unmanned rocket launch program at KSC. It is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion A in the area of Space Exploration as Kennedy Space Center’s (KSC) original Mission Control Center for its program of unmanned launch missions and under Criterion C as a contributing resource in the CCAFS Industrial Area Historic District.
    [Show full text]
  • High-Resolution Mosaics of the Galilean Satellites from Galileo SSI
    Lunar and Planetary Science XXIX 1833.pdf High-Resolution Mosaics of the Galilean Satellites from Galileo SSI. M. Milazzo, A. McEwen, C. B. Phillips, N. Dieter, J. Plassmann. Planetary Image Research Laboratory, LPL, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721; [email protected] The Galileo Spacecraft began mapping the Jovian orthographic projection centered at the latitude and system in June 1996. Twelve orbits of Jupiter and more longitude coordinates of the sub-spacecraft point to than 1000 images later, the Solid State Imager (SSI) is still preserve their perspective. Depending on the photometric collecting images, most far superior in resolution to geometry and scale, it may be necessary to apply a anything collected by the Voyager spacecraft. The data photometric normalization to the images. Next, the collected includes: low to medium resolution color data, individual frames are mosaicked together, and mosaicked medium resolution data to fill gaps in Voyager coverage, and onto a portion of the base map for regional context. Once very high-resolution data over selected areas. We have the mosaic is finished, it is checked to make sure that the tie been systematically processing the SSI images of the and match points were correct, and that the frames mesh. Galilean satellites to produce high-resolution mosaics and to We produce 3 final products: (i) an SSI-only mosaic, (ii) SSI place them into the regional context provided by medium- images mosaicked onto regional context, and (iii) the resolution mosaics from Voyager and/or Galileo. addition of a latitude-longitude grid to the context mosaic. Production of medium-resolution global mosaics is The purpose of this poster is to show the mosa- described in a companion abstract [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Apollo Over the Moon: a View from Orbit (Nasa Sp-362)
    chl APOLLO OVER THE MOON: A VIEW FROM ORBIT (NASA SP-362) Chapter 1 - Introduction Harold Masursky, Farouk El-Baz, Frederick J. Doyle, and Leon J. Kosofsky [For a high resolution picture- click here] Objectives [1] Photography of the lunar surface was considered an important goal of the Apollo program by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The important objectives of Apollo photography were (1) to gather data pertaining to the topography and specific landmarks along the approach paths to the early Apollo landing sites; (2) to obtain high-resolution photographs of the landing sites and surrounding areas to plan lunar surface exploration, and to provide a basis for extrapolating the concentrated observations at the landing sites to nearby areas; and (3) to obtain photographs suitable for regional studies of the lunar geologic environment and the processes that act upon it. Through study of the photographs and all other arrays of information gathered by the Apollo and earlier lunar programs, we may develop an understanding of the evolution of the lunar crust. In this introductory chapter we describe how the Apollo photographic systems were selected and used; how the photographic mission plans were formulated and conducted; how part of the great mass of data is being analyzed and published; and, finally, we describe some of the scientific results. Historically most lunar atlases have used photointerpretive techniques to discuss the possible origins of the Moon's crust and its surface features. The ideas presented in this volume also rely on photointerpretation. However, many ideas are substantiated or expanded by information obtained from the huge arrays of supporting data gathered by Earth-based and orbital sensors, from experiments deployed on the lunar surface, and from studies made of the returned samples.
    [Show full text]