NASA SP-4025 

ASTRONAUTICS 

AND 

AERONAUTICS, 

1985 

A Chronology 

THE NASA HISTORY SERIES 

Scientific and Technical Information Division 1988 Iw\sA National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Washington, DC 
NASA maintains an internal history program for two principal reasons: (1) Sponsorship 

of research in NASA-related history is one way in which NASA responds to the provision 

of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 that requires NASA to “provide for 

the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its a<:- 

tivities and the results thereof.” (2) Thoughtful stidy of NASA history can help agency 

managers accomplish the missions assigned to the agency. Understanding NASA’s past 

aids in understanding its present situation and illuminates possible future directions. 

The opinions and conclusions set forth in this book are those of the author; no official 

of the agency necessarily endorses those opinions or conclusions. 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, US. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 

20402 (paper cover) Library of Congress Catalog Number 65-60308. 
Astronautics and Aeronautics for 1985 continues the series of annual chronologies of events in aeronautics, aviation, and space science and exploration prepared by the History Office of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration. A compendium chronology covering the events between 

1979 (the date of the most recently published Astronautics and Aeronautics 

chronology) and 1984 is in preparation. 

The present volume introduces a new format designed to make the series 

more useful as an historical reference work. Events are arranged by major 

subject categories and subcategories, and chronologically thereunder. It was 

written by Bette R. Janson under the editorial supervision of the Director of 

the NASA History Office. Items for inclusion in this volume were collected by 

Eleanor H. Ritchie and Lee D. Saegesser of the NASA History Office. 

As with any work of this nature, its extensive scope has made the use of 

primary sources prohibitive. Thus entries are based largely on normally reliable secondary sources. All entries are followed by their sources to provide 

serious researchers points of access for further investigation. 

A chronology of this size necessarily involves considerable seiection; readers are invited to notify the NASA History Office of any serious omissions, as 

well as errors, for possible correction in subsequent volumes. 

Sylvia D. Fries 

Director, NASA History Office 

Washington, D.C. 

PRECEDCNG PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 

... 

111 

CONTENTS 

... Preface ............................................... 111 

3 

Aeronautics ......................................... 4 

Balloons ............................................ 16 

LaunchVehicles ...................................... 18 

Aerospace Industry ...................................... 1 

Aerospace Research and Development ....................... 

Large Space Systems ................................... 17 

Military Applications .................................. 22 

Simulation Technology ................................. 26 

Transatmospheric Vehicle ............................... 28 

Astronauts ............................................. 31 

Astronomy ............................................ 37 

Planetary Exploration .................................. 61 

Atmospheric Research ................................... 71 

Upper Atmospheric Research ............................ 77 

Aviation .............................................. 81 

Civil Aviation ........................................ 82 

Human Powered Aircraft ............................... 96 

Su person i c Transport .................................. 96 

Awards ............................................... 99 

Colombia ............................................. 105 

Comsat ............................................... 107 

Conferences ........................................... 109 

Department of Defense ................................... 111 

Antisatellite System .................................... 111 

Budget ............................................. 116 

Missiles ............................................ 117 

NASA and the Department of Defense ..................... 120 

Procurement ......................................... 120 

Satellites ............................................ 121 

Strategic Defense Initiative .............................. 125 

European Space Agency .................................. 135 

Federal Aviation Administration ............................ 141 

France ............................................... 145 

Hermes Program ..................................... 145 

Geophysics ............................................ 147 

History ............................................... 151 

India ................................................. 155 

INTELSAT ............................................. 157 

Satellites ............................................ 159 

V PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 
Japan ................................................ 163 

Launch Vehicles ...................................... 163 

Materials Processing ..................................... 165 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration ................ 167 

Budget ............................................. 168 

Data Tracking and Relay Systems ......................... 171 

Management and Personnel ............................. 173 

NASA Installations .................................... 186 

Ames Research Center ............................... 186 

Goddard Space Flight Center .......................... 189 

Johnson Space Center ............................... 190 

Kennedy Space Center ............................... 191 

Langley Research Center ............................. 194 

Lewis Research Center ............................... 196 

Marshall Space Flight Center .......................... 198 

Wallops Flight Facility ............................... 199 

Office of Inspector General ............................. 200 

Procurement ......................................... 201 

Public Affairs ......................................... 203 

Review Boards ....................................... 204 

Technology Transfers ................................... 206 

Peoples Republic of China ................................ 213 

Satellites .............................................. 217 

Search For Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) ................... 235 

Smithsonian Institution ................................... 237 

Space Science and Applications ............................ 243 

Space Station Program ................................... 255 

Space Transportation System (STS) ........................... 271 

Civilian in Space Program .............................. 271 

Crews .............................................. 277 

External Tank ........................................ 285 

Launch and Landing Facilities 286 

Launch Schedules 294 

Main Engines 306 

Management 310 

Mi I itary Applications 314 

Missions 322 

Revenues 343 

Scientific Research 348 

Shuttle Orbiter 358 

Solid-fuel Rocket Boosters .............................. 366 

Student Involvement Program ............................ 369 

Spacelab .............................................. 373 

............................ ..................................... ........................................ 

........................................ .................................. ............................................ 

........................................... .................................... ....................................... 

vi 
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics .......................... 385 

Missiles ............................................ 385 

Satel lites ............................................ 386 

Space Program ....................................... 388 

Spacecraft ........................................... 396 

United Kingdom ........................................ 401 

Satellites ............................................ 401 

United States .......................................... 403 

Congress ........................................... 403 

U.S.AirForce ........................................ 404 

Aircraft ........................................... 404 

NASA and the U.S. Air Force ............................ 409 

US . Science and Technology ............................ 411 

Policy ............................................ 413 

Resources ......................................... 414 

U.S. Space Policy ..................................... 417 

Civilian Programs ................................... 420 

Commercialization .................................. 425 

International ....................................... 432 

Military Programs ................................... 436 

National Space Commission .......................... 440 

Miscellaneous .......................................... 443 

Appendixes ........................................... 447 

A . Satellites, Space Probes, and Manned Space Flights, 1985 .... 447 

B . NASA Launches, 1985 ............................... 499 

C . Manned Space Flights, 1985 .......................... 507 

D . Abbreviations of References ........................... 513 

Index ................................................ 519 

vii 
AEROSPACE INDUSTRY 

March 78: In its aerospace forecast and inventory issue, Aviation Week reported that aerospace sales would continue to expand in 1985 as a result of 

business that was already on the books, with reviving commercial transport 

orders expanding on earlier rebounds in the military and space segments of 

the industry. However, as strong as the expansion was, sales were not as 

robust in some markets as had been predicted the previous year. 

Among the factors affecting the sales picture was Congressional trimming 

of military funding in the FY 85 budget. But Aviation Week predicted that to 

trim outlays the Pentagon would go after operating funds rather than hardware money that was spent over periods longer than a year. Thus the aerospace industry experienced moderately slower but still firm growth. Also 

international and domestic competition was intensifying, particularly because the Pentagon sought to use competition as a primary tool to hold down 

weapons costs. 

The magazine forecasted that total aerospace sales in 1985 would reach 

$99 billion and over $100 billion in 1986. Military aircraft would produce 

$32 billion in sales, compared with $27.5 billion in 1984; missile sales 

would rise to $15.7 billion from $13.8 billion in 1984; space technology, 

rebounding from weak sales in the 1970s, would reach $14.8 billion compared with $12.5 billion in 1984; commercial transport orders would revive 

from the $6-billion level in 1984 to $9.2 billion in 1985; and business flying 

sales would remain flat at about $1.8 billion. 

Both transport and corporate aircraft had a common problem: the high cost 

of relatively small increments of new technology and the drop in fuel prices 

that had placed a premium on modest improvement in fuel efficiency. However, all-composite turboprop aircraft for the business market were flying and 

might begin to change that situation in 1986 and 87. Also, new ultra-highbypass engines (in some situations a euphemism for propellers) were under 

test and might hit the commercial transport market in the early 199Os, as 

would increased use of composites, lighter and simpler subsystems, and 

more flexible cabins in terms of seating, galley, and lavatory layouts. 

Military sales levels depended on what happened to President Reagan’s 

defense budget in Congress. Although orders on the books would carry 

industry sales for 1985 to forecasted levels, a stalemate in Congress would 

affect the longer term outlook. (AvWk, Mar 18/85, 10) 

August 8: The Washington Post reported that Fairchild Industries would sell 

its 50% interest in American Satellite Co. and Space Communications Co. for 

$105 million to Continental Telecom Inc., which owned the other half of the 

1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

two joint ventures. Observers considered the two satellite communications 

subsidiaries Fairchild’s leading growth opportunities. 

American Satellite of Rockville (Amsat) provided private and general satellite communications services. It transmitted regional editions of The Wall 

Street Journal, The New York Times, and other newspapers and had won a 

large number of government contracts. 

Space Communications of Gaithersburg (Spacecom) owned and operated 

the tracking and data relay satellite system for NASA, provided communications to the Space Shuttle, and was building a $122.8 million communications network for the Air Force. 

Fairchild president Emanuel Fthenakis said the company decided to sell its 

interests in Amsat and Spacecom to consolidate its other businesses. “We are 

addressing the same market with more than one company,” he said. “The 

main reason is to consolidate our activities and address these markets with 

our wholly owned subsidiaries.” 

Analysts said the move showed Fairchild was unwilling or unable because 

of troubles in its other operations to invest the large amounts of capital 

required to continue to expand the two companies. (WPost, Aug 9/85, B1) 

August 79: Martin Marietta Corp. completed an agreement giving it a 25% 

stake in Equatorial Communication Co., a provider of satellite-based data 

communications networks, the Washington Post reported. Under the agreement, Marietta acquired about 3.6 million shares of Equatorial’s common 

stock for $13.87% a share and warrants to purchase an additional 1.8 million 

shares for $17.50 each. Marietta would assume two seats on Equatorial’s 

board, which would expand to seven members. 

Equatorial, which provided small, low-cost microearth stations, satellite 

transmission capacity, and other services that let companies construct and 

control their own private data communications networks, said it planned to 

use the funds to reduce debt and provide working capital. 

Marietta and Equatorial said they planned to pursue joint ventures in the 

information systems market. ( W Post, Aug 20/85, E4) 

2 
AEROSPACE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

April 75: NASA announced that Edward Taylor, a technician at Langley Research Center, modified an existing system, the uresco ultrasonic immersion 

testing system, by adding a holding device that permits accurate ultrasonic 

testing of small diameter polymeric tubes used in research programs, particularly small graphite fiber reinforced epoxy specimens, testing which formerly 

had to be done by hand. 

The existing uresco system could not test curved or cylindrical shapes. 

Taylor’s device rotated the tubes about their longitudinal axis while a highfrequency sound wave, transmitted through the tube wall, checked for flaws. 

This new method would permit nondestructive testing of tubular specimens 

without altering the electronic or mechanical configuration of the system. 

Engineers checked graphite tubes for defects, trapped gases, void spaces, 

or foreign elements like a piece of metal. If they found a defect, engineers 

then decided if the tube would perform as one homogeneous material; if not, 

it was discarded. (NASA Release 85-57) 

lune 79 Dr. Raymond Colladay, NASA‘s associate administrator for aeronautics and space technology, said in an interview that NASA was developing a 

set of “technology roadmaps” that would provide the framework for the 

government, military, and industry to implement programs that would allow 

the U.S. to meet the national aeronautics research and development goals 

proposed in a White House report, “National Aeronautical R&D Goals,” 

Aerospace Daily reported. Dr. Colladay said the report, written by the White 

House Office of Science and Technology, had charged NASA with develop 

ing the quantitative performance levels and technology steps that would be 

required to achieve three major goals in subsonics, supersonics, and transatmospherics. NASA hoped to have the roadmaps, being developed in cooperation with the Defense Department and industry, completed in July for 

review at the next planned interagency meeting. 

The roadmaps “will represent a national consensus” on what needs to be 

done to achieve the aeronautics goals outlined in the report, Colladay said, 

although they would not spell out specific programs or funding levels. 

The report had three goals: to advance technology for a new generation of 

fuel-efficient, affordable U.S. subsonic aircraft; to develop the technology for 

efficient, long-range supersonic cruise capability for military and civil aircraft; and to develop options in aeronautics and space technology for routine 

cruising and maneuvering into and out of the atmosphere with takeoff and 

landing from conventional runways. A fourth major national R&D goal, Colladay noted, was to maintain the basic research and technology that sup 

ported those three goals. 

3 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Colladay singled out the transatmospheric vehicle and hypersonic speeds 

as developments that would be "the biggest driver" with the "biggest payoff." 

Observers had identified hydroglen-fueled scramjets as holding greatest 

promise in producing substantially improved propulsive efficiency over current rocket technology. Colladay added that both NASA and the Defense 

Department were "very interested" in the hypersonic area. 

Vehicles of that type depended on further technological developments in 

propulsion, materials, and intelligent integrated flight controls. Colladay 

pointed out that NASA had made substantial progress in all those areas over 

the last decade. 

When questioned about future funding, Colladay indicated NASA might 

not face problems such as those created by the Office of Management and 

Budget when reportedly it had attempted to delete part of the NASA's aeronautics budget. Colladay said, "I think that the content of the program, when 

we focus on these national goals, will not be subjected to the same policy 

disagreements that we have had in the past," which centered primarily on the 

role of NASA in support of "civil aviation oriented research. In the case of 

supersonic cruise research and transatmospheric vehicles, there is no longterm commercial driver . . . that industry would do on their own . . . it's 

a clear example of where the government needs to take the lead to make it 

happen," Colladay concluded. (MD, June 19/85, 1) 

Aeronautics 

During lanuary: NASA announced it was testing a concept, called laminar 

(air)-flow control, which removed the layer of air molecules nearest an aircraft's wing surface to increase transport-aircraft flight efficiency. Since air/ 

skin friction during a subsonic flight's cruise phase caused about one-half of 

the total drag on an aircraft, the laminar-flow control would use suction 

through porous wing surfaces to remove the turbulent air, reducing drag and 

fuel consumption. 

NASA contractors had designed and fitted two laminar flow-control systems on the leading edge of each wing of a JetStar four-engine light transport. 

Gloves, perforated either by more than a million tiny suction holes or by 

narrow slots, encased the systems. Lockheed-Georgia Corp. had de'signed the 

test article on the Jetstar's left wing; Douglas Aircraft Co. the one on the right 

wing. 

Lockheed's construction was a sandwich of nomex-honeycomb core and 

graphite epoxy-face sheets, covered by a thin sheet of titanium bonded to the 

surface. Slots in the titanium sheets, .004 in., ran the length of the section 

and were the openings that drew air through the surface, directing it down 

ducts in the wing into the fuselage. The Douglas test article, instead of 

4 
Aerospace Research and Development 

slotted, was perforated by an electron beam that drilled 800 precise, nearly 

microscopic holes per sq. inch of wing surface. 

Both concepts had built-in systems to keep the wing surface insect and ice 

free. The Lockheed system pumped a cleansing fluid through the slots to the 

surface, making it too slippery for insects to adhere. The Douglas concept 

used a retractable insect shield deployed in front of the leading-edge panel 

during takeoff, climb, descent, and landing. 

After tuning the leading-edge systems for best performance, NASA would 

flight test the airplane at various locations around the country at different 

times of year to record effects of weather and insect conditions. 

Langley Research Center (LaRC) researchers managing the project pointed 

out that one energy-saving transport configuration, already efficient by today’s standards, would be 22% more efficient with the addition of laminarflow control. (NASA announcement, Jan 85, 7) 

NASA announced that up to 20% of all fatal light-airplane accidents might 

be preventable with a LaRC- and ARCdeveloped wing modification, a carefully designed “glove” placed over the outer portion of a wing’s leading edge 

and covering about the first 6 in. of the upper surface and first 18 in. of the 

lower surface. The glove was lightweight, had no moving parts, and required 

no maintenance. Wind-tunnel and flight tests of reshaped wings had revealed 

greatly increased resistance to airplane spins, which could result in aircraft 

stalls. 

Before modification, three test airplanes would enter a spin about 18 of 

every 20 times pilots stalled wings and applied pro-spin controls. With 

LaRC’s wing leading-edge design, the same planes had entered a spin only 

once in every 20 attempts. The spins that did occur had required improper 

airplane loading or extremely aggravated pilot inputs. And the pilot usually 

had three to four times as long (measured in seconds) to make a correction 

before the plane entered a spin. 

NASA hoped ultimately to provide airplane designers with the ability to 

incorporate the modification as an integral part of a wing, rather than as an 

add-on, and the analytical tools to determine amounts of spin resistance for 

new planes. NASA was expanding the research beyond the series on unswept, low-wing airplanes to include high-wing planes and those with different airfoil shapes. (NASA anno Jan 85, 12) 

March 7: NASA announced a demonstration at Lewis Research Center (LeRC) 

of a convertible gas turbine engine, which could operate in turboshaft or 

turbofan modes or both simultaneously, that would enable future rotorcraft to 

operate either as rotary or fixed-wing aircraft capable of speeds equivalent to 

commercial transports. The demonstration was part of a joint NASNDefense 

Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) program using a TF-34 engine 

modified under a General Electric Co. contract. 

5 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Such an engine would provide future X-wing (Cbladed) rotorcraft with the 

necessary shaft power to take off vertically. After reaching the conversion 

speed, near 200 knots, the pilot would disengage the transmission of the 

rotorcraft and lock the rotor blades in an “X” configuration for operation as a 

fixed-wing aircraft. The engine would convert from shaft to fan mode in 15 to 

20 seconds to power the craft at speeds near .8 Mach. Landing would require 

reversing the conversion process. 

During the past year, designers had evaluated performance characteristics 

of the engine and in Dec 1984 accomplished successfully the first transient 

operation simulating the conversion to and from rotary-wing to fixed-wing 

flight. The conversion had required 18 seconds, with the engine responding 

as predicted throughout. These tests had represented the first successful 

operation of a 5,000 hp-class convertible engine in both fan and shaft modes 

and the first dual mode operation for an engine. 

The new engine would make possible a class of civil and military highspeed rotorcraft that could operate efficiently from hover to transonic speeds. 

(NASA Release 85-30) 

March 21: NASA announced that it had scheduled for March 27 the first 

government flight in the joint Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 

(DARPA)/U.S. and the Air Force/NASA X-29 flight research program. The X29 was a high-performance research aircraft incorporating a wide variety of 

advanced technologies, each aimed at producing a better fighter-type aircraft. As a technology demonstrator, the X-29 was intended to provide engineering data for future design rather than to serve as a prototype for 

production. 

The flight research program followed four recently completed contractor 

demonstration flights flown by Grumman Aerospace Corp., builder of the 

experimental craft for DARPA. All flights were at Dryden Flight Research 

Center (DFRC). 

NASA, Air Force, and Grumman pilots would fly the first phase or initial 

concept evaluation of the government flight research program and then 

would gradually increase the performance of the forward-swept wing aircraft 

to speeds of about Mach 0.6 (almost 400 mph) at altitudes of about 30,000 ft. 

That phase would include as many as 30 flights and would conclude during 

the summer. 

The first three flights would concentrate on handling qualities and stability 

and control aspects of the aircraft in its backup flight control mode, one of 

three different modes of the X-29’s computercontrolled flight. These flights 

would also provide pilot familiarization and allow smooth program team 

transition from the contractor to the government. NASA test pilot Stephen 

Ishmael would pilot the first flight. 

6 
Aerospace Research and Development 

Following the three flights, NASA would reconfigure the DFRC control 

room from its functional flight monitoring mode to a research mode that 

would allow the team to expand the aircraft’s flight envelope for the second 

flight research phase scheduled for early fall 1985. 

Prior to start of the second phase or full envelope concept evaluation, the 

contractor would modify the aircraft‘s flight control system to incorporate full 

envelope flight control system capabilities. 

The second phase, lasting through October 1986, called for as many as 100 

research flights by NASA and Air Force pilots and should extend the X-29’s 

flight envelope to Mach 1.5, about 1,000 mph, and to 50,000 ft. in altitude. 

(NASA Release 85-40) 

During May: Dr. George Keyworth, II, the President’s science advisor, released a report of the Aeronautical Policy Review Committee that proposed 

national goals for research and development in aeronautics, NASA reported. 

The report stressed that, in the face of strong and growing challenges from 

foreign interests, the U.S. would maintain lasting aeronautical leadership 

only by vigorous application of the country’s traditional strength-innovative 

technology. The report also pointed out that there were aeronautical opportunities that could make virtually all of that day’s operational military and civil 

aircraft obsolete before the end of the century. 

The report reaffirmed the government’s role in supporting research and 

technology in aeronautics. “From our viewpoint, aeronautical research and 

technology remain an important investment. Our national interests, in particular our national security interests, dictate continued federal support.” 

The first goal outlined in the report addressed advancement of technologies applicable to a variety of subsonic aircraft including short-, medium-, 

and long-range transports; rotorcraft; high-speed turboprop engines; all-composite primary structures; high-lift aerodynamics systems, as well as new 

flight control and guidance improvements. 

The second goal concerned higher-speed regimes of supersonic transports. 

The report noted that the Reagan Administration had made no commitment 

to supersonic transports, but was laying the groundwork, both in NASA and 

the Department of Defense, in the fundamental technologies essential for 

any future efforts in supersonic flight. 

The third goal called for capturing the potential payoffs available from 

super high-speed flight-hypersonic speeds and transatmospheric vehicles. 

These vehicles would operate from conventional runways, maneuver at the 

fringe of the atmosphere, and ascend into space orbit when required. 

The report concluded that the government could only provide part of the 

technological base and support to achieve those goals and that private industry must share in the development of new technology and in its application to 

new projects. (NASA Activities, May 85, 9) 

7 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

lune 74: With the aim of eventually conducting a piloted simulation study to 

assess airplane susceptibility to tumbling (an autorotative pitching motion 

where an airplane could theoretically go out of control end over end) and 

developing mathematical control laws for providing resistance to tumbling 

motions, Langley Research Center was testing in its spin tunnel a modern 

configuration, the X-29A forward-swept wing demonstrator, that had shown 

a tendency for the unaugmented airframe (without black box) to tumble, the 

Langley Researcher reported. 

Certain modern aircraft design trends had established the need to study the 

phenomenon of tumbling. One such trend was relaxed static stability, where 

a displacement in pitch was not automatically corrected by the natural aerodynamics of the airplane; however, an electronic black box made such an 

airplane controllable. Other design trends contributing to tumbling were the 

elimination of aft-mounted horizontal tails and an unprecedented demand 

for pitch agility. 

Langley's free-tumbling tests and "singledegreeof-freedom free-to-pitch 

tests" demonstrated tumbling motions that could not be controlled by the 

canard (forward horizontal wing) surfaces. The strake flaps were somewhat 

effective d u ri ng turn bl i ng . Researchers a I so o btai ned ae rod y nam i c w i nd-t u nne1 data for the X-29A configuration over a 360° angleof-attack range (to 

include flying backwards). (Langely Researchel; June 14/85, 4) 

july 8: NASA announced that its Ames-Dryden Flight Research Center 

(DFRC) would begin a series of simulated airline flights to test two experimental laminar air flow control devices. Previous research had shown that 

laminar air flow could reduce aerodynamic drag from 25 to 40% and thus 

provide significant fuel savings under laboratory conditions. However, in 

actual flight insects, ice, and other obstructions adhering to the leading edges 

of an aircraft's wings could disrupt laminar flow. 

Ames-DFRC had installed on its business-sized JetStar aircraft the two experimental laminar control flow devices and would simulate airline service 

flights in widely separated areas of the U.S. to experience a wide variety of 

contaminant conditions. NASA would conduct the simulated airline service 

flights just as an airline would under normal air traffic rules and regulations. 

During the test, researchers planned up to four flights each day over a twoweek period to gather as much information as possible on the test articles' 

performance. 

The test article installed on the left wing used suction through 27 0.003-in. 

spanwise slots on the upper and lower surface to maintain laminar flow. A 

propylene glycol methyl ether (PGME)/water mixture discharged through 

several slots at the wing leading edge and flowing back over the wing provided ice and insect impact protection. Lockheed-Georgia manufactured the 

article for NASA. 

8 
Aerospace Research and Development 

The test article on the right wing used suction through approximately 1 

million 0.0025-in. diameter holes in the titanium skin to maintain laminar 

flow on the upper surface of the article. For insect protection, a shield, which 

retracted at 6,000 feet altitude, extended much like a wing leading edge flap 

on commercial transports. Spray nozzles behind the shield could spray the 

PGMVwater mixture on the test article for additional insect protection. For 

additional ice prevention, glycol was forced through the wing's porous metal 

section of the shield leading edge. McDonnell-Douglas manufactured the 

article for NASA. 

The JetStar would carry a Knollenberg probe, mounted atop the aircraft, to 

measure the number and size of ice and water particles encountered in flight. 

A charge patch, located on the pylon that held the probe, would measure the 

static electric charge caused by particles in the air rubbing across the patch 

surface, thus giving a qualitative measure of ice and water particles. Correlation of the probe and patch data could calibrate the charge measurement in a 

simple cockpit display. (NASA Release 85-101) 

july 26: In work done under a three-year grant in cooperation with Wichita 

State University (WSU) and aircraft and component manufacturers, Lewis 

Research Center (LeRC) developed the Electro-Impulse Deicing System 

(EIDI), which creates an electromechanical impluse at the leading edge of an 

aircraft's wing to produce a minute flexing of the metal skin that serves to 

shatter, debond, and remove ice buildup, the Lewis News reported. 

At a LeRC symposium, more than 100 representatives from various companies and other government agencies met to review the results of the coop 

erative program to develop a technology base for EIDI. Cessna Aircraft Co. 

planned to apply for Federal Aviation Administration certification for their 

model 206 aircraft with the ElDl system. 

Although several methods of deicing or anti-icing were available, all had 

u ndesi ra ble energy req u i re men ts. The elect ro-magnet i c i m pu I se met hod, 

first suggested in 1937 by Rudolf Goldschmidt, a German national residing in 

London after World War II, offered a promising alternative. 

During the 1950s and 1960s, industry used electro-impulse methods for 

metals forming in various industrial processes. In the 1970s, the USSR pursued further research including some aircraft applications. However, for various reasons the development stopped short of full implementation; the 

system still lacked a well developed underlying technology and known design parameters. Early ElDl system research offered promise of ice removal 

with low energy requirements, minimal maintenance (no moving parts), 

greater reliability, and a weight and cost competitive with existing methods. 

In mid-1982, LeRC funded a six-month grant to WSU to work with two 

small plane makers and an aircraft electrical system manufacturer to do a 

feasibility study that resulted in a successful icing tunnel demonstration in 

9 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

October/November 1982. LeRC then organized a consortium of companies 

for full development of the method for the whole range of civil aircraft, each 

company agreeing to contribute some services or equipment to the project in 

return for eligibility to submit its own products for deicing design and tests by 

the ElDl method. 

Engine aircraft candidates for the ElDl system included commercial transport turbofans, business jet turbofans, commuter transport turboprops, and 

commercial transport propfans. (LeRC News, July 26/85, 2) 

August 9: A flight today of an F-14 marked the completion of the latest phase 

in the plane’s aileron-rudder interconnect (ARI) ‘program, which was intended to coordinate turns, prevent wing rock, and resist spins at high angleof-attach flight conditions, the DFRC X-Press reported. Dryden Space Flight 

Center (DFRC) modified the F-14 X’s basic analog flight control system for 

ARI. 

Although earlier configurations were successful in flight tests, pilots noted 

a deficiency in loss of roll power in high angle-of-attack flight regions. NASA 

then developed a “cross control” feature in the ARI system to correct the 

problem. 

The cross control feature allowed the pilot to roll the aircraft opposite to 

lateral stick input but in the direction of the rudder pedal input. This gave the 

F-14 pilot roll power needed for tactical maneuvering while the aircraft was 

in a high angle-of-attack mode. 

Flight tests of the cross control feature began in June 1985. Two NASA 

Ames-DRFC F-15 project pilots, three Navy pilots, and one Grurnman pilot 

flew these initial evaluation flights. As part of the evaluation program, four 

other Ames-DRFC pilots not involved in the F-14 program flew the aircraft. 

NASA Ames-DFRC pilot Ed Schneider said after his flight that ”The new 

modification permits improved rolling performance at angles of attack above 

30°, yet the system retains spin resistance and wing rock suppression, both 

ARI features.” 

Navy personnel taking part in the evaluation would make presentations on 

program results to NAVAIR. Navy pilot Lt. Commander Chuck Baucom would 

also present results at the Society of Experimental Test Pilots‘ September 

symposium. (DFRC X-Press, Aug 16/85, 2) 

August 74: The deputy for tactical systems at the Air Force Aeronautical 

Systems Division (ASD) issued a request for proposals for demonstration and 

validation of the Air Force’s planned Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF), Defense 

Daily reported. ASD planned to award up to four fixed-price contracts running approximately 33 months. 

Seven ATF concept formulation contractors would compete for the contracts. The companies were Boeing Military Airplane, General Dynamics, 

10 
Aerospace Research and Development 

Grumman Aerospace, Lockheed, McDonnell Douglas, Northrop, and Rockwell Internatl. 

ASD said the demonstration/validation contractors would develop detailed 

concepts and designs of the ATF to meet operational needs, conduct testing 

to validate and assess proposed concepts, and identify and reduce overall 

program risks prior to start of full-scale development. 

General Electric and Pratt & Whitney were competitively developing the 

joint advanced fighter engine for the ATF. 

ASD was planning a FY 89 decision on full-scale development of the ATF, 

with initial operational capability set for 1995. The Air Force estimated the 

cost of developing and building 12 research and development ATF aircraft at 

$15.3 billion and believed it could build the ATF at a total unit cost only 20% 

higher than that of the F-15. 

A top Air Force official had noted in 1984 that the ATF would have a basic 

Mach 1.5 speed and that it could ernploy technologies being demonstrated 

by the Grumman X-29 forward swept wing aircraft. (D/D, Aug. 14/85, 1) 

August 23: The testing of the AFTVF-111 mission adaptive wing program at 

NASA’s Ames-Dryden Flight Research Center (DRFC) was an important milestone, the DRFC X-Press reported. It was the aircraft’s first taxi under its own 

power in four-and-a-half years. 

In the test, the control room was fully staffed, the air crew was aboard the 

aircraft just as they would be for the first flight, and the airplane operated as if 

it were ready to fly. Engineers checked and verified all aircraft and control 

room displays, including the mission adaptive wing color panel that duplicated cockpit displays and featured a caution panel that identified discretes, a 

trou ble-shooti ng tool. 

“Things went really well,!’ said Ames DRFC AFTVF-111 project manager 

Louis Steers. “There were some small problems on the aircraft, but no show 

stoppers.” (DFRC X-Press, Aug 30/85, 2) 

September 9: NASA announced that pilots flew the NASNArmy XV-15 tiltrotor research aircraft with its stability control augmentation system (SCAS) 

both operative and inoperative. The SCAS reduced pilot workload, allowing 

the pilot to devote attention to other tasks; however, if the SCAS failed, the 

pilot had to provide stability and control commands. A primary question 

answered by the NASA research was whether a pilot could fly a tilt-rotor 

aircraft with a sidestick controller when the SCAS failed. 

The objective of the XV-15 tilt-rotor research aircraft program was to develop and evaluate tilt-rotor technology for civil and military applications. A 

tilt-rotor aircraft could lift off vertically like a helicopter and then, by rotating 

its rotor thrust from vertical to horizontal, fly like a conventional airplane at 

speeds up to 345 miles per hour. 

11 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The sidestick control system evaluation provided data tor the V-22 Osprey, 

a tilt-rotor aircraft NASA was developing for the Department of Defense 

(DOD). DOD would consider the flight test when deciding whether to use a 

sidestick controller in the V-22. 

Results of the flight evaluation indicated the sidestick controller provided a 

reasonable means of controlling the aircraft with or without the SCAS. However, when the third axis (yaw) was added to the sidestick controller, pilots 

noted a significant increase in workload, indicating that additional studies 

were necessary in this area. 

The sidestick controller system used onboard digital computers and electronics, which replaced mechanical linkages that normally transmitted pilot 

signals to the aircraft's control surfaces. Ames Research Center developed the 

system and would refine and reevaluate it during future control system studies. (NASA Release 85-124) 

September 70: The C-5's new B model made its first flight today from Dob 

bins Air Force Base, Georgia, climbing to 15,000 feet and cruising at 300 

knots-an appropriate altitude and speed to determine airworthiness, the Air 

Force Systems Command (AFSC) Newsreview reported. Airborne for slightly 

more than three hours, the Galaxy began 55 hrs of production flight testing 

designed to evaluate its improved features. Evaluation would be shorter than 

usual for a newly designed aircraft because the C-5B only carried state-ofthe-art features added to the already proven C-5A. 

Col. Thomas Stover, acting C-5B director in Aeronautical System's Division 

(ASD) Deputy for Airlift and Trainer Systems, called the first flight a "key 

event . . . ushering in a significant improvement to our strategic airlift capa bi I ity. " 

The nine-member crew alternately shut down and restarted each of the 

airlifter's four General Electric TF39-1 C engines, which restarted without a 

hitch. 

Production flight evaluation would include airborne testing of an improved 

onboard computer called MASAR II, the malfunction detection analysis and 

recording computer. Pilots would also evaluate the improved automatic flight 

control and landing gear actuation systems. 

In October 1982 ASD awarded Lockheed Georgia a $50-million preliminary contract to begin C-5B production, and the first aircraft rolled out July 

12, 1985. The Air Force had contract options to buy 50 C-~BS, at total cost of 

$7.8 17 billion. 

Military Airlift Command expected to receive its first B model by December, with delivery of the 50th expected near mid-1989. (AFSC Newsreview, 

Sept 27/85, 1) 

12 
Aerospace Research and Development 

September 73: Researchers in the Workload and Ergonomics Branch of the 

Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory were working to adapt 

machines to pilots rather than the traditional other way around, the Air Force 

Systems Command Newsreview reported. “The success or failure of a modern Air Force aircraft and mission depends on whether the pilot has the 

ability to handle the unpredictable situations typical in a wartime environment,’’ said Maris Vikmanis, supervisory industrial engineer for the lab. He 

explained that laboratory researchers studied how pilots performed in different environments, including combat, to provide information to aircraft designers so that future aircraft would be better adapted to pilots. 

But he pointed out there was more to it than simply assessing new aircrafts‘ 

cockpit designs. “Not only do we have to observe how the pilot performs in 

the aircraft cockpit, we also have to tap into the pilot himself:’ Vikmanis 

explained. “We must know how much effort the pilot is expending, his 

mental capability, and his workload limitation.” 

In analyzing cockpit design, researchers checked into how well a pilot 

could see and reach cockpit controls and displays. 

Only in existence as an aerospace research field since 1979, workload 

research measured both the pilot’s performance and his internal state of wellbeing. By combining experiments in the laboratory and in flight, lab researchers measured human performance/workload using three different 

methods. 

First, researchers used a computer-based performance test to measure a 

pilot‘s physical and mental action. By having the pilot perform up to 11 

different tasks, researchers could characterize various aspects of human behavior. 

Second, pilots answered, after flying a simulator or an actual aircraft, sub 

jective questions about their experience. 

A third method measured human performance/workload from a physiological viewpoint by collecting and analyzing vaGable responses of the human 

brain, heart, muscles, and visual system. 

Lab scientists and engineers used the test data to prepare a workload scale, 

which focused on problems the pilot, aircrew, and the aircraft itself might 

encounter in the future. 

NASA was applying similar methodology to the Space Shuttle and its crew, 

particularly to examine the effects on astronauts of microgravity as an element of stress. (AFSC Newsreview, Sept 13/85, 7) 

September 17: NASA announced the first flight at Ames Dryden Flight Research Facility, scheduled for late September, of the advanced fighter technology integration (AFTI) F-111 with a mission adaptive wing (MAW). The AFT1 

F-111 research aircraft was modified with a wing that could change its camber (fore and aft wing curvature) and its wing sweep to adjust to varied flight 

conditions. 

13 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NASA expected that MAW'S variable camber capability would allow optimum efficiency at supersonic, transonic, and subsonic speeds by adopting 

the best wing shape for each speed. The MAW program was intended to 

demonstrate that smooth variable camber technology showed improvements 

over current aircraft wing lifting-altering devices in such areas as aircraft 

payload and range capability, maneuverability, fuel efficiency, and aircraft 

handling qualities. 

The first flights would test the airworthiness and flight envelope expansion 

phase of the program, followed by the research phase. The plans for the 

initial phase called for about 15 flights that gradually increased the MAW 

aircraft to speeds of approximately Mach 1.05 and altitudes of about 35,000 

feet. NASA expected that phase to be complete by January 1986; and the 

research phase, about 30 flights, by June 1986. 

The MAW system had smooth-surfaced, variablecamber wing leading- and 

trailingedge flaps, an actuation mechanism, hydraulics, and redundant computers to control flap positions. Six independent trailingedge flaps (three per 

wing) and two leadingedge flaps provided a smooth continuously variable 

wing camber using flexible fiberglass skins on the upper surface and sliding 

panels on the lower surface. 

Fully developed, the MAW system would result in an aircraft equipped 

with an automatic flight control system with several control modes. Cruise 

camber control mode would optimize the trailingedge flap position for maximum cruise speed. Maneuver camber control mode would continuously 

position leading and trailing edge for optimum lift-todrag ratio depending on 

the lift coefficient and speed of the aircraft. Maneuver enhancemendgust 

alleviation mode would enhance the aircraft reponse to pilot control inputs, 

while reducing the aircraft's sensitivity to wind gusts. 

Designed for research rather than as a production prototype, the AFT1 F111 was a joint program of Ames-Dryden Flight Research Center and the U.S. 

Air Force's Flight Dynamics Laboratory. The Boeing Military Airplane Co. 

manufactured the MAW. (NASA Release 85-129) 

October 4: As part of the continuing Lewis Advanced Turboprop Project 

(ATP), supported by some 50 contracts and 15 grants, two advanced propeller 

propulsion systems recently underwent testing, the Lewis News reported. 

Lewis Research Center's (LeRC) Advanced Turboprop Project Office was directing development of the new highly loaded, multi-bladed propellers for 

use at speeds up to Mach 0.85 and at altitudes compatible with commercial 

air support system requirements. Advanced turboprop engines offered the 

potential of 15 to 30% savings in aircraft fuel burned relative to advanced 

turbofan engines (50 to 60°/0 savings over the current turbofan fleet). Investigators were developing both single- and counter-rotation propeller systems. 

Researchers at Wright Patterson Air Force Base were testing in a static 

propeller test rig the first Largescale Advanced Propfan (LAP), designed and 

14 
Aerospace Research and Development 

built by Hamilton Standard Div. of United Technologies Corp. under a NASA/ 

LeRC contract. Testing of the nine-foot diameter propfan, powered by an 

electric drive motor in the rig test, began in late August. 

At approximately the same time, the General Electric Co. began static 

proof-of-concept tests of its Unducted Fan (UDF) demonstrator engine at the 

GE Peebles, Ohio, test site. LeRC partially funded development of this advanced counter-rotating pusher propellers propulsion system. 

After completing a series of ground tests, both advanced propeller propulsion systems would undergo flight tests starting in mid-to-late 1986. The 

propfan would be tested in a wing-mount installation on a modified Gulfstream II testbed aircraft under a NASA-contracted program with Lockheed; 

the UDF would be tested as an aft-mounted pusher on a Boeing 727 as part 

of a GUBoeing cooperative program. 

The propfan of the LAP program was an example of the application of 

single-rotation tractor propulsion technology, whereas the UDF was a unique 

example of counter-rotation pusher propulsion technology. The UDF was 

unique in that its propellers were directly driven by the multi-stage power 

turbine without the need for gearbox speed reduction. Normal procedure in 

propeller installations was to drive the propeller through a reduction gearbox 

so that both the propeller and its driving turbine operated at close to their 

optimum speeds for peak efficiency. 

The APT effort was also addressing more conventional counter-rotation 

propfan configurations, as well as associated gearbox designs. (LeRc News, 

Oct 4/85, 1) 

October 9: NASA announced it signed with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) a memorandum of agreement to conduct a two-year study of the possible benefits to the nation of the 

continued development of tilt-rotor aircraft. In particular, the study would 

assess the broader implications of V-22 aircraft development, including the 

potential for other versions and sizes, both civil and military; civil certification issues; civil production impact on the defense industrial base; and any 

indirect technology spin-offs. 

Tilt-rotor aircraft combined the vertical take-off-and-landing ability of the 

helicopter with the relatively higher cruising speed and longer range of fixedwing aircraft. 

A small proof-of-concept aircraft, the XV-15, was tested successfully, leading to a larger tilt-rotor aircraft, the V-22 Osprey, which DOD was develop 

ing. DOD expected the V-22 to bring the tilt-rotor configuration closer to 

maturity, enabling lower risk development of other versions and sizes, for 

both military and civilian use. 

The FAA would certify any civil versions of a U.S. tilt-rotor aircraft and 

would assess its impact on the national airspace system, airport and heliport 

development, and other air service needs. 

15 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NASA acquired a high level of expertise in tilt-rotor technology during 

development and flight testing of the XV-15, and the agency also had a 

charter to study use of NASAdeveloped technology and to assess future 

research needs. (NASA Release 85-144) 

October 18: NASA announced the first flight of the NASA/Air Force/F-111 

mission adaptive wing (MAW) [see Aerospace R & D/Aeronautics, Sept. 171 at 

the Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility. The flight accomplished functional 

verification of the variable camber MAW at flight conditions up to MACH 0.6 

and altitude of 15,000 feet. 

The Boeing Military Airplane Co. manufactured the MAW. (NASA Daily 

Activities Report, Oct 21/85) 

December 13: NASA announced that during 1985 it began a series of research flights under simulated airline conditions to evaluate the effects of an 

operational environment on new technology for smooth, or laminar, airflow 

over aircraft wings [see Aerospace R & D/Aeronautics, July 81. Previous research had shown this technology could reduce aerodynamic drag from 25 

to 40% under laboratory conditions and could provide significant fuel savings. However, insects, ice, and other obstructions could disturb laminar flow 

in actual flight service. 

To test the system in an operational environment, NASA's AmedDryden 

Flight Research Facility's business-sized jet Star, equipped with two experimental laminar flow control devices, was based in Atlanta and flown in and 

out of commercial airports in the southeast and midwest, including those in 

St. Louis, Cleveland, and New Orleans, to test the devices in humid summer 

climates. 

While based in Pittsburgh to test the devices in early autumn east coast 

conditions, the plane flew in and out of airports in Boston; Chicago; Chattanooga; Cleveland; Charleston, W.Va.; Washington, D.C.; Detroit; Bangor, 

Maine; New York; Kalamazoo, Michigan; Oklahoma City; Albuquerque; and 

Denver among others. 

The flight tests would continue in 1986 with the plane based in Cleveland 

during January. (NASA Release 85-170) 

Balloons 

February 17: Ben Abruzzo, who took part in the 1st balloon crossings of the 

Atlantic and Pacific oceans, died February 11 along with five others when his 

twinengine Cessna 421 plane crashed after takeoff from Coronado Airport 

north of Albuquerque, the Washington Post reported. 

16 
Aerospace Research and Development 

In 1978 Abruzzo, along with Maxie Anderson and Larry Newman crossed 

the Atlantic in the Double Eagle II, landing near Paris after the 3,000-mile 

flight. Late in 1981 Abruzzo, Newman, and two other men flew the Double 

Eagle V across the Pacific. Lifting off November 9 from Nagashima, Japan, 

Abruzzo crash-landed four days later in northern California in one of the 

worst storms there in 20 years. Abruzzo and another crew member won the 

Gordon Bennett race in 1979. (W Post, Feb 13/85, C6) 

Large Space Systems 

january 24: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced that a December 1985 experiment, EASE or the experimental assembly of structures in EVA 

(extravehicular activity), aboard Space Shuttle flight 61-C would provide 

information about humans working in space. In the experiment, two crew 

members would move six aluminum beams, each 12 feet long and four 

inches in diameter, into space from the Space Shuttle payload bay and assemble them into a tetrahedron shape and then disassemble them. This experiment would demonstrate human ability to build strong, practical structures in 

space. During the experiment videotape and still photographs would record 

crew member movements to link beams by special connectors at the beam 

tips. 

This building approach was a technique in the Large Space Structures 

program called an “erectible” method, as opposed to a “deployable” method 

that would not be demonstrated until 1986 or 1987 when NASA would orbit 

a structural-assembly demonstration experiment. MSFC had conducted tests 

similar to EASE in its neutral buoyancy simulator, a million-gallon water tank 

that gave a sense of weightlessness to submerged people working in space 

suits. Researchers would compare assembly and disassembly times recorded 

in the space test with results found in the neutral buoyancy tank. However, 

MSFC’s Ed Valentine, experiment manager, noted, “We‘d like to be able to 

measure a human’s productivity in space scientifically, and we’re not really 

sure if time measurements are all that are needed to guage that, so we’ll be 

examining other possible criteria to use in the future.” 

A Langley Research Center structural assembly experiment would accompany the MSFC experiment. (MSFC Release 85-3) 

During April: NASA announced it awarded to Howard University’s School of 

Engineering Large Space Structure Institute (LSSI), Washington, D.C., an ongoing grant expected to total $1.9 million to develop theoretical knowledge 

supporting the design and construction of very large space systems. NASA 

expected the knowledge to make a significant contribution to the establishment of large space stations and space settlements. 

17 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The LSSl research project would help demonstrate the practical benefits of 

US. space capabilities, including construction of a solar power satellite that 

would convert the sun’s energy into electricity for transmission back to earth 

and construction of large platforms that would allow scientists to observe the 

earth for improved understanding of the weather and the ground water table. 

The LSSl team would consist of Dr. Taft Broome, chief project investigator 

and chairman of the Department of Civil Engineering, and other Howard 

University faculty members; and one faculty member each from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge University, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Graduate students from the latter institutions would also 

participate. 

NASA was primarily interested in LSSl doing the concept development and 

the research and demonstration analysis. Once Broome and his team provided the agency with the needed data, NASA could turn the project over to 

private industry for implementation. (NASA Activities, Apr 85, 8) 

Launch Vehicles 

January 9: NASA announced that Lewis Research Center awarded a 

$32,346,000 follow-on contract to General Dynamics’s Convair Division 

(GD/C) to erect, test, and launch (with accompanying launch facility modifications) Atlas-Centaur launch vehicles and to perform support testing and 

launching of Centaur upper stages from the Space Shuttle in 1986; GD/C 

would work at Kennedy Space Center. The cost-plus-award-fee contract, beginning January l, 1985 and running through December 1986, was a continuation of work GD/C had performed under earlier contracts. The Centaur 

should increase the Space Shuttle’s capability to carry heavier payloads from 

low-earth orbit to geosynchronous orbit or interplanetary trajectories. (NASA 

Release 85-5) 

During March: In a report of 1984 accomplishments, Arnold Engineering 

Development Center (AEDC) commander, USAF Col. Philip Conran, said that 

AEDC conducted more than 200 separate test and evaluation programs during FY 84 and demonstrated the importance of the center’s full-spectrum test 

support to development and operational aerospace programs. 

In that year, propulsion systems testing dominated test and evaluation efforts, turbine engine testing being the busiest in the history of the center. 

Much of that had resulted from the new start for the F109 next-generation 

trainer engine and the fly-off competition between the F110 and F100 engines 

for the USAF’s F-16 Fighting Falcon and the subsequent product verification 

of the F110. 

18 
Aerospace Research and Development 

In rocket motor testing, AEDC conducted three altitude test firings of the 

inertial upper stage (IUS) in an effort that helped Space Division and Boeing 

Aerospace Co. successfully understand and fix the April 1983 upper stage inflight anomaly. After failure of the Palapa B-2 and Westar 6 commercial 

satellites to reach desired orbits, AEDC supported the conversion of defense 

and commercial satellite perigee and apogee booster motors from carboncarbon to carbon phenolic rocket nozzles. 

AEDC considered completion of construction of the aeropropulsion systems test facility (ASTF) its outstanding achievement for 1984 and was proceeding with activation and acceptance testing to prepare the ASTF for 

operations in September 1985. 

In the flight dynamics area, AEDC completed in a specially modified vacuum chamber the initial ground testing phase of the antisatellite pathfinder 

sensor that required the use of a spin mount rig, which had been three years 

in development, and an optical alignment system that provided accuracies on 

an order of magnitude better than any other available system. AEDC also 

developed and successfully demonstrated a new test technique of spinning a 

nose cone to evaluate reentry erosion. 

One of the most productive programs at AEDC in 1984 was for the C-17 

advanced cargo aircraft. AEDC provided more data in less time than usual 

and saved the sponsors about $1 million in wind-tunnel test time. 

The in-house technology program, which supported testing and evaluation 

missions, delivered needed test techniques for testing of advanced reentryvehicle materials, engine icing, and rocket motors. For example, AEDC ap 

plied a flash X-ray technique and worked with the University of Tennessee 

Space Institute to enhance the image of three test firings of the inertial upper 

stage, resulting in successful completion of the anomaly investigation. 

(AEDC Test Highlights, Spring/85, 2) 

luly 72: Arnold Engineering Development Center completed the fourth and 

final qualification test firing of the Payload Assist Module-D (PAM-D) II 

rocket motor, the Air Force Systems Command Newsreview reported. The 

PAM-D II featured increased propellant capacity (7200 Ib.) over its predecessor, the PAM-D (4400 lb.), and could boost both military and commercial 

communications satellites into geosynchronous orbit about 22,300 miles 

above earth. 

A Space Shuttle would deliver the motor and its payload into space at an 

altitude of 160 to 180 miles, where the PAM-D II satellite package, spinning 

at 30 to 85 rpm, would spring-eject from the orbiter’s open bay doors. 

At a safe distance from the orbiter, the PAM-D II, which served as a perigee 

kick motor, would ignite and propel its payload more than 22,000 miles 

higher. PAM-D II would then separate from the payload, which was positioned by its own apogee motors activited by signals from earth. 

19 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

AEDC test-fired the motor in one of its high-altitude rocket development 

test cells at a simulated pressure altitude of approximately 100,000 feet while 

spinning it about its thrust axis at 70 rpm. Test objectives were to determine 

ballistic performance and to take plume (exhaust) radiation measurements, 

which were important in determining if the exhaust radiation would damage 

the motor case or satellite. 

With the fourth test completed, the Air Force considered the motor ready 

for production and flight. Morton Thiokol’s Wasatch Division was the rocket’s 

manufacturer. NASA had tentatively scheduled PAM-D 11’s first flight for 

November 1985 aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger to place the RCA SATCOM satellite into orbit. (AFSC Newsreview, July 12/85, 7) 

July 26: NASA announced the Lewis Research Center awarded a $10,169,016 

contract to General Dynamics Corp. for management and engineering services in support of the Atladcentaur launch vehicle program. The contract 

also called for the company to provide technical management, engineering 

design, analysis and development, engine testing and development, and 

reliability and quality assurance. The cost-plus-award fee follow-on contract 

would begin July 1985 and continue through December 31, 1986. 

Centaur was a high-energy, upper-stage used with expendable boosters to 

deliver large payloads to geosynchronous orbit. NASA was modifying it for 

use as an upper stage on the Space Shuttle. (NASA Release 85-110) 

August 1: Lewis Research Center (LeRC) announced it awarded a 

$12,386,535 sole source fixed-price-incentive-fee contract to Teledyne Industries, Inc. for the fabrication, assembly, and testing of digital computers and 

remote multiplexer units in support of the Space Shuttle/Centaur program. 

Work began in July 1985 and would run through October 1987. 

Digital computers would serve as the focal point for the Centaur flightcontrol system, processing data from the other flight boxes including the 

multiplexer units. They would also provide the hardware capability to interface with the orbiter and ground system; 

NASA scheduled the first Centaur launch-the Ulysses mission-for May 

15, 1986, from the Space Shuttle payload bay followed on May 21, 1986, by 

the Galileo mission. (LeRC Release 85-58) 

September 6: NASA announced that its Lewis Research Center (LeRC) 

awarded a $79,194,665 contract to General Dynamics Corp.’s Convair Division to support the Space ShuttleKentaur program from August 30, 1985 

through June 1987. Under the cost-plus-award-fee contract, General Dynamics would supply labor, materials, and resources necessary for management and engineering services and launch operations services to implement 

the program. 

20 
Aerospace Research and Development 

Included in the multi-contract concept were services such as overall program management; administration and engineering support; technical management; operations, planning, and integration; and launch complex 

modifications. 

NASA planned that the Space ShuttleKentaur combination in May 1986 

would launch Ulysses, the first and only planned mission to observe the 

polar regions of the sun, and a week later Galileo to explore Jupiter’s atmosphere. In spring 1988 the combination would launch the Venus radar map 

per mission to investigate the surface and interior of Venus. (NASA Release 

85-125) 

September 9: General Dynamics would delay for more than two weeks the 

delivery of the first Space Shuttle/Centaur upper stage to the company’s 

facility at Cape Canaveral Air Force Base, adding an increased schedule risk 

to already tight timing for launch in May 1986 of the Galileo and Ulysses 

missions on trajectories toward Jupiter, Aviation Week reported. Martin 

Winkler, General Dynamics Space ShuttleKentaur program manager, said 

the stage remained in San Diego to complete acceptance testing and also to 

conduct some tests that were to have been done in Florida. Winkler said that 

keeping the stage in San Diego to complete assembly and testing would not 

affect the testing and processing schedule in Florida, since it would be delivered in time for the scheduled mating with the Centaur integrated support 

structure (CISS). 

Winkler said the schedule called for completion of acceptance testing by 

September 11 and that there were no unresolved flight safety issues, although 

it was possible some might come up during future safety reviews and subsystem qualification testing. 

Problems fixed prior to shipment included a mislocated forward bearing 

bracket that held each of the 12 springs on the stage, installation difficulties 

resulting from a minor tooling problem, and strut reengineering required for 

installation of a component in the tank. 

The CISS, which was then in Florida for the first Space Shuttle/Centaur 

stage, was flight hardware and was a complete system with only some small 

parts yet to be delivered by mid-September. NASA had scheduled a major test 

for September 16, when the assembly would rotate with all of the installations in place to assure clearances. A November milestone would be four 

tanking tests. 

The second Space ShuttleKentaur was on schedule; contract date for delivery of the second stage and second ClSS was the end of December. General Dynamics estimated it would deliver the second Space ShuttleKentaur 

on November 22 and the second ClSS on October 29. (AvWk, Sept 9/85,24) 

October 7: NASA announced that it signed a 21-month agreement with Scott 

Science and Technology, Inc. (SST) to provide technical expertise to SST in 

21 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

the development of a commercial liquid-fuel upper stage for boosting Space 

Shuttledeployed satellites to geosynchrous orbit. 

SST, whose president was former astronaut David Scott, had worked for two 

years on developing the upper stage, called the Satellite Transfer Vehicle, 

which would be able to boost satellites ranging from 2,000 to 19,000 Ib. On 

some missions, the stage would be recoverable. 

Engineers at NASA's Johnson Space Center would monitor the stage's development and consult with SST staff on technical problems. SST would reimburse NASA for the use of any test facilities and the salaries and travel of JSC 

personnel working on the project. (NASA Release 85-143) 

November 27: NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) requested proposals for a 12-month study of an advanced high-thrust, high-performance 

liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen rocket engine that could be used for the advanced launch vehicles being examined in NASNAir Force Space Transportation Architecture Studies (STAS), which included heavy lift launch vehicles, 

Defense Daily reported. NASA considered the advanced LOWhydrogen cryogenic engine and a new LOXhydrocarbon engine to be key elements to 

advanced transportation systems. MSFC said it planned to award up to three 

parallel firm-fixed-price contracts for the study of the Space Transportation 

Main Engine (STME). 

During the study, the contractors would prepare parametric trade-off data 

for engine requirements and configurations that might be employed in future 

launch vehicles. NASA would compare these engine configurations to the 

Space Shuttle main engine (SSME) for application to new launch vehicles. 

The contractors would identify candidate engine configurations, compare 

their features, and then recommend engine configurations that would best 

satisfy the requirements of future launch vehicles. 

The three principal contenders for the STME study were Rockwell's Rocketdyne Div., prime contractor for the SSME; and Aerojet Technologies and 

United Technologies's Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, who conducted component 

improvement studies for the SSME. (D/D, Nov 21/85, 105) 

Military Applications 

April 26: Although the Defense Department's fourth edition of Soviet Military 

Powerdescribed an unfavorable imbalance between U.S. and Soviet strategic 

forces and research programs [see USSWMissiles, Apr. 11, the annual report 

of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering stated that 

the U.S. would lead the Soviet Union in virtually every basic technology 

"critical to defense'' over the next 10 to 20 years, Science reported, including 

22 
Aerospace Research and Development 

many that would be crucial to the success of a sophisticated ballistic missile 

defense. 

U.S. technology was superior in computers and software, electro-optical 

sensors, guidance and navigation, materials, microelectronics, optics, propulsion, radar, robotics, signal processing, telecommunications, and signature reduction (or stealth), the report said, and also in life sciences, 

productiodmanufacturing, and submarine detection. The Soviets, in contrast, led in no areas and matched the U.S. only in aerodynamics, conventional and nuclear warheads, and power sources. 

In the area of weapons systems, the report said the U.S. was superior in 25 

of 30 categories; the only exceptions were in categories where the U.S. had 

not chosen to deploy any weapons or where the U.S. was ready to deploy 

what experts believed were vastly superior weapon systems. These categories 

included deployed antiaircraft missiles, a deployed ballistic missile defense, 

deployed chemical weapons, and deployed antisatellite weapons. 

The report concluded that the ”strengthening of the U.S. military R&D 

commitment will make it more difficult for the USSR to close existing technology gaps.” (Science, Apr 26/85, 478) 

May 70: Deputy Secretary of Defense William Howard Taft gave approval to 

the U.S. Air Force to begin development of higher thrust derivatives of the 

Pratt & Whitney F100 and General Electric F110 engines that powered the F15 and F-16 fighters, Defense Daily reported. The development program, 

expected to cost between $400 and $500 million, would boost the thrust of 

the 24,000-lb. thrust FlOO and 27,000-lb. thrust FllO to 29,000 Ib., about the 

maximum possible. 

Air Force Assistant Secretary Thomas Cooper said durability, not thrust, was 

the key problem for fighter engines and that the new engines would have the 

same durability as current engines. He said the Air Force planned to start 

production of the engines in 1989 and to complete annual buys on a shared 

basis. The Air Force would seek warranties on the derivatives as on current 

engines, access to proprietary data, and pre-priced production options. 

Cooper said the new engines, costing slightly more than current engines 

that were between $2 and $3 million apiece, would have the same dimensions as present engines, could be used in all models of the F-15 and F-16, 

and could be retrofitted. He pointed out the Navy could also use either 

derivative engine for its fighter program. 

Under questioning, Cooper declined to say whether the Air Force planned 

to buy the Northrop F-20 fighter in FY 87, but said the Air Force was interested in the aircraft and needed more detailed cost data to make a decision. 

Northrup had offered to supply 396 F-20s over four years at a fixed price of 

$15 million per plane; however, Cooper said the Air Force required more 

detailed data on the “bits and pieces” of the program in order to make the 

cost comparison that people were asking for. (D/D, May 10/85, 57) 

23 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

/une 26: U.S. Rep. George Brown, Jr. (DCalif.1, author of an amendment to 

prohibit tests of the antisatellite miniature homing vehicle (MHV-ASAT) 

against objects in space, suggested that in light of the successful groundbased laser test with the orbiting Space Shuttle [see Space Transportation 

System, Military Applications, June 211, the U.S. should drop the MHV in 

favor of a laser antisatellite system, Defense Daily reported. 

Brown said that ”. . . This very successful demonstration raises the question of whether the United States should spend sewral billion dollars on the 

technologically less-advanced MHV ASAT system, still in the testing stage, 

when we could have a more technologically advanced, far more versatile 

system available for deployment in the same timeframe . . . and probably 

at a lesser cost.” 

Brown emphasized the significance of the laser test, which he noted had 

hit a target on the Space Shuttle “less than a foot in diameter, much smaller 

than an ICBM, traveling faster than a missile, and there is no question but that 

a missile would be just as easy to hit.” 

Although lethality was not demonstrated in the test, the U.S. had “demonstrated lethality more than 10 years ago when we knocked down a drone 

airplane with a laser, and we haw now in the inventory lasers with about a 

million times the energy of the one that was used” in the Space Shuttle test, 

Brown added. “There is no question that lethality is achievable with existing 

technology.” (D/D, June 26/85, 318) 

/uly 12:The US. Air Force rolled out the C-5B today, the first B model of the 

free world’s largest military cargo aircraft, the Air Force Systems Command 

Newsreview reported. Although it looked like a C-5A, the new C-5B had 

many improved features including state-of-the-art materials and avionics. It 

also had the new wings, which would boost the service life of the aircraft to 

30,000 flight hours, that the Air Force was retrofitting to the A model. 

The Air Force planned to buy 50 C-5Bs, nearly doubling its capability to 

airlift non-stop anywhere in the world large equipment such as the Army’s 

74-ton mobile scissors bridge, Abrams M-1 tanks, and helicopters. When the 

purchase of the C-5Bs was completed, the Air Force would be about 18 

million-ton-miles per day short of its goal of 66-million-tons per day of outsized airlift capability, the minimum capability recommended in a 1981 

Congressionally mandated mobility study. The Air Force planned to make up 

the difference by acquiring the C-17. 

Four improved General Electric TF-39 engines, rated at 41,000 Ib. of thrust 

each, powered the C-5B. The aircraft seated 75, and its seats were 30% 

lighter than the A model’s, decreasing total aircraft weight by 725 Ib and 

cutting fuel consumption by an estimated $13 million yr the life of the C5B fleet. 

The C-5B’s 24 main landing gear wheels had carbon brake assemblies 

with multiple discs. More than 400 Ib. lighter per aircraft, the new brakes 

24 
Aerospace Research and Development 

doubled the life of the A model’s beryllium system and should bring about an 

estimated 20-year savings of $20 million. 

In October 1982 the Air Force’s Aeronautical Systems Division had 

awarded a $50-million preliminary C-5B production contract to LockheedGeorgia. Plans called for early September flight testing of the first production 

aircraft at Dobbins AFB, Georgia. The Air Force had contract options to buy 

50 C-5Bs for $7.817 billion. (AFSC Newsreview, July 29/85, 1) 

August23: In the first test of the precision location/strike system (PLSS), three 

TR-1 aircraft picked up a radar signal like one an enemy might use to guide a 

missile attack and passed the signal direction and time data to a ground 

station computer. The computer analyzed the data, compared inputs from 

the three aircraft, and pinpointed where the radar signal was coming from, 

the Air Force Systems Command Newsreview reported. If the source had 

been an enemy site for radardirected missiles, artillery, or an anti-aircraft 

system, the US. Air Force could quickly direct an F-16 to it for an attack. The 

PLSS passed the test by zeroing in on a prepositioned radar emitter the 

moment its signal started. 

Lt. Col. Day1 Donahey, PLSS program director for the Aeronautical Systems 

Division, called it “a giant leap forward” for future wartime capabilities of 

U.S. tactical forces. “The system performed better than expected at this point 

in its development testing,” he said. 

Lockheed Missiles and Space Co. was developing the PLSS, which featured 

an integrated, lethal mix of ground-based and airborne electronics. 

In an operational scenario, the three highly instrumented, high-altitude 

TR-1 s would fly racetrack patterns behind the forward edge of a battle area. 

Around the clock, in all kinds of weather, the TR-1 listening platforms would 

detect enemy electronic transmissions. Despite dense electromagnetic interference, the TR-1s could pick up individual pulses of enemy radar. (AFSC 

Newsreview, Aug 23/85, 1) 

December 6: Lockheed Georgia, manufacturer of the C-5B Galaxy, resumed 

flight testing of the aircraft after it replaced about 12,000 fastener nuts on the 

plane, the Air Force Systems Command (AFSC) Newsreview reported. Lockheed-Georgia grounded the plane after its September maiden flight when 

quality control inspectors found that construction crews had installed aluminum, instead of steel, nuts on the first eight planes. The mistake slowed 

production and temporarily halted certain aircraft flight testing. 

Col. Thomas Stover, acting C-5B program director for Aeronautical Systems Division, said, ”It is important to note that flight safety was never an 

issue. The concern was for development of maintenance problems 10 to 15 

years down the road.” Stover explained that steel nuts were stronger and 

lasted longer than aluminum nuts and that, although there were about 3.7 

million nuts for each C-5B, only 35,000 had to be steel. 

25 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Lockheed-Georgia spokesman Dick Martin said workers installed the 

wrong nuts because some engineering drawings, used by supervisors and 

assembly line workers, were not specific about nut type. He said about 3EiOi0 

of the nuts had to be replaced on the first aircraft. 

The Air Force had scheduled the first C-58 for delivery by January 1, and 

Lockheed-Georgia still expected to deliver the aircraft on time because the 

company had been four weeks ahead of schedule before the delay caused by 

the replacement. (AFSC Newsreview, Dec 6/85, 4) 

Simulation Technology 

March 20: NASA announced that a five-year project at Lewis Research Center 

(LeRC) resulted in development of the real-time multiprocessor simulator, a 

low-cost easily programmable computing system that simulated or monitored complex physical processes in real time. The simulator could offer 

considerable savings, for example, in the development and testing processes 

for producers of airplane engines. 

Real-time simulations were particularly important in studying the internal 

aerodynamics of a jet engine, including such variables as the performance of 

turbine and convergentdivergent nozzles, bypass valves, injectors, and fan 

and compressor geometry and the coordination of these variables with fuel 

flows and flight controls. In a real-time simulation of a helicopter engine, the 

NASA system solved all 63 engine equations within 1/100th of a sec. 

The system had hundreds of real-time applications where there was a 

critical need to simulate or monitor many processes at once or when the 

reaction of one process could be vital to the performance of another, such as 

monitoring the structural dynamics of a space station at several locations, 

with a processor dedicated to each location. 

The essence of the NASA system was a network of computers tied together 

and operated simultaneously but with different programs, each one a portion 

of the overall task. The system could detect a change in one aspect of a 

dynamic process and report the effect of that change on other parts of the 

process. Us i ng state-of-the-art, h i g h-pe do r m ance m icrocom pu ters, NASA scientists had designed hardware configurations that enabled a person at a 

single terminal to control up to 10 microcomputers operating simultaneously, 

each handling a portion of a total program. NASA scientists had also developed a companion form of computer language, taken from the PASCAL 

format, that enabled an engineer who was not a computer specialist to 

program his or her own multiprocessor for experimentation and monitoring. 

(NASA Release 85-39) 

December 6: NASA announced that a flight simulation laboratory, the ManVehicle Systems Research Facility (MVSRF), was in operation at its Ames 

26 
Aerospace Research and Development 

Research Center to give scientists a new tool to study human factors in 

operating commercial aircraft. 

The MVSRF contributed to flight safety by allowing researchers to simulate 

the complex set of relationships among pilots, their crews, converging aircraft, the weather, and air traffic controllers. Using the facility, scientists could 

study the effects of new and increasingly automated technologies on flight 

crew performance. NASA's human factors researchers worked directly with 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), airplane manufacturers, and commercial airlines to improve flight safety. For example, with the 727 simulator, 

NASA scientists researched airplane landings to learn methods that minimized fuel consumption while allowing pilots to maintain safe distances 

between their planes and other air traffic. 

The MVSRF included an exact replica of a Boeing 727 cockpit, a mock air 

traffic control station, and a cockpit known as the advanced concept flight 

simulator (ACFS). In both the 727 replica and the ACFS, a computer visual 

system provided out-the-cockpit window displays of approaching aircraft and 

landscapes of many U.S. airports. The computer system also depicted clouds 

and other weather conditions, the glow of the horizon at dusk and dawn, and 

the varied texture of the area illuminated by the simulated aircraft's landing 

lights. 

Researchers at the MVSRF put the pilots and controllers through created 

situations, during which the researchers monitored communications among 

flight crew members and between the crew and traffic controllers. They also 

read the aircraft's instruments and observed flight control settings while making audio and video recordings that included tracking a pilot's eye movements. (NASA Release 85-162) 

December 20: Scientists at the Air Force Geophysics Laboratory's (AFGL) 

Space Physics Div. developed a computer program that predicted the electrical effects of the highly charged polar space environment on spacecraft. 

These effects could range from the production of noise in circuits to system 

failure in extreme cases, the Air Force Systems Command's (AFSC) Newsreview reported. Called Potential of a Large Object in the Auroral Region 

(POLAR), the code simulated in three dimensions the electrical interaction of 

the Space Shuttle or any other space vehicle with the polar space environment in the region from 100 to 600 miles above earth. Space Shuttle launches 

from Vandenberg Air Force Base would orbit through the polar region, and 

the polar charging code could provide important data for the design of large 

space structures such as space stations. 

Lockheed Corp. used POLAR to predict the effect of charging on the Space 

Shuttle in low-altitude polar orbits with payloads funded by the Air Force 

Space Test Program Directorate and other Air Force and NASA programs. 

RCA performed calculations with POLAR for the Defense Meteorological 

Satellite Program vehicles. 

27 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NASA’s Spacelab 2 mission scientists used POLAR to predict the electrified 

gaseous environment, or plasma, of the Space Shuttle when the Plasma 

Diagnostics Package, a free-flying satellite, deployed. And NASA’s LAGEOS 

Satellite Project Office would use POLAR to study charged particle drag on 

this laser reflecting satellite. 

POLAR was a successor to NASCAP (NASA Charging Analyzer Program),, 

the computer code AFGL developed with NASA to model charging of Air 

Force satellites at geosynchronous altitude. The European Space Agency 

(ESA) had used that code to design weather and TV relay spacecraft, and the 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory used it to design the Galileo satellite. 

POLAR would incorporate data derived from future spacecraft flights and 

would become a computer-aided design tool for the construction of the 

advanced extravehicular mobility unit, the manned maneuvering unit, the 

NASAproposed space station, and the Strategic Defense Initiative. (AFSC 

Newsreviey Dec 20185, 7) 

Transatmospheric Vehicle 

April 2: Robert Cooper, director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects 

Agency (DARPA), said in testimony delivered in late March before the U.S. 

House Armed Services Committee research and development subcommittee 

that a space plane capable of flying to anywhere on the earth within half an 

hour to intercept enemy bombers or perform space spy missions might be 

possible within the next 10 years, the Washington Times reported. 

The US. Space Shuttle, which had limited ability to maneuver in space, 

was put in orbit only after a lengthy and complicated rocket launch. So the 

U.S. Air Force wanted a ”transatmospheric vehicle” that would be able to 

quickly reach and return from space like an ordinary aircraft. Cooper said a 

recent breakthrough in so-called ramjet technology might make possible an 

aircraft capable of taking off from a runway and reaching speeds of Mach 25 

(times the speed of sound), the velocity necessary to escape earth’s gravity. 

Cooper noted the plane would weigh about 100,000 Ib., take off from and 

land on a 10,000-foot runway, and probably use hydrogen as a fuel. Only a 

small amount of rocket power would be required to “deorbit” the plane, he 

said. 

DARPA proposed to build two full-scale model ramjet engines for testing 

on the ground. ”There are a number of very interesting technical problems 

here . . . none of them insurmountable. They’re all within our grasp,” 

Cooper said. 

Cooper explained that the ramjet combustion providing the extra boost 

took place only when thg air flowing through the jet engine chamber was at 

supersonic speeds. Ordinarily, to get air flowing at this speed through the 

28 
Aerospace Research and Development 

entire length of the chamber, the aircraft itself had to be moving at Mach 6. 

However, “a way has been found,” he said, “to use a subsidiary scheme for 

driving the air through the engine up to supersonic speeds, even though the 

vehicle on which the engine is attached is sitting on the runway.” 

By slightly varying the geometry of the engine, it might be possible to fly 

the aircraft from takeoff to Mach 6, and “with slight variations” fly from Mach 

6 to 14 and then to Mach 25, Cooper said. 

The Air Force and Navy were interested in the engine, development of 

which marked a resurgence in hypersonic speed research that had been “put 

on a back burner” in the late 1960s, Cooper commented. (W Times, Apr 2/ 

85, 3A) 

November 21: U.S. Air Force Maj. Gen. Donald Kutyna said today that the 

Defense Department had decided to proceed with a $500 million program to 

design a hypersonic plane capable of flying around the globe in less than two 

hours and of flying in the highest reaches of the atmosphere and to provide a 

low-cost method for launching satellites and other equipment critical to 

President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, the NY Times reported. 

Speaking at a Colorado Springs symposium on space technology, Kutyna said 

construction of the plane itself could cost $2 to $3 billion. 

“It is something we are very serious about, and we think the technology is 

now within reach,” said Kutyna, who coordinated the Air Force’s research 

and development of space systems. “We have been examining the principles 

for some time, and now we are ready to head into the next phase.” 

However, in Washington an aide to George Keyworth II, the President‘s 

science advisor, said, “Funding for the project’s next phase is not assured.” 

He noted Congress would have to approve the program. “This is all a little 

premature,” the aide noted. “We have not yet presented the plan to President 

Reagan.” 

But on November 20 Keyworth and top officials on the Defense Advanced 

Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and NASA presented details of the plan to 

members of Congress interested in aerospace issues. 

Unlike the Space Shuttle, which was launched vertically with rocket 

boosters, the aerospace plane would take off like an ordinary airplane, but 

would not have jet engines with heavy compressors, making the aerospace 

plane a light-weight vehicle. “Once you reach about Mach 3,” or three times 

the speed of sound, Kutyna said, “the air streaming through the engines 

begins to compress itself. Some studies indicated that the plane could attain 

speeds of Mach 20, although there were experts who said half that speed 

would be more reasonable. 

If successful, the project could solve a key problem for the military: drastically reducing the cost of placing satellites and defensive space weapons in 

orbit. (NYT; Nov 22/85) 

29 

ASTRONAUTS 

February 6: President Reagan and USSR Chairman Konstantin Chernenko 

had approved the idea of establishing ties between the U.S.’s Young Astronauts and the Soviet’s Young Cosmonauts, the Washington Post reported, as a 

step toward better U.S.-Soviet relations and peaceful cooperation in space. 

The program would begin with a Young Cosmonauts’ delegation visiting 

the U.S. to view a space launch and tour space facilities. Young Astronauts 

would then write to Young Cosmonauts, explaining their interest in space 

and what the groups might accomplish together. Those writing the best 

letters would visit, all expenses paid, their letters’ recipients. In addition, the 

International Aeronautical Federation had adopted the Young Astronaut program and planned to offer it to other nations to establish ties between Young 

Astronauts and Cosmonauts around the world. 

In his Washington Postcolumn, jack Anderson wrote that the Young Astronaut Council was recruiting 6-to-16-yr-olds for future space exploration and 

that those joining would be eligible to participate in the “Letter to a Young 

Cosmonaut” contest. (WPost, Feb 6/85, F11) 

February 8: Johnson Space Center USC) announced that Warren North, JSC 

specialist in astronaut selection and training, retired February 1 after 38 years 

with NASA. 

North had joined the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics 

(NASA’s predecessor agency) in 1947 as a test-pilot engineer at LeRC. In 1959 

North had transferred to NASA Headquarters, where he participated in early 

planning for Project Mercury, including selection and training of the seven 

original Mercury astronauts; in 1962 North assumed leadership of the JSC 

division responsible for training astronauts for Gemini rendezvous and docking development flights and for the Apollo lunar landing program. North was 

currently special assistant to the JSC flight-operations director for planning 

Space Shuttle crew training and flight-simulation equipment and techniques. 

North received a bachelor’s degree from Purdue University and master’s 

degrees from Case Institute of Technology and Princeton University. USC 

Release 85-7) 

May 9: NASA announced that astronauts Paul Weitz, Dr. Kathryn Sullivan, 

and Dale Cardner would support NASA activities at the 36th Paris Air Show 

at Le Bourget from May 31 through June 9 [see Space Station Program, Mar. 

221. 

Weitz, then chief of astronaut appearances at Johnson Space Center, was a 

member of the first Skylab crew in 1973 and later commanded the first flight 

of the Space Shuttle orbiter Challenger in April 1983. He had logged 793 

hours in space. 

31 PRECEDPNG PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Sullivan, an astronaut since 1978 with 197.5 hours in space, served as a 

mission specialist on the October 1984 Space Shuttle mission 414 and was 

the first American woman to perform an extravehicular activity or space walk, 

during which she and astronaut David Leestma conducted a 2.5-hour demonstration of the potential of refueling satellites in space. 

Gardner, an astronaut since 1978 with 337 hours in space, had flown on 

the August 1983 Space Shuttle mission STS-8, the first night launch and 

landing using the orbiter Challenger, and in November 1984 on the 51-A 

mission, during which the crew retrieved two communications satellites that 

had failed to achieve proper orbits after launch from an earlier Space Shuttle 

flight. NASA refurbished the satellites for reflight. 

During the Air Show, the astronauts would make numerous public appearances, participate in media interviews, and assist NASA's marketing efforts at 

its exhibit in the U.S. pavilion. (NASA Release 85-72) 

May 22: The Congressional Record reported the remarks of Cong. Frank 

Annunzio (D-Ill.) during a U.S. House session on May 22. 

". . . Today I am introducing legislation to strike medals in commemoration of the Young Astronaut Program. The medals would be sold by the Young 

Astronaut Council to raise money to help fund the program. 

". . . The Young Astronaut Program is designed to use the excitement of 

the United States space program to increase student interest and skills in 

math and science through a comprehensive program in elementary and 

junior high schools. 

". . . This September, the council will launch its 'Decade of Discovery.' 

Already more than 20,000 schools have responded to the program. The 

council estimates every elementary and junior high school in the nation will 

be signed up for the program by the beginning of the next school year. 

". . . To assist the council, and commemorate the 'Decade of Discovery: 

the Young Astronaut Program Medal Act will authorize the United States 

Mint to strike up to 750,000 gold, silver, and bronze medals for the council 

to sell to raise money for this exciting educational endeavor. The council will 

pay the mint the cost of manufacture plus a 10 percent surcharge. 

". . . I urge my colleagues to join with me in cosponsoring this worthwhile legislation." (CR-House, May 22/85, H3585) 

lune 4: NASA announced selection of 13 new astronaut candidates, six pilots 

and seven mission specialists, who would report to the Johnson Space Center 

in late summer to begin a one-year period of training and evaluation. Upon 

successful completion of the training, they would be eligible for assignment 

to Space Shuttle flights. 

The candidates would join 90 current astronauts. Including the new group, 

NASA had named 157 astronauts since the beginning of the program. In 

32 
Astronauts 

making the latest selections, NASA considered 33 civilians from the selection 

rosters developed during the 1984 selection process and 133 nominees from 

the military services. 

Those selected as pilot candidates were LCdr. Michael Baker (USN), Maj. 

Robert Caban (USMC), Capt. Brian Duffy (USAF), Stephen Oswald (civilian), 

and LCdr. Stephen Thorne (USN). Mission specialist candidates were Jerome 

Apt (PhD-civilian), Capt. Charles Gemar (US Army), Linda Godwin (PhDcivilian), Richard Hieb (civilian), Tamara Gernigan (civilian), Capt. Carl 

Meade (USAF), and Lt. Pierre Thuot (USN). (NASA Release 85-84) 

lune 7: NASA announced it would alter its process of soliciting astronaut 

applications for pilot and mission specialist positions to one where it would 

accept applications from civilians on a continuing basis beginning August 1, 

1985, and nominees from the military on an annual basis. NASA would make 

selections in the spring of each year with successful candidates reporting in 

the summer. Mission requirements and attrition rate of the current astronaut 

corps would determine number of candidates selected. (NASA Release 85- 

89) 

lune 79: NASA announced that Dr. Joseph Allen, who in November 1982 was 

a mission specialist on the four-member crew of mission STS-5, the first fully 

operational flight of the Space Shuttle, would resign July 1, 1986 from NASA 

to become executive vice president of Space Industries, Inc., a Houstonbased firm pursuing commercial ventures in space. Allen also flew on mission 51-A, the second flight of Discovery, during which he participated in 

the deployment of two communications satellites and, in the first space 

salvage mission, helped retrieve the Palapa 8-2 and Westar VI satellites for 

return to earth. 

In addition to his astronaut work, Allen was a mission scientist for Apollo 

15, staff consultant on science and technology to the President’s Council on 

International Economic Policy, and NASA assistant administrator for legislative affairs. 

Allen had received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal, Exceptional Service Medal, and Superior Performance Award. (NASA Release 

85-91) 

September 73: During a recent ceremony, the U.S. Naval Academy named a 

new Space Systems Research Chair in memory of two naval astronautsRoger B. Chaffee, who was a Lt. Commmander in the Navy, and Clifton C. 

Williams, who was a Major in the U.S. Marine Corps. The faculty chair was 

designed to enhance space education programs for the Navy. The astronauts’ 

widows, Jane Williams and Martha Chaffee, joined Rear Admiral Charles 

Larson, Academy superintendent, and Commodore Richard Truly, commander of the Naval Space Command, for the plaque unveiling ceremony. 

33 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Both Williams and Chaffee were among the third group of astronauts NASA 

named in October 1983. Williams served as backup pilot for the Gemini 10 

mission. He was killed in a T-38 crash October 5, 1967. Chaffee was assigned as one of the pilots for the first three-man Apollo flight. He was killed 

in the Apollo 1 spacecraft fire January 27, 1967, at Kennedy Space Center 

along with astronauts Virgil Grissom and Edward White. 

The Naval Space Command and the Naval Academy signed earlier in the 

year an agreement to establish the Space Research Chair. The principal objective of the new Academy professorship, as stated in the agreement, was to 

provide a means for future officer candidates at the Academy to further their 

understanding of space systems and their naval applications. “It will provide 

the mechanism by which midshipmen and faculty members will become 

exposed, involved, and committed to scientific activities at the forefront of 

the technologies related to space systems,” the agreement said. 

Rear Admiral William Ramsey, director of the Naval Space Systems Division, also participated in the Space Chair dedication ceremony. He presented 

the Defense Superior Service Medal to three Navy astronauts present at the 

dedication-Commodore Truly, Captain Robert Crippen, and Commander 

Robert Gibson-commending them for “exceptionally superior achievement” as astronauts. Truly served as pilot on STS-2 and commander of STS-8; 

Gibson served as pilot for STS 41-8; Crippen had flown on STS-1, STS-7, STS 

41-C, and 414. USC Roundup, Sept 13/85, 2) 

October 28 Astronaut John Fabian resigned from the NASA astronaut corps 

in the summer of 1985. It was the eighth astronaut resignation over the 

previous 16 months, the Washington Post reported, suggesting the way of life 

that was the hallmark of astronaut service might have begun to wear thin. 

Besides Fabian, NASA lost over those months Joseph Allen, Terry Hart, William Lenoir, jack Lousma, Thomas Mattingly, Donald Peterson, and Richard 

Truly, all veterans in the prime of their careers whose combined experience 

covered 12 of the 21 Space Shuttle missions flown. 

“Are these resignations something we worry about?” said NASA Administrator James Beggs. “Yes, especially the younger ones like Allen [45] and 

Fabian [44], who still have a lot of tread left on them. We‘ve now begun to 

lose the guys we‘ve educated and trained to the most difficult things we do, 

like spacewalks, and if this trend starts to increase, it‘s going to disturb me,” 

he concluded. 

Stripped of its glamor, astronaut service was demanding work that kept its 

members away from home, the Post said. One female astronaut, who just 

began training for a flight late in 1986 said she had seen her husband twice in 

the previous two months, “The last time it was for 12 hrs,” she said, “and for 

six of those we were both asleep.” 

Astronaut training ranged from studying the physics and biology of spaceflight to making parachute jumps and threeday survival visits in Panama’s 

34 
Astronauts 

jungle. Classroom hours were equivalent to time spent by Ph.D. candidates. 

Physical fitness was a must, but astronauts had to exercise on their own time. 

Once assigned a mission, the astronaut’s training pace quickened. At Johnson and Kennedy Space Centers there were around-the-clock computer simulations of astronaut tasks and potential problems in space. Astronauts also 

visited other NASA centers and contractors’ facilities to become familiar with 

the equipment they would use on their missions. 

NASA officials said there was nothing they could do to slow the training 

pace, because they believed it was the reason the U.S. had not had a fatal 

accident in space. NASA Administrator Beggs indicated that the way to keep 

astronauts happy and in the corps was to keep them busy and assigned to a 

mission. 

That didn’t keep Fabian from resigning, however, the Post pointed out. “1’11 

miss flying and I’ll miss the people, but I don’t want to be known to posterity 

as the oldest astronaut to fly in space,“ Fabian said. (WPosf, Oct 28/85, AI) 

35 

ASTRONOMY 

january 7: NASA was accelerating design of an unmanned U.S. space mission 

that would rendezvous with a comet and possibly drop a penetrator to return 

data directly from the comet’s surface, Av Wk reported. NASA officials believed that this first U.S. comet-rendezvous mission using the new Mariner 

Mk. 2 spacecraft would be a high-priority item in the FY 87 budget. 

NASA planners would probably select the Comet Kopff or Comet Wild-2 as 

mission target; FY 87 new-start funding could make a 1991 launch possible. 

Unlike Halley’s Comet flybys, the U.S. spacecraft in a rendezvous mission 

would spend many months flying in formation with a comet. Mission concept proposed rendezvous well before closest approach to the sun, so the 

spacecraft could observe the comet while it was in its asteroidal stage and 

before solar wind would blow large amounts of dust off its surface. The 

spacecraft would remain in formation during the comet’s active phase and 

possibly the post-solar-encounter phase. 

GSFC and ARC were examining comet-penetrator concept systems that 

would return compositional data using a gamma-ray spectrometer. (AvWk, 

Jan 7/85, 18) 

january8 NASA announced it signed with the University of Arizona, Tucson, 

a memorandum of understanding to study, plan, and, if approved by Congress, develop an orbiting astrometric telescope facility, which would be 

mounted in the mid-1990s on the planned space station, to detect and study 

planetary systems around other stars. Astrometric telescopes measured with 

extraordinary precision positions of stars and other celestial objects. 

Eugene Levy, director of the University‘s Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, 

and David Black, head of Ames Research Center‘s (ARC) Space Sciences 

Division, would be project principal scientists. Black described the effort as 

“the beginning of a new scientific discipline. The results of the search, 

whether positive or negative, will profoundly alter our view of the universe.” 

The gravitational pull of planets orbiting a star causes it to wobble as seen 

against the sky. By measuring this wobble, an astrometric telescope could 

determine the presence of planets and perhaps determine the properties of 

such a planetary system. Although ground-based telescopes use the wobblemeasuring technique to measure properties of double stars in orbit around 

one another, an astrometric telescope could measure the disturbance in a 

star’s motion caused by objects as small as planets. Until researchers find 

other planetary systems, they cannot fully test theoretical models used to 

explain the origin of our solar system or the formation of stars. The joint 

project would be coordinated with development of photometric and spectroscopic techniques and theoretical modeling of planetary system formation. 

37 

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FlLMED 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

ARC would clarify final telescope design and manner of mounting on the 

space station as well as Oversee telescope and instrument construction and 

mounting. The University would establish operating facilities on the ground 

and coordinate continuing scientific investigations that would extend more 

than a decade. 

The project would include a core program of planet detection and study, 

and guest investigators could use the telescope for astrornetric studies of 

other important celestial objects. Initial study and definition work would 

begin shortly; ultimate implementation would require Congressional ap 

proval and funding. (NASA Release 85-3; ARC Release 85-01; ARC Asfrogram, Jan. 17/85, 1; A/D, Jan 17/85, 95) 

january 15: Naval Observatory astronomer Richard Walker proposed a simple 

explanation for the inclination of a descending passageway in the Great 

Pyramid of Cheops in Egypt, the Washington Post reported. Walker had first 

examined the suggestion of John Herschel, an early 19thcentury astronomer, 

that the 337-foot passageway was at an angle of 26.5230° to point at the 

North Star, allowing the pyramid to serve an as astronomical observatory as 

well as tomb for the pharaoh. Walker noted, however, that due to the wobble 

of earth’s axis in its orbit around the sun, no prominent star could have been 

seen from the base of the passageway in 2800 B.C. 

Walker suggested the angle resulted from the construction technique. By 

placing three stones of equal length horizontally and another of equal size 

on top of the 3rd horizontal stone, the angle from the top stone to bottom 

stone at the other end was 26.5’. (WPost, Jan 15/85, A10) 

January 17: The Washington Times reported on the “Planet X“ theory of 

Daniel Whitmire and John Matese, physics and astronomy professors at the 

University of Southwestern Louisiana, in which they had suggested that an 

undiscovered planet triggered a rain of comets upon earth, resulting in extinctions of dinosaurs and other species at roughly 26-million-year intervals. 

“Planet X, if it‘s out there:’ Whitmire said, ”lies in an orbit outside Neptune 

and, every 30 million years or so, passes through a ring or disc of comets that 

also lie out there. When it does, gravity diverts some of the comets toward 

earth, kicking up huge clouds of dust on impact that disrupt the weather 

enough to kill off many species of plants and animals.” 

Whitmire noted the theory would explain several phenomena that had 

puzzled scientists: fossil evidence of extinctions at approximately 26-millionyear intervals and the slight variations in Neptune and Uranus’s orbits by 

Planet X’s gravitational pull. (W Times, Jan 17/85, 3A) 

January 78 Observations by the lnternational Ultraviolet Explorer (/UD revealed what appeared to be a variable gas cloud surrounding the star Beta 

38 
Astronomy 

Pictoris. This was the first evidence of gas around the star as well as the large 

dust particles previously observed from the Infrared Astronomy Satellite 

(IRA3 and ground-based telescopes, the JSC Roundup reported. Many astronomers considered Beta Pictoris, in the constellation Pictor in the southern hemisphere, a leading candidate for another planetary system. 

Dr. Yoji Kondo, Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) IUE project scientist, 

and Dr. F.C. Bruhweiler of Catholic University jointly made the observations 

in December and said the coexisting dust and gas clouds were consistent 

with scientific theories of planetary system formation. “Many stars like Beta 

Pictoris show evidence of being surrounded by clouds of gas at ultraviolet 

wavelengths,” said Kondo. “If such data imply that these stars also are surrounded by a protoplanetary gaseous cloud with a disk of dust particles, then 

many nearby stars may have evolving planetary systems. That’s exciting,” he 

concluded, “because these stars would offer a unique opportunity to see the 

way a solar system might appear in formation.” Theories of planet formation 

had generally predicted that planets evolved from large stellar clouds of dust 

and gas that gradually condensed into orbiting planetary bodies, a theory 

strengthened by the IUE observations. USC Roundup, Jan 18/85, 3) 

March 3: The NY Times reported the death in Moscow of losif S. Shklovsky, 

internationally known Soviet astrophysicist and early champion of the search 

for intelligent extraterrestrial life. Shklovsky was 68. 

Dr. Herbert Friedman of the National Academy of Sciences in Washington 

said Shklovsky’s contributions were diverse and, in some cases, basic. For 

example, in 1953 Shklovsky had proposed that the strange light from such 

features as the Crab Nebula, puzzling because it occurred at all wavelengths 

instead of being concentrated into spectral lines like ordinary light, was 

synchrotron radiation generated by electrons whirling in extremely strong 

magnetic fields. Researchers later discovered that the Crab Nebula and other 

remnants of great stellar explosions, or supernovas, emitted synchrotron radiation across the full width of the spectrum. 

Shklovsky also proposed the widely held concept that periodic X-ray emissions from space came from superdense stars circling one another at close 

range. 

In 1962 Shklovsky published a book arguing that intelligent creatures 

might exist in other worlds; it had gone through four Soviet editions and was 

translated by Carl Sagan. Later, Shklovsky began to doubt the existence of 

nearby civilizations, but had urged the creation of hugh space colonies. 

He received the Lenin Prize in 1960 and was made a corresponding member of the Soviet Academy of Sciences in 1966. (NYT, Mar 6/85, B10) 

March 6 NASA announced selection of the scientific investigators whose 

projects would be included on the proposed Advanced X-ray Astrophysics 

39 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Facility (AXAF), an observatory that would operate in lowearth orbit for at 

least 15 years. A spacecraft carrying an array of instruments and providing 

power, precise pointing, and data transmission would house the observatory 

containing a 1.2m diameter, 10m focal length telescope. AXAF construction 

could begin around 1987-88 with launch approximately five years later. 

In orbit, AXAF would join the Hubble Space Telescope, scheduled for 

launch in 1986, and the Gamma-Ray Observatory, planned for a 1988 

launch. The three observatories, together with the planned Space Infrared 

Telescope Facility, would provide simultaneous observations of cosmic 

sources over infrared, visable, ultraviolet, X-ray, and gamma-ray wavelengths. 

Those selected included instrument principal investigators to design and 

fabricate scientific instrumentation for placement in the telescope focal 

plane, interdisciplinary scientists to provide expertise on X-ray astrophysics 

and other fields of astronomy, and a telescope scientist to guide telescope 

fabrication. 

Instrument principal investigators selected were Dr. Gordon Garmire, 

Pennsylvania State University (charged coupled device imaging spectroscopy); Dr. Steven Murray, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (high-resolution camera); Dr. Stephen Holt, Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) (X-ray 

spectroscopy investigation for the AXAF); Dr. Claude Canizares, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (high-resolution X-ray spectroscopy using AXAF); 

and Dr. Albert Brinkman, University of Utrecht, Netherlands (high throughput transmission grating for cosmic X-ray spectroscopy). 

Interdisciplinary scientists selected were Dr. Riccardo Giacconi, Space Telescope Science Institute (advanced X-ray astrophysics facility mission); Dr. 

Jeffrey Linsky, National Bureau of Standards (the coronal structures of selected cool stars and close binary systems); Dr. Richard Mushotzky, GSFC (a 

program to measure the mass of galaxies and clusters of galaxies with AXAF); 

Dr. Andrew Wilson, University of Maryland (studies of radio jets and the 

narrow line regions of active galaxies with AXAF); and Dr. Andrew Fabian, 

Cambridge University, United Kingdom (cooling flows in clusters and galaxies). 

Dr. Leon Vay Speybroeck, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, would 

serve as telescope scientist. 

The investigators, as members of the AXAF science working group, would 

provide scientific and technical guidance throughout the project and would 

receive a specified amount of time to use the telescope during its first 30 

operational months. Astronomers from the U.S. and around the world would 

use the majority of observing time. 

Marshall Space Flight Center managed the AXAF project for NASA's astrophysics division, Office of Space Science and Applications. (NASA Release 

85-33) 

40 
Astronomy 

March 12 Soviet and French scientists would soon launch into orbit a space 

observatory, the Gamma 1 Project, that would carry a large gamma-ray telescope to help determine sources of cosmic rays, streams of highly charged 

particles that bombarded the earth from space, the NY Times reported the 

newspaper lzvestia as saying. Researchers hoped to obtain a detailed picture 

of the sky in gamma rays in order to understand the mysterious nature of 

gamma stars and their possible relationship with known astrophysical ob 

jects. lzvestia had gone on to say that testing was underway on the observatory but did not report a launch date. 

The lzvestia article said the two countries had cooperated in designing a 

special spacecraft, to be placed in an orbit 216 miles above earth, capable of 

carrying nearly two tons of scientific equipment for the Gamma 1 experiment, including main, small gamma-ray and X-ray telescopes. 

Franco-Soviet space cooperation dated back to an agreement signed in 

1966; France was a major partner in the Vega missions the Soviets had 

launched in December to examine Venus and Halley’s Comet and, in June 

1982, the French cosmonaut Jean-Loup Chretien had been the first and was 

the only man from a country outside the Soviet block to go into space aboard 

a Soviet spacecraft, the Soyuz T-6. (NYT, Mar 12/85, C3) 

April 70: NASA announced that observations by the International Ultraviolet 

Explorer (lug satellite revealed what appeared to be a variable gas cloud 

surrounding the star Beta Pictoris in the constellation Pictor in the southern 

hemisphere, a star that many astronomers considered a leading candidate for 

a planetary system resembling earth’s. Scientists using the lnfrared Astronomy 

Satellite (//7ASI and ground-based telescopes previously had reported large 

particles of dust around the star. 

The WE findings of coexisting dust and gas clouds were consistent with 

scientific theories of planetary system formation, noted Dr. Yoji Kondo, IUE 

project scientist at Goddard Space Flight Center. In general, theories predicted that planets evolved from large stellar clouds of dust and gas that 

gradually condensed into orbiting planetary bodies. Observations with the 

MAS strengthened this theory by suggesting that planetary disks surrounded a 

number of nearby stars. Also, astrometric measurements of the movement of 

several stars indicated the possible presence about each star of a planetary 

body several times more massive than Jupiter. 

Kondo and his associate Dr. F. C. Bruhweiler of Catholic University, Washington, D.C., used the IUE telescope to obtain the ultraviolet spectra of Beta 

Pictoris to determine the manner in which ultraviolet light was absorbed by 

the gas cloud and the extinction of the light by the dust cloud. The ultraviolet 

spectra showed an absence of selective extinction of the light at shorter 

wavelengths, evidence that the star’s light was being blocked evenly at all 

wavelengths by dust particles greater than one micron (millionth of a meter), 

as infrared data had reported. 

41 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

“The IUEobservation:’ Kondo said, “indicates the gas is either clumpy or is 

varying under the pressure of the stellar wind and radiation. If so, this would 

tend to complement lRAS and ground-telescope observations that a substantial dust cloud of protoplanetary material exists around Beta Pictoris.” 

Kondo cautioned that the lack of observed extinction could also be due to 

viewing the star just a little off-plane, so that the telescope’s Iine-of-sight was 

not aligned directly through the disk of orbiting dusty matter. However, Bruhweiler added, “that would be unlikely. All evidence seems to point to a belt 

too thick around Beta Pictoris for the line-of-sight to be missing the dust 

belt.” (NASA Release 85-52) 

April 76: NASA announced it selected the first participants in a program to 

assimilate discoveries from space astronomy experiments into a comprehensive modern astrophysical theory in order to use more effectively future 

experiments such as the Hubble Space Telescope, the Gamma-ray Observatory, the Solar Optical Telescope, and similar planned projects. After evaluating 49 proposals from 300 individuals at 80 institutions, NASA selected 

seven groups to participate in the astrophysical theory program. 

Dr. Richard McCray and a scientific team from the University of Colorado 

would study detailed ways in which spectra form in a variety of astrophysical 

sources such as stars, supernovae, and active galactic nuclei. 

Dr. Jeremiah Ostriker and colleagues from Princeton University would 

analyze the most distant observable parts of the universe to determine possible effects of the theoretical “big bang”. 

Dr. Pierre DeMarque and a team from Yale University would develop 

computer models of the sun to examine the internal motions and magnetic 

fields that caused sunspots, solar flares, and solar wind. 

Dr. Roger Chevalier and his team from the University of Virginia would 

study the hot gases that appeared to surround clusters of galaxies, individual 

galaxies, and supernova remnants to determine the origin and motion of the 

gases as well as their effect on the development of galaxies. 

Dr. Ronald Taam and colleagues from Northwestern University would 

study the origin of rapid bursts of high-energy radiation from neutron stars 

and globular clusters in order to model the ignition, nuclear evolution, and 

propagation of burning fronts on surfaces of neutron stars and to understand 

the nature of hot plasma confinement in magnetic fields near such subjects. 

Dr. David Black, heading a team from Ames Research Center and the 

University of California, Santa Cruz and Berkeley campuses, would investigate various physical and chemical processes taking place in the formation of 

stars, concentrating particularly on the stars’ origins in giant molecular 

clouds in interstellar space and the protostellar/protoplanetary disk-shaped 

nebulae surrounding fledgling stars. 

42 
Astronomy 

And Dr. Simon White and a team of scientists from the University of 

Arizona would study questions regarding star and planet formation, including properties of star-forming regions, galaxy formation, and evolution. 

NASA would bring the researchers together in 1986 to exchange information and to encourage a better understanding of the advances that science 

has made with data acquired from space research. (NASA Release 85-59) 

May 37: When a gap occurred in ancient records dealing with the appearance of Halley's Comet-its appearance in 164 B.C.-pertinent information 

was found on ancient clay tablets originating in Babylonia and residing in the 

British Museum, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory's UPL) Universe reported. 

The museum had about 1,200 astronomical texts from Babylonia, but they 

were in disarry and few scholars had looked at them. Museum representative 

C.B.F. Walker said that information from the tablets relating to Halley constituted "the first significant addition to our knowledge of past history of the 

comet" in more than a century. The information was impressed into the clay 

in the cuneiform alphabet, an ancient system that employed wedge-shaped 

sym bok. 

JPL's Dr. Don Yeomans said that since recorded history mentioned all ancient sightings of the comet except the 164 B.C. appearance, archeologists 

and astronomers had joined forces to discover such a reference, resulting in 

the find at the British Museum. 

"It filled in a blank:' Yeomans said. "The information showed that we were 

extremely close to where we thought it [Halley's 164 B.C. visit] would be." 

For the International Halley Watch, of which JPL was the lead organization, 

Yeomans was discipline specialist in the area called "astrometry; the science 

of predicting where, when, and how the comet would appear and what the 

world could expect from it. 

Yeomans served in a similar capacity for the planned mission to the comet 

Giacobini-Zinner with the international cometary explorer (ICE) spacecraft. 

UPL Universe, May 31185, 1) 

lune 5: NASA announced that flight controllers for its International Cometary 

Explorer (ICE) performed the first and largest of four midcourse corrections to 

direct the spacecraft toward a September 11 intercept of Comet GiacobiniZinner. Conducted from ICE mission control at Goddard Space Flight Center, 

these corrections used two thousand pulses of the spacecraft's two-lb. hydrazine thrusters to change its heading so it would fly through the comet's tail 

16,200 miles from the comet's nucleus. The thruster burns lasted four-and-ahalf hours. 

In 1982, NASA redirected the International Sun-Earth Explorer, which was 

launched in 1978, toward the comet for what would be the first satellite1 

comet encounter in history. This encounter would provide scientists with 

their first look at the makeup and dynamics of a comet's tail. 

43 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The ICE trajectory adjustment would place the satellite/comet encounter 

within the coverage window of the world’s largest single dish radio astronomy telescope located at the Arecibo Observatory, Puerto Rico. The 300-m 

dish, managed by the National Science Foundation, would supplement coverage by three NASA deep space network stations at Goldstone, California; 

Madrid, Spain; Canberra, Australia; and the recently completed 64-m antenna of the Japanese Space Agency at Usuda, Japan. 

NASA based ICE’S course adjustment on telescopic observations of Giacobinidinner as the comet emerged in April from behind the sun, the first 

observation since July 1984. The comet was approximately 149 million miles 

from the sun on the inbound leg of its orbit between the sun and the neighborhood of Jupiter. 

NASA would direct three smaller orbit maneuvers as ICE approached the 

comet, the last scheduled for three days prior to encounter. Course corrections were necessary because material spontaneously outgassed from the 

comet’s core, acting as jet thrusters on the comet’s body, slightly altered the 

its orbital path. 

Astronomers in 1900 discovered Giacobini-Zinner, which returned to 

earth’s neighborhood every six-and-one-half years. It would not be visible to 

the naked eye, but amateur astronomers with small telescopes would be able 

to see it. (NASA Release 85-86) 

lune 7: Two groups of scientists, who were making observations at infrared 

and radio wavelengths, reported the strongest evidence so far of a supermassive black hole in the center of the Milky Way galaxy, the NY Times reported, 

strengthening the theory that very massive black holes existed in the cores of 

all galaxies. Astrophysicists had already deduced that black holes might be at 

the cores of some distant galaxies. 

Eight physicists and astronomers from the University of California, Berkeley, reported in the British journal Nature their infrared observations showing 

gas whipping around a core at 100,000 to 400,000 miles per hour. They 

concluded the gas was in the grip of a black hole four million times the mass 

of the sun. 

The group measured the velocities near the center of the core with sufficient precision to show that they decreased further out in a way to be expected 

if controlled by gravity from a single central object. They believed this ruled 

out a dense cluster of stars, proposed by some astronomers, because that 

gravity field would be more uniform. 

Radio astronomers using coordinated observations with antennas in Westford, Massachusetts; Green Bank, West Virginia; Fort Davis, Texas; and Goldstone, Hat Creek, and Owens Valley, California; and the 27 antennas of the 

very large array in New Mexico aimed the antennas at a radio source, a 

suspected black hole, almost directly in the center of the Milky Way called 

44 
Astronomy 

Sagittarius A (in the constellation Sagittarius). The results indicated that the 

source, despite its enormous mass and output of energy, was smaller than the 

orbit of Saturn. Donald Lyndon-Bell of Britain's Royal Greenswich Observatory and Martin Fees of Cambridge University had proposed 14 years before 

that there might be such an object there. 

Astronomers using improved radio and infrared techniques had mapped in 

more and more detail the Milky Way core, which was 30,000 light years from 

earth. They could not see the core with visible light because of dense clouds 

of dust and gases. (NYTJune 7/85, A15) 

lune 22 NASA announced that the International Ultraviolet Explorer (IUD 

observed for the first time the comet Giacobini-Zinner while the comet was 

approximately 87 million miles from earth on the inbound leg of its orbit 

between the sun and the neighborhood of Jupiter. IUE would continue observations of the comet as it moved closer and ultimately became the target of 

the world's first intercept, on September 11, 1985, of a comet by a satellite, 

the International Cometary Explorer (IC0 spacecraft. 

The June 22 WE observations of Giacobini-Zinner produced ultraviolet 

spectrograms-graphic depictions of the intensity of light over a range of 

ultraviolet wavelengths-revealing emissions of two molecules, carbon 

monosulfide and another known as the hydroxyl radical. Preliminary evaluation indicated that the ultraviolet emissions from both molecules were somewhat brighter than expected at this stage of the comet's development. 

The IUE had taken the ultraviolet "pulse" of not only nearby solar system 

objects such as comets and planets, but also extragalactic objects such as 

quasars, providing research data to more than 1,000 astronomers around the 

world. 

Scientists, engineers, and technicians at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center designed and integrated the spacecraft, which was launched in 1978 as a 

cooperative venture of the British Science Research Council, the European 

Space Agency, and NASA. (NASA Release 85-103) 

luly I: The European Space Agency (ESA) announced that the European X-ray 

Observatory Satellite, EXOSAT, had been in orbit over two years, during 

which time it had performed nearly 2,000 observations, returning data to an 

observatory based at the European Space Operations Centre, ESOC, in West 

Germany. 

The EXOSAT telescopes had provided among other findings detailed images of the remnants of dead stars, called supernova, which had consumed 

their nuclear fuel (hydrogen and helium) and ended their lives in a spectacular explosion. The images enabled astronomers to deduce the amount of 

energy in the original explosion and the physical conditions in space in the 

neighborhood of the explosion. 

45 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Some astronomers speculated that a supernova might end as neutron stars 

or black holes, and EXOSAT was helping astronomers study a number 01 

these "exotic" objects in the Milky Way. 

Early in 1984 astronomers proposed using EXOSAT to search for very fast 

rotating neutron stars in X-ray binaries. In mid-July 1985, ESA announced that 

these observations had led to the discovery of a completely unexpected 

phenomenon, that of quasi-periodic oscillations that might indicate the presence of fast rotating neutron stars in very old X-ray binary systems. The 

discovery of the oscillations opened up an entirely new area of investigation 

in the study of neutron stars that, because of the stars' extreme gravitational 

conditions, could make it possible to test to their limits some of the fundamental laws of physics. (ESA release July 1/85; ESA release July 19/85) 

july2: The European Space Agency (ESA) announced that it launched at 11.23 

hours GMT July 2 Giotto, ESA's interplanetary space probe that would after a 

700 million km voyage encounter Halley's Comet in March 1986. ESA 

launched Giotto by an Ariane 1 launcher from the Kourou Space Center in 

French Guiana, the ninth straight success for the agency's unmanned Ariane 

1 rocket. 

The rocket placed Giotto into a geostationary transfer orbit with parameters 

of 35,966 km, apogee; 199.2 km, perigee; and 7O inclination. Following 

separation from the launcher's third stage 22 minutes after liftoff, ESA's Space 

Operations Centre (ESOC) at Darmstadt, West Germany, took control of the 

spacecraft. During the following 32 hours, ESOC spacecraft controllers 

worked around the clock to reconfigure the spacecraft in its geostationary 

transfer orbit and carry out spin-up and attitude maneuvers. After Giotto 

made three revolutions in its transfer orbit, ESOC at 19.24 hours GMT July 3 

injected the spacecraft into an earth-escape trajectory. 

Giotto, named for the lrlthcentury artist Giotto de Bondone, who in 1301 

witnessed what probably was Halley's Comet, should come within 310 miles 

of the comet's fivemildiameter nucleus. When the spacecraft reached its 

rendezvous, ESA scientists expected it to be destroyed by billions of highspeed dust particles pouring off the comet's nucleus. Before its destruction, 

Giotto would perform approximately 10 experiments examining the image, 

chemistry, magnetism, and other aspects of the comet and its tail. 

Other spacecraft participating in the Halley's Comet investigation were the 

USSR's Vega 1 and 2, launched December 15 and December 21, 1984, 

respectively, to encounter the comet at a distance of 62,000 miles; Japan's 

Sakigake launched January 8, 1985, and Planet A, scheduled for launch in 

August 1985 to photograph the comet's tail at a distance of 160,000 miles; 

and NASA's International Comet Explorer, ICE (formerly ISEE-31, launched 

December 22, 1983, and diverted from its previous earth orbiting position for 

the Halley's Comet encounter. (ESA release July 2/85; ESA release July 4/85; 

W Post, July 3/85, A3) 

46 
Astronomy 

August 2: Crew aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger on mission 51-F made 

major progress in fixing the instrument pointing system (IPS) for a $60 million solar telescope, the Washington Post reported; and flight planners 

moved closer to extending the mission one day to make up for lost sunwatching time. The extension would have Challenger landing in California 

after eight days in orbit. 

The IPS’S improved operation enabled the astronauts to increase the pace 

of their observations of the sun, the only star close enough for detailed study. 

Although the balky telescope mount late in the evening again failed to work 

properly, the Space Shuttle scientists manually locked the telescope on target. New computer commands radioed earlier from earth had helped solve 

some initial problems with the IPS, and it aimed its three solar telescopes 

precisely at specific spots on the sun, holding them there for a few minutes 

each time. However, the steadiness did not last. 

During one long sun-sighting period, astronaut-physicist Loren Acton said 

the solar chronosphere, a layer of gas that resembled a flaming forest, ap 

peared more active than he had suspected. The phenomenon was dubbed 

the “Acton effect.” 

A decision to extend Challengers’s mission depended largely on the orbiter’s supply of hydrogen for generating electricity. (W Post, Aug 3/85, A101 

August 2: NASA Administrator James Beggs met with planetary science experts to discuss a plan to develop a spacecraft capable of flying in formation 

with a comet known as Wild-2 and dropping a probe down onto its surface 

in hopes of bringing back samples, the Washington Times reported. 

Space scientists said NASA wanted to launch the $400 million mission in 

the early 1990s. NASA hoped to get about $30 million in start-up money 

earmarked for the project in the agency’s FY 87 budget. 

The mission would be an important space first, because none of the previous spacecraft launched toward Halley’s Comet would fly alongside that 

comet, launch a probe, or return to earth after rendezvous. (W Times, Aug 2/ 

85, 10A) 

August 5: Astronauts aboard the Challenger on Space Shuttle mission 51-F 

spent an extra day in space gazing at the sun after the instrument pointing 

system was back in order, the Washington Postreported. The sudden recovery 

on August 4, as a result of a lucky radio command transmitted on a whim 

after a jolting rocket firing, of a fourth solar telescope called a solar optical 

universal polarimeter added to the science data. Most of the August 5 sun 

observations used that telescope after NASA had considered it a failure. 

The telescope initially recorded images of sunspots, dark splotches that 

erupted through the visible surface of the sun when underlying magnetic 

fields became convoluted, the Washington Times reported. The astronauts 

47 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

turned the telescope on the sunspot again on August 5, and the TV image 

was so clear scientists on the ground reported that they could see changes in 

its penumbra, a surrounding halo-like feature made up of jets of gas streaming out from the dark central area. (W Post, Aug 6/85, AS; W Times, Aug 6/ 

85, 2A) 

August 15: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co. personnel fitted the Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL) wide-field/planetary camera (WFPC) into the Hubble 

Space Telescope, the JPL Universe reported. They then removed and returned 

it to JPL for modifications and testing. ”Everything went fine,” Dave Rodgers, 

JPL‘s WFPC project manager, said. “There were no problems with any of our 

equipment.” 

The WFPC consisted of two complete camera systems with different focal 

lengths. There were four cameras in each system, all sharing the same housing and electronics. The wide-field camera would obtain a wide perspective 

of a region in the sky, while the planetary camera would make high-resolution studies of individual objects. “It‘s called a planetary camera, but you can 

use it for any object that you want to study in detail,” Rodgers explained. 

Besides planets in earth’s solar system, the planetary camera would study 

galaxies and star-like objects such as quasars. Astronomers could also use the 

camera system to search for clues suggesting the presence of other planets 

orbiting nearby stars. Because the space telescope would be above the earth’s 

obscuring atmosphere, it would be able to detect objects 100 times dimmer 

than those visible from earth with about 10 times greater resolution. 

The orbiting observatory was a major part of NASA‘s astronomy effort 

through the end of the century. Space Shuttle crew would service and replace 

in orbit the space telescope instruments, keeping the telescope operating for 

at least 15 years. (JPL Uniwse, Aug 23/85, 1) 

August 19: Officials at Japan’s Institute of Space and Astronomical Research 

announced that today Japan launched from the Kagoshima Space Center in 

Kyushu its second spacecraft to observe Halley’s Comet the following March, 

the NY Times reported. The spacecraft, Planet A, was on a trajectory that 

would take it within about 60,000 miles of the comet. The USSR had two 

craft bound for Halley and the European Space Agency had one. 

Planet A had a solar-wind analyzer to measure the distribution and direction of high-energy particles from the sun as they encountered the vicinity of 

Halley’s Comet and an ultraviolet telescopic camera to examine the cloud of 

atomic hydrogen, glowing in the ultraviolet, that extended tens of thousands 

of miles out from the comet. (NYT Aug 20185, C3) 

September 3: NASA announced that, when its International Cometary Explorer (ICE) intercepted the dust-filled tail of Comet Giacobini-Zinner on 

48 
Astronomy 

September 11, it would be the world’s first spacecraft encounter with a comet. 

When it moved into the comet‘s bow shock approximately 45 minutes before 

the predicted rendezvous with the tail at 7 a.m. EDT, ICE would have traveled 

for more than seven years and covered more than 1 billion, 500 million 

miles, participating in three distinct scientific missions instead of the one 

planned. 

When launched August 12, 1978 from Cape Canaveral, ICE was known as 

the International Sun-Earth Explorer (ISEE-3). The 1054-lb. 16-sided space 

craft became the first spacecraft to orbit at the sun-earth libration point (that 

point in space where a satellite is suspended in a gravitational equilibrium 

between the sun and the earth-moon system) and the first to traverse the 

earth’s distant geomagnetic tail. ISEE-3 also was the first spacecraft to make 

multiple swings by the moon and the first to use a lunar gravity-assist maneuver for targetingescape trajectory. It made more gravity-assist maneuvers 

(five) than any other spacecraft. 

After the spacecraft completed most of the objectives of its original mission, it remained in good operational condition and had approximately 75% 

(150 Ib.) of its total propellant reserves (200 Ib.). Engineers at Goddard Space 

Flight Center (GSFC), under the leadership of Dr. Robert Farquhar, developed 

a plan that would divert ISEE-3 from its libration point orbit, take it past the 

moon five times, and propel it out toward Comet Giacobini-Zinner. Although 

the spacecraft was not designed for cometary investigation (it had no cameras 

or dust detectors), GSFC scientists believed it was well-suited for measurements of a comet‘s plasma properties, a chief objective of cometary exploration. In addition, the trajectory developed by Farquhar and his colleagues 

brought the spacecraft within range of a March 1986 upstream intercept of 

Comet Halley. 

That 1986 upstream pass, following an October 31, 1985 distant pass, was 

important because ICE would provide data on the solar-wind state upstream 

from Halley and earth-based telescopes would then observe the effect of the 

solar wind on Halley’s tail. 

The spacecraft would return in July 2012 to the vicinity of earth, where a 

lunar gravity-assist maneuver could place the spacecraft into an earth orbit 

from which it might be retrievable. (NASA Release 85-121) 

September 11: At 44 million miles from earth, the International Cometary 

Explorer (ICE) spent 20 minutes traveling through the tail of Comet Giacobini-Zinner, the Spaceport News reported. During the precedent-setting encounter, ICE was traveling at 46,000 miles per hr. when it entered the 

14,000-mile wide tail at a point 4,900 miles behind the comet’s nucleus; 

when it emerged, ICE had no apparent damage. 

Dr. John Brandt, head of Goddard Space Flight Center’s Laboratory for 

Astronomy and Solar Physics, summarized scientists’ tentative conclusions at 

49 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

a press conference, saying that mission discoveries added significantly to and 

confirmed many predicted features of the scientific portrait of a comet. 

Scientists expected to see a sharply defined bow shock, but instead they 

observed that a broad U-shaped turbulent interaction region preceded the 

comet as it moved through the solar wind of interplanetary space. 

Some data, however, confirmed what cometary scientists postulated about 

the comet's plasma tail: it was threaded by hairpin-shaped magnetic field 

lines captured from the solar wind and included electrified gases both denser 

and colder than those of the surrounding solar wind. 

The flight also showed that the hazard of flying through the dust in Comet 

G iacobi n i-Zi nner's tai I was less than expected. 

There was one new-found phenomenon that puzzled the ICE scientists. At 

least 300,000 miles before the ICE reached the comet, it detected high-speed 

heavy ion beams never before found in space. ICE scientists theorized that 

these beams were actually low-speed molecules that escaped from the 

comet, were ionized by solar ultraviolet light, and then turned around by the 

supersonic solar wind and accelerated back toward the comet as particle 

beams. 

ICE was then continuing on to take solar wind measurements upstream of 

Halley's Comet on two occasions-the second, March 28, 1986, to be within 

19.5 million miles of the comet. (Spaceport News, Sept 27/85, 1) 

September 72: Planetary scientists at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory outlined 

plans for two future $400 million missions, one of which NASA would select 

for funding, the Washington Post reported. 

One mission entailed a spacecraft that in September 1991 would fly by the 

asteroid Hedwig and rendezvous in 1995 with Comet Wild 2. The other 

called for a spacecraft in 1995 to pass by the asteroid Freia and rendezvous in 

1996 with Comet Tempel 2. 

JPL scientists preferred the Hedwig and Wild 2 mission, in part because 

Wild 2 was a newer and brighter comet than Tempel 2. Plans for that mission 

called for a March 1991 spacecraft launch from the Space Shuttle with an 

ultimate encounter January 8, 1995, with Wild 2, when the comet was at the 

far end of its orbit 465 million miles from earth. 

Scientists would program the spacecraft to match the comet's speed as it 

turned in toward the sun, which would then draw the comet and spacecraft 

toward it at the same speed for the next 850 days while the spacecraft's 

instruments measured the comet. (W Post, Sept 31/85, A231 

October 2: NASA announced that U.S., French, West German, and United 

Kingdom scientists completed preliminary findings from the September 11 

[see Astronomy, Sept. 111 encounter of NASA's International Cometary Ex50 
Astronomy 

plorer (ICE) spacecraft with comet Giacobini-Zinner, which took place 44 

million miles from earth and was the first comet intercept in history. 

In the precedent-setting encounter, ICE, traveling at 46,000 miles an hour, 

entered at approximately 6:50 a.m. EDT, September 11, the 14,000-milewide 

tail of the comet 4,900 miles behind the cometary nucleus and emerged 

from the tail about 20 minutes later. Midpoint of the tail encounter came at 

7:02 a.m., when the spacecraft passed through a narrow region called the 

neutral sheet. 

ICE was then on its way to its fourth space exploration assignment to record 

on October 31 and March 28, 1986 solar wind measurements upstream of 

Halley’s Comet. (NASA Release 85-138) 

October 8: The National Academy of Sciences’ Astronomy Survey Committee, the NASA Solar System Exploration Committee, and the NASA Committee on Solar and Space Physics made recommendations for future NASA 

space exploration and science programs, which Rep. Wyche Fowler, Jr. (DGa.) was asking the U.S. House to endorse in concurrent resolutions, Defense Daily reported. Advisory committee recommendations were often the 

basis for programs NASA sought to implement. 

The Astronomy Survey Committee recommended the following major new 

programs “in order of priority” for total funding of up to $950 million (in 

constant 1980 dollars) over the next ten years: (1) the advanced x-ray astrophysics facility (AXAF) to be authorized in FY 87, (2) a very-long baseline 

(VLB) array of radio telescopes, (3) a new technology telescope (NTT) of the 

15-m class operating from the ground at optical and infrared wavelengths, 

and (4) a large deployable reflector (LDR) in space. 

The Solar System Exploration Committee recommended a program funded 

at a sustained annual level of $300 million per year (in FY 84 dollars). Its four 

initial core program recommendations were the Venus radar mapper (authe 

rized in 19841, the Mars observer (authorized in FY 851, a comet rendezvous/ 

asteroid flyby to be authorized in FY 87 for a 1990-92 launch, and the Titan 

probe/Saturn orbiter to be authorized for a 1988-92 launch as a joint NASA/ 

European Space Agency mission, 

Other committee recommendations included the Mars aeronomy orbiter, 

the Venus atmospheric probe, the lunar geoscience orbiter, the Mars surface 

probe, the comet atomized sample return, the multiple mainbelt asteroid 

orbitedflyby, the earth-approaching asteroid rendezvous, the Saturn flyby/ 

probe, the Uranus flyby/probe, the Neptune flyby/probe, and the Pluto flyby. 

The Committee on Solar and Space Physics recommended an average 

annual funding of $400 million (in FY 84 dollars) “which would be sufficient 

to achieve the highest objectives in solar and space physics between the year 

1988 and the year 2000.” Major missions recommended were the upper 

atmosphere research satellite (authorized in FY 851, solar optical telescope 

for launch in 1990, the international solar terrestrial physics program for 

51 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

launch between 1989 and 1993, a solar probe for launch in 1995, and a solar 

polar orbiter to be launched in 2000. The committee also endorsed a series 

of moderate Explorer-class missions of about one launch per year. (D/D, Oct 

8/85, 197) 

October 77: NASA Administrator James Beggs confirmed this week that 

NASA cancelled a mission to send an unmanned spacecraft to comet Wild 2, 

citing budgetary constraints, the Washington Post reported. ”However, the 

comet rendezvous proposal is a very promising candidate for a new start” in 

FY 88, Beggs said. NASA had expected the mission from FY 87 to 1992 to 

cost $400 million, which was within the budgetary limits NASA established 

in 1981 for new planetary missions. The NASA budget the Reagan Administration was drafting eliminated the mission. 

Delaying a decision on a comet rendezvous by even one year meant the 

spacecraft could not fly to Wild 2, the favorite candidate of space scientists 

because it was a bright, fresh comet. Discovered in 1978, the comet would 

make its third and fourth appearances in 1990 and 1996. In order to rendezvous with the comet when it passed near the earth, NASA in 1986 would 

have to begin work on the mission to have the spacecraft ready by 1991 for 

launch from the Space Shuttle. The announcement followed NASA decisions 

in 1980 and 1981 not to attempt a mission to fly by Halley’s Comet. 

“Once again, the United States is passing up an opportunity to initiate the 

exploration of the comets, which contain the most unblemished record of the 

origins of our solar system,” the Postquoted Dr. Laurel Wilkening, dean of the 

graduate school at the University of Arizona and vice chairman of President 

Reagan’s Commission on Space. ”The decision is a major setback for the U.S. 

planetary exploration program,” he concluded. 

Space scientists were also upset because NASA’s science advisory groups 

recommended that a comet rendezvous be the next new misson in planetary 

exploration [see Astronomy, Oct. 81. Scientists pushed for a mission to Wild 2 

because the spacecraft could travel with the comet for 850 days, observing it 

before its long dust tail formed and obscured the comet’s nucleus or damaged the spacecraft. It would have been NASA‘s most ambitious mission to 

explore the sofar system. 

The next comet that NASA could approach would be Tempel 2, which 

would pass by earth in 1998. Such a mission, also costing $400 million, 

required a NASA decision by the middle of 1986. (W Post, Oct 17/85, A21) 

October 24: The European Space Agency announced today that the European Space Operations Centre (ESOC) on October 14 and 16 simulated the 

spacecraft Giotto’s encounter with Halley’s Comet (scheduled for about midnight March 13, 1986) by testing the spacecraft’s systems, the different scientific instruments, 3nd the associated ground systems in the first of a series of 

52 
Astronomy 

rehearsals that would take place up until a few days before the encounter. The 

first rehearsals showed satisfactory operation of the spacecraft and its payload 

and helped experimenters and engineers obtain better insight into the type of 

situations they might face during actual encounter. 

Before the formal rehearsals, engineers had switched on and tested all 

scientific instruments. The two plasma analyzers and the ion mass spectrometer produced measurements of the solar wind and its composition; the 

magnetometer, of the interplanetary magnetic field. 

The onboard camera made observations of the star Vega, the planet Jupiter 

and, on October 18 and 23, of earth. Taken at a distance of about 20 million 

km, images of the Pacific Ocean region showed a pattern of darker and 

brighter structures, the latter being associated with cloud formations. The 

quality and resolution of the images showed that the camera was functioning 

according to its design specifications. (ESA release Oct 24/85) 

October28: NASA announced that the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS), 

launched January 25, 1983, worked almost perfectly for 300 days until it 

depleted its liquid helium coolant and that it had achieved mission objectives, which were to produce an unbiased all-sky survey using a number of 

broad infrared photometry channels, to study selected galactic and extragalactic sources, and to map extended sources. 

For infrared astronomy, IRAS represented as great an improvement over 

ground-based telescopes as the Palomar 200-in. telescope had over Galileo's 

telescope. Because fewer than 1,000 infrared sources were cataloged before 

the IRAS launch, the sensitivity of IRAS produced a survey of a large unexplored area in the electromagnetic spectrum. The IRAS All-Sky Survey catalog contained about 250,000 sources, including some 20,000 new galaxies 

and 16,000 small extended sources. IRAS surveyed more than 96% of the sky, 

16% more than was required for mission success. Information in the IRAS 

databased revolutionized the infrared study of the sky and provided a rich 

data source to observers in other wavebands. 

The IRAS program resulted from a cooperative effort among the US., The 

Netherlands, and the United Kingdom in the areas of operations, spacecraft 

design, infrared technology, and scientific collaboration. During the next four 

years, scientists would continue to examine and analyze the more than 200 

billion data bits in the IRAS database and, by developing specialized processing techniques, possibly increase the sensitivity of the survey. (NASA MOR 

E-885-83-01 [postlaunch] Oct 28/85) 

During October: NASA announced that its Marshall Space Flight Center 

(MSRC) awarded a 14-month $140,000 contract to Perkin-Elmer Corp. to 

study concepts and technologies needed for a next generation telescope with 

ten times the capability of the Hubble Space Telescope. This study, the first 

53 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

step toward preparing to launch a space telescope array in the first decade of 

the next century, would define a technology development plan for the array 

and provide NASA with cost and schedule data. 

Perkin-Elmer would initially examine the probable science such a telescope would perform as well as the concept of an array of telescopes working, 

together as one. Perkin-Elmer said it would develop two telescope concepts 

based on the best use of the proposed space station and technology advancements needed to implement them. The first would emphasize assembly and 

optical alignment in orbit using the space station as an assembly base. The 

second concept would focus on modularization, ground assembly and 

checkout, and minimal on-orbit assembly. 

The study would also explore the possibilities of adapting, for visible light 

purposes, interferometer techniques used by radio astronomers to obtain 

high-resolution maps of deep space objects. In addition, Perkin-Elmer would 

define and recommend technologies needed for maximum use of the space 

station for assembling, testing, and servicing the next generation facility for 

optical astronomy. 

Perkin-Elmer built the Hubble Space Telescope scheduled for launch August 1986 on Space Shuttle flight 61-J. (NASA Activities, Oct 85, 14) 

November 7: Jet Propulsion Laboratory UPL) planetary scientist Steve Ostro 

recently completed a five-year study of asteroids located in a belt between 

the orbits of Mars and Jupiter, the JPL Uniwrse reported, and then turned his 

attention to observing nearearth asteroids using the world’s most powerful 

radar telescope at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico. 

“Some asteroids are among the most primitive planetesimals-the matter 

which accreted to form the solar system,” Ostro said. ’Asteroids are every bit 

as exciting as comets and potentially the most important objects in our solar 

system,” he pointed out. 

Asteroids constituted an enormous and diverse population, ranging in size 

from a few hundred meters to 1,000 km, and varying in composition, spin 

rate, and shape. Most asteroids were in the belt Ostro had studied and were 

thought to be the remnants of a planet that failed to form due to Jupiter‘s 

gravitational influence. However, many other asteroids tumbled through 

space close to and sometimes across earth‘s orbit. 

Some scientists believed nearearth asteroids could be the nuclei of 

burned-out comets. “We really don‘t know what the nucleus of a comet is,” 

Ostro said. “Comets might eventually lose all of their volatile compounds 

and then travel as asteroids.” And scientists believed asteroids were some of 

the most primitive objects in the solar system. “We really have a spectrum of 

asteroids-some of the primitive material left from the solar nebula all the 

way up to those that are highly evolved,” Ostro commented. “So asteroids are 

a laboratory for studying the evolution of planets and other planetary objects.“ 

54 
Astronomy 

No spacecraft had ever explored an asteroid, nor had scientists obtained an 

image of an asteroid’s surface. That was why many planetary scientists believed JPCs proposed Comet Rendezvous/Asteroid Flyby mission was critical 

to understanding not only comets and asteroids, but also the history of the 

solar system. 

Another JPL planetary scientist, Eleanor Helin, recently discovered a nearearth asteroid with a 36-inch telescope located in Caussols, France. The 

asteroid, designated 1985-PA and the 22nd asteroid discovered by JPL researchers, had a small elongated orbit highly inclined to the ecliptic plane; 

scientists had discovered only two other near-earth asteroids with orbital 

inclinations higher than 1985-PA. Helin said the asteroid’s inclination suggested it could have had a close encounter with Mars and been knocked into 

the steeply inclined orbit. 

At discovery the asteroid was moderately bright-measuring at 16.5 magnitude-and reddish, indicating the asteroid was probably a stony, silicaceous 

body. UPL Universe, Nov 1/85, 1 and 2) 

November 75: Nobel Laureate Charles Townes, speaking recently at a 

Smithsonian institution Associates lecture, discussed how he and his colleagues at the University of California-Berkeley proved, after years of hypothesizing and researching, that there was a black hole, twice the size of the sun 

and four million times as heavy, in the center of our galaxy, the Milky Way, 

the Washington Times reported. 

A black hole is a body of such enormous gravity that nothing escapes itno light waves, no radio waves, no waves of any kind-and it cannot, by 

definition, be seen or heard. Townes said he and his colleagues identified the 

black hole by deductive reasoning and picking up clues here and there. 

The first clue came in the 1940s when a scientist at Bell Laboratories 

picked up a steady stream of radio noise from roughly the center of the Milky 

Way. Electrons bumping into protons and heating them produced radio 

waves, but great permanent clouds of silicate dust obscured the radio wave 

source. Several decades later scientists at Berkeley detected infrared waves 

coming from the same place. The waves were just long enough to get through 

the dust clouds, seeming to indicate they came from a cluster of stars. 

About ten years before, the scientists picked up gamma rays-a sure sign 

that, somewhere near the galactic center, antimatter (protons) was destroyed 

at a rate of about 10 million tons a second. Black holes sucked in stars, 

causing them to spiral in a whirling cluster, moving faster and faster until they 

reached the speed of light and were ripped apart and swallowed, a process 

that created great waves of energy. “That suggested that something very 

strong and violent was going on,“ Townes said. 

“There were three possibilities,” Townes said. ‘A large cluster of stars, 

alone, which pulled everything into it, a black hole, or some combination of 

the two.” If it was a cluster of stars, they would all travel at the same speed. If 

55 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

it was a spiral of stars in the process of falling into a black hole, the ones 

nearest the hole would move a lot faster than those on the outer edge. 

Since each element had its own spectrum, an astronomer using a radio 

telescope could search and find the identifiable wave emitted by a particular 

element. The astronomers at Berkeley picked out molecules of neon along 

the line of stars around the galactic center; those furthest from the center 

were going at the slowest rate, those nearest at the fastest. That proved the 

presence of a black hole. 

Yet to be definitively answered, Townes said, were such questions as 

whether black holes came in different sizes; whether every galaxy had a 

black hole at its center; and how it all would end, since black holes were 

destroying stars. “It’s possible,” Townes said, “that eventually the black hole 

will pull in all the stars in our galaxy, if something else doesn‘t happen first. It 

would take an enormous time, so far in the future, that all kinds of other 

things would be more likely to happen. Such as our sun cooling off. We‘re 

more likely to fall into the sun than into the black hole. I don’t think we have 

to worry about that immediately.” (W Times, Nov 15/85, C1) 

November 79: NASA announced it had added an educational experiment 

package sponsored by the Charleston County, South Carolina school district 

to the Astro-1 payload aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia scheduled for 

launch March 6, 1986. The Astro-1 complement of three ultraviolet astronomical instruments and a special visible-light, wide-field camera system would 

study Halley’s Comet and other celestial objects during its nineday flight in 

space. The primary objective of the student project, called “Can Do:’ was to 

photograph Halley’s Comet; middle school students (grades 6 through 8) 

would then study and interpret astronomical photos obtained from the flight. 

The photographic equipment-four 35mm still cameras equipped with 

lenses addressing a particular aspect of cometary science-would be in a 

canister normally used for Get Away Special experiments. The camera package, developed with the participation of the National Geographic Society, 

would use a newly developed color film with unprecedented film speeds to 

photograph the dim tail of Halley’s Comet. The color photos would complement the black-and-white images obtained by Astro-1 ’s own image-intensified, scientific wide-field camera. 

In addition, the canister would contain a separate package of passive student experiments including biological samples, magnets, and two kinds of 

accelerometers to study effects of microgravity. 

The Charleston County Schools, in cooperation with NASA‘s Educational 

Affairs Division, developed a broad program of astronomical science and 

related educational activities that they would offer to other students throughout the nation. These included concurrent ground-based photography by 

student groups to compare with results from the Space Shuttle-based photos, 

teaching packets for classroom use, and comparative studies of Comet Halley 

56 
Astronomy 

through interviews with people who recalled the comet’s passage in 1910. 

(NASA Release 85-154) 

November 24: Astronomers tracking Halley’s Comet with the recently built 

radio telescope called the Very Large Array found that water streamed off the 

comet at two to three times the rate expected from calculations made after 

the 1910 passing, the Washington Post reported. Comets were mainly ice 

balls embedded with dust and rock; they remained frozen until they neared 

the sun, when their surfaces began to sizzle. On October 19, when the 

comet was about 190 million miles from the sun, Halley was giving off two 

tons of water per second. 

Looking at the watery stream through a radio telescope showed only a 

“hole” extending 30,000 miles around the comet. This appearance occurred 

because earth-based telescopes could not pick up the wavelengths of light 

given off by water-they were obscured by the earth‘s soggy atmosphere. Past 

the 30,000-mile hole, astronomers detected the water broken up into oxygen 

and hydrogen at a distance extending out to 60,000 miles around the comet. 

Astronomers were surprised to find the oxygen-hydrogen emission in 

“clumps” about the size of earth rather than in a continuous cloud. ”No one 

had even hypothesized such clumps,” said lmke de Pater of the University of 

California. Researchers had no explanation for the clumps. 

To observe the comet, de Pater and colleagues Patrick Palmer, University of 

Chicago, and Lewis Snyder, University of Illinois, were the first to use the two 

dozen “dishes“ arranged in a grid at the Very Large Array, which provided 

resolutions 20 times better than that of a single telescope. (W Post, Nov 24/ 

85, A18) 

December2 NASA issued a revision of its October 28 report on the Infrared 

Astronomical Satellite (IRAS) [see Astronomy, Oct. 281, in which it noted a 

major IRAS survey discovery that many galaxies emitted far more energy in 

the infrared than in the optical band where normal stars emitted the bulk of 

their luminosity. 

Astronomers considered these galaxies to be of three distinct kinds. The 

first was “starburst galaxies,” those that were presumably undergoing an active period of star formation leading to a large infrared luminosity and in 

which as much as 10 to 20 solar masses of gas and dust were being converted 

into new massive stars each year. 

Another class was sometimes called Seyfert galaxies, which astronomers 

believed were powered by matter falling into an accretion disk surrounding a 

black hole. The active regions of these galaxies had a great deal of interstellar 

dust, which absorbed the optical and ultraviolet radiation from the accretion 

disks, accounting for the large infrared luminosity. 

The third and most mysterious class of extragalactic objects discovered by 

IRAS was the extremely luminous infrared galaxies corresponding to very 

57 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

faint optical galaxies. Such galaxies produced 100 to 300 times as much 

energy in the infrared as in the optical, and the total luminosities of these 

galaxies were approximately 100 times those of ours. Astronomers believed 

the infrared radiation in these galaxies was probably from thermal dust emission, where the dust was reradiating energy absorbed from shorter wavelengths. 

Astronomers found a large fraction of the active infrared galaxies were 

interacting galaxies, that is, galaxies that were undergoing a collision or near 

collision with a neighboring galaxy. The IRAS survey demonstrated the profound effect such collisions had on galaxies, and it could well be that such1 

events dominated the evolution of most galaxies.’(NASA MOR E-885-83-01 

[postlaunch] Oct 28/85, revised Dec 2/85) 

December 5: NASA announced it selected three scientific investigations for 

the Hubble Space Telescope that would lead to the design and development 

over the next several years of one or two advanced scientific instruments for 

flight readiness during the period 1992 to 1994 for that orbital observatory. 

The three investigations selected for the definition phase were an imaging 

Michelson spectrometer, by Donald Hall, University of Hawaii, Honolulu; 

near-infrared camera and multi-object spectrometer, by Dr. Roger Thompson, 

University of Arizona, Tucson; and space telescope imaging spectrograph, by 

Dr. Bruce Woodgate, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. All the proposed 

instruments would be capable of taking photos of celestial objects and breaking down the light from these objects into spectral colors. 

NASA would then select one or two of the investigations for flight hardware 

development about one year after telescope launch, scheduled for the last 

half of 1986. Space Shuttle astronauts would install the selected instrument(s1 

on the telescope while it was in earth orbit. (NASA Release 85-164) 

December 6: NASA announced that, during mission 51-L scheduled for 

launch no earlier than January 22, 1986, it would release from the Space 

Shuttle a free-flying payload called Spartan-Halley to observe Halley‘s Comet. 

Scientists believed that comet exploration was a search for the beginnings of 

earth, because comets were the most unaltered samples of the early solar 

system. 

Spartan-Halley was the only NASA satellite dedicated solely to observing 

Comet Halley. During these observations, January 24 through 31, the comet 

would be in its most active period as it headed towards its closest approach to 

the sun on February 9. The objective of the Spartan-Halley mission was to 

measure from earth orbit the ultraviolet spectrum of Comet Halley using twin 

spectrographs designed and built by the University of Colorado‘s Laboratory 

for Atmospheric and Space Physics. 

Spartan-Halley’s cameras and instruments would analyze the active comet, 

looking for hydrogen and oxygen atoms and carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur 

58 
Astronomy 

molecules. If the spacecraft detected these elements, it might indicate more 

complex compounds could be present in the ice and dust that made up the 

comet’s nucleus. 

Goddard Space Flight Center developed Spartan-Halley, a modified Spartan-2 spacecraft, to be a research carrier. The spacecraft consisted of the 

spectrographic instrumentation, attitude control cameras (which also provided science photography), a microprocessor, associated electronics, a sunlight baffling system, and a service module. The January mission would be 

the first for the Spartan-2 type carrier, a completely reusable spacecraft to be 

reflown later on several other missions. Following completion of the January 

mission, the Space Shuttle‘s robot arm would retrieve Spartan-Halley and 

store it in the cargo bay. (NASA Release 85-161) 

December 70: NASA announced that scientists from the U.S., France, the 

United Kingdom, and West Germany released their findings from the rendezvous on September 11 of the International Cometary Explorer (ICE) spacecraft 

with Comet Giacobini-Zinner. Although some ICE data confirmed the traditional portrait of a comet, other information was unexpected. 

Perhaps most surprising was detection of electrical wave (plasma) disturbances and high-speed molecular species coming from the comet more than 

a day before rendezvous. The spacecraft’s Plasma Wave Experiment, developed by TRW‘s Dr. Frederick Scarf, detected the electrical waves while ICE 

was 1,429,200 miles from the comet. Scientists had theorized that first detection might occur just a few hours before the spacecraft crossed the comet’s 

tail. 

A few hours after initial detection, but still one day before intercept, two of 

ICE’S instruments discovered electrically-charged particles (ions) as far as 

1,130,000 miles from the comet. The Energetic Proton Experiment, directed 

by Dr. Robert Hynds, Imperial College, London, and the Low-Energy Cosmic 

Ray Experiment, directed by Dr. Dieter Hovestadt of the Max Planck Institute 

for Extraterrestrial Physics, Garching, West Germany, detected these ions. 

According to Hynds, it was believed solar ultraviolet light ionized gas molecules escaping from the comet’s nucleus, then the solar wind picked up and 

accelerated the ions back toward the comet. 

In another finding, Dr. Samuel Bame of the Los Alamos National Laboratory reported that, in contrast to the hot electrons on the outskirts of the 

comet, its tail consisted of a dense narrow structure of cool plasma. The 

Radio Wave Experiment of France’s Meudon Observatory made this same 

finding. 

The ICE’S Ion Composition Experiment, directed by Dr. Keith Ogilvie of 

Goddard Space Flight Center, made the first direct measurements of molecules in a comet. The experiment found mainly water vapor ions, confirming 

the “dirty snowball” model of comets. 

59 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

A major prediction confirmed by the ICE data was that the magnetic structure of the comet’s plasma tail consisted of two parallel lobes, each threaded 

by a magnetic field of opposite polarity. ICE’S Magnetometer Experiment of 

Dr. Edward Smith of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory mapped this structure, 

which was predicted in 1957 by Nobel physicist Dr. Hannel Alfven. 

Putting conflicting scientific conjectures to rest, the ICE mission revealed 

that no clear-cut bow shock-a surface moving ahead of the comet like that 

through which a jet aircraft passes as it breaks the sound barrier-accompanied the comet. instead, researchers found around the head of the comet 

what they called “a transition region” in which the solar wind was heated,. 

compressed, and slowed. 

Neither the ICE spacecraft nor its instrument payload suffered any detectable damage as a result of the impact with the comet‘s dust. (NASA Release 

85-166) 

December 17: NASA announced that its Comet Halley Active Monitoring 

Program (CHAMP), a middeck payload to obtain wide field visible and ultraviolet data on Comet Halley using handheld equipment, would have its 

primary flight January 1986 on the Space Shuttle (STS) mission 51-L. It was 

during that time that the comet would be most active but viewing from earth 

would be most difficult due to the narrow viewing angle between the comet 

and the sun. 

The first flight of CHAMP would be on STS mission 61-C in December 

1985; the third, on STS mission 61-E March 1986. The December and March 

flights would provide important pre- and post-perihelion baseline data that 

would assist with the interpretation of the January flight data. 

NASA considered CHAMP data supplemental to the extensive and detailed 

space-based data to be obtained from the flight of the ASTRO payload on STS 

mission 61-E, the Spartan-Halley payload on STS mission 51-L, the UVX 

payload on STS mission 61 -C, and the International Cometary Explorer (ICE) 

spacecraft. However, the CHAMP data would be unique in its nature and 

ability to provide a single context for all of these activities, because it would 

make observations on three Space Shuttle missions. 

Before each observation, the assigned mission specialist would set up the 

experiment by mounting the CHAMP equipment in the appropriate window. 

On the January flight, the mission specialist would use the orbiter Challenger‘s UV transmissive side hatch quartz window. On the other two flights, data 

probably would be acquired through the aft flight deck windows. During 

observations, the orbiter would be oriented so the appropriate window was 

pointed to within 5O of the celestial coordinates of the comet, with attitude 

drift rates of less than 1.002O maintained. 

Each observation required exposing a series of one to four calibration shots 

plus six to eight frames of film for images or spectra during the approximately 

60 
Astronomy 

fiveminute period occurring in each orbit when the comet was in view and 

the sun was at least 8O below the earth’s horizon. 

NASA hoped there would be an observation for each flight day during the 

sevenday December and March missions, and up to 20 observations during 

the January flight. However, conflicts with other operational requirements 

might reduce the actual number of observations, although unusual cometary 

behavior could require additional time allocated to the experiment. (NASA 

MOR E-420-61 -C-20 [prelaunch], Dec 17/85) 

December 31: NASA announced that on December 26 its Venus orbiting 

Pioneer spacecraft began six weeks of observations of Halley’s Comet during 

the comet’s most active period closest to the sun (perihelion). Near the time 

of perihelion, the comet, Venus, and Pioneer were located on the opposite 

side of the sun from earth, making observations difficult from earth (160 

million miles away). 

Pioneer was the only spacecraft close to Halley’s Comet during perihelion, 

and NASA expected that Pioneer’s ultraviolet observations would provide 

valuable insights into the state of the comet in advance of flybys of Halley’s by 

European, Soviet, and Japanese spacecraft beginning March 6, 1986. 

Pioneer’s first phase of observations would end January 4 when both Venus 

and Pioneer passed behind the sun for almost a month, cutting off effective 

communications between the spacecraft and ground controllers at Ames 

Research Center. Observations would resume about February 3, six days 

before perihelion, and would continue until March 6. 

NASA scheduled Pioneer to produce two images of the comet in ultraviolet 

light. One would show the hydrogen cloud surrounding the comet, an image 

expected to be 20 times larger than a photo of the comet in visible light. The 

image would come from 20,000 scans of the comet as it drifted for three days 

through Pioneer’s ultraviolet spectrometer’s field of view. A second image 

would show both Venus and Halley’s Comet in a single view. (NASA Release 

85-181) 

Planetary Exploration 

january 78 NASA Administrator James Beggs approved the addition of an 

asteroid 28 Amphitrite-flyby option to the Galileo mission, permitting a December 1986 final flyby decision and changing the Jupiter arrival date from 

August to December 1988, the JSC Roundup reported. 

Approval had followed a two-year study by scientific groups, mission designers, and program officials, in which the National Academy of Sciences 

and NASA‘s Solar System Exploration Committee identified asteroids investigations as an essential element of a balanced planetary exploration program. 

61 
Astronautics and Aeronautics. 1985 

The asteroid flyby could not compromise or risk mission objectives. NASA. 

would make the final decision for a flyby after launch based on analysis of 

spacecraft health, particularly the attitude-control and mission-operations 

systems. 

Amphitrite, about 200 km in diameter and one of the larger of the minor 

asteroids, was in a near-circular solar orbit in the middle of the asteroid belt 

at 2.5 Astronomical Uriits (AU) from the sun (the earth’s distance was 1 AU 01’ 

about 150,000,000 km). 

A specially convened hazards workshop had concluded that, at a 10,000- 

to 20,000-km flyby distance, hazard to the spacecraft was no greater than 

flying through the asteroid belt as 2 Pioneer and 2 Voyager spacecraft had 

done, and measurements analysis and Doppler-tracking data could achieve 

significant scientific objectives. As Amphitrite had a rotation period of about 

5.39 hours, Galileo’s mapping spectrometer could photograph and scan most 

of its surface. Data analysis would reveal size, shape, mass, density, exact 

rotation rate, pole orientation, detailed surface morphology, and mineral 

composition, thus indicating whether Amphitrite was a primitive accumulation of solar nebulae condensates or an evolved body that was a fragment or 

perhaps a core of a broken-up minor planet. With this data, scientists could 

possibly confirm or refute a hypothesis that asteroids were sources of many of 

the meteorites that had fallen on earth. 

NASA had developed a new trajectory containing both Amphitrite and 

Jupiter, constrained by launch-vehicle energy and the existing launch window, that would result in a Jupiter arrival date delay from August 29, 1988 to 

December 10, 1988. Since the flyby would require early added-propellant 

expenditure, NASA would decrease the number of Jupiter-tour orbits from 11 

to 10 and lengthen the tour from 20 to 22 months, permitting achievement of 

all major ll-orbit tour objectives. The delayed arrival and increased tour time 

would add five months and about $20-25 million in costs to the mission. 

(ISC Roundup, Jan 18/85, 1) 

January 25 NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) would launch in 

1986 Ulysses, previously known as the International Solar Polar Mission, to 

explore behind and around the sun beginning in July 1987, the JPL Universe 

reported. JPL managed the U.S. mission phases and was responsible for part 

of the magnetometer experiment. The Space Shuttle would take Ulysses into 

orbit; a modified Centaur upper stage rocket would send it on a trajectory 

toward Jupiter, where it would gain energy from Jupiter’s gravity field to pull it 

out of the ecliptic plane (the plane of the earth’s orbit) and back over the sun. 

Researchers would incorporate into the spacecraft bus instruments shipped 

to the European Space Research Technology Center near Amsterdam, Holland; after extensive testing scheduled for completion in August, an international board would review the spacecraft’s readiness. After a mission 

62 
Astronomy 

operations review, ESA would ship Ulysses to KSC for flight tests and preparations. At a June meeting in Switzerland, a team of scientists would decide 

whether Ulysses would approach the sun over its north or south pole. UPL 

Universe, Jan 25/85, 1) 

January28 NASA announced it had received signals from the USSR's VeneraHalley space probes at its Deep Space Network's (DSN) 210-foot antenna at 

Goldstone, California. The USSR had agreed that Vega-1 and 2, launched in 

December 1984, would carry experiments for joint U.S./French research. 

For the June 1985 experiment, each spacecraft would drop into the Venusian atmosphere an instrument-laden balloon, which would float free in the 

middle, most active layer, of Venus's three-tiered cloud system. Transmitters 

on the balloons would continually send signals to earth during the twoday 

lifetime of each balloon. Three globally-placed, hypersensitive dish antennas 

of NASA's DSN, part of an international network of radio astronomy antennas 

organized by the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales for the study, would 

receive the signals. Using data received from the combined array of at least 10 

antennas worldwide, in addition to that from the USSR's network, scientists 

could calculate in detail the balloons' locations and motions. 

Scientists would use a radio astronomy technique known as Very Long 

Baseline Interferometry (VLBI) to measure balloon velocity and hence 

Venus's wind velocity with a precision of approximately two miles per hr. at a 

distance of 67 million miles from earth. Scientists hoped data obtained 

would help further understanding of the complex Venusian weather system. 

The DSN antennas would also receive data from the other scientific instruments on the balloon gondola, including instruments to measure lightning 

flash frequency, wind gusts' vertical velocity, atmospheric temperature and 

pressure, and cloud location and density. 

Understanding turbulence and wave-type motions in clouds was important 

because scientists believed Venus's cloud layers to be the driving gear of the 

planet's multilayered weather machine. For example, scientists hoped data 

would explain why the atmosphere at Venus's cloud tops circled the planet at 

250 miles per hr. as compared to near-calm on the surface. 

By studying the atmospheric dynamics on Venus and other planets, scientists hoped to understand atmospheric processes in general in order to characterize all planets, including earth, in terms of a general set of physical laws. 

(NASA Release 85-13) 

March 8 NASA announced that astronomers at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory 

(JPL) and the Universities of Hawaii, Arizona, and Texas were observing Pluto 

and its only known satellite, Charon, as the two alternately moved in front of 

one another in a series of eclipses that occurred every 124 years or twice in 

each orbit of the sun. Each time Charon passed between Pluto and earth, a 

63 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

portion of Pluto‘s surface was blocked from view, resulting in a dimming a4 

the combined light from both bodies. When Charon m& behind Pluto, 

their roles reversed. Measurements of the times, durations, and changes in 

brightness of the events would allow astronomers to calculate the masses, 

diameters, and densities of Pluto and Charon, permitting development of 

models of the two bodies’ composition. 

Current estimates of Pluto’s density had an uncertainty of 50°/o, not accurate enough to derive information on its composition. However, researchers 

thought Pluto’s density was about that of water, making it the lowestdensity 

planet known that had a solid surface. 

The new measurements indicated that the combined brightness of Pluto 

and Charon diminished by 4% during the eclipses, a dimming that lasted 

about two hours and was superimposed on a 30% brightness change that 

occurred over a 6.4day period. The longer change in brightness happened 

because one hemisphere of Pluto was 30% brighter than the other. 

Very little was known about Pluto and even less about Charon, including 

when or even if the five-year-long series of eclipses would begin. In order not 

to miss any of the earliest events, the astronomers had established an obsew 

ing network at McDonald Observatory in Texas, the University of Arizona 

observatories, Palomar Observatory in California, and Mauna Kea Observatory in Hawaii. Dr. Edward Tedesco of JPL had been the first to see and 

measure an eclipse of Pluto by Charon January 16 from Palomar; Richard 

Binzel observed another eclipse February 17 from the McDonald Observatory; and Dr. D. J. Tholen observed a third eclipse February 20 from the 

Mauna Kea Observatory, Pluto and Charon’s great distance from earth and 

relatively small sizes made them the solar system’s most difficult objects to 

observe. (NASA Release 85-36) 

March 8 Galileo project team members would soon complete the twomonth-long environmental test, phase 2, of the spacecraft, during which they 

put Galileo in a 25-ft. space simulator, an evacuated chamber cooled to 

-250 to 270’ F, in order to observe how Galileo functioned in a space-like 

environment, the JPL Universe reported. Engineers also exposed the spacecraft to an array of high-intensity quartz lamps, which simulated the solar 

effects Galileo would experience in space. 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory UPL) personnel would move Galileo in about two 

weeks to the spacecraft assembly facility for the system test, phase 3. Following spacecraft disassembly, researchers would simulate different operational 

phases of the mission for spacecraft testing. 

Galileo was composed of a planetary orbiter and an atmospheric entry 

probe for investigations of the planet Jupiter’s magnetosphere’s chemic1al 

composition and its physical state of structure and physical dynamics. (JPL 

Universe, Mar 8/85, 1) 

64 
Astronomy 

lune 7: After its 1979 Jupiter encounter and 1980 Saturn encounter, Voyager 1 

at 12 noon EDT June 1 was 2,095,063,224 miles from earth and 

2,170,849,615 miles from the sun, Omni reported. Voyager 2, after Jupiter 

and Saturn encounters in 1979 and 1981, respectively, on June 1 was 

1,499,732,272 miles from earth, 1,593,867,481 miles from the sun, and 

187,782,284 miles from Uranus. 

At 12 noon EDT June 14, Pioneer 10, which encountered Jupiter in 1973 

and was the first spacecraft to leave the solar system, was 3,410,823,980 

miles from earth and 3,319,306,400 miles from the sun. (Omni, June 85, 28) 

lune 75: An international team of planetary scientists gathered at the USSR’s 

Space Research Institute to catch the first return of data from the Vega-2 

spacecraft plunging into the atmosphere of Venus, the NY Times reported. At 

6:06 a.m. Vega-2 began its descent. Among the roughly 100 participants 

were representatives from eight European nations and the French Ambassador. 

Two days before, exploding bolts had freed an eight-foot sphere that carried 

one-and-a-half tons of payload bound for Venus’s night side. The main craft 

would miss Venus entirely and use energy provided by the planet‘s gravity to 

propel it toward an encounter with Halley’s Comet. Inside the rapidly decelerating sphere a timing device programmed months before switched on the 

scientific packages around it, then set loose a 15-lb. stack of miniaturized 

weather instruments built by French, Soviet, and U.S. scientists. An ll-footdiameter teflon balloon filled with helium kept the instruments from reaching Venus‘s surface. 

An hour after the balloon inflated, the Vega-2 lander had reached the 

surface safely. The lander, in an atmospheric pressure 80 times the earth’s at 

sea level and in a nighttime temperzture of 855O F, was relaying information 

on surface conditions and excavating a small sample of the surrounding soil 

for crude analysis of its composition. 

Vega-1’s balloon had reached the planet June 11 and had covered nearly 

6,000 miles through the Venusian clouds in 46 hours, passing into the planet’s sunlit hemisphere before exhausting its battery. 

The new ’Jega results suggested the planet had five discrete cloud layers 

whereas earlier missions detected only three. (NY Times, June 18/85, C8, 

June 16/85, 24; W Post, June 14/85, A101 

September 6: Jet Propulsion Laboratory UPL) engineers and technicians recently practiced the exact technique that would be used to fuel the Galileo 

spacecraft, simulating the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) environment where 

the spacecraft would actually be fueled, the JPL Universe reported. This was 

necessary because Galileo’s propulsion system, designed and built by West 

Germany and unlike previous JPL spacecraft in which the propulsion system 

65 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

was a separate module, would be sandwiched in between the bus and the 

despun section of the spacecraft. This would require fueling when Galileo 

was fully assembled, and any resulting problems could jeopardize the sensitive cargo. 

“This fourday exercise is basically an ’undress rehearsal’,” Hank Delgado, 

propulsion and pyro devices group leader, said. “We want to acquaint everyone with the procedures and equipment we plan to use to fuel Galileo.” 

Instead of using the actual propellants-mono-methylhydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide-that Galileo would use, the team practiced with less hazardous fluids-isopropyl alcohol and freon-allowing them to work without 

special suits. When Galileo was fueled at KSC, technicians would wear 55-113. 

SCAPE (self-contained atmospheric protective ensemble) suits to protect 

them from the highly toxic propellants. Although the suits had an air supply 

and thermal control system, the limited air supply allowed only about an 

hour of work, requiring technicians to work in shifts. 

JPL would send Galileo to KSC early in 1986 for final launch preparations. 

Technicians would then fuel the spacecraft, taking a day for each of its four 

tanks. For the following four months, the technicians would monitor the 

propellant closely for leaks or changes in temperature. UPL Universe, Sept 6/ 

85, 1) 

October 8 NASA announced that a panel of scientists at its Ames Research 

Center (ARC) said today that, although Mars presently was a frigid desert 

planet, it once had enough water to cover its entire surface with an ocean 

more than 300 feet deep. Dr. Michael Carr of the U.S. Geological Survey said 

at the meeting, which grew out of research discussed the previous winter at 

ARC‘s Water on Mars Workshop, that “The pictures taken by the two Viking 

spacecraft in orbit around Mars tell us that Mars had as much water in 

geologic history as earth did.” 

Carr said the 20,000 close-up pictures taken since 1976 by the two Viking 

spacecraft revealed canyons that were deeper, wider, and longer than the 

Grand Canyon and could be made only by rushing rivers. The photos also 

showed thousands of gullies formed only by water or snow and ice slicing 

into the surface or forcing their way up to the surface. 

“If all the water that existed on Mars to form these channels covered its 

surface today,” commented ARC’s Dr. James Pollack, “it would be enough to 

form a global Martian ocean tens of hundreds of meters deep.“ 

Carr pointed out that the Viking photos also suggested that water was 

below the surface at latitudes near the Martian equator where the planet‘s 

interior heat could keep it from freezing just as do underground rivers in most 

temperate latitudes on earth. “There is a softening of the terrain, a rounding 

off of the edges . . . that is evidence of underground water flow and the 

creep of ice near the surface,” he said. 

66 
Astronomy 

“This terrain is also located where most of the Martian gullies are today, 

where snow, ice, and water burst out of the ground to cause the colossal 

floods that formed the channels we see today:’ Carr said. 

And Pollack added that Mars long ago lost most of its carbon dioxide, 

which helped trap the sun’s heat, causing in effect a permanent Martian ice 

age. (NASA Release 85-140) 

November 29 New observations supported the prediction that Saturn’s satellite Hyperion was tumbling wildly rather than rotating with a regular predictable period, Science reported. 

In 1983 Jack Wisdom, who was currently at the Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology, and his colleagues predicted that the combination of Hyperion’s 

odd potato shape and the stretching of its orbit by the gravitational tugs of the 

larger satellite Titan would prevent Hyperion from rotating regularly. Instead 

of keeping one face toward Saturn, as the moon faced earth, Hyperion would 

rotate chaotically, tumbling one way then another, slowing down and speeding up, in a fashion impossible to predict in any detail from its preceding 

behavior. 

Since then, Peter Thomas of Cornell University and his colleagues reported 

analyses of the brightness of Hyperion in Voyager images that indicated a 

regular 13day period of rotation during the 61 days of Voyager-2’s encounter 

with Saturn. 

Jack Wisdom and Stanton Peale of the University of California, Santa Barbara, countered that determining a period from 14 brightness observations 

scattered over several supposed rotations could not determine whether the 

rotation was chaotic or not. They found many periods by similarly sampling a 

numerically generated chaotic light curve. 

The University of Texas‘s Richard Binzel, Jacklyn Green, and Chet Opal 

reported at a recent meeting of astronomers that the light curve of Hyperion 

they observed in April was “highly inconsistent with a 13.1-day rotation 

period.” On April 16 and 17, Hyperion’s magnitude was at a maximum for the 

14day observing period; it faded by 1 magnitude by April 21 and was no 

brighter 13 days after the first observations. It should have become 1 magnitude or 2.5 times brighter if it had a 13day period. Although the observations 

did not prove chaotic rotation, the group said, ”they provide strong evidence 

in favor of the hypothesis.” 

To say much more about Hyperion’s rotation, astronomers would have to 

observe Hyperion nightly for many weeks, something that those assigning 

telescope time had been reluctant to permit. (Science, Nov 29/85, 1027) 

December 3: Dr. Michael Kaiser of the Goddard Space Flight Center said at a 

news conference today that, “We see no radio emissions from Uranus that 

would tell us it has a magnetic field, and we’re less than 46 million miles 

from the planet” with the Voyager 2 spacecraft, the Washington Post reported. 

67 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

“We still pick up Jupiter’s radio noise, Saturn’s radio noise and even the sun’s 

radio noise but we’re not hearing any radio events at Uranus:’ he added. If 

Uranus had no magnetic field, it would make it only the second known 

planet in the solar system without one, Venus being the other. 

Kaiser said the sign of a planet‘s magnetic field was its radio noise, generated when protons and electrons poured off the sun and collided with the 

planet’s magnetosphere. This collision triggered the one billion-watt radio 

signal from earth called the Northern Lights, a 100 billion-watt signal from 

Saturn, and a signal so loud from Jupiter that it dwarfed every other radio 

signal in the solar system. 

“You don’t need much to fotm a magnetosphere that would generate noise 

out at Uranus’s distance,” Kaiser said, “so we figure we’re either dealing with 

a planet that has no magnetic field at all or is so bizarre we don’t even know 

what to look for.” 

Kaiser pointed out that a missing magnetic field suggested that Uranus had 

no internal heat source-no radioactive core such as that which made the 

rotating earth behave like a dynamo, and no internal heat source such as 

those that gave the rapidly rotating Jupiter and Saturn a strong magnetic field. 

“You need an internal heat source to drive a magnetic field:’ Kaiser said. ‘A 

planet’s rotation is not enough by itself to create one.” 

Voyager 2, which had been in space for eight years and had passed Jupiter 

and Saturn, on January 24 would fly within 51,000 miles of the cloud tops of 

Uranus. Voyages 2 would in August 1989 encounter Neptune, but its fiight 

would not take it near Pluto, the last known planet from the sun. The spacecraft would then pass out of the solar system. (W Post, Dec 4/85, A20) 

December 4 NASA announced that Voyager 2 began today its encounter 

with Uranus, which would continue through February 25, 1986. During the 

period, the spacecraft‘s 11 instruments would perform close-range studies of 

the planet, its five known satellites, and nine rings. Voyager 2 would also 

search for a planetary magnetic field, new satellites, and new rings. 

The spacecraft would make its closest approach to Uranus, flying 81,500 

km above the cloud tops of the seventh planet, at 1 :00 p.m. EST January 24, 

1986. Because Voyager 2 was the first spacecraft to reach the planet, the 

encounter would provide scientists with more information about Uranus and 

its satellites and rings than had been learned since William Herschel discovered the planet March 31, 1781. 

In addition to two cameras, a photopolarimeter, and a spacecraft radio, 

Voyager 2 carried an infrared interferometer/spectrometer and radiometer, an 

ultraviolet spectrometer, a cosmic-ray detector, a plasma instrument, a lowenergy charged-particle detector, magnetometers, a planetary radio astronomy receiver, and a plasma-wave instrument. Three radioisotope 

thermoelectric generators supplied the spacecraft’s electric power, a system 

68 
Astronomy 

necessitated because solar cells could not receive sufficient solar energy at 

such a great distance from the sun. 

NASA's Deep Space Netwoh (DSN) antenna complex at Canberra, Australia, would receive most key data obtained during the Uranus encounter and 

all of that during the closest approach. (NASA release Dec 85, NASA Voyager 

Bulletin, Dec 4/85) 

69 

ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH 

lanuary 14: NASA announced that Goddard Space Flight Center’s (GSFC) 

Wallops Island, VA, facility in cooperation with the Air Force Geophysics 

Laboratory (AFGL) at Hanscom AFB, Massachusetts, and the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), Copenhagen, Denmark, would carry out that winter the 1985 Cooperative Observations of Polar Electrodynamics (COPE) 

project of sounding rocket research in Greenland to gather knowledge about 

the solarearth relationship. The project would include studies of polar-cap 

turbulence and electrodynamics, auroral-zone electrodynamics, auroralelectrojet turbulence, neutral-atmosphere coupling, and polar-ionospheric 

irregularities. 

Researchers selected Greenland for the investigations because of its access 

to the auroral oval, polar cap, and polar cusp; an existing rocket range; 

support from the Sondre Stromfjord incoherent-scatter radar, the Hi Lat 

Spacecraft, and the extensive array of scientific ground-observing stations in 

Greenland, Scandanavia, and North America; and a broad choice of launch 

azimuths. GSFC/Wallops Flight Facility personnel had spent several weeks 

during the previous summer at the Greenland Sondre Stromfjord facility 

installing additional launchers and related ground-support equipment, radar, 

telemetry, and communications systems and erecting vehicle and payload 

assembly structures. 

Project experimenters scheduled nine suborbital rocket launches of which 

two would release chemicals creating artificial vapor clouds 250 km high. 

NASA scheduled seven flights: two Black Brant Xs, two Terrier-Malemutes, a 

Taurus-Orion, a Nike-Tomahawk, and a Taurus-Tomahawk; AFGL scheduled 

two missions: a Black Brant Vlll and a Black Brant IX. (GSFC Release 85-5) 

February 22 Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) announced that on February 4 technicalkientific teams from Australia, India, Finland, and the U.S. 

had begun a six-week meeting at Wallops Flight Facility, Va., to compare 

radiosonde instruments used worldwide. Measuring only a few inches 

square and weighing less than 2 Ib., the radiosonde was a low-cost, massproduced instrument for measuring atmospheric pressure, temperature, relative humidity, and wind while ascending on a small balloon up to about 25 

km (15 miles), or more frequently 30 km (18 miles), above earth. Worldwide 

weather services used radiosonde data for forecasts to aid aviation and for 

research. 

There were currently 17 radiosonde manufacturers in a number of countries, resulting in occasional differences in instrument measurements and the 

need to make periodic comparisons. A working group on the quality of 

meteorological data meeting in 1982 at the World Meteorological OrganizaPRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 71 
Astronautics and Aeronautics. 1985 

tion’s (WMO) headquarters, Geneva, Switz. had agreed that two phases of 

tests were required. 

The United Kingdom’s Meteorological Office had hosted the 1 st phase in 

1984, when researchers released 106 ballons. Phase2 participants at Wallops 

launched four halloons a day, five days a week, weather permi!ting, for an 

anticipated total of about 1GO flights, each balloon carrying four or more 

instruments. Researchers would then correlate Phase-2 data with Phase1 

results. (GSFC Release 85-81 

April 16: NASA announced the postlaunch status of the NOAA-A, -B, and 

-C missions carried out for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adrninistration. In addition, NASA announced it scheduled NOAA-D for launch in 

1987. NASA submitted on January 24, 1984 a postlaunch report for NQAA-E 

(launched March 18, 1983) and would submit a postlaunch report for 

NOAA-F (launched December 12, 1984) after a full year of data collection 

and evaluation. 

NASA successfully launched N0.M-A (NOM-6) June 27, 1979, from the 

Western Space and Missile Center into a sun-synchronous orbit. The satellite 

ceased providing usable atmospheric soundings on October 22, 1983, when 

the filter wheel assembly became inoperable. NASA still used the primary 

imaging system. NOAA-C would replace NOAA-6 in November 1985. 

During NOAA-B launch on May 24, 1980, one of the two Atlas booster 

engines had a thrust reduction. This premature booster engine cutoff caused 

a deficit in velocity and altitude of the Atlas, making the sustainer engine 

burn 55 seconds longer than planned. As the sustainer engine was still 

thrusting when the spacecraft attempted to separate from the launch vehicle, 

the spacecraft consumed most of its attitude control gas as it fought the 

booster for its attitude control. The apogee kick motor burn put NOAA-B 

into a highly elliptical, 269 x 1466 km, 92.5’ inclination orbit. As a result of 

the combination of incorrect orbit and loss of attitude control, NASA terminated the mission. The aborted NOAA-B mission brought about changes in 

subsequent NOAA launches, and the next three launches were successful. 

On June 23, 1981, NASA successfully launched NOAA-C (NOAA-7) from 

the Eastern Space and Missile Center into a sun-synchronous orbit. Failure of 

the filter wheel assembly on February 7, 1985, terminated the collection of 

usable atmospheric soundings. On February 25, 198.5, NASA placed the 

primary imaging system on standby when NOAA-9 became the operational 

spacecraft for afternoon observations. 

NASA achieved the mission objectives of NOAA-A and -C, and the spacecraft provided useful sounding and imaging data far in excess of their twoyear design life. NASA certified these missions successful. Due to launch 

vehicle malfunction, NASA terminated the NOAA-B mission and reported 

that mission unsuccessful. (NASA MOR E-6 15-79-01 [postlaunch], E-615- 

80-02 [postlaunch], E-615-81 -03 [postlaunch] Apr 16/85) 

72 
Atmospheric Research 

During May: The Canadian government had cut $5 million (Canadian) from 

the National Research Council of Canada's space sciences budget, eliminating the sounding rocket program and most of the balloon research, Spaceflight reported. The cuts meant the end of nearly a quarter-century of space 

research with the indigenous Black Brant family of sounding rockets. The 

council did not cut major satellite and Space Shuttle research projects. (Spaceflight, May 85, 201) 

lune 6: NASA announced it selected Aerojet ElectroSystems Co. to negotiate 

a cost-plus-award-fee contract for three advanced microwave sounding unitsA for flight aboard National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) spacecraft. The contract work statement called for development and 

delivery of flight instruments and associated ground support equipment as 

well as instrumenthpacecraft integration and test support. 

The contract, with an estimated value of $29 million, would take effect 

about November 11 and continue for 51 months. (NASA Release 85-88) 

lune 14: Goddard Space Flight Center announced that a team from its Wallops Flight Facility completed studies of the atmospheric ozone profile at 

Natal, Brazil. The team acquired data from 9 to 40 miles above the earth at an 

equatorial site using the improved 'A" version ROCket OZonesonde (ROThe team took seven profiles during ozone-measuring satellite overpasses 

to compare the ROCOZ-A data with other satellite data for the same time 

and place. Although the primary mission was to support the SAGE II ozone 

measurements acquired by the .ERBS/SAGE I/ satellite, the team would also 

compare the data with that from the solar backscatter ultraviolet spectrometer 

on the Solar Mesopheric Explorer (SMD satellite. 

Each ROCOZ-A launch included the supporting launch of a super-loki 

datasonde dart (a small meteorological rocket) to collect temperature data 

from 9 to 43 miles in the atmosphere and an electrochemical concentration 

cell (ECC) balloon-launched ozonesonde to collect lower-atmospheric (below 18 miles) ozone, temperature, and pressure data. The team would use 

the supporting data to define the atmosphere at the site for comparison with 

the appropriate satellite. 

The team provided ROCOZ-A coverage during five dual and two single 

satellite overpasses. There were at least two ROCOZ-A profiles for each 

satellite with four profiles for the NOAA-9. (GSFC Release 85-17) 

COZ-A). 

lune 26: Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) announced that its Wallops 

Flight Facility had launched at 1:46 p.m. EDT June 24 and 1:46 p.m. EDT 

June 26 Nike-Orion sounding rockets for the University of Illinois to investigate the daytime mid-latitude ionosphere between 96 and 241 statute miles 

73 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

above earth. Specific mission objectives were to investigate differential ab 

sorption of radio waves; determine the electron density profile; and investigate the irregular structure of the electron density profile in terms of neutral 

turbulence, plasma instabilities in the mid-latitude region, and gravity wave 

effects. The 120-lb. payloads reached peak altitudes of 110 statute miles, and 

preliminary results indicated all instrumentation performed satisfactorily and 

obtained good data. 

The Nike-Orion was a two-stage, solid-propellant unguided sounding 

rocket about 30 feet long. 

Researchers would correlate scientific data from the missions with information from a similar study of the daytime equatorial ionosphere conducted 

March 1983 in Peru as part of Project CONDOR. Dr. L.G. Smith, University 

of Illinois project scientist, noted the studies were important “because turbulence is the major unsolved problem of the atmosphere and ionosphere.” 

(GSFC Release 85-19) 

September 9 Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) announced that its Wallops Flight Facility conducted today a coordinated series of rocketborne 

experiments to study effects of lightning in the earth’s troposphere. Three 

rocket payloads at different altitudes simultaneously collected lightning measurement data, and a series of ground-based instruments designed to detect 

the location and characteristics of lightning also made coordinated measurements. 

Wallops researchers launched at 8:Ol EDT a single-stage Orion sounding 

rocket, 70 seconds later a two-stage Taurus-Orion, and then 57 seconds later 

a Nike-Orion; all three were solid-propellant sounding rockets. 

The Taurus-Orion lofted its 297-lb. payload to a peak altitude of 120 statute 

miles, and the Nike-Orion carried its 303-lb. payload to a peak altitude of 

71.5 statute miles. The Taurus-Orion experiment package contained a water 

recovery system using an eight-foot parachute with flotation bag, flashing 

strobe light, and recovery beacon. 

Wallops personnel, following the three rocket series, launched a meteorological data sonde on a small rocket to determine the meteorological characteristics in the upper atmosphere near the time of the other measurements. 

The Wallops P-3 search aircraft located the Taurus-Orion payload package 

at 9:45 p.m. that same day about 40 miles offshore, and the next day the 

Coast Guard cutter “Point Brown” recovered and returned it to the Wallops 

Flight Facility for refurbishment and future spaceflights. (GSFC Release 85- 

2 6) 

October 16: NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center announced the launch at 

6:Ol a.m. DST today of a single-stage Orion sounding rocket from its Wallops 

74 
Atmospheric Research 

Flight Facility to evaluate electrical fields and charged particles in earth’s 

middle atmosphere. 

The Orion, about 16 feet long and 14 inches in diameter, carried the 90-lb. 

payload to a peak altitude of 52 statute miles, after which a Wallops Skyvan 

aircraft recovered the payload in mid-air. 

NASA launched the experiment from the Poker Flat Research Range (PFRR) 

in Alaska on April 12, 1985; however, snow cover hindered payload recovery. 

On August 26 a sheep hunting party found the payload and its parachute 

floating on Beaver Creek in the White Mountains, Alaska and returned it to 

the PFRR. Range officials on September 23 sent the payload to Wallops for 

refurbishment for today’s launch. 

NASA tentatively scheduled for July 1986 another launch of the experiment 

in Sweden. (GSFC Release 85-29) 

November 7: Scientists analyzing data recently sent from two monitoring 

devices aboard the Nimbus-7 satellite said the observations confirmed a 

progressive deterioration in the earth’s ozone layer above Antarctica, the NY 

Times reported. Since 1974, the satellite data showed that a “hole” appeared 

each October in the ozone layer there, meaning the layer in that area became 

less able to shield the earth from damaging solar ultraviolet rays. This had 

caused scientists to predict that increased atmospheric pollution was causing 

the gradual depletion of stratospheric ozone; the new data seemed to show 

researchers that the ozone loss was proceeding much faster than expected. 

However, Goddard Space Flight Center’s Dr. Donald Heath, who had monitored the satellite recordings for several years, said he was uncertain of the 

reason for the ozone decline. In addition to the theory that fluorocarbons 

caused ozone depletion, some scientists blamed the depletion on the sulfur 

compounds and other particles ejected into the stratosphere in the 1982 

eruption of El Chichon in Mexico. And Heath said there were other possible 

explanations, such as the sunspot cycle, which was then near a minimum. 

According to a study by NASA scientists, the chemical reactions that produced stratospheric ozone were stimulated by a form of ultraviolet radiation 

that became weak when sunspots were fewest. 

Even under normal conditions the ozone layer was subject to wide variations, so it was difficult to establish that the recent depletion was part of a 

long-term trend. Heath also pointed out that it was not clear whether the 

Antarctic readings manifested a local change in atmospheric circulation or a 

global depletion, since the condition of the winter atmosphere over Antarctic 

was unique. 

Government officials in 1977 imposed a ban on fluorocarbons as spray-can 

propellants, but it became evident that the ozone varied in response to a 

variety of interacting natural and human influences. By 1984 a National 

Academy of Science report estimated fluorocarbon-caused ozone reduction 

at only 2 to 4%. (NYT, Nov 7/85, B21) 

75 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

November 19 The TOMS, or Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer, aboard 

Nimbus-7 made measurements the previous week indicating that the gas 

cloud ejected from the Nevado del Ruiz volcano in Columbia released twice 

as much sulfurous gas into the sky as the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens 

and five times as much as the 1982 eruption of Galung-gung in Indonesia, the 

NY Times reported. Dr. Arlin Krueger of the Goddard Space Flight Center 

said that within 14 hours of the November 13 eruption, the cloud spread over 

an area of 600,000 sq. km (230,000 sq. miles). 

NASA researchers designed TOMS to monitor changes in earth’s protective 

ozone layer, and it scanned the stratosphere at a succession on ultraviolet 

wavelengths whose relative intensities provided an index of ozone abundance. But the TOMS readings could also identify sulfur dioxide. 

The sulfur cloud, 14 hours after the main eruption, spread chiefly to the 

east, covering most of Colombia and part of Venezuela. One arm of the cloud 

reached as far south as the equator in Colombia and as far north as Lake 

Maracaibo in Venezuela. 

Because TOMS was not used for day-today weather forecasting, it was not 

ordinarily subjected to a rapid-analysis process. As soon as the Colombian 

eruption occurred, however, Dr. Krueger and his colleagues began to study 

its readings. The sulfur dioxide, he said, “shows up very well.” 

Although estimates of the cloud’s volume were preliminary, Krueger said it 

appeared much smaller than that formed by the eruption in 1982 of El 

Chichon in southern Mexico. Visible and infrared data from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration satellites had traced El Chichon’s dust, 

which formed a narrow plume, through one complete circuit of the globe 

from April 5 to April 15, 1982. 

Although Nevado del Ruiz’s sulfur cloud was extensive, it did not appear 

sufficient, with its associated ash cloud, to have an effect on climate. 

Whereas El Chichon’s sulfur cloud was traced around the world, researchers 

expected del Ruiz to dissipate within days without any severe environmental 

effects. (NM, Nov 19/85, A141 

November 20: NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility announced it launched at 5:19 

a.m. today a three-stage, Taurus-Nike-Tomahawk sounding rocket that left 

several colored clouds high over the mideastern U.S. coastline. The objective of the experiment was to provide baseline data on expected yielas, vapor 

expansion velocities, and other parameters for the chemical release canisters 

for the Combined Release and Radiation Effects Satellite (CRRES), scheduled 

for launch in July 1987 from the Space Shuttle. 

The 157-lb. payload ejected balls of greenish-white titanium-boron-barium 

and barium-cupric-oxide at an altitude of 230 statute miles, one as the rock.et 

ascended and one as the payload descended. The barium clouds rapidly 

expanded, while ejecting barium ions along the earth‘s magnetic field to 

form a visible streak more than 62 miles long. Another red titanium-boron76 
Atmospheric Research 

lithium cloud released at 325 miles expanded to a diameter of several hundred kilometers in less than a minute. 

Goddard Space Flight Center‘s (GSFO Wallops Range Control Center received reports of cloud sightings from as far north as Waterville, Maine, as far 

south as Wilmington, North Carolina, and as far west as South Bend, Indiana. 

(NASA Release 85-148; GSFC Release 85-39) 

Upper Atmospheric Research 

January 11: Observers had anticipated seeing the world’s first man-made 

comet 72,000 miles above earth (over the Pacific Ocean west of Lima, Peru) 

the morning of December 27, 1984, the JPL Uniwrse reported. Although 

clouds obscured viewing from official ground-observation sites, scientists 

called the artificial comet a success, marking another milestone in the active 

magnetospheric particle tracer explorers (AMPTE) program sponsored by the 

U.S., West Germany, and the United Kingdom. Mission goal was to inject, 

from a satellite tracer, ions of lithium and barium inside, outside, and just 

within the earth’s magnetosphere (creating the comet appearance) and to 

detect and monitor these ions with two other satellites as the ions convected 

and diffused through the inner magnetosphere. Scientists hoped that this new 

data would improve understanding of the influence and mechanisms of interaction of the solar wind with earth’s magnetosphere, including formation of 

the van Allen Belts. 

A NASA Convair 990 reported a six-minute viewing; an Argentine Boeing 

707 an eight-minute view. Overall intensity of the “comet” was lower than 

expected; the 12,000- to 20,000-km tail was somewhat shorter than expected. Experimenters withheld other canisters of chemicals aboard the German ion-release module (IRM) for AMPTE experiments later in the year. 

GSFC managed the U.S. portion of the project; a JPL mission control team 

operated the charge composition explorer (CCE) spacecraft to observe the 

cloud. UPL Universe, Jan 11/85, 1; GSFC News, Jan 85, 3) 

March 6: NASA announced it awarded a $145.8 million contract to General 

Electric Co.’s Valley Forge Space Center, Philadelphia for development of the 

upper atmosphere research satellite (UARS) observatory. Scheduled for October 1989 deployment from the Space Shuttle, the satellite would carry 10 

scientific instruments into a 373-mile circular orbit. Valley Forge Center 

would design the observatory system, design and fabricate an instrument 

module compatible with the NASA standard multimission modular spacecraft (MMS), integrate the instrument module with the MMS and flight instruments, test the observatory system, integrate the observatory into the Space 

Shuttle, and support postlaunch flight operations. 

77 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The UARS, with its remote sensing instruments providing essentially global 

coverage, would for the first time generate data for understanding the composition and dynamics of the upper atmosphere, important to solving many 

questions about the earth‘s weather and climate. For example, the observatory would provide previously unavailable data on the nature of natural and 

human effects on earth’s ozone layer. 

GSFC would provide UARS project management for NASAs office of space 

science and applications. (NASA Release 85-32) 

March 22 NASA announced that the third phase of the active magneto-. 

spheric particle tracer explorers (AMPTE) magnetotail probe, a U.S., West 

German, and United Kingdom scientific experiment to determine how the 

solar wind interacted with the earth’s magnetosphere, was underway. 

Gilber Ousley, AMPTE project manager of Goddard Space Flight Center 

(GSFC), said that the first AMPTE magnetotail release of barium occurred 

March 21 at 4:20 a.m., EST and that the release conditions had been well 

within established criteria. The German ion release module spacecraft immediately detected a magnetic field change as expected. The satellite would 

make one additional release of barium and two of lithium (the tracers) into 

the earth’s magnetotail. The U.S. satellite would analyze the charged-particle 

space environment around the magnetotail to determine the effects on the 

environment of the injected elements. 

Ousley also said that all ground stations except the one in Argentina reported clear weather and that the observatory at Kin Peak, Arizona, reported 

visual sighting with the naked eye for about 20 minutes. The airborne NASA 

Convair 990 and Argentine Boeing 707 observation aircraft had recorded the 

event. 

The first phase of the AMPTE project had consisted of lithium releases 

September 11 and 20, 1984, into solar wind outside the earth’s magnetosphere about 70,000 miles above the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Lima, 

Peru. Results of the experiment indicated that the artificial comet was 

“eroded” by the solar wind much faster than previously anticipated. 

The only scheduled AMPTE experiment remaining after the March-April 

releases was formation July 13 or 14, 1985, of another artificial comet on the 

opposite flank of the magnetosphere from the December experiment. 

All releases had to satisfy several criteria, including clear voice communications between the U.S. AMPTE science data center located at Johns 

Hopkins University’s Applied Physics Lab and the German Space Operations 

Center in West Germany, where German scientists gathered to view the data. 

The latter sent the command for release through their center and NASA‘s 

Spaceflight Tracking and Data Network. 

Goddard Space Flight Center managed the U.S. portion of AMPTE for 

NASA’s office of space science and applications; Johns Hopkins Applied 

78 
Atmospheric Research 

Physics Lab under contract to NASA had built the U.S. spacecraft. (NASA 

Release 85-42) 

/uly 77: Dr. Mario Acuna, project scientist at Goddard Space Flight Center 

(GSFC), announced that the Active Magnetospheric Particle Tracer Explorers 

(AMPTE) project, an international scientific experiment to determine how the 

solar wind interacted with the earth’s magnetosphere, would produce on July 

18 or 20 at midnight EDT the world’s second artificial comet. In the fourth 

and final phase of the project, a West German satellite would release at 

70,000 miles above earth two barium canisters into the solar wind on the 

flank of the earth‘s magnetosphere. The release would create an artificial 

comet expected to be visible in the southwestern United States to the unaided eye for approximately four minutes. 

In the first phase of the AMPTE project, the West German satellite released 

September 1984 lithium into the solar wind outside the earth’s magnetosphere. Preliminary results of that experiment indicated that less than 1% of 

the solar wind gained access to the magnetosphere under the conditions in 

which the releases took place. 

In the second phase, the German satellite created on December 27, 1984, a 

barium cloud on the flank of the earth’s magnetosphere about 70,000 miles 

above the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Peru. Data from the artificial comet 

indicated that the solar wind eroded it much faster than scientists had anticipated. 

Releases on March 21 and May 13, 1985, of barium and lithium into the 

earth’s rnagnetotail region ended the third phase of the AMPTE experiments. 

Acuna said of those releases, ”Although, disappointingly, no tracer ions were 

detected by the U.S. satellite (Charge Composition Explorer) located inside 

the magnetosphere, this fact is in itself a very significant result. It implies that 

fundamental revisions to our current models of the magnetosphere need to 

be made to account for these negative observations.” (NASA Release 85-105) 

November 4: A team of Jet Propulsion Laboratory UPL) researchers launched 

on November 4, as part of the Balloon-borne Laser In-situ Sensor (BLISS) 

experiment, a 10.2-million-cubic-foot balloon carrying a microprocessorcontrolled payload that produced vertical profile measurements of nitrogen 

dioxide, water vapor, and nitric oxide concentrations at 115,000 and then 

90,000 feet in altitude, the JPL Universe reported. When researchers left JPL 

for Palestine, Texas, to conduct the research, they expected to return home in 

three weeks. But two hurricanes, a cancelled insurance policy, and a balloon 

failure-which caused JPCs instrument-laden gondola to be dumped in the 

mud in a prison camp-extended the trip to 11 weeks. 

The researchers used two balloons, each large enough to enclose an entire 

football field, to lift scientific payloads into the atmosphere. At launch, the 

79 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

balloons stood about 600 feet high and were about 70 feet across; at cruising 

altitude they expanded to about 420 feet. 

A balloon’s 3000-lb. payload included two types of lasers, a TV carntm, 

and a retroreflector suspended by a steel cable one-third mile below the 

gondola after the balloon reached cruising altitude. The optically tracked 

retroreflector-swinging like a pendulum-bounced infrared laser beams 

through the atmosphere and back to the payload’s receiving optics. “We use 

liquid helium to cool the lasers and our supply only lasts a day,” said Dr. 

Christopher Webster, principal investigator for the experiment. “So over the 

11 weeks we had to fill the cryostats 220 times.” 

Balloon failures in scientific research occurred frequently, mainly due to 

defects in the thin plastic balloon material or because seams ripped out, 

Webster noted. “This is a serious problem and scientific research is definitely 

suffering because of it,” he said. “However, the payload recovery is excellent, 

so JPL does not lose its instruments.” 

“The greatest advantage of a balloon-borne laser instrument,” he added, “is 

that we can obtain continuous spectroscopic analysis of the upper atmosphere in situ with high sensitivity.” UPL Uniwrse, Nov 29/85, 3) 

80 
AVIATION 

August 7: Fourteen-year-old Todd Holmes of Fort Smith, Arkansas, unofficially became the youngest person to solo in a glider, the Washington Times 

reported. 

According to Federal Aviation Administration regulations, a pilot had to be 

14 before he or she could solo in any kind of aircraft and 16 to be licensed in 

a passenger-carrying glider or to fly a powered aircraft. The agency did not 

keep statistics on who might have been the youngest person ever to solo. 

Todd, who got his glider license on his 14th birthday, said, “I could’ve done 

it two weeks ago, but I had to wait until I was 14.” (W Times, Aug 1/85, 4B) 

August 6: Arthur Smith, 74, retired chairman of United Technologies Corp. 

and the originator of the concept for water injection in piston engines that 

made major contributions to the performance of World War II combat planes, 

died August 6 after a long illness, the Washington Times reported. 

Smith retired as chairman of United Technologies-then known as United 

Aircraft-in 1973. He had assumed the post 15 months earlier after serving as 

executive vice president, president, and chairman of the executive committee. 

In 1935, after two years in the automotive industry, Smith joined Pratt & 

Whitney as an experimental test engineer. As a project engineer, he and a coworker invented and patented a system for water injection to control detonation and increase horsepower in aircraft piston engines. The 1938 invention 

increased the speed of U.S. fighter planes used during World War II by 40 

mph. 

In 1949 he became chief engineer at Pratt & Whitney and helped develop 

the J57, which powered the F-100 fighter, the first production aircraft to 

exceed the speed of sound in level flight. Smith became president of the 

company in 1967. (W Times, Aug 8/85, 78) 

December20 The US. Air Force’s Aeronautical Systems Div. (ASD) issued in 

December a request for proposals to supply a wide-body jet aircraft to replace two aircraft known as Air Force One, which was used by the president 

and his staff, the Air Force Systems Command’s (AFSC) Newsreview reported. 

Current candidates included the Douglas DC-10 and Boeing‘s 747SP and 

747-300. The Air Force planned to award a contract for the plane by May 

1986. Military Airlift Command’s 89th Military Airlift Wing at Andrews Air 

Force Base would receive the first jumbo jet in late 1988; the second in 1989. 

Existing Air Force One aircraft were deficient in three basic ways, Air Force 

officials said. They were getting more difficult to maintain; they were so 

crammed with equipment that there was no room for new communications 

equipment, an emergency medical treatment facility, or improved work areas 

81 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

for the president and staff and they did not meet Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) standards and had limited performance, especially range. 

The Air Force said the new aircraft must be certified by the FAA, have three 

or more engines, and be a model that had at least two years of airline service 

time. “The two-year in-service requirement guarantees a performance record 

will be available to evaluate the maturity of aircraft design relative to safety, 

reliability, and maintainability,” said Col. Robert Black, program manager of 

ASD’s Deputy for Airlift and Trainer Systems. Other Air Force One performance requirements under evaluation would call for the aircraft to take off from 

a 9,300-foot runway and fly 6,000 nautical miles nonstop. The new plane 

had to have a minimum cruising speed of about 528 mph while flying 

between 36,000 and 45,000 feet and a high-speed cruise capability of about 

575 mph. 

On the new Air Force One the president and staff would have state-of-theart communications complete with secure voice terminals and cryptographic 

equipment for writing and deciphering classified messages. The cabin areas 

would provide seating for 80 passengers and 23 crew members; and presidential accommodations would consist of an office, stateroom, and adjacent 

dressing room and lavatory. 

Other features would be a conference room; guest, staff, press, and Secret 

Service compartments; and a complete medical treatment facility. Onboard 

galleys would allow stewards to prepare and serve about 50 meals from each 

galley. (AFSC Newsreview, Dec 20/85, 4) 

Civil Aviation 

lanuary 24: NASA announced that its anonymous and voluntary Aviation 

Safety Reporting System (ASRS), managed by Ames Research Center, had 

evaluated some 42,000 incident reports in eight years and had issued 805 

alert bulletins and 28 research reports to improve airway safety. Designed and 

implemented by NASA in 1976 at the request of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), ASRS gave pilots and flight controllers a means of reporting 

incidents that would otherwise have passed unnoticed, resulting in revisions 

to both air traffic control procedures and FAA regulations. NASA served as a 

neutral third party in operating the system, protecting the confidentiality of 

those who reported. In addition, FAA could grant participants limited immunity from disciplinary action except in cases of accident or criminal conduct. 

The system had identified, for example, the need for more flight-controller 

help to general aviation pilots operating at night over unfamiliar terrain and 

restriction of cockpit conversation and activity in transport aircraft flying 

below 10,000 ft. The system had also produced a number of changes in 

airline, military, and general aviation pilot flight training based on real flight 

82 
Aviation 

data. Reports in the ASRS data base had become a major resource for humanfactors research and behavior models. 

ASRS received about 500 incident reports a month; experienced pilots and 

controllers screened these to identify existing safety problems and forecast 

future problems and trends, and NASA used the data for safety research for 

FAA, the National Transportation Safety Board, Department of Defense, and 

other government agencies. ASRS issued a monthly safety bulletin and also 

alert bulletins for hazards needing rapid response. (NASA Release 85-12) 

During January: NASA announced that its new findings on the nature of highaltitude, clear-air turbulence (CAT), based on data gathered from airline 

flightdata recorders, could eventually lead to CAT prediction, enabling pilots 

to fly around the invisible wind swirls. 

The findings provided the first detailed description of hazardous, clear-air 

turbulence, a series of swirls or vortices of air embedded in upper-level wind 

streams at altitudes between 35,000 and 40,000 feet. The findings also 

showed that a jet traveling at 500 mph flew through a singlevortex core in 

about one second. During that second, the wind would push the plane 

upward and then down, exerting the weight of an extra G (a measurement of 

gravity) on passengers. Planes might encounter two to four vortices in succession about four seconds apart, possibly causing injury to flight attendants and 

passengers without fastened seat belts. 

Ames Research Center investigators had found that the strongest vortices 

occurred at about 25 miles downwind of large thunderstorms or mountain 

ranges, which caused a swell in the upper-level wind stream, and that wind 

shears formed vortices at the tropopause, the boundary between the troposphere and the stratosphere. At the tropopause, higher-velocity jet streams 

traveled just above lower-speed windstreams, the difference in the speeds 

forming a wind shear. The investigators had verified that wind-shear layers, 

pushed up over a thunderstorm or a mountain range, acted like ocean waves 

when forced to rise over an obstacle. The air would form a series of swells 

that turned to waves that curled like those on the sea. They would continue to 

curl until they formed complete circles or vortices that whirled at high speeds 

before disintegrating. 

As a result of its research, NASA hoped one day to be able to give pilots 

better indications of when and where they might encounter the vortices. 

(NASA announcement, Jan 85, 9) 

February 27: In its just-released annual ’Aviation Forecasts,” which covered 

FY 85-86, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) forecasted healthy 

growth for the nation’s major air carriers in the next dozen years and slow but 

steady growth for general aviation (private and business flying). 

The agency noted that U.S.-certificated air carriers had recorded passenger 

gains in each of the previous three years and in FY 84 achieved their largest 

83 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

operating profit in history-$2 billion. The FAA said airlines, over the 12-year 

forecast period, would increase passenger enplanements at better than 4.5%) 

annually, from 336 million in FY 84 to 573 million in FY 96. Commutelr 

airlines had increased passenger boardings 14% in FY 84, a figure expected 

to more than double during the forecast period to 54.2 million in FY 96. 

The FAA expected the general-aviation fleet to increase from 213,300 aircraft in 1984 to 270,500 in 1996, an annual growth rate of 2%. 

FAA projections for takeoffs and landings at airports with FAA control 

towers indicated an increase from 57 to 92 million, as the number of aircraft 

handled by the agency’s en route control facilities would rise from 31.6 to1 

45.7 million. (FAA Release 8-85) 

During March: A panel organized by the National Academy of Engineering in 

conjunction with the National Research Council (NRC) published its assessment of aviation technology in, “The Competitive Status of the Civil Aviation 

Manufacturing Industry,” the NRC Newsreview reported. 

U.S. aircraft manufacturers in the past had been particularly successful in 

translating advanced technology into products suited to the marketplace; 

however, as competition intensified, the timing of the introduction and the fit 

of the product to customers’ needs had become increasingly important. European countries had tried repeatedly to create a viable air transport manufacturing industry; in 1970 their efforts were realized in the creation of Airbus 

Industrie, which drew on the resources of many companies in a number of 

countries. Those foreign companies created a dilemma for U.S. manufacturers, whose product lines were not extensive. Furthermore, U.S. markets were 

relatively open to competitors, while many foreign markets were closed to 

Ame r ican-made products. 

The panel foresaw a need for U.S. manufacturers to form international 

partnerships, especially as the U.S. aircraft industry was often in virtual competition with governments as well as with private commercial companies. 

And the panel determined that U.S. manufacturers had to be even more 

sensitive in interpreting the needs of foreign customers. 

The panel did conclude that it was possible to further improve reliability of 

aircraft and air travel, as well as increase efficiency in fuel consumption and 

operations. Studies cited by the panel indicated that a variety of technological changes together could improve fuel efficiency by as much as 30-50%. 

Introduction of advanced turboprops or propfans could provide up to 20% 

additional improvement, and the experimental unducted propfan engine 

could raise that figure. 

In the technology area of advanced structures, the panel viewed the U.S. 

and Europe as on a par in developing this technology. Although the U.S. led 

in application experience, Europe threatened the U.S. position. In propulsion 

technology, the panel saw the U.S. lead as not unassailable; Rolls Royce was 

the principal foreign competitor, and the U.K. was committed to maintaining 

84 
Aviation 

a comparative position with the U.S. The panel rated U.S. R&D facilities as 

the best in the world, European facilities as adequate, and Japanese facilities 

as handicapping their efforts to benefit from technological developments. 

(NRC NewsReport, Mar/85, 11) 

lune 17: The Air Transport Association reported that a record 343 million 

passengers and five rnillion tons of cargo traveled without a single passenger 

fatality on 5.4 million scheduled jet airline flights in 1984. The industry 

achieved a 1984 net profit of more than $800 million, after losses for three 

consecutive years. The year‘s operating profit was a record $2.2 billion on 

revenues of $44 billion. 

Other facts noted in the association‘s annual report included lengthened 

airline passenger trips (average passenger trip length was 887 miles, up from 

785 miles 10 years previously), average passenger‘s cost was 12.1 cents per 

mile (compared with 11.6 cents in 1983 and 12.3 cents in 19811, airlines in 

1984 accounted for more than 88% of the intercity public passenger traffic 

miles in the U.S. (up from 80% in 19741, and Chicago’s OHare was the 

busiest passenger airport in the country, handling more than 45.7 million 

people (New York‘s JFK airport handled the most air cargo, 1.3 million tons). 

(ATA Release No. 38) 

lune 19 Responding to a suggestion made by President Reagan at a June 19 

press conference that the U.S. expand its sky marshal force for use on international flights, Thomas Pyle, speaking for the International Air Transport Association, said security experts found little merit in the suggestion, the NY 

Times reported. “We’re not happy about anybody having guns up in the air,“ 

he said. “There’s a distinct danger to passengeh and a bigger danger of 

damage to the aircraft.” Pyle did acknowledge that there might be special 

occasions, including cases of known threats to particular flights, when marshals would be needed. 

Richard Lally, security chief for the association representing U.S. airlines 

and for the Federal Aviation Administration from 1974 to 1982, agreed with 

Pyle’s assessment. “It is not an answer to the problem and introduces an 

impression that it is. It provides for a very dangerous situation.” 

The views expressed by Pyle and Lally reflected the consensus of security 

experts that the best place to head off hijackings was on the ground. (NY 

Times, June 20/85, A20) 

luly 26: NASA would once again be one of the chief exhibitors at the 33rd 

annual Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) International Fly-in July 26 to 

August 2 at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, the Langley Researcher reported. NASA 

would broaden its exhibit, “The Shape of Things To Come,” which was 

traditionally only aeronautical, to include a greater representation of its activities in space technology. 

85 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

A 60 x 90-foot tent would house displays of NASA’s research and technology development work in aeronautics, the space station, Space Shuttle, and 

space exploration. Langley Research Center and Ames Research Center 

would provide aeronautical exhibits, Lewis Research Center would provide 

aeropropulsion and space exhibits, Goddard Space Flight Center would have 

its search and rescue satellite van on hand, and Johnson Space Center and 

Marshall Space Flight Center would exhibit material on space research. Astronauts Robert Gibson and Robert Overmeyer would be EAA guests and 

would participate in a program the evening of July 29. Two dozen NAS,A 

forum speakers would give presentations covering every aeronautical discipline. 

Each year for the last several years about 100,000 people and 10,000 

privately owned light airplanes were at Oshkosh for the exhibition. Organizers also scheduled the British Airways Concorde to make special fly-bys 

during the afternoon air shows. (LaRC Researcher, July 26/85, 3) 

luly 26: Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Hanford Dole announced the 

award of a $196.9 million contract to IBM to provide new-generation computers that would give controllers extra capacity to handle growing air traffic 

safely and efficiently in the coming decade. Under the contract, IBM would 

replace the computer systems in the nation’s 20 air route traffic control 

centers. Contract options for future hardware maintenance and software and 

technical support, if exercised, could total an additional $235.1 million. 

In making the announcement, Dole said that “existing computers are 

based on outmoded technology . . . The new computer will have the capacity to assume added functions-such as improved conflict detection and 

resolution-permitting the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to make 

more efficient use of controllers.” And it would provide a vehicle for a stable 

transition to an advanced automation program in the future. 

The new computers would have greater storage capacity than the IBM 

9020s used since the early 1970s in FAA centers, which control all aircraft 

operating under instrument flight rules between the nation’s airport terminal 

areas. 

The FAA awarded the contract to IBM following a 21-month design competition with the Sperry Corp. The FAA based the selection on a number of cost 

and performance factors including the results of a “compute off at the FAA 

Technical Center near Atlantic City, New jersey. A key factor in the sidebyside evaluation was the capability of each computer system to run the current 

9020 software package with minimum modifications. 

Key element in the IBM hardware was the IBM 3080-BX1 model. Each 

installation would consist of two units with one serving as the primary processor and the other as a backup. 

The contract called for IBM to deliver the new computer systems over a 

oneyear period beginning in the summer of 1986 to air route traffic control 

86 
Aviation 

centers including the FAA Technical Center and the FAA Aeronautical Center 

where the computer system would be used for training purposes. (FAA Release 32-85) 

luly 29 U.S., Indian, and Canadian officials were estimating the cost of 

raising portions of the wreckage of the Air-India Boeing 747 that crashed June 

23 into the Atlantic off Ireland, Aviation Week reported. Lack of significant 

data on either the cockpit voice recorder or the flight data recorder, recovered 

July 10 and July 11, respectively, by a remotely controlled submersible vehicle, stalled the investigation into the cause of the crash until more information became available. Raising portions of the wreckage seemed the only way 

to accomplish this. 

After a British ship initially surveyed the sea bed where the wreckage lay, 

the Canadian ship John Cabot completed a second sonar survey of that 

portion of the ocean floor. Officials later said wreckage of the aircraft could 

be identified only as “lumps.” 

Officials said they had not determined the cost of raising the wreckage or a 

significant part of it, but knew it to be high. Although responsibility for the 

accident investigation legally belonged to India, the U.S. and Canada-both 

parties to the investigation-might contribute funds to the salvage operation. 

(AvWk, July 15/85, 28; July 29/85, 29) 

August2 In a letter to the editor in the NY Times, Saunders Kramer, a Fellow 

of the American Astronautical Society, commented on the NY Time’s report 

of speculation in a London newspaper that debris from a satellite reentering 

the atmosphere may have struck the Air-India jetliner that crashed in July [see 

Aviation/Civil Aviation, July 291. “You dismiss that possibility as ’bizarre,”’ 

Kramer wrote, “Not quite.” 

Kramer then related a tale of an incident that occurred in the early 1960s, 

when passengers on a airline flight from Honolulu to Tokyo saw at 30,000 

feet a white flash and heard a thud. 

‘After they landed at Tokyo, inspection revealed a smooth dished-in area 

(about 18 inches across) on the plane’s right wing leading edge between the 

two starboard engines:’ Kramer continued. There was no evidence of a bird 

cot1 is ion. 

When the navigator returned home, he related the tale to Kramer, who 

checked North American Air Defense Command‘a (NORAD) space-tracking 

data bulletins, which showed reentry of satellite debris at the time and location of the Pan Am flight. “We concluded that the debris had indeed struck 

the plane:’ Kramer wrote. 

“The propulsion section of the last stage of a satellite booster is frequently 

massive enough to survive reentry. Had it struck the tail section severely or 

struck the cockpit from above, it is certainly conceivable, however remote, 

87 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

that destruction of the aircraft could have been instantaneous," Kramer concluded. (NM, Aug 2/85, A241 

August 2 Federal investigation of the Delta Air Line Lockheed L-1011-1 

crash August 2 at DalladFt. Worth International Airport showed strong evidence of wind shear and microburst in the aircraft's landing path, Aviation 

Week reported, which raised issues concerning the adequacy of detection 

and training of pilots to respond to violent weather. The Delta TriStar crashed 

at 6:05 p.m. CDT on final approach to runway 17L after entering a suddenly 

developed violent thunderstorm cell that eluded detection by ground-based 

sensors and was not reported by pilots. 

The problems posed by wind shear would force the government in the 

following weeks to deal with procurement of Doppler radar systems (which 

the Federal Aviation Administration successfully tested as a wind-shear and 

microburst detector), regulations requiring simulator training and cockpit 

resource management instructions to prepare pilots for wind shear, and enhancement of the lowlevel, wind-shear alert system (LLWAS) to broaden 

coverage of the detection system. 

Rep. Mickey Edwards (R.-Okla.) had called for investigations to go beyond 

the direct cause of the Delta accident to "basic airline and government 

operating procedures and priorities" in responding to weather hazards. 

(AvWk, Aug 12/85, 16) 

August 26 The investigation into the August 12 crash in a remote mountain 

area of a Japan Air Lines Boeing 747-100SR after it lost most of its vertical 

stabilizer and rudders focused on damage in the aft pressure bulkhead of the 

aircraft, Aviation Week reported. Japan's Aircraft Accident Investigation Committee said it was attempting to determine whether the bulkhead damage was 

caused by a crack or cracks that existed in the bulkhead, by explosive decompression in the cabin, or by the crash impact. The Boeing Co. said inspections 

as of August 19 of the aft pressure shell of 43 Boeing 747 aircraft showed no 

evidence of cracks. 

In addition to cracks in the bulkhead, lower ends of 5 of 18 triangular 

panels, or gores, were buckled toward the rear. Boeing Co. had replaced 9 of 

the 18 panels after the aircraft was involved in a hard landing June 2, 1978. 

Further optional or mandated inspections of the wide-body transport fleet 

stalled the previous week due to lack of information on damage to the JAL 

aircraft. Information from Japan was sparse, partly because of restrictions 

placed on access to the wreckage and because of damage done to some of 

the vital evidence by members of the rescue team. Rescuers had cut the 

bulkhead into pieces and removed them to clear the way for rescue. Boeing's 

accident investigation team had not been able to make a close inspection of 

the bulkhead by the previous week. 

88 
Aviation 

One of the few pieces of evidence-damage to the vertical fin-led Boeing 

to suggest that Boeing 747 operators inspect the fin and rudder structure. 

And reports that a depressurization occurred prompted the company to suggest inspection of the external and aft portion of the pressure shell structure. 

The Federal Aviation Administration declined to take action pending re 

ceipt of more information. (AvWk, Aug 26/85, 28) 

August 26: At least 54 persons were killed and 83 injured when a Boeing 

737-200 operated by British Airtours aborted its takeoff, ran off the runway, 

and caught fire at Manchester International Airport in northern England, 

Aviation Week reported. Manchester Airport officials said the pilot radioed as 

he approached rotation speed that he was having trouble with one of his 

engines. Then the aircraft rolled off the side of the runway causing the fuselage to break. Fire quickly gutted the aircraft. 

British Airtours Flight KT 328, en route to the Greek island of Corfu, carried 

a full load of fuel plus 131 passengers and a crew of six. Most of those who 

died were in the rear section of the aircraft. Two crew members were among 

the dead, but both the pilot and copilot survived. 

Loss of life was reduced because the Boeing 737 skidded to a halt near the 

airport's fire station, and all seven of the airport's firefighting vehicles were on 

the scene within minutes. Firemen were able to rescue many of the passengers, although a secondary explosion during the rescue attempt injured two 

of the firemen. (AvWk, Aug 26/85, 28) 

September 2: Loss of 13 commercial aircraft hulls since January, including 

four wide-body transports, totaled $318 million and exceeded hull losses in 

any previous year, Aviation Wk reported. The wide-body losses included a 

UTA Boeing 747-300, which burned March 1985 on the ground in Paris, an 

$85 million loss; an Air-India Boeing 747-200B; a Delta Air Lines Lockheed 

L-1011-1; and a Japan Airlines Boeing 737-100SR. Observers expected this 

to result in increased airline insurance premiums, the third round of increases 

since heavy hull losses in 1982 and 1983 and the onset of large liability 

awards in U.S. courts. 

Insurance officials also predicted the year's losses would narrow capacity in 

the insurance market, meaning airlines could negotiate for insurance, but it 

would be harder to get and at higher rates. Payouts from hull losses already 

incurred had exceeded total premiums paid plus any interest income gained 

from investment, although interest rates were low and produced comparatively little income. 

Premium rates on a world scale averaged a 45% increase in 1984 and 

would probably rise another 15% in 1985. Also, the levels at which deductible insurance became effective would likely double. Most policies signed in 

1984 increased the deductible from $250,000 to $500,000 for narrow-body 

89 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

aircraft and from $600,000 to $1 million for wide-body aircraft. This was part 

of a long-term trend toward airlines self-insuring for the first few million 

dollars of liability. 

Of greatest concern to insurance officials was the rise of average settlements for passenger fatalities in the U.S., which averaged $450,000 in 1979, 

$650,000 in 1982, and would likely rise to between $800,000 and $1 million, the officials believed. The average settlement in the rest of the world was 

approximately $50,000 but varied considerably. (AvWk, Sept 2/85, 34) 

September 6 Air safety experts, flight attendants, and some members of 

Congress were complaining that the emergency evacuation tests run by airlines had little resemblance to a real accident, the Washington Post reported. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations required that all jetliners 

pass an evacuation test that showed a planeful of passengers could be evacuated in 90 seconds. Such tests determined how many seats a plan must have 

in relations to the number of exits. However, flight attendants typically rehearsed several days for the tests in which there was no smoke, no fire, no 

elderly participants, or children. 

Federal regulations didn't prohibit manufacturers from using their own 

employees for the tests, although no "passenger" could rehearse for the 

evacuation. Although regulations required a certain percentage of elderly 

persons or children for the tests, FAA officials said they often waived the 

requirement because of concerns that they might be injured. 

Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), whose U.S. House public works and transportation subcommittee on investigations and oversight monitored the FAA, 

said that changes in the FAA's handling of evacuation requirements were long 

overdue. "We've got . . . no uniformity, just sort of a haphazard approach 

to rule making and safety, and lives of people are at stake," he said. Rep. Newt 

Gingrich (R-Ga.) of the same subcommittee called the approach to evacuation taken by the FAA and industry "just totally out of touch with the real 

world. " 

The controversy over the adequacy of evacuation requirements had simmered for months since the FAA permitted the Boeing Co. to eliminate two of 

ten exit doors on its 747 jumbo jet. Boeing officials convinced the FAA to 

allow elimination of the two over-wing emergency doors on the plane, because federal regulations required two doors for every 110 seats and none of 

the 747s with sealed doors would carry more than 440 seats. 

The FAA's Seattle office, which handled certification of large commercial 

aircraft, approved the change without a test to see whether passengers actually could evacuate the plane within 90 seconds and instead relied on a 

mathematical calculation using old evacuation tests. Critics complained that 

those tests were themselves flawed. (W Post, Sept 6/85, A211 

90 
Aviation 

September 9 A mountain climbing team reached the wreckage of an Eastern 

Airlines Boeing 747 that crashed January 1, 1985, at 19,600 feet into Mt. 

lllimani in the Bolivian Andes and photographed the site for use in an investigation, Aviation Week reported. Judith Kelly, wife of William Kelly, a U.S. 

Peace Corps official who died in the crash, financed and led the three-person 

expedition because she was concerned that the accident investigation was 

lagging. 

Photographs of the site showed parts of the tail structure and the fuselage. 

Kelly also collected cable and honeycomb structures identified by part numbers and turned them over with the photos to the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Remains of the 29 persons on board were not 

located. 

The Kelly team’s ascent was the fourth visit to the site since the crash and 

prompted questions over the status of the accident investigation. Although 

Bolivia had primary responsibility to report the accident, government officials said it was unlikely Bolivia would finance an expedition to the site due 

to lack of funds, but added it would not stand in the way of an investigation 

by the U.S., which was the country of aircraft registry and manufacture. 

Early in January Bolivian Bernard0 Guarachi, who was Kelly’s guide, 

reached the crash site and spent several hours there, bringing back pieces of 

wreckage and luggage tags identifying the flight. 

A second Bolivian team in March reached the site and took motion pictures. The film showed the aircraft wreckage, including a tail section that was 

torn off the plane, and scattered cargo and baggage. The team also found an 

engine cowling, a piece of the fuselage with the Eastern name on it, and 

other parts of the tail structure. A team sponsored by the Bolivian Red Cross 

spent three days in August at the site, but was hindered by new-fallen snow 

and lack of guidance on where to look for technical evidence. 

John Young, the NTSB investigator in charge, said he was discussing with 

officials in the safety board’s accident investigation division whether the 

safety board should attempt to carry on the investigation and what approach 

to take. Recovery of the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder could 

aid in determining navigation procedures the crew were taking. 

Because of the questions surrounding the crash of the aircraft, which was 

several miles off course when it struck the mountain 26 miles southeast of La 

Paz International Airport, the U.S. Air Line Pilots Association was discussing 

financing an expedition to recover the recorders. (AvWk, Sept 9/85, 40) 

September 9 Continental Airlines filed a reorganization plan with the U.S. 

Bankruptcy Court in Houston in which it said creditors would be repaid 

100% in a combination of immediate cash and deferred payments with 

interest, Aviation Week reported. Cash payments would total about $121 

million at the time of court confirmation of the plan, expected by mid-1986. 

91 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Continental had originally filed September 24, 1983, for protection under 

Chapter 11 or the bankruptcy laws. 

"We have submitted a plan that will make whole our obligations to those 

individuals and companies that stood with us through the worst of times," 

said Continental Chairman Frank Lorenzo. "It's taken nearly two years to do 

it, but the pieces of the puzzle are almost all in place." 

One missing piece in the plan was provision for union and employee 

claims. Continental asked the bankruptcy court to estimate these claims, a 

process that had been used in a number of other companies' bankruptcies. 

Continental said its plan to repay its debt in five to ten years had the 

support of important creditor groups including Continental's banks and the 

committee representing Continental's unsecured creditors. Included in the 

plan was an agreement in principle for two groups of banks to provide the 

airline with $50 million in revolving credit and equipment financing facilities, which the airline said was "clear evidence of the financial community's 

support and confidence" in the company. 

Once the reorganization plan was approved by the court, most creditors 

were entitled to vote on it. Even if a creditor class did not approve the plan, 

the bankruptcy court could still confirm it if the court found it "fair and 

equitable" and that it did not discriminate against the creditor class. (AvWk, 

Sept 9/85, 34) 

October 21: The Canadian recovery ship MV Kreuztrum, chartered by the 

U.S. government, retrieved from the Atlantic Ocean the first piece of wreckage, a section of fuselage skin approximately 15 by 30 feet, of the Air-India 

Boeing 747 that crashed in June off Ireland, Aviation Week reported. Another 

Canadian recovery ship, the John Cabot equipped with a Scarab 2 underwater search and recovery vehicle, was also at the site. The two ships later 

recovered three other sections of the aircraft's fuselage and were in the process of lifting a fifth section. Recovery team members said they had confronted 

no serious problems but that the work was timeconsuming. 

The Scarab 2 itself lifted a smaller second piece of wreckage; highcapacity 

winches on the Kreuztrum lifted two other sections. Officials said it was 

taking 18 to 24 hrs to lift each piece of wreckage. 

The ships' crews recovered the larger pieces by using four clamps that the 

Scarab 2 attached to each corner of a piece. Scarab 2 could take only two 

clamps down during a dive, and a third dive was necessary to carry down a 

lifting bridle to attach to the four clamps and a lift line to attach to the bridle. 

This method made it possible to raise large sections with as little additional 

damage as possible. 

"Since it takes two hours for the Scarab to dive to the 6,700-foot depth, two 

hours to do its work, and another three hours to swim back to the surface," a 

recovery official said, "it's going to take some time." 

92 
Aviation 

Recovery officials believed wreckage retrieved as of the previous week was 

from the fuselage both fore and aft of the wing, and they were working to 

locate its position on the aircraft structure. They believed the fifth piece being 

recovered was a primary fuselage structure, including ribs and skin. 

Recovery officials said they established a two-tier priority system for the 

order in which they recovered wreckage. They gave top priority to pieces that 

were likely to confirm or refute primary theories on the cause of the crash. 

Secondary priority was given to pieces considered likely to contain evidence 

of what occurred to cause the aircraft to break up in flight. Early efforts 

focused on fuselage structure. 

The officials had located the aft pressure bulkhead of the Air-India 747 and 

scanned it with TV cameras, but said ”there is nothing visible to indicate any 

common problem” with the August crash of a Japan Air Lines 474. Plans 

called for raising this bulkhead section toward the end of the recovery operation. (AvWk, Oct 21/85, 32) 

October 22: Northwest Airlines Inc. completed an agreement today to purchase 10 Boeing 747-400s as part of a $21 billion airplane order, the Washington Post reported, making Northwest the first airline to have the 

long-range, 450-seat 747-400. Northwest president Steven Rothmeier, in a 

telephone conversation with the Post, said, “the 747-400 is really the next 

logical step in the progression of aircraft for the Pacific . . . It‘s our belief 

that this plane will set the economic structure of the Pacific to the end of the 

century.” Northwest also purchased ten more Boeing 757-2OOs, a hightechnology, twin-engine standard-body aircraft. 

The 747-400 would be 22% more fuel efficient than current 747s, which 

it closely resembled; however, it had wings six feet longer that were tipped 

with “winglets” that bent upward and forward to improve aerodynamic efficiency. 

Digital instrument displays and computers would permit the 747-400 to 

have a two-pilot cockpit instead of the three-person flight crew required for 

current 747s; and the new plane would have a range of 8,000 statute milesthe longest of any commercial jet-permitting it to fly nonstop from New 

York to Tokyo, Seoul, or Shanghai. 

Boeing would deliver the 747s between December 1988 and 1990; the 

757s from 1987 through 1989. (WPost, Oct 23/85, F1) 

Nowmber 7: United Airlines today placed orders with a value of over $3.1 

billion for up to 110 737-300s and up to six 747s, the largest order ever 

placed by an airline, Aviation Daily reported. The previous record was a 

November 12, 1980, order by Delta for 60 757s valued at $3 billion. 

United President James Hartigan said that the first two 737s and two 747- 

200Bs had a June 1988 delivery date and that ”we have obtained flexibility in 

93 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

the contracts to change the downline delivery dates of the later aircraft to 

meet our needs.” He added that the orders were made possible because “we 

reached cost-competitive contracts with all of our work groups. We are now 

positioned properly for dramatic growth in the competitive marketplace.” 

All aircraft should be delivered by the end of 1990, giving United a fleet of 

478 transports. (ND, Nov 8/85, 41) 

December 13: NASA announced that researchers at its Langley Research 

Center (LaRC) were developing use of pyrotechnic-activated emergency exit 

systems that might save lives in an emergency situation aboard commercial 

transport ai rc raft. 

Although pyrotechnic components aboard commercial aircraft might seem 

dangerous, Laurence Bement, an aerospace technologist specializing in pyre 

technic-activated aircraft escape systems, pointed out that military aircraft 

had used such escape systems for more than 20 years and NASA had used 

them in their manned spaceflight programs as far back as Project Mercury in 

the 1960s. The emergency egress system he proposed would be more reliable and more effective in aiding the rapid evacuation of airplanes and more 

cost-effective than existing mechanical and electrical systems. “What we 

have done is take the best materials and applications from years of pyrotechnic usage and tried to assemble the best escape system, using our past 

experiences,” Bement said. 

One U.S. Air Force system, the emergency lifesaving instant exit, used 

pyrotechnic chargers to sever a panel inside the aircraft door. Another, the 

NASA general aviation egress opening system, created by an explosion an 

opening in the fuselage without modifying the airframe structure. The pyre 

technic-activated escape systems on U.S. armed forces planes had already 

saved approximately $10 million by avoiding component replacement costs. 

However, they added weight and complexity to the aircraft and do not increase the structural efficiency of the airframe. 

To improve existing systems, Bement studied the possibility of replacing 

fuselage skin sections with an explosively severed, composite material panel. 

Researchers had tested graphite/epoxy and fiberglass composite panels, demonstrating that the graphite/epoxy was the better material. Not only was the 

graphite/epoxy easier to sever than the original fuselage material, but the 

composite panel was much lighter and more crashworthy. Once activated, 

the explosive material severed the panel from the fuselage and jettisoned the 

panel outward. No debris was projected inward and no sound or over-pressure hazard existed inside the aircraft. 

The composite system was more reliable than existing mechanical and 

electrical systems and would require less maintenance, since the system was 

expected to last at least 15 years. Bolts would hold the composite panel to the 

primary structure and it would be a loadcarrying component, unlike existing 

emergency exits. 

94 C- 2 
Aviation 

Bement estimated that using composite panels with the pyrotechnic system 

could reduce the weight of existing emergency exits by 30 to 50%. If the 

airframes were designed to include the composite panels, the weight reductions would be far greater, because the light-weight composite panels were 

capable of carrying loads, meaning the fuselage would not require as much 

support structure around the emergency door frames. 

The explosive in the system was hexanitrostilbene (HVS), an organic compound insensitive to handling, impact, gunfire, and lightning and was unaffected by 50 hours of exposure to temperatures of 350' F. HNS would burn if 

exposed to a flame but would not explode. 

Another advantage of the compound was its explosive power; in a test of 

the Langley general aviation opening system, less than 0.4 ounce of the 

compound was sufficient to sever a panel about 30 square inches. (NASA 

Release 85-171 1 

December 16: In a recent report to the U.S. House Public Works and Transportation Committee and its subcommittee on aviation, the U.S. General 

Accounting Office (GAO) said that deregulation of the U.S. air transport 

system had forced carriers to become more efficient and competitive, lower 

fares, and improve services for most travelers, Aviation Week reported. However, airlines had dropped nonstop service between some cities, and some 

small communities had lost all scheduled air service. Most communities 

receiving subsidies were not progressing toward self-sustaining air service 

and had lost passengers since deregulation began, the report said; and it 

indicated that without legislative action, many of the small communities with 

subsidized essential air service would lose all scheduled service when the 

current subsidy ended in 1988. GAO repeated its recommendation that Congress consider giving the Department of Transportation greater flexibility to 

increase or decrease subsidies to selected communities. 

The report found the airline industry was still in the process of adapting to 

deregulation with these trends dominant: more airlines offering competing 

services; declines in average fares; improvements for most passengers in 

service, availability, and convenience; and industry profitability improved 

through increased efficiency and declining unit labor and fuel costs. 

Travelers between high-traffic, long-distance city-pairs gained the most from 

deregulation, as fares came closer to cost; and competition fostered greater 

choice in fares and service. However, the smaller number of passengers 

flying between many light-traffic, shortdistance city-pairs did not benefit 

from lower fares, the report said. 

GAO predicted that the industry would probably remain competitive, although the number of airlines might decrease due to bankruptcies and mergers. And the report said the number of large airports with capacity 

limitations on service could increase from the current 8 to 61 by the end of 

95 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

the century and that the allocation of limited airport capacity among competing airlines could offset the benefits of regulations. (AvWk, Dec 16/85, 33) 

December 31: In terms of fatalities, 1985 was the worst year in aviation 

history, the Washington Post reported, as nearly 2,000 people died in 36 

accidents. The previous worst year was 1974, when 1,299 people died in 29 

accidents. 

Among the 1985 aircraft losses were: an Air India jet that disintegrated off 

the Irish coast, killing all 329 on board; a Delta Air Lines jumbo jetliner that 

crashed in a violent thunderstorm while approaching the Dallas airport, 

killing 133; a Japan Air Lines jet on a flight from Tokyo to Osaka that hit a 

mountain, killing 520; a British Airways charter plane that burst into flames 

on the runway in Manchester, England, killing 54; a charter plane carrying 

US. military service members that crashed at Gander, Newfoundland, killing 

all 258 on board; and a twinengine plane that crashed into the roof of a 

suburban California shopping mall, killing four persons and injuring 88. In 

addition, hijackers took over a TWA plane on a flight to Beirut and killed a 

passenger. 

The year's aircraft losses resulted from pilot error and equipment failure, 

sugar in the fuel line of one plane, and possibly a bomb in the luggage 

compartment of another. Some blamed the crashes, if only indirectly, on the 

1981 firing of the air traffic controllers, on deregulation, and on the enforce 

ment role of federal safety inspectors. However, federal officials said that 

there was no common thread among the year's major aviation disasters. (W 

Post, Jan 2/86, A3) 

Human Powered Aircraft 

February 5: Langley Research Center announced that John Langford of the 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology would speak February 11 on the MIT 

Monarch, a human-powered aircraft that had won first prize May 11, 1984, in 

the Kremer World Speed Competition. 

An all-volunteer team had designed and built the craft in 88 days during 

the summer of 1983 and had flown it 29 times before disassembling it. With 

an improved version, the team had made 35 flights in spring 1984, culminating in the record flight. 

Langford would discuss design consideration and construction details of 

the Monarch, including propulsion and avionics. (LaRC Release 85-5) 

Supersonic Transport 

February 25: Lewis Research Center (LeRC) researchers believed their engine 

research, focusing on development of supersonic combustion ramjet (scram96 
Aviation 

jet) technology, would lead to air-breathing engines capable of operating at 

speeds through Mach 12, Aviation Week reported. Testing had already produced net thrust-todrag ratios of better than one at high Mach numbers. 

Research included solution of engine aerodynamics, diagnostics and measurement problems, and effects of change to full-scale, flight-weight engine 

prototypes. 

Although the Reagan Administration budget request for NASA FY 86 hypersonic research continued the existing level of effort, NASA believed propulsion technology development would be the pacing factor for 

hypersonic-flight capability and looked to congressional interest, evidenced 

by a request for a NASA report on hypersonic research, for increased funding. 

Initial scramjet technology applications might lie in missile development. 

As the potential for higher speeds and longer ranges became attainable, 

NASA concentrated on basic research for later generations of military cruise 

missiles rather than applications to aircraft. (AvWk, Feb 25/85, 52) 

During March: After a detailed review of the history of Concorde develop 

ment, J.C.D. Baine in his article, “The Concorde Supersonic Airliner-The 

Struggle for Survival,” concluded that the survival of Concordes or their being 

superseded by second generation supersonic airlines appeared doubtful under the persisting circumstances of international economic, political, and 

social relationships. 

He noted that the confrontation between aviation technology and the environment had brought into focus problems, whether real or emotional, that 

only advanced aeronautical science and technology would solve. That was 

especially true with respect to airport noise, sonic booms, and stratospheric 

pollution caused by emissions from multiengines that consumed large quantities of petroleum-based fuels. Until those acceptable solutions were found, 

he concluded, opposition to civilian supersonic aircraft would continue and 

might further restrict or ban the aircraft‘s use on national and international 

routes. 

However, he noted that the efforts of Great Britain and France to develop 

the Concorde should not be dismissed as a waste of human effort and resources. They had contributed to advancements in aeronautical science and 

technology that, though not financially rewarding, represented a store of 

scientific knowledge that would be available for future development. (Aerospace Historian, Marl85, 10) 

November 73 NASA announced an award of a $400,000 contract to North 

American Aircraft Operations of Rockwell Internatl. Corp. for preliminary 

design of a pivoting wing for a supersonic aircraft. The contract covered 

Phase B of a joint NASNNavy program to design, develop, and flight test an 

aeroelastically tailored, pivoting-oblique wing for transonic and supersonic 

flight evaluation. It was part of a four-phase procurement program to modify 

97 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

the NASA Ames-Dryden F-8 fly-by-wire research aircraft to a supersonic 

oblique-wing configuration. 

For takeoff and landing, the pivoting wing was set in the conventional 

aircraft flight position. For faster flight speeds, the wing pivoted so that one 

side was swept forward and the other side swept aft, forming an oblique angle 

with the aircraft's fuselage. In the oblique wing configuration, an aircraft in 

high-speed flight encountered less air resistance. 

The contract covered preliminary design of the oblique wing, its pivot 

assembly, and flight control program for the F-8's computers. The company 

would also define the aircraft's flight envelope and assess the operational 

capabilities of oblique wings for potential naval applications. 

A follow-on contract phase would provide detailed design, fabrication, 

ground testing, and flight support for a 12-month flight test program of ap 

proximately 40 flights. (NASA Release 85-152) 

98 
AWARDS 

january 30: NASA announced its graphics and visual communications system 

had won the Presidential Design Award, presented January 30 by President 

Reagan. The National Endowment for the Arts sponsored the award to recognize excellence in federal design and had selected the NASA project, along 

with 12 others, from among 91 Federal Design Achievement Award winners. 

The Presidential Design Awards jury chairman, architect 1.M. Pei, said in 

his jury report, ”. . . Especially noteworthy is the visual-communications 

system developed by NASA whose posters, publications, and logotype generally maintain a high standard of design, which truly captures the spirit and 

vitality of the space program.” (NASA Release 85-16) 

During january: NASA announced it had conferred its Space Act Awards on 

four Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory personnel for the invention of 

a medical device based on space and aeronautics technology. The invention, 

a programmable implantable medication system (PIMS), was a computerized 

pump intended for implanting in the human body to dispense medicine 

automatically to treat disease such as diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular 

problems. 

A nonhypodermic device introduced medication to a reservoir located in 

the PlMS device so that its tiny battery-powered pump could send the rnedicine into the body via a tube in minute doses precisely timed by one of two 

clocks within the PIMS. A small computer in the PlMS analyzed its performance and operated an alarm if the device was malfunctioning or about to run 

out of fluid. 

NASA technologies employed in the PlMS development were space microcircuitry, titanium welding, and the pump and fluid-handling systems used 

on the Viking spacecraft and space-program techniques of quality control. 

Awatd recipients were Robert Fischell, Wade Radford, Albert Sadilek, and 

Arthur Hogrefe. (NASA anno Jan 85, 14) 

February 1: The National Society of Professional Engineers had recognized 

Marshall Space Flight Center‘s (MSFC) role in the first Spacelab mission as 

one of the nation‘s 10 outstanding engineering achievements for 1984, the 

center announced. Because the 1Oday mission occurred so late in 1983, the 

society had placed it in the 1984 competition. The society also cited MSFC 

for its management of NASA’s role in Spacelab development, which had 

included the transfer tunnel connecting the Space Shuttle orbiter cabin to the 

module and other components necessary for successful laboratory operation, 

for its technical and programmatic monitoring of Spacelab’s European design 

and development activities, and for lending technical expertise and support 

to the European Space Agency (ESA) in the project. 

99 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

MSFC’s deputy director Thomas Lee had accepted the award on behalf of 

center employees at the society’s winter meeting in Albuquerque, New Mexico. (MSFC Release 85-5) 

February 7: The US. Navy awarded Dr. Robert Stevenson, an oceanographer 

with the Office of Naval Research (ONR), its Meritorious Civilian Service 

Award for his role in the application of space technology to the solution of 

oceanographic problems, the US. Navy announced. The award cited Stevenson as the ”father” of space oceanography in the western world, recognizing 

him as one of the first American scientists to suggest that remote sensing 

instruments in space could accurately record oceanographic measurements. 

As an advisor on space-related programs, Stevenson had worked with the 

National Council for Marine Resources and Engineering Development, the 

National Academy of Science, North American Air Defense Command 

(NORAD), and NASA. Stevenson was a Fellow of the Geological Society of 

America and author of numerous scientific articles on ocean surface-layers’ 

research, particularly as observed from earth-orbiting satellites. (Dept. of the 

Navy Release 1-85) 

March 5: The Soviet Geophysical Committee of the USSR’s Academy of 

Sciences presented Dr. Alexander Dessler, director of Marshall Space Flight 

Center’s (MSFC) Space Science Laboratory, a bronze medal for his contribution to fulfillment of international geophysical programs, MSFC announced. 

The committee awarded 1,000 medals, 100 to American scientists, commemorating the 100th anniversary of the first international geophysical program, 

the First International Polar Year, 1892-1983. Scientists receiving the award 

made important contributions to international geophysics in such areas as 

solid earth, oceans, atmospheres, solar-terrestrial relations, and the geophysical programs in Antarctica and space. 

Since beginning his scientific career in 1956, Dessler specialized in research in low-temperature physics, atmospheric electricity, and space physics 

and authored more than 100 technical papers on these subjects. Dessler was 

a Fellow of the American Geophysical Union and the American Association 

for the Advancement of Science and served as an officer of the International 

Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. (MSFC Release 85-11 ) 

March 28: NASA announced it had presented at a ceremony at NASA Headquarters its 1984 inventor of the year award to Dale Kornfeld, Marshall Space 

Flight Center (MSFC), and John Vanderhoff, Mohammed El-Asser, and Fortunato Micale, all of Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, for their 

“process for preparation of largeparticle size monodisperse latexes.” 

The monodisperse latex reactor processor, an experiment flown aboard the 

Space Shuttle, had produced microspheres in zero gravity in sizes ranging 

100 
Awards 

from 5 to 30 micrometers. The maximum size particles produced on earth, 

with the required standards of quality and uniformity, were about 2 to 3 

micrometers. 

Researchers used microspheres in calibrating sensitive scientific instruments such as microscopes, filters, and particle counters. Medical uses included identification of cancer and glaucoma and the study of the transport 

of materials inside living organisms. Industrial applications included the 

production of finely ground products such as paint pigments, inks, toners, 

explosives, and other powder materials. 

NASA took an important step toward making the microspheres commercially available when it presented 15 grams of 10-micrometer particles to the 

Commerce Department’s National Bureau of Standards for certification as 

“standard reference material.” (NASA Release 85-44) 

April 5: NASA announced it would award James Harford, executive director 

of the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), its Public 

Service Medal at a luncheon ceremony April 10 during AIAA’s annual meeting in Washington. 

The award cited Harford “for more than 30 years of staff leadership of the 

nation’s principal professional society for the advancement of aerospace.” 

In 1953 Harford became executive secretary of the American Rocket Society (ARS), than a fledgling organization of about 2,100 missile engineers and 

scientists. When ARS and the Institute of Aeronautical Sciences merged in 

1963 to form the AIAA, Harford became its deputy executive director and a 

year later its executive director. AIAA, under Harford’s leadership, grew to 

35,000 members with 66 professional sections and 132 student branches. 

Harford was a Fellow of AIAA, the British Interplanetary Society, the American Association for the .Advancement of Science and an Associate Fellow of 

the Royal Aeronautical Society. (NASA Release 85-49) 

May23: In a ceremony today in the East Room of the White House, President 

Reagan presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom to 12 people including 

former test pilot Chuck Yeager. “More than you‘ll ever know,” Reagan said, 

“this world would have been much poorer and a dimmer place without each 

of you.” 

In presenting Yeager’s award, Reagan said he was “a hero in war and 

peace,” who on October 14, 1947, in a rocket plane named “Glamorous 

Glennis” after his wife, “became the first human being to travel faster than the 

speed of sound, and in doing so, showed to the world the real meaning of 

‘The Right Stuff.” After the ceremony, Yeager gave Glennis Yeager his medal. 

In an interview with a Washington Post reporter upon his arrival in Washington for the ceremony, Yeagar said, “I was just a lucky kid who caught the 

right ride. But then I was as naive as could be, living a cloistered life out at 

Muroc, where the flying was fun and the living was easy. 

101 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

’I. . . We didn’t know what the word ‘macho’ meant. We were jes’ a 

bunch of hell raisers . . . It wasn’t a case of the right stuff. just dumb luck. 

“When they refer to a pilot ‘having the right stuff,’ that doesn’t mean a rat’s 

ass to me or any other pilot. It‘s more meaningful to be in the right place at 

the right time.” (WPost, May 23/85, D1; May 24/85, B1) 

August 7: The Smithsonian Institution announced selection of Robert Gilruth 

and astronauts Kathleen Sullivan and Bruce McCandless II to receive the 

newly created National Air and Space Museum Trophy for their achievements 

in the fields of aerospace science and technology. The Smithsonian on October 4 would present the trophy, created by Washington, D.C., sculptor john 

Safer, at the Air and Space Museum. 

Sullivan, selected by NASA as an astronaut in 1978, was the first US. 

woman to walk in space in October 1984 on Space Shuttle flight 414. 

During that flight, Sullivan and fellow astronaut David Leestma tested an 

orbital refueling system for use on satellites and the proposed space station. 

McCandless, a 1966 astronaut selection, flew for the first time February 

1984 aboard Space Shuttle flight 41-8 and became the first person to fly in 

space the manned maneuvering unit that he helped develop. 

In 1936 Gilruth joined Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory where 

he specialized in structures, dynamic loads, and pilotless aircraft. In 1958 

NASA named him director of its space task group, the organization responsible for designing, developing, and testing the Mercury spacecraft. From 1961 

to 1971, Gilruth was director of the manned spacecraft center in Houston 

where he was responsible for the Mercury, Gemini, and many Apollo missions. (Smithsonian Institution release, Aug 7/85) 

November 77: The Circumnavigators Club in New York City would present 

Sally Ride, the first American woman astronaut, with its Order of Magellan, 

the Washington Post reported, which was presented to individuals who were 

dedicated to advancing peace and understanding in all parts of the world and 

who had circumnavigated the globe. Ride was only the 17th person to receive the award. 

Other recipients were Gen. Douglas MacArthur, former President Hoover, 

Neil Armstrong, Sen. Barry Goldwater, Lowell Thomas, and Thor Heyerdahl. 

(W Post, Nov 11/85, C3) 

November 75: NASA’s Inventions and Contributions Board awarded the Jet 

Propulsion Laboratory’s (IPL) Dr. Robert Nathan a plaque and a check for 

$20,000 for his work in planetary image processing, the JPL Uniwrse reported. Nathan received the award for his “combined technical contributions 

to planetary and biomedical image processing and scientific data analysis 

techniques.” Nathan invented digital image processing, a technique in 

102 
Awards 

which computers remove noise, correct distortions, and enhance different 

images such as planetary objects or biomedical images. 

Nathan joined JPL in 1959 to manage scientific data analysis for the up 

coming Ranger moon missions. The Ranger spacecraft used the best available 

cameras, but they were subject to distortion and noise contamination. Nathan devised techniques to eliminate extraneous patterns from the images. 

His processes and the creation of the image processing laboratory (IPL) established JPL as an important center for planetary image processing. 

In 1969 Nathan launched JPL into biomedical imaging with a $2 million 

grant from the National Institutes of Health, which later led to formation of 

the JPL biomedical image analysis facility. 

In 1976 Nathan developed a system at the IPL to handle large amounts of 

data by means of a large array filter using very-large scale integration (VLSI) 

system silicon chip technology. The microchip reduced computer time by a 

factor of 100. 

He was currently working on another microchip design that would perform 

highquality geometric image manipulations and filter chips that would perform pattern recognition functions. UPL Uniwse, Nov 15/85, 1) 

During November: NASA announced that its Lewis Research Center (LeRC) 

received four of Research & Dewlopment magazine’s IR-100 awards to 

honor the 100 most significant new products developed during the past year. 

A panel of technical judges selected the winners from more than 1,000 

entries. The award-winning products were servomechanism for propellerpitch change, transmit module, communications traffic processor, and rotary 

power-transfer device, all of which LeRC and private firms under contracts to 

the center developed jointly. 

LeRC researchers Stuart Loewenthal and Bruce Steinetz with General Electric engineers developed the servomechanism for propeller-pitch change, 

which could accurately control the propeller blade angle of large (10,000 

kw) turboprop aircraft propellers over the complete spectrum of flight operating conditions. With certain modifications, the product should be adaptable 

for applications as aircraft wing pivot mechanisms, tank turret aiming actuators, and other heavy mechanisms, requiring very accurate pointing and 

tracking control. 

The transmit module, developed by LeRC researchers Thomas Kascak, 

Godfrey Anzic, and Denis Connolly along with Rockwell Internatl. engineers, provided rf signal amplification and phase shifting at a frequency of 20 

gigahertz. The device was of monolithic design in which all module functions were contained on a single 6.4 by 4.8 millimeter semiconductor chip 

with the smallest circuit feature about 40-millionth of an inch. This develop 

ment made possible the production of weight- and cost-effective phased array 

antenna systems for future communications satellite systems. 

103 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

LeRC engineer Russel jirberg along with electronics engineers from Motorola Corp. developed a communications traffic processor for the next generation of communications satellites. The system provided the capacity and 

routing flexibility needed to handle the nation's growing demands for telephone and computer message traffic. When used aboard satellites having 

multiple narrow beam antennas, the device enabled more than 60,000 individual voice messages, video pictures, and computer data to be routed directly to users throughout the U.S. equipped with low-cost ground terminals. 

LeRC engineer David Renz in cooperation with Sperry Flight Systems engineers developed a rotary power-transfer device that transferred electrical 

power through a rotating joint. It had a low loss space-type design capable of 

transferring high power (hundreds of kilowatts), AC or DC, to frequencies 

such as 20 kilohertz. One of its outstanding features was loss of only 22 watts 

per circuit while transferring 100 kilowatts. Renz and his colleagues said the 

roll-ring assembly device had the potential to be one of the major components of the proposed space station and other spacecraft where large 

amounts of power are required. (NASA Activities, Nov 85, 10) 

December 72: President Reagan, at a White House ceremony, presented 

Distinguished Executive Awards worth $20,000 each to 32 career civil servants for their professional accomplishments, including in many cases, their 

plans and programs that saved millions of dollars, USA Today reported. 

Among the recipients were Samuel Keller, NASA's deputy associate administrator for space science and applications; and Andrew Stofan, director of 

NASA's Lewis Research Center. (USA Tiay, Dec 13/85, 9; LeRC Release 85- 

84) 

104 
COLOMBIA 

April 77: Colombia lodged a protest with the US. over placement of a private 

US. satellite in geostationary orbit over that country, FBIS, Bogota Emisoras 

CARACOL Network in Spanish reported, space that Colombia claimed as its 

own. Colombia’s Foreign Minister August0 Ramirez Ocampo said the satellite was placed there secretly, since the firm owning it had not presented a 

request to the interested nation in accordance with international legal procedures. 

Colombia’s United Nations Ambassador Ernest0 Rodriguez Medina denounced the situation before the U.N.’s Legal Subcommittee for Outer 

Space, saying his country planned to place its Satcol satellite in that same 

position in orbit. (FBIS, Bogota Emisoras CARACOL Network in Spanish, Apr 

11/85) 

105 

COMSAT 

February 7: Comsat Corp. announced unaudited yearend results showing a 

$29 million decrease in income from continuing operations in 1984 compared to 1983 income, the Washington Post reported. Comsat reported consolidated 1984 operating revenue of about $442 million, with consolidated 

net income of about $51 million and income from continuing operations of 

about $45 million. 

The company attributed $13 million of the decline to a write-off associated 

with Satellite Television Corp., the direct satellite-to-home TV company, and 

to the write-down of inventory from Comsat's equipment manufacturing 

business. 

Comsat officials said they would release final figures and per share earnings later in the month (W Post, Feb 1/85, F5) 

P_RECEDMG PAGE BLANK NOT FlLMED 

107 

CONFERENCES 

january 70: The Jet Propulsion Laboratory UPL) hosted January 10-11 150 

cometary scientists from around the world at a meeting of the Internatl. 

Halley Watch (IHW), for which JPL was the western hemisphere lead center 

and University of Erlangen-Nurnberg, W. Germany, the eastern hemisphere 

lead center, the JPL Universe reported. Lead center representatives at the 

meeting had joined IHW discipline specialists in such fields as astronomy, 

photometry and polarimetry, radio science, and spectroscopy; representatives of European, Japanese, and Soviet spacecraft missions to Halley; and 

IHW steering group members. The IHW organized a group of ground-based 

professional and amateur Halley watchers worldwide to coordinate their 

observations with those of airborne, earth-orbital, and spacecraft-flyby observations. Nine hundred professional astronomers from 50 countries and some 

300 amateur astronomers had signed on as members of the IHW. 

JPL expected the IHW meeting would be the last before perihelion, Halley’s closest approach to the sun on February 9 at 53.1 million miles. Since its 

1948 inbound leg of its 74-year orbit around the sun, Halley would make its 

closest approaches to earth on November 27 at 57.6 million miles and the 

following April 11 at 39 million miles. 

Astronomers had already observed that Halley‘s coma (the bright halo of 

dust and gas surrounding the nucleus) had begun developing and questioned 

why the comet exhibited this feature at such a great distance from the sun. 

Early observations had also unexpected I y revealed the comet’s brightness 

was fluctuating. 

Amateur observers with small telescopes would be able to see Halley by 

fall 1985; naked-eye viewing would be possible by March or April 1986. 

Halley would appear again in 2061. UPL Universe, Jan 25/85, 1) 

April 23: “Space and Society-Progress and Promise” was the theme of the 

twenty-second Space Congress, a nonprofit technical symposium sponsored 

by the Canaveral Council of Technical Societies, April 23-26 in Cocoa 

Beach, Florida, Spaceport News reported. Speakers discussed new space 

initiatives, including operation and robotics in space, advanced missions and 

transportation, Space Station plans and development, and private sector investment and participation in space activities. Lt. Gen. James Abrahamson, 

director of the Strategic Defense Office, would speak about the Strategic 

Defense Initiative (SDI). 

The traditional “Meet the Astronauts” session would be open to the public, 

as would be a one-man play entitled Leviathan 99 by Ray Bradbury, a noted 

science fiction writer. (Spaceport News, Apr 12/86, 8) 

PRECEDlNG PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 

109 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

October 15: Navy Secretary John Lehman said that intercepting U.S. Navy 

aircraft ordered the Egyptian Boeing 737 Airliner, which Palestinians hijacked and ordered to be flown from Egypt, to land at Sigonella Air Base in 

Sicily “or else,” Defense Daily reported. Lehman said one of two Grumman 

E-2C Hawkey airborne control aircraft, which joined six Grumman F-14 

Tomcats and four tankers in the intercept mission, issued the command. 

Lehman said four of the F-14s flew a close intercept formation on the 737 

to the landing in Sicily; the E-2Cs from the USS Saratoga had loitered overhead until the airliner took off from Egypt with the hijackers. 

There “was no deal,” Lehman said, and no help from any other country. He 

noted the operation demonstrated the Navy’s readiness, which “doesn’t come 

cheap.” (D/D, Oct 15/85, 225) 

Antisatellite System 

lanuary 16: The U.S. Air Force couldn’t decide whether the next test of the 

miniature homing vehicle antisatellite (ASAT) system should be against a 

target in space, Aerospace Daily reported. The Air Force was evaluating data 

from its November 13 ASAT test, in which the miniature homing vehicle 

MHV infrared sensor tracked a star, but had said that its next ASAT test would 

be flown against an instrumented target vehicle. Congressional limitations 

barred such a test until March 1 and until President Reagan had certified to 

Congress that the test was needed and wouldn’t undercut the potential for 

negotiations with the USSR. 

The previous day the magazine had discussed a House Republican research report recommending raising the limit of three U.S. ASAT tests against 

objects in space during that fiscal year. (ND, Jan 16/85, 84; Jan 15/85, 73) 

May 24: The U.S. Senate voted today, 74 to 9, to approve a proposal by Sen. 

John Warner (R-Va.) to allow three final-stage antisatellite tests next year as 

long as President Reagan told Congress the test would not disrupt negotiations aimed at banning antisatellite weapons, the Washington Post reported. 

The Senate previously rejected, 51 to 35, a testing ban proposed by Sen. John 

Kerry (D-Mass.). 

The U.S. antisatellite (ASAT) weapon was a small warhead atop a rocket 

carried by an F-15 jet to the edge of space, where it was released to pursue its 

target. Although the U.S. had tested the weapon in stages, the U.S. had not 

fired the weapon against a target in space. The Pentagon had scheduled that 

final round of testing to begin within several months. 

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FiLMED 111 

jNTENTIONAUY RUNN 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

During the Geneva negotiations on weapons reductions, the USSR sought 

a halt to ASAT tests, while the Reagan Administration said it was open to such 

a proposal but had refused to halt ASAT testing as a condition to talks. 

In 1984 Congress banned tests of the U.S. system in hopes the pause might 

help negotiations, which had not then started. 

The Washington Post earlier had reported that electronic problems would 

raise the cost of the antisatellite system and stretched out its testing program. 

The Air Force planned a test, originally scheduled for fall 1984, for late July in 

which the target would be two metallic balloons attached to an orbiting 

satellite. 

However, the Air Force was cautious about the first test against a target in 

space, fearing that a well-publicized failure would hurt the space defense 

program. Sources told the Postthat it might be impossible for the Air Force to 

carry out a second test of the weapon against the balloon target in space 

during the current fiscal year. Originally the Air Force had planned for three 

tests in 1985. (W Post, May 25/85, A4; May 16/85, A27) 

july 3: The first test of a U.S. antisatellite weapon against a physical target in 

space was delayed indefinitely because technical difficulties forced postponement of the target launching, the Washington Post reported. The U.S. 

Air Force cancelled the launching from Wallops Island, Virginia, and sent the 

targets back to the manufacturer, Avco Systems, for repair. Until the cause of 

the problem was found, Air Force officials said they could not estimate when 

the test might be rescheduled. 

The NY Times reported john Pike, associate director of the Federation of 

American Scientists, as saying he was told by “usually reliable sources” that 

the technical problems centered on the radio that would signal the results of 

the target practice back to earth. 

The Air Force had conducted two of the test flights planned for the antisatellite weapon, but aimed at a point in space rather than a physical target. The 

Air Force had already for apparently technical reasons rescheduled several 

times in 1985 the latest test, in which the weapon would be fired at one of 

two six-footdiameter target balloons in orbit. 

The antisatellite weapon was a two-stage rocket with a 13-inch, heat-sensing homing vehicle in its nose. Launched from beneath an F15 fighter, the 

rocket would intercept and destroy its target on impact. 

The U.S. House the previous week approved an amendment to the military 

programs bill banning tests of antisatellite weapons against targets in space as 

long as the USSR refrained from similar tests. The Senate voted to permit the 

testing as long as President Reagan certified that he was trying to negotiate a 

treaty prohibiting antisatellite weapons. A House-Senate conference committee was scheduled to begin reconciling differences on the military bill the 

following week. (WPost, July 4/85, A4; NV July 4/85, A9) 

112 
Departmend of Defense 

August 20: President Reagan informed Congress that the U.S. planned shortly 

to conduct the first test of an antisatellite weapon (ASAT) against a target in 

space, which a spokesman said would provide an “incentive,’ to the USSR to 

negotiate limits on such weapons, the Washington Post reported. Reagan 

promised the US. was bargaining in good faith with the Soviets to limit 

ASATs, although the White House repeated the administration’s opposition to 

a Soviet proposal for a moratorium on ASAT development and testing. 

Officials said they expected the test of an ASAT fired from an F-15 at an 

obsolete U.S. satellite to take place in September or early October. Technical 

problems with both the antisatellite weapon, called the miniature homing 

vehicle, and the intended target, an instrumented balloon to be inflated in 

space, delayed the first test. Since the original target was still experiencing 

problems, the test would use an obsolete satellite. 

That same day Presidential spokesman Larry Speakes read to reporters a 

lengthy statement criticizing Soviet advances in antisatellite weapons and 

technology and said this provided justification for the first US. test against a 

target in space. Speakes added that a moratorium on antisatellite weapons 

tests would “perpetuate” a Soviet “monopoly” on antisatellite systems. ( W 

Post, Aug 21185, All 

September 77: Kenneth Adelman, director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, told a U.S. House foreign affairs subcommittee that the U.S. 

should not change its military plans, such as delaying a test of its new 

antisatellite weapon, to assist in negotiating an arms control agreement, the 

Washington Post reported. Adelman argued that testing “would not impair‘, 

negotiations and “can constitute an incentive to the Soviet Union to reach 

agreements on a wide range of issues.” 

Although the Air Force had set September 13 as its first test of the antisatellite weapon against a target in space, congressional sources said the Reagan 

Administration might step up its test plan because of the negotiations or the 

November summit meeting. As of mid-July, the Air Force had no plans to test 

the weapon in September, because it had returned both the weapon and its 

instrumented target to their manufacturer for repairs expected to take through 

October. Thus when House-Senate conferees met in July to iron out differences on the 1987 defense spending bill, the Pentagon agreed to a provision 

that limited the Air Force to three tests against a target in space through the 

end of FY 86. “They said they would not have a test before the new fiscal year 

began in October,” one conferee recalled. 

Pentagon sources said Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and President 

Reagan agreed in early August to test the weapon against an old U.S. satellite 

“to show resolve.” 

Critics of the weapon, including four members of Congress, had filed suit 

in U.S. District Court in Washington seeking to block the test, arguing that 

Reagan had not met a congressional requirement that he certify he was 

113 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

negotiating ”in good faith to get an agreement with the Soviets limiting such 

weapons. Oral arguments in the case were set for September 12. 

Rep. George Brown Jr. (D-Calif.), one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, told the 

subcommittee the presidential certification was “less than candid“ and “circumvented the intent and will of the Congress.” 

Brown also criticized the weapon, which was two years behind schedule, 

saying that the Pentagon talked about “how vital to the national security the 

system is, right up to the day they cancel it.“ (W Post, Sept 12/85, A261 

September 73: An air-launched antisatellite missile (ASAT) hit its target in the 

Air Force’s first ASAT test against a target in space, the Air Force Systems 

Command Newsreview reported. An F-15 from Edwards Air Force Base 

launched the two-stage ASAT missile 35,000 to 40,000 feet above the Western Test Range at Vandenberg Air Force Base, then two boosters carried the 

ASAT into space. When the ASAT’s infrared sensors locked on to the target, 

which was about 350 miles over the Pacific, small rocket motors guided the 

weapon to its kill. 

The Air Force in 1979 launched the ASAT’s target, an Air Force satellite 

known as P78-1, which gathered scientific data on the space environment 

but which had outlived its usefulness. 

In 1984 F-15s launched two Iive-fire tests but not at targets. The first was an 

ASAT launch to a point in space; the second tested the ASAT sensor’s ability to 

home in on a star‘s infrared emissions. 

Air Force plans called for nine more target tests against specially instrumented balloons and satellites that had completed their missions. 

The Washington Post later reported that, according to Robert MacQueen, 

director of the high-altitude observatory at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, the Solwind satellite destroyed in the test was 

providing “very useful data” on solar activity until the moment it was hit. 

MacQueen said he was surprised and upset at seeing a fruitful experiment 

being used as a military target and said it was “deplorable” that the Pentagon 

“had taken a scientifically useful thing and sacrificed it in this way.” 

The satellite carried seven experiments for the Naval Research Laboratory 

(NRL) and other government agencies. One NRL experiment used a coronagraph that sent to earth during each of the satellite’s orbits, or roughly 15 

times a day, images of activity on the sun’s surface. 

Several months previously, NRL scientists had to draft what one source said 

“they thought was a routine paper to justify continued operation of their 

coronagraph.” Although the scientists acknowledged problems with the 

spacecraft system, the source said, they wrote that it should continue. 

NRL Scientists were told in July that ”the satellite would be turned off 

sometime after August 1, but they weren’t told how,” the source said. The 

Washington Post reported on September 6 that Solwind was the likely target 

114 
Department of Defense 

for the ASAT test because the original target, an instrumented balloon, was 

plagued with technical problems. 

A Pentagon spokesman said the satellite was intended to operate for three 

years at most and that recent data from the satellite had “marginal value.” 

The Washington Post reported that another Defense Department official 

said the Solwind research satellite was originally scheduled as a target in the 

weapon’s seventh test, which probably would have come in 1987. The satellite’s solar research program was expected to be ending by then, scientists 

associated with the program said. 

Although Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger described the satellite 

as “burned out,” an Air Force spokesman said the fact that the satellite was 

still sending signals back to earth played a key role in its selection as a target. 

“We had to have an active telemetry system to verify it had been hit,” the 

spokesman said. ‘A dead satellite would not have given us that.” (AFSC 

Newsreview, Sept 27/85, 1; W Post, Sept 20185, Al, Sept 27/85, A9) 

December 27: Reps. Les AuCoin (D-Ore.) and Norman Dicks (D-Wash.) sent 

a letter to Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger warning that “Congress 

would not excuse any attempt by the Department of Defense to circumvent” 

a congressional ban on antisatellite weapon testing, the Washington Post 

reported. The warning came after the Post reported that a DOD official 

discussed plans to continue development of a $4 billion U.S. antisatellite 

weapon despite a week-old law that banned tests against an object in space 

as long as the Soviets did not test such a system. 

The DOD official said a possibility under study was to fire a test weapon 

against “a point in space“ rather than at two targets put into orbit December 

12 [see U.S. Air Force/NASA and DOD, Dec. 121. The Air Force ”won’t do 

anything in direct violation” of the congressional language attached to an 

omnibus spending bill signed into law by President Reagan, but “we will find 

a way to go ahead,“ the DOD official had said. 

Although the congressional action stopped testing, it did not halt the overall antisatellite program, for which Congress increased by $15 million a 

Pentagon request for $150 million in FY 86 to develop the system. The 

increase, a congressional aide said, was to show the Soviet Union that the 

US. program would be available for testing if Moscow broke its moratorium. 

The spending bill also had a special $5 million item for the Air Force “to 

carry out a research program to develop new and improved verification techniques to monitor compliance with any antisatellite weapon agreement that 

may be entered into by the U.S and the Soviet Union.” 

Rep. Les Aspin (D-Wis.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said he hoped to bring arms-control supporters in the House together to 

discuss antisatellite weapons. The long-term goal of arms control, he said, 

was “to promote stability.” In the antisatellite area, he added, that meant 

115 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

finding a way to make secure the superpowers’ high-altitude satellites that 

monitored nuclear forces and provided early warning of an attack. (W Post, 

Dec 28/85, A5, Dec 25/85, All 

Budget 

March 29: A defense budget frozen to the inflation level could kill the Air 

ForcdMcDonnelI Douglas C-17 transport program, for which Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger had approved full-scale development in FY 86, De 

fense Daily reported. In a markup by the Senate Armed Services sea power 

and force projection subcommittee, funds would be included for the C-17 in 

the 3% and 4% real growth version of the budget. 

The subcommittee also cut the budget request for the Lockheed C-5BI 

which would have to fill the gap if the C-17 was terminated. Weinberger had 

said earlier that the C-5B would be one of over 170 aircraft to be deleted if 

there were a budget freeze, but he had not mentioned the C-17 in his list of 

threatened programs. 

Weinberger had previously approved a request of $453.68 million for the 

C-17 in FY 86 and $624.8 billion for FY 87. (D/D, Mar 29/85, 161) 

/u/y 7: Rep. Samuel Stratton (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Armed Services 

Committee’s procurement subcommittee, said a new bomber force study, 

done by the Defense Department in response to a U.S. House request, could 

lead to changes in the planned mix of 100 B-1B bombers and something 

over 100 Advanced Technology Bombers (ATBs-Stealth), Defense Daily reported. The new study was intended to reevaluate and update the conclusions of a 1981 study. 

Stratton pointed out that major changes in the strategic environment demanded that the U.S. House take a new look at the air-breathing leg of the 

strategic triad to determine if those requirements had changed. He emphasized that the subcommittee did not have a prejudged position on the 

bomber mix question and that the group did not want a rehash of positions 

taken years before when circumstances were significantly different. 

When asked by Rep. Beverly Byron (R-Md.) if the study could change the 

mix of the bomber force, Stratton responded, “I think that is entirely possible. 

If the study group finds that a different ’mix‘ is required, they should clearly 

state the differences and provide justification for those changes. This study 

could call for more or fewer of either bomber or for a high aggregate number 

of both . . . but there must be full debate on the proposed bomber force, 

because obviously a good deal of money would have to be spent if we are 

going to continue both those lines into the future.” (D/D, July 2/85, 9) 

116 
Department of Defense 

November 7: The Senate Appropriations Committee cut the Air Force FY 86 

request for development of the advanced tactical fighter (ATF) by $103 million to $140 million and recommended that a unit cost cap be put on the 

program, Defense Daily reported. The House Appropriations Committee 

earlier approved $170 million for ATF. 

Acting on the recommendation of its defense subcommittee, the Senate 

committee allocated $100 million for the joint advanced fighter engine development program, $13 million for avionics development, and $27 million 

for continuation of the competitive air vehicle demonstration and validation 

"for not less than three contractors." Although the committee endorsed the 

ATF development program "as a long-term counter to Soviet tactical air improvements:' it said it "is concerned that the current program does not provide sufficient time to absorb all of the technology" to be incorporated in the 

aircraft and that the program "entails unacceptable risks." And the committee 

pointed out that "these advanced technologies would be very expensive to 

obtain." 

The Air Force estimated R & D costs for the ATF at $11.8 billion in FY 85 

dollars and, after considering a figure up to $40 million, assumed the purchase price would be $35 million in FY 85 dollars. However, the committee 

pointed out that the Air Force "has not identified how it will reduce ATF costs 

without deleting technical features previously identified as aircraft requirements." Therefore, the committee directed the Air Force to submit an annual 

report on the future likely cost of ATF, beginning with the FY 87 budget. It 

recommended that "a 20% limit be placed on the ATF program unit flyaway 

costs" above F-15 costs and that this limit be made the baseline of the ATF 

development program. 

The ATF would include sustained supersonic dash, internal weapons carriage, blended aerodynamic design including low observable (stealth) technology, and higher thrust (32,000 Ib.) engines. It would also have short 

takeoff and landing (STOL) capabilities, high transonic and supersonic maneuverability, an expanded flight envelope, and improved survivability. (D/D, 

Nov 7/85, 33) 

Missiles 

january 23: The U.S. Air Force's Aeronautical Systems Division successfully 

flight-tested a low-cost, state-of-the-art autopilot on an unmanned research 

vehicle, the Air Force Systems Command's Newsreview reported. The division adapted commercially available microprocessor chips in the $50,000, 

in-house autopilot program to develop flight control-systems technology that 

would lead to cost reductions in tactical missiles. Researchers made five 

flight tests of the autopilot since October 1983 on an XBQM-106 unmanned 

117 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

vehicle during which the autopilot provided control augmentation, translating user inputs into vehicle actions. 

Current guidance and stabilization packages in missiles and other aerospace systems were costly because they used expensive data processing microchips that had excessive amounts of computational processing capability 

but no built-in control functions, thus requiring additional electronic interface components to perform the “control” function tasks. The microprocessor 

chip, in contrast, had sufficient built-in computational and control functions 

to permit 60% fewer interfacing components and should be appropriate to 

numerous tactical weapons systems, both surface and air-launched. 

The next step in the program would require replacing the wire-wrapped or 

brassboard model of the autopilot with a refined system on a printed circuit 

board, which would undergo at least 2 additional flights before the end of FY 

85. (AFSC Newsreview, Jan 23185, 8) 

March 12: A US. House Appropriations subcommittee approved a resolution 

to release $1.5 billion frozen in Congress the previous year for an additional 

21 MX missiles, the Washington Post reported. The vote, expected in the 

defense subcommittee that had supported the MX in the past, was only the 

first in a series of votes required before funds could be released. But missile 

opponents acknowledged that the vote was indicative of the uphill battle 

they faced in trying to defeat the MX in the midst of renewed arms control 

talks with the Soviets. 

The Reagan Administration had lobbied hard for the previous two weeks to 

win release of the funds, contending that continued funding of the MX was 

crucial to the arms control talks that had opened in Geneva. 

MX missile supporters on the subcommittee argued that the administration 

should not be denied a weapon that could be a “bargaining chip” in the arms 

talks. On the other hand, opponents characterized the missile as “the glass 

jaw in our strategic forces” and “totally irrelevant” to the arms talks. 

The resolution would next come before the full committee, which had 

backed it in the past. Observers agreed the real fight over the missile would 

occur on the Senate and House floors. Under a complicated arrangement 

worked out the previous year, representatives of the Republicancontrolled 

Senate and the Democraticcontrolled House had agreed that the MX legislation would be sent to the floor of both chambers regardless of what action 

was taken at the committee level. (W Post, Mar 13/85, A4) 

May 13: General Electric pleaded guilty to 108 counts of making false claims 

to the government for work on the Minuteman Mark-12 reentry vehicle 

systems for January 1, 1980 to April 1983, during which time they had 

claimed more than $800,00 on nonreimbursable overrun labor costs by 

altering employees’ time cards, Defense Daily reported. 

118 
Department of Defense 

GE faced a maximum penalty of $1.04 million. Because there was not a 

plea agreement to halt indictment of officials within GE, the investigation 

would continue in order to find which GE managers were criminally responsible. 

A company spokesman said, “We changed our plea because of new information given to us and to the U.S. Attorney’s office and the attorney for a 

former employee. Four years of investigation by GE and various government 

agencies revealed errors in time card charging in 1980. From the beginning, 

we offered to reimburse the government for any incorrect charges. However, 

until now, GE was unable to conclude that any individual has engaged in 

criminal activity.” (DD, May 14/85, 73) 

June 28: In May an armament division F-16 from the US. Air Force’s 3246th 

Test Wing fired an advanced, medium range air-to-air missile (AMRAAM) 

over White Sands Missile Range in the first guided launch of its full-scale 

development program, the Air Force System Command’s (AFSC) Newsreview 

reported. Armament division officials said the successful flight verified 

AMRAAM‘s interface with the F-16‘s avionics system and the performance of 

its active radar guidance capabilities. 

AMRAAM is an all-weather, all-aspect radar missile designed to replace the 

AIM-7 radar missile. AMRAAM is smaller, lighter, and faster than AIM-7 and 

had an active radar seeker that would permit air crews to “launch and leave’’ 

or to execute simultaneous multipletarget attacks during a single intercept. 

Pilots could launch AMRAAM from beyond visual range, because it re 

ceived target information from the launch aircraft‘s avionics systems. After 

launch, the aircraft could pass target information to the missile, or the missile 

could use its own inertial reference unit and microcomputer to guide inertially toward the target. During the terminal phase, the missile’s active seeker 

would take over and guide the missile to the target. 

The Air Force and Navy had a contract with Hughes Aircraft Co. for fullscale development of AMRAAM, with Raytheon Co. designated as “follower” 

contractor to introduce competition during the production phase. 

The previous December an AMRAAM separationkontrol test vehicle flew 

a preprogrammed course to evaluate the missile‘s autopilot, control system, 

aerodynamic characteristics, and safe separation from the aircraft. 

The Air Force planned over the next three years more launches from several 

aircraft including the F-14, F-15, F-16, and F-18. Plans also called for combat aircraft of the United Kingdom and Federal Republic of Germany to carry 

AMRAAM. (AFSC Newsreview, June 28/85, 4) 

August 23: Under a 1985 memorandum of agreement, the Eglin Air Force 

Base’s armament division was leading a joint U.S., British, and Mst German 

project to determine how a non-nuclear, long-range standoff missile should 

119 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

be developed, the Air Force Systems Command Newsreview reported. General Dynamics and Boeing Aerospace Co., which had 15-month contracts to 

study the possibilities, was working with subcontractors from the other two 

countries. 

The countries could use the conventional, low-altitude subsonic missile, 

launched from air or ground, primarily against airfields. The immediate goal 

of the project was to design the system, develop a procurement program and 

schedule, and identify technological transfers among the three countries. 

The point of the agreement was to save money and eliminate duplication of 

effort in development of a needed weapon system. One country would build 

the system, but the others would support the effort. While the U.S. completed the procurement package, England provided most of the threat information needed to design the missile. West Germany was taking an active part 

in all project phases. (AFSC Newsreview, Aug 23/85, 3) 

NASA and Department of Defense 

September 77: The U.S. Air Force announced today that it had selected Air 

Force Undersecretary Edward “Pete” Aldridge to fly on the first Space Shuttle 

mission launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, the Arizona Daily Star 

reported. The Air Force said Aldridge and Air Force Maj. John Brett Watterson 

would serve as payload specialists with five astronauts named by NASA for 

the Defense Department’s mission set for launch March 20, 1986. 

Aldridge, 47, who had been Air Force undersecretary since 1981, said in a 

statement, “I‘m thrilled at the opportunity and thrilled at the prospects that I 

will be able to apply what I have learned to expanding U.S. efforts in space.” 

NASA and the U.S. Air Force were building the Vandenberg Space Shuttle 

launch facility primarily for military missions. Because the Space Shuttle 

could be launched from there directly south, it could go into a north-south 

orbit that covered the entire globe, passing over both poles and allowing 

Space Shuttle crews to observe Soviet military forces anywhere in the world. 

Space Shuttles launched from Kennedy Space Center could not go directly 

north or south because they would fly over inhabited areas during the initial 

minutes of flight, possibly endangering the population if something went 

wrong. Those Space Shuttles launched into east-west orbits did not fly any 

closer than about 2000 miles to the poles. (Ariz. Daily Stac Sept 12/85, A3) 

Procurement 

August 2: McDonnell Douglas Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Sanford McDonnelI in a letter to Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger explained a company policy that instituted “expanded, no-questions-asked” 

120 
Department of Defense 

refund policies on the sale of spare parts and support equipment to the U.S., 

foreign countries, and commercial customers worldwide, Defense Daily reported. 

McDonnell said the government could return “any covered spare part or 

piece of support equipment if there is any dissatisfaction with its cost-no 

questions asked.” 

McDonnell described the refund policy as the most comprehensive in the 

aerospace industry and said that if the military felt it must retain an item in 

stock for operational readiness, “their complaint will be addressed without 

concern for a time limit.” 

Under the new policy, the military could, if dissatisfied with the price, 

return within six months of delivery new and unused parts or equipment 

built by McDonnell Douglas and purchased under prime contracts. The 

company said the policy applied to prices to the government up to $100,000; 

at that level the company furnished cost data in advance of establishing price. 

Earlier Weinberger directed establishment of a standard industry-wide refund policy based on voluntary refund policies of Boeing Co. and the General Electric Co. The BoeingKeneral Electric refund programs accepted for 

credit the return of any spare parts or support equipment that the Pentagon 

considered to be unreasonably priced. (D/D, Aug 2/85, 1) 

Satellites 

February 18: Sources inside and outside the Reagan Administration said the 

Department of Defense (DOD) was developing for constant surveillance of 

all objects in deep space a new generation of navigation, communications, 

and spy satellites, which would orbit 22,000 miles high and be aided by a 

nearly completed network of ground stations, the Washington Post reported. 

DOD would harden the new satellites against radiation and laser attacks and 

give them some small jet engines for maneuvering away from attack. DOD 

was also determining if the satellites could be armed to defend themselves. 

DOD was completing Spacetrack, a worldwide U.S. network of five spacewatching facilities, that would provide adequate time to take defensive 

actions if the USSR launched weapons at U.S. deepspace satellites. DOD’s 

FY 86 budget reportedly would contain $20 million to complete a fully 

operational Spacetrack sensor system by 1988. 

The Soviets had had for 10 years a rudimentary weapon that could knock 

down low-level U.S. satellites. The Pentagon was beginning tests on its own 

antisatellite weapon, which would knock down low-level Soviet satellites as 

they passed over the U.S. (W Post, Feb 18/85, Al) 

April 26: The Department of Defense (DOD) placed a satellite on the Space 

Shuttle Discovery [see STS/Military Applications, Jan. 241, which put it in a 

121 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

radically different orbit from many spy satellites, the NY Times reported. 

According to figures made public by the Air Force, DOD put the satellite in a 

highly elliptical orbit at a low angle above the equator; the majority of U.S. 

spy satellites were in roughly circular orbits that passed across polar regions 

so that satellites would spend as much time as possible over the USSR. The 

satellite’s, whose United Nations designation was 1985-108, highest altitude 

was 34,670 km (21,543 miles); its low point was 341 km (212 miles). This 

elliptical path was inclined 28.4’ to the equator, and the satellite took 10 

hours to complete one revolution. In addition to its elliptical orbits, the 

satellite could maneuver from its initial orbit into another, perhaps more 

usual, orbit. 

By international treaty, DOD was required to release to the United Nations 

a technical description of all its satellites’ initial orbits. This recording process, which passed through the State Department and included filing the 

information with the Library of Congress, often took several months after an 

object was launched. The DOD released the data in early April to the State 

Department; the NY Times then requested and received the information. 

(NYJ Apr 26/85, A191 

lune 11: The Rome Air Development Center planned to award three contracts 

for work in support of the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s 

(DARPA) proposal to develop a multiple satellite system (MSS) consisting of 

several hundred low-cost, low-o rbi t i ng com m u n i cat i ons satel I i tes i n several 

orbits, Defense Daily reported. 

The satellites, expected to cost about $1 million each, would comprise a 

highly survivable, high-bandwidth global communications system through 

the combination of high bandwidth packet switches and burst radios with 

low-cost proliferated, low-orbiting satellites. Each satellite would carry a lowcost burst radio capable of instantaneous data rates on the order of 100 Mbps, 

along with digital controllers to do the packet switching and a suitable 

antenna system capable of both omnidirectional and directive beams. 

The contracts would be for study of burst radio development, low-cost 

antenna design, and low-cost satellite integration. (D/D, June 11/85, 229) 

lune 28: A 8-52 equipped with the Navstar global positioning system (GPS) 

flew a mission over the North Pole to prove the space-based radio navigation 

system’s ability to navigate a polar mission, the Air Force System Command’s 

(AFSC) Newsreview reported. The mission marked first time a preproduction 

Navstar CPS was used on a polar mission. The flight also tested the system’s 

high-latitude navigation and compatibility with the aircraft’s inertial navigation system (INS). 

Navstar GPS, when completed in the late 1980s, would use 18 GPS satellites in six orbital planes to give worldwide, three-dimensional position and 

122 
Department of Defense 

velocity information to U.S. and allied land, sea, and air forces. To determine 

the position of an aircraft such as the 8-52, an onboard receiver would pick 

up signals from at least four satellites and measure the time it took each 

signal to travel from the satellite. 

The Navstar GPS on the B-52 aligned the inertial navigation system, giving 

the crew constant navigation during the 13-hour mission despite the CPS 

being available only three hours. The GPS and INS kept track of the aircraft‘s 

position at all times, even when crossing lines of longitude faster than the 

onboard screen could update them. 

Although testing of the Navstar GPS using the 8-52 was almost complete, 

production integration was just beginning. The production phase of Navstar 

GPS required bringing the three segments-space, user, and control-to full 

operational capability. The Air Force expected two-dimensional capability in 

1987, three-dimensional capability in 1988. (AFSC Newsreview, June 28/85, 

7) 

August 28: A Titan 34-D booster carrying a classified payload, possibly a 

reconnaissance satellite, exploded August 28 minutes after launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base, the NY Times reported. Because of the classified 

payload, the Air Force revealed little information about the launch. Booster 

rockets typically carried an internal destruct package that ground controllers 

could activate in the event of a malfunction. 

The explosion and subsequent crash of the booster started a 20-acre brush 

fire near the launch pad. An Air Force spokesman said it took firefighters 

more than five hours to extinguish the blaze. 

The Air Force was conducting an investigation to determine the cause of 

the booster failure. (NYT; Aug 31/85, A14) 

September 73: New car buyers in 1988 might find a Navstar Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver among their list of options, the Air Force Systems 

Command Newsreview reported. 

”It would essentially be a small TV screen that shows your position on a 

map,” said 1st Lt. John Schoenewolf, GPS cargo manager for the Eastern 

Space and Missile Center. A small cursor, or mobile electronic dot, would 

pinpoint a car’s location to within 300 miles, he added, and map cassettes 

could be purchased separately. 

Before the satellite electronic car map became a reality, along with other 

GPS applications both military and civilian, the Air Force between 1986 and 

1988 would have to launch 28 satellites, the most ambitious launch rate 

attempted in space-launch history. 

“We plan to launch the satellites for the GPS system at a rate of one every 

seven weeks aboard the shuttle.” Schoenewolf said. “We will need a total of 

123 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

18 to start operating the system, and the target year is 1988 to begin operating.” 

The East Coast Navstar GPS launch facility opened in August at Cape 

Canaveral Air Force Station to help make possible the accelerated launch 

rate. At the facility’s ribbon cutting ceremony, Maj. Gen. Donald Henderson 

said the facility and GPS itself “will revolutionize the way we perform precision navigation.” 

He noted the satellite system would be the largest constellation ever established and would have an influence on everything that floats, drives, flies, or 

submerges. (AFSC Newsreview, Sept 13/85, 5) 

October 11: The Department of Defense (DOD) decided to drop the fee it 

planned to charge civilian users of the Navstar Global Positioning System, the 

Air Force System Command Newsreview reported. William Taft IV, deputy 

secretary of defense, said deleting the user fee was necessary to enhance 

worldwide aviation safety and to avoid charge difficulties. He said the standard positioning service signal, which would be the lower of two accuracy 

levels, would be broadcast in the clear and available to any properly 

equipped user. However, Congress could reinstate user fees. 

The precise positioning service signal, the higher-accuracy signal, would 

be encrypted and made available initially to the U.S. and some allied military 

users. DOD would permit limited civil use if it was shown to be in the 

national interest, adequate security protection was provided, and comparable accuracy could not be obtained from another source, DOD officials said. 

DOD scheduled the Navstar system, a continuous worldwide satellitebased radio navigation system, for operation in the late 1980s. (AFSC 

Newsreview, Oct 11/85, 6) 

October 77: American University professor Jeffrey Richelson, testifying at the 

espionage trial of former Navy intelligence analyst Samuel Morison, said 

publication in 1984 of three secret KH-11 spy satellite photos in lane’s Defense Weekly told the Soviets nothing important that they did not already 

know, the Washington Post reported. Morison, who worked at the Naval 

Intelligence Support center in Suitland, Maryland, had official approval for 

his part-time job as U.S. editor of lane’s Fighting Ships and in 1984 sent the 

weekly the three photos in hopes of securing a full-time job there. He was 

also indicted on charges of keeping in his apartment two classified documents about a May 1984 fire at a Soviet naval ammunition depot. 

In his testimony, Richelson said the Soviets already had the KH-11 manual, 

which they had bought from a CIA officer, as well as earlier published satellite photos to show them how the system worked. 

Government witnesses earlier testified that the photos sent to Jane’s were 

potentially valuable to the Soviets in confirming the KH-11’s sophisticated 

124 
Department of Defense 

workings and in disclosing U.S. targeting interests. Similarly, a Navy intelligence expert testified that the details about the ammunition depot fires, also 

gleaned from satellite photos, were so precise that it would have been “very 

damaging” to the U.S. if the documents had been leaked. 

Richelson, however, said public sources had provided much detail about 

the KH-11 and other satellite programs, such as their flight paths over the 

Soviet Union, their altitude (75 to 155 miles), and the fact that a Titan 3D 

rocket launched them and another so-called Keyhole satellite, the KH-9. He 

said it was well known that the KH-11 sent its pictures back to Washington in 

a matter of seconds via another satellite and that it passed over targets quite 

frequently. 

Another defense witness, John Pike, associate director for space policy at 

the Federation of American Scientists, testified on what was publicly available about the KH-11, saying DOD would soon replace it with a longer-lasting 

KH-12. According to Pike, the KH-11 orbited the Soviet Union 11 times a 

day, had the capacity to take pictures continuously, and had a peripheral 

vision that could switch from extreme left to extreme right in an instant. 

The Washington Post six days later reported that Morison was found guilty 

of espionage and theft and could be sentenced to up to 10 years in prison and 

fined 310,000 on each of four counts. (WPost, Oct 12/85, A9, Oct 18/85, Al) 

Strategic Defense Initiative 

january 77: The Wall Streetjournal printed Robert Jastrow‘s comments on the 

Union of Concerned Scientists’s (UCS) Space Defense Initiative (SDI, or Star 

Wars) report, in which Jastrow noted that although the UCS had originally 

stated the program would require 2,400 satellites, they had corrected this to 

300, making the program not a seemingly impractical proposal but one 

readily affordable within fiscal limits on strategic forces. 

The UCS had also stated in its report that the neutral particle beam (to 

destroy Soviet missiles) would require orbiting a 40,000-ton accelerator, an 

impossible task. However, Jastrow noted the correct weight of the accelerator 

was 25 tons, quite reasonable for earth orbit, and the UCS had admitted the 

error. 

Also on the SDI program, Space World published the Council on Economic Priorities’s (CEP) recommendations, in which CEP suggested the De 

partment of Defense reduce emphasis on developing prototype systems until 

clarification of the technological uncertainties of deploying an effective overall space defense and Congress should significantly slow SDl’s growth rate 

until demonstration of the plan‘s technical feasibility. ( WSj, Jan 17/85, 2-E; 

Space World, Jan 85, 3) 

125 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

kbruary 20: Michael Burch, assistant secretary of defense for public affairs, 

said beginning in 1987, two years earlier than planned, two Space Shuttle 

flights a year would carry experiments for President Reagan‘s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) research program, with initial experiments testing the 

ability to detect, track, and aim against targets in space, the Washington Post 

reported. 

The tracking and targeting tests, developed in a Pentagon research program 

that antedated the Reagan Administration, would include a mounting device 

for attaching the telescopelike sight to the Space Shuttle and sensors that 

could pick up at a distance equal to the width of the U.S. the “signature of 

objects” such as the booster plume of a missile. 

The Department of Defense had canceled a Space Shuttle test of the system’s main telescope, though sources said it would continue land-based tests 

to develop a more capable telescope. Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger 

had said the previous year‘s congressional SDI program budget cuts would 

delay by one year an integrated-system demonstration. (W Post, Feb 20/85, 

A5) 

February 22: In testimony February 21 before the Senate Armed Services 

Committee, Lt. Gen. James Abramhamson said the High Frontier organization’s proposal for a system of non-nuclear space interceptors based on kinetic-kill vehicles was an attractive weapons concept that could be deployed 

earlier than others, but questioned whether it was the best system, the Washington Post reported. 

Retired Gen. Daniel Graham, High Frontier’s director and former director 

of the Defense Intelligence Agency, had proposed the satellitelaunched system of kinetic-kill vehicles three years previously as a possibly near-term, 

space-based missile defense. Abramharnson said the High Frontier system 

was simpler than other systems being considered and might be useful against 

the current generation of missiles, but said he feared such a system would 

only drive the Soviets to deployment of more missiles and development of 

countermeasures. He pointed out a truly effective space-based, missile-defense system had to be tied in with warhead tracking and command and 

control systems, which he said would be ready in a decade or less. 

Abrarnharnson went on to say it would be the early 1990s before the 

Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI)-research effort would be far enough along 

for a decision on which technologies to develop for a deployed system; an 

effective system would require a whole family of technologies. The Washington Post article quoted Abramhamson concluding that he “wouldn’t give a 

figged nickel” for calculations by groups such as the Union of Concerned 

Scientists that space defense is impossible. (W Post, Feb 22/85, 8A) 

March 78: Lt. Gen. James Abramhamson, in testimony before the Senate 

armed service strategic and theater nuclear forces subcommittee, said that 

126 
Department of Defense 

bringing down the cost of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program was a 

critical factor in proving that SDI was affordable, Defense Daily reported. The 

aim was to have a program that was “practicable and could be implemented,” 

he said. 

Abramhamson told the subcommittee that he believed the SDI program 

would develop a sufficient base of understanding by the early 1990s so that 

“we could be reasonably confident that decisions could be made [for moving] into the initial portions of a layered defense.” 

He pointed out that, although a limited defense system using conventional 

weapons might be possible by 1995, the emphasis on weapons was not the 

problem, but rather it was putting together the command and control by that 

time. However, he added that if a national decision were made to have a 

limited defense system by 1995, this would be possible. (D/D, Mar 18/85, 89) 

March 29: Robert Cooper, director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), in testimony before the U.S. House Armed Services 

Committee’s research and development subcommittee, said the U.S. had 

developed a secret graphite coating that could shield spacecraft, satellites, 

and missiles from Soviet laser beams, the Washington Times reported. The 

new material could be highly effective at a modest weight penalty, perhaps 

1Ooh of a spacecraft or missile’s payload, and could withstand as much as 100 

times more laser energy deposited on it than the typical aerospace material. 

The CIA estimated that the Soviets could have a space-based laser capable of 

shooting at U.S. satellites by 1988 and one capable of shooting at targets on 

the ground possibly by 1990. 

The development added a new dimension to the controversy over President 

Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative. Critics had argued that it would be 

difficult if not impossible for a space-based laser to destroy an ascending 

missile in its early and vulnerable boost phase before its multiple warheads 

had been launched. Development of the new class of lightweight shielding 

materials appeared to bolster this argument, increasing the possibility of 

missiles as well as spacecraft and satellites being made impervious to laser 

destruction. 

When questioned about the Soviets using such a material to thwart a U.S. 

space-based defense system, Cooper replied, “1 don’t know what implementation it has for a Soviet space or missile system. I’m not sure they have the 

technology, or even could achieve it in the near term.” (W Times, Mar 29/85, 

1 A) 

April23: Anthony Battista, the U.S. House Armed Services R&D subcommittee senior staff adviser, said on April 3 that a “reasonable” funding effort for 

the Reagan Administration’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program would 

be between $2.2 and $3 billion for FY 86, Defense Daily reported. Battista 

127 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

noted that the reductions in SDI should be taken from surveillance, acquisition, and targeting, which represented about $1.5 billion of the $3.7 billion 

requested by the administration and that “the one troublesome part about 

SDI, from a command and control point of view right now, is that there is not 

enough emphasis on the hardening of detectors to live in the thermo-nuclear 

environment. I’m worried about the ability of missiles to live in that environment.“ 

However, in testimony before the Senate defense appropriations subcommittee, Under Secretary of Defense Fred lkle said on April 23 that a reduction 

in the FY 86 SDI budget would be extremely harmful to the program and a 

poor policy decision. SDI “is not some optional experiment, to be continued 

or curtailed depending on short-term budgetary or arms control considerations:’ he said. “It is a vital long-term effort to strengthen our ability to 

prevent nuclear war. 

”. . . If we slow down the SDI in this early phase, we would not have the 

answers in the next decade that we need to chart our long-term strategy and 

arms control policy.” The Administration planned to spend $4.9 billion in FY 

87 and $16 billion in FY 88-89 on the program. (D/D, Apr 3/85, 185, 24/85, 

305) 

May4 France turned down President Reagan’s invitation to participate in the 

U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) project because of the subordinate role 

France would have to play and because it was at that time promoting its own 

French-led European advanced technology/space research project that included some key technologies related to strategic defense, Defense Daily 

reported. 

French President Francois Mitterrand told a news conference May 4 at the 

close of the Bonn economic summit that President Reagan used the term 

“subcontractors” in reference to Europe’s role in the SDI project, which confirmed his view that the US. would not treat France and other European 

countries as equal partners in SDI and that they would not get access to all 

research results. 

“The technology interests me,” Mitterrand said, “but the strategic project is 

interesting only for the future when man becomes a master of space.” He 

urged other European nations to join France in an independent advanced 

technology R&D program called “Eureka,” which would explore civilian uses 

of space and other advanced technologies including high-power lasers, op 

tics, microelectronics, and high-speed computers. Although these technologies would apply to a number of areas including strategic defense, the 

primary aim of Eureka would be to “explore space through advanced research in order to master new technologies,” Mitterrand said. He noted that 

Eureka was important for Europe because of the need to ”preserve their fund 

of intelligence, technology, and brains. All this has to be mobilized in a great 

project that is European.” 

128 
Department of Defense 

According to reports, Mitterrand told Reagan that he was concerned about 

actual deployment of SDI because it could alter the strategy of mutual assured destruction that had successfully prevented nuclear war. (France had its 

own small nuclear deterrent, but it was more vulnerable to ballistic missile 

defense than the large strategic forces of the U.S. and USSR.) 

France had agreed to support the European Space Agency's proposal to 

define a pressurized module called Columbus for the U.S. space station, if all 

parties could work out adequate arrangements. (D/D, May 7/85, 35) 

May 70: The Australian minister of defense, Mr. Beazley, confirmed that 

Australia would help test a new U.S. satellite system called "Teal Ruby" that 

was associated with the space defense system known as the Strategic Defense 

Initiative (SDI), FBIS, Melbourne Overseas Service in English reported. Mr. 

Beazley stressed, however, that Australia's involvement was not directly related to SDI and would end the following year. 

He said the U.S. would use Australian defense vessels and aircraft to test 

the satellite system using infrared rays and that the project had some benefits 

for Australia over the long term because of that country's surveillance problems. He pointed out that infrared sensing was a good way to maintain 

surveillance af countries with electronic warfare systems. 

However, the Australian Democrats's Spokesman, Senator Mason, condemned the decision, saying the research was an essential part of the SDI 

system and that the Australian government was guilty of hyprocrisy in agreeing to participate in the testing. (FBIS, Melbourne Overseas Service in English, May 10/85) 

May 23: The Pentagon's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) office said today 

that the Space Shuttle Discovery would participate in June in the first SDI 

experiment in orbit, carrying a mirror intended to intercept and reflect a laser 

beam fired from earth, the Washington Post reported. In some missile defense systems, a large orbiting mirror would receive a powerful beam from a 

ground-based laser and reflect it to destroy an enemy missile, but in the space 

shuttle experiment, the laser beam would be too weak to harm the spacecraft. A small mirror would reflect the beam back to the ground so engineers 

could verify their ability to keep the laser pointed at the orbiting mirror. 

The laser would travel from an Air Force Base on Maui, Hawaii, and 

bounce back by a special 8-in.diameter "retroreflector" that astronauts 

would place in one of the Space Shuttle's middeck side windows while the 

spacecraft was over the Pacific. 

An SDI spokesman said the laser had successfully tracked during earlier 

tests an airplane carrying the mirror at an altitude of 30,000 feet. The Space 

Shuttle flew in orbit at 100 miles and more. 

The test, called the high precision tracking experiment, was the first in a 

series that the SDI office had booked aboard the Space Shuttle. Beginning in 

129 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

1987, the Pentagon would fly two major SDI experiments each year. (W Post, 

May 24/85, A8) 

DuringMay: Brigadier General Robert Rankine, Jr., U.S. Air Force, writing in 

Aerospace about the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), said that, ”In the long 

term, we have confidence that SDI will be a crucial means by which both the 

U.S. and the Soviet Union can safely agree to very deep reductions and 

eventually even the elimination of ballistic missiles and the nuclear weapons 

they carry. This does not represent a shift from the basic deterrent strategy of 

the US., but represents a new means for enhancing deterrence. 

”. . . A ballistic missile defense capability has the potential of increasing 

deterrence and adding to stability, by increasing substantially the uncertainties in the success of nuclear attack by an enemy, thoroughly confounding his 

targeting strategy, thus significantly reducing or eliminating the utility of 

preemptive attack. The system need not be perfect to accomplish this objective, but most meet three important criteria: 

-effective against the systems and countermeasures that exist or could be 

deployed, 

-sufficiently survivable that it would not encourage an attack on the system itself . . . 

-effective at lower cost than any proliferation or countermeasure attempts 

to overcome it. 

“. . . Some of the opponents of the Strategic Defense Initiative,” Rankine 

said, “have argued that the research and technology program currently under 

way is inconsistent with the ABM treaty and conflicts with arms control in 

general. Quite to the contrary, the initiative it totally consistent with current 

U.S. ABM treaty obligations. The initiative contemplates only research and 

experimentation on a broad range of defense technologies to provide the 

basis for a decision in the future whether or not to develop systems which 

would provide an effective ballistic missile defense capability.” 

Rankine then described the technical scope of SDI and said the program 

was broken into five major program elements: surveillance, acquisition, 

tracking and kill, assessment; directed energy weapons; kinetic energy weap 

ons; systems analysis and battle management; and an assortment of other 

high-priority technologies that did not warrant separate program elements. 

Rankine concluded that the goal for SDI had not changed since the President’s March 1983 speech proposing the system, when he “challenged all of 

us in the scientific community to create a means for rendering ballistic 

missiles impotent and obsolete.” (Aerospace, Spring 85, 2) 

luly 14: The first in a series of laser experiments in the Strategic Defense 

Initiative (SDI) program was only partly successful because laser operators 

were unable to lock on to a fast, high-flying rocket target, the NY Times 

reported. A laser station on the island of Maui succeeded in focusing a laser 

130 
Department of Defense 

beam on the rocket but failed to bounce the beam off an eight-inch reflective 

shield attached to it, said unidentified sources. 

The Pentagon had announced it was preparing a new round of laser tests 

similar to one conducted in June when a low-power blue-green laser was 

reflected off the Space Shuttle Discovery. On July 16 the Pentagon issued a 

statement saying the first of five planned experiments was conducted in the 

early morning of July 14 and that “it was only partially successful due to 

technical difficulties not associated with the experiment.” 

Officials in the SDI office refused to elaborate beyond that saying the 

Navy’s Pacific Missile Range Facility launched a Terrier-Malemute rocket that 

traveled almost 450 miles into space and that the laser had been fired. (NYT 

July 16/85, C7) 

August 4: In a study important to the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) 

missile defense program, Space Shuttle crew aboard Challenger on mission 

51-F briefly fired the orbiter’s rocket engines while scientists in Australia 

attempted to analyze the effect on the ionosphere, the Washington Post 

reported . Challenger’s engines burned 600 Ib. of fuel as the spacecraft passed over 

an observatory in Tasmania where telescopes measured the effect of the 

rocket exhaust on the charged gas particles, called plasma, that made up the 

ionosphere. 

A second shorter rocket firing took place over observatories in Massachusetts. (W Post, Aug 5/85, A4) 

September 6: The Department of Defense announced that, a large highpowered chemical laser destroyed at a distance of six-tenths of a mile a large 

liquid-fuel booster stage from a Titan 2 rocket in an experiment for the 

Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program, the Arizona Republic reported. 

The experiment, conducted at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, was 

significant ”because this was the first full-scale test against an object this 

large,” said Mary Pshak, a spokeswoman for the SDI organization. “We had 

done a lot of subscale testing, but this particular experiment verified our 

earlier tests,” she noted. 

Pshak declined to discuss the amount of power used because the information was classified, but said the laser was a large working model of MIRACL 

(mid-infrared chemical laser), considered the largest weapon-grade device of 

its type developed in the U.S. However, the SDI research program also was 

focusing on other types of lasers, some of which were considered even more 

promising. (Ariz. Republic, Sept 14/85, A28) 

October 4: Department of Defense scientists the previous week sent concentrated laser beams adjusted for atmospheric distortion from an Air Force 

131 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

facility on Maui, Hawaii, to a retroreflector on a Terrier-Malemute sounding 

rocket launched from the Navy Pacific Missile Range Facility in Hawaii, the 

Los Angeles Times reported. The test demonstrated for the first time that the 

U.S. could fire such a beam through the atmosphere and prevent air molecules from distorting and weakening it. The test appeared to be a significant 

technical achievement because distortion, or “blooming,” of a laser as it 

passed through air could totally block the beam. 

To correct beam distortion, engineers developed a flexible mirror that, 

taking orders from computers, distorted the beam at the start of its journey to 

compensate, or correct, in advance the dispersing effects of the air molecules. 

The sounding rocket reached an altitude of over 350 nautical miles with a 

flight time of 10 minutes, Defense Daily reported. Return of telemetry data 

from the diagnostic array aboard the rocket confirmed test success. 

Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger announced the test during a speech 

at a Philadelphia World Affairs Council luncheon for what appeared to be the 

start of a Reagan Administration campaign to justify continuing its $26-billion 

Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) research effort in the face of intensified 

USSR protests over the program. (LA Times, Oct 4/85, A5; D/D, Oct 18/85, 

251) 

October 71: The U.S. Air Force Space Technology Center‘s Kirtland Contracting Center awarded Aerojet Electro Systems a $17-million contract and 

Hughes Aircraft a $21-million contract for work on the Strategic Defense 

Initiative (SDI) program, the Air Force Systems Command Newsreview reported. 

Under the contracts the companies would develop and build a space 

surveillance sensor called “the precursor above the horizon sensor,” which 

would look across space using several frequency bands in the long-wave 

infrared spectrum to track the trajectory of intercontinental ballistic missiles 

or space systems. (AFSC Newsreview, Oct 11/85, 3) 

Nowmber 18: Britain and the U.S. in the last week of October reached an 

outline agreement on British participation in the U.S.’s Strategic Defense 

initiative (SDI) program that did not guarantee Britain any specific share in 

SDI research, development, or production contract awards, but did provide 

assurances on technology transfer acceptable to Michael Heseltine, British 

Secretary of State for Defense, Aviation Week reported. However, Defense 

Daily later reported that Britain decided to delay signing its formal agreement 

of participation. 

The delay apparently stemmed from Britain’s political embarassment over 

loss of the United States Army’s Mobile subscriber equipment (MSE) program. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and Heseltine had intervened in the 

MSE competition, although reportedly unaware that the disparity in the bids 

132 
Department of Defense 

was beyond the ability of political influence to set right. Also, Britain's Department of Trade and Industry was said to be objecting to certain provisions 

of the agreement, including property rights to certain technologies developed during Britain's SDI participation. (AvWk, Nov 4/85, 26; D/D, Nov 18/ 

85, 81) 

December 6: Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and British Defense Minister Michael Heseltine signed a memorandum of understanding for Britain's 

participation in the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program, Defense 

Daily reported. The signing came one day after British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had told Parliament that the negotiations over British participation were not finished but that she hoped for a signed agreement before 

Christmas. 

Joining Heseltine at a press conference following the signing, Weinberger 

said it "emphasizes both the closeness of our alliance and the special nature 

of our relationship which is a very vital thing" to both countries. "Britain is 

the leader in many of these technologies and we want very much to have 

these capabilities placed at the benefit of the program," he said. 

Heseltine explained the signing of the agreement one day after Thatcher's 

statement to Parliament, saying both he and Weinberger had received communiques overnight from their teams in Washington permitting completion 

of the agreement. Heseltine said the agreement offered a "very significant 

opportunity for British industry and for British research capability to be associated with a major and exciting program at the frontiers of human capabilities in many of the technologies of tomorrow." (D/D,. Dec 9/85, 185) 

December 28: The Department of Energy's Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory supervised detonation of a hydrogen bomb buried in a boxcar 

sized canister 1,800 feet below the Nevada desert floor in a test of technology for President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), the Washington 

Post reported. An Energy Department official declined to discuss the test's 

purpose, but Defense Department and congressional officials said earlier that 

it was designed to test the concept of harnessing X-rays produced by a nuclear 

explosion into a laser cannon to destroy Soviet missiles. 

The nuclear explosive had a force of 20 to 150 kilotons, the Energy Department spokesman said, registering 5.6 on the Richter scale, according to an 

official at the National Earthquake Information Center in Boulder, Colorado. 

it measured 5.3 at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. 

The Energy Department postponed the test several times because of unfavorable winds and the Christmas holidays. Scientists routinely delayed underground nuclear tests in the Nevada desert when winds were blowing toward 

the south and west because of the possibility that in an accident a radioactive 

cloud might drift over a populated area. (W Post,. Dec 29/85, A5) 

133 

EUROPEAN SPACE AGENCY 

January 78: Ministers from Belgium, Denmark, France, W. Germany, Ireland, 

Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the U.K., Austria, Norway, and Canada would meet in Rome January 30 and 31 to consider proposed space projects and set the agenda for European Space Agency (ESA) 

through the remainder of the century, the JSC Roundup reported. Ministers 

would consider proposals ranging from development of a space station program, possibly in conjunction with the U.S., to eventual pursuit of manned 

spaceflight. 

ESA said it would propose a substantial increase in its activities, particularly 

scientific and technological programs; developments in earth observations, 

telecommunications, microgravity processing, and technology; and construction of a new version of Ariane 5. ESA’s efforts with Spacelab and Ariane 

and in a wide range of other activities such as the Giotto probe to intercept 

Halley’s Comet had required the new decisions. 

With Ariane 3 operational, ESA said it expected to introduce an upgraded 

version, Ariane 4, in March 1986, followed by the proposed Ariane 5, which 

would be capable of generating up to 220,000 Ib. of thrust, that could be 

used to launch European astronauts into orbit. The ministers had to decide 

whether to authorize development of the large cryogenic engine to power the 

launcher. USC Roundup, Jan 18/85, 1; ESA release Jan 17/85) 

February 4: Western European cabinet ministers in a two-day meeting in 

Rome agreed to participate in the 1992 U.S. launch of a permanently manned 

space station, the European Space Agency (ESA) announced. The ministers 

also increased the ESA budget and approved funding for Ariane 5, making 

clear their intent to pursue independent European space activities, but failed 

to decide on a French-sponsored plan for a small space shuttle (called Hermes). 

ESA would base its participation in the U.S. space station on an ItaloGerman project called Columbus, with an estimated $2-billion project cost. 

Although W. Germany, Britain, and Italy had made funding commitments, 

France had not announced its project share. 

The ministers’ decision ended controversy over European cooperation with 

the U.S., which had resulted from an earlier U.S./European cooperative effort 

that ended negatively when a $750 million investment in the 1973 Spacelab 

produced little significant research or technological spinoffs, the Washington 

Post reported. 

ESA also announced its annual expenditures would increase 70% to almost 

$1.3 billion by 1990. (ESA release Feb 4/85, Jan 31/85; W Post, Feb 1/85, 

A23) 

PRECEDING FAGE BiNM NOT FILMED 135 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Februa1y44:The European Space Agency (ESA) announced it would hand over 

on February 5 MARKS 8-2 to the International Maritime Satellite organization (INMARSAT) for commercial operation. The spacecraft, launched Ne 

vember 10 and operational since January 8, would complete INMARSAT’S 

first-generation satellite system, which would offer worldwide service covering three oceans: the Atlantic region with MARKS-A positioned at 26O W, 

the Indian Ocean with INTELSATMCSA at 63O E, and the Pacificocean with 

MARKS 8-2 at 176.5O E. 

In preparation for future communications satellite services, ESA in cooperation with INMARSAT was conducting experiments with MARKS B-2 to 

design economically operated equipment compact enough for installation in 

small whicles. (ESA release Feb 4/85) 

February 9: The European launcher Ariane 3 launched two satellites, Brazil’s 

Brasilsat 7 and the Arab Arabsat 7, FBIS AFP in Spanish reported. Frederick 

D’AIlest, French Center for Space Studies director general, noted Ariane had 

taken off on schedule, down to the exact hour planned a year previously. 

Ariane’s three sections functioned perfectly, and the 3rd one had reached 

satelliteejection speed at an altitude of 210 km; three minutes later Arabsat 7 

separated from the rocket, followed a half minute later by Brasilsat 7. The 

satellites would require several weeks to reach their geostationary orbits: 

Arabsat 7 over Zaire, Brasilsat 7 above central Brazil. (FBIS AFP in Spanish, 

Feb 9/85) 

May 7: The European Space Agency (EM) launched at 9:15 p.m. EST today 

from Kourou an Ariane rocket that successfully deployed two telecommunications satellites including a U.S.-built G-Star 7, the Washington Post reported. A breakdown in timing between the rocket and the EWs various 

earth-based satellite tracking stations delayed launch 79 minutes. 

ESA officials described the launch as “another success’’ in the agency’s 

competition with the U.S. Space Shuttle to capture the world market for 

satellite launches. The Ariane rocket was the 13th fired, including two 

aborted launches, since 1979. The previous launch February 9 also put two 

satellites into orbit. Officials said they had nearly 30 orders to launch commercial satellites, compared with about 60 orders for the Space Shuttle. 

The Ariane rocket deployed the G-Star 7 satellite, owned by the GTE 

Spacenet Corp., and the French Te/ecomdB 20 minutes after liftoff at about 

22,000 miles above the equator. (W Post, May 8/85, A261 

May 75: Roger Bonnet, director of the European Space Agency‘s (ESA) scientific programs, speaking today at the opening of a meeting with the USSR’s 

“lntercosmos” Council for International Cooperation, Soviet Academy of Sciences, said, “We are keenly interested in extending cooperation with the 

136 
European Space Agency 

Soviet Union in space exploration,” FBIS, TASS in English reported. “The first 

results of our joint work and experiments have given us reasons for making 

the most optimistic forecasts and opened up new opportunities for studying 

and using space for peaceful purposes.” 

The program for the threeday meeting included discussion of details of the 

Soviet “Vega” mission to study Venus and Halley’s Comet and review of 

preparations for a similar West European program called “Giotto,” which 

would use data from the Soviet probe. 

Attendees also heard reports on the Soviet “Phobos” project for the comprehensive study of Mars and its satellites and EWs plans to develop an 

orbital radio telescope. (FBIS, Tass in English, May 15/85) 

lune 72: The European Space Agency (ESA) announced that, as a result of 

decisions made January 30 and 31 at its council meeting in Rome, it had 

created an earth observation and microgravity directorate, a telecommunications directorate, and, due to the magnitude of ESA’s Columbus program, a 

directorate dedicated to that program. 

The ESA Council at its June 11 and 12 meeting made the following nominations to the new director posts: Philip Goldsmith, United Kingdom, director 

of earth observation and microgravity program; Giorgio Salvator, Italy, director of telecommunications; and Dr. Fredrik Engstrom, Sweden, director of the 

Columbus program. 

In addition, the council appointed Marius Le Fevre, France, to the post of 

director of EWs space research and technology establishment. (ESA Release, 

June 12/85) 

luly 1: The European Space Agency (ESA) announced that M. Bignier, ESA 

director of space transportation systems, and Ing. Heise, executive vice president and president of the Space Systems Group of MesserschmidVBoIkowBlohm (MBB)/Erno, signed a contract for the development of the European 

Retrievable Carrier, EURECA, a payload carrier intended for use on the U.S. 

Space Shuttle. MBB/Erno would serve as EURECA prime contractor with 

support from some 24 European industrial firms. The approximately $95 

million contract called for delivery of the EURECA flight unit to NASA by the 

end of 1987 for launch from the Space Shuttle in March 1988 and recovery, 

by the Space Shuttle, six months later. 

The first EURECA payload, developed by European national institutes and 

space agencies, would consist primarily of experiments in the microgravity 

sciences (life and material sciences) and a limited number of experiments in 

space science and technology. Work on the payload would proceed in parallel with the development of the carrier, and plans called for delivery of all 

payload elements to MBB/Erno by spring 1987 for integration onboard 

EURECA before shipment to the U.S. 

137 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The EURECA payload carrier incorporated the more attractive features of 

Spacelab and in addition provided for relatively long duration flights (up to 

eight months), higher power and mass capability for the payload, and lower 

costs compared with Spacelab and many conventional satellites because the 

system occupied only about 2.5 m of the Space Shuttle orbiter cargo bay. 

ESA also envisioned EURECA's eventual use in association with the proposed US. space station, with the EURECA operating either in a freeflying 

mode (co-orbiting with the space station or in polar orbit) or as a mantended, semipermanent payload carrier with modified docking facilities. 

(ESA release July 1/85) 

August 7: The European Space Agency (ESA) announced that following validation tests of the second Ariane launch site (ELA-2) in Kourou, French 

Guiana, it accepted the new facilities and made them available to the 

Arianespace company for international use. ELA-2 would provide an enhanced capability for launching the Ariane 2, 3, and 4 and make it possible 

to reduce the interval between launches to one month and carry out up to ten 

launches per year at lower operating costs. 

The new complex close to the current Ariane launch site had two separate 

zones, a launcher preparation zone and the launch zone, linked by a one-km 

rail line. This configuration made possible two simultaneous launch preparations and provided considerable operational flexibility. Arianespace could 

assemble one launcher in the preparation zone, while another, previously 

transported on a mobile table to the launch zone, underwent final checkout 

prior to launch. 

The French National Space Centre (CNES) was prime contractor for ELA-2 

construction, which took four years to complete. ELA-2 would become Europe's main launch complex; ELA-1 would serve as the backup. Arianespace 

scheduled the first launch from ELA-2 for December 1985, using an Ariane 3 

to launch Brasilsat 2 and G-STAR 2. (ESA release Aug 1/85) 

August 2: The European Space Agency announced that it had signed with the 

Commission of the European Communities an agreement to cooperate on 

the APOLLO project, which would provide, through the EUTELSAT 1 series of 

communications satellites developed by ESA and European industry, a highspeed digital information transfer system suitable for long data messages, 

particularly document facsimiles, transmitted from a small number of information providers (up to 10) to many widely dispersed users. 

The agreement provided for development as specified by ESA of prototype 

equipment by European industry and for the Commission with the assistance 

of ESA to provide overall coordination of APOLLO, including archives 

planned for the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 

in Luxembourg and for several other large document archives in Europe. 

138 
European Space Agency 

The commission estimated that APOLLO would help to provide a longterm infrastructure for a market expected to expand greatly over the next five 

years and to contribute to experience in the design, costing, and operation of 

small dish earth terminals and other equipment developed for APOLLO. 

APOLLO could also stimulate the creation of a market for European earth 

stations and associated equipment. 

Trial users transferring digital records, documents, and computer files 

would assess the system for high-speed and high-quality information. (ESA 

release Aug 2/85) 

September 12: Arianespace officials blew up the European Space Agency's 

(ESA) Ariane V15 rocket, which carried the third in the European Communications Satellites (ECS-3) series and the U.S. communications satellite Spacenet F3, less than ten minutes after liftoff when the rocket veered off course 

and began falling, threatening inhabited areas, the Washington Post reported. 

The failure was Ariane's third in 15 launches. French President Francois 

Mitterrand, on a stopover on his way to French Polynesia, watched the failed 

launching. 

Liftoff at the Kourou (French Guiana) launch site was on schedule at 8:26 

p.m. Reports said Ariane was on course during the first minutes of its ascent, 

but then it suddenly went off course and lost altitude because of a propulsion 

problem in the third-stage motor. 

Ariane's other failures were on May 23, 1980, on its second launch, and on 

May 9, 1982, on its fifth. (W Post, Sept 13/85, A12; ESA release Sept 2/85) 

October 24: The European Space Agency (ESA) announced today that during 

the 71st meeting October 23 and 24 of the Council of the European Space 

Agency it unanimously approved the accession of Austria and Noway to full 

membership status, bringing ESA membership to 13 countries. 

The agreement between ESA and the governments of Austria and Norway 

required governmental approval and parliamentary ratification in the two 

countries with the intention of giving them full membership status on January 

1, 1987. 

The decision followed a period of close cooperation between ESA and the 

two countries, both of which had been closely associated with many of ESA's 

activities over the previous 20 years including the Spacelab, Marecs, and 

ERS-1 programs. (ESA release Oct 24/85) 

December 70: ESA announced it signed three contracts with Arianespace, 

two for future launches-ECS-4 scheduled for the second quarter of 1986 

and Hipparcos scheduled for June 1988-and one for technical assistance for 

satellite launches on the first flight of Ariane 4. 

139 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

ECS-4 would replace ECS-3, lost as a result of the launch failure September 12 of Ariane V15. ECS-4 was in production at that time, and ESA accelerated its completion. Arianespace was providing the earliest possible launch 

slot in accordance with the relaunch conditions in the ECS-3 launch contract. 

Hipparcos would provide measurements of the positions, annual proper 

motions, and parallaxes of some 100,000 stars. From its position in geostationary orbit, the satellite systematically and repeatedly throughout its twoand-a-half-year lifetime would scan the whole sky, providing measurements 

that would serve as a reference system of unprecedented precision, important 

in studies of earth's motion, the solar system, and our galaxy, and forming a 

basis for future ground and space astrometry. 

Under the third contract, the first flight of Ariane 4, part of ESA's Ariane 4 

development program, would be carried out under ESA's responsibility. The 

launch, scheduled to take place during the third quarter of 1986, was designed to demonstrate the operational capability of Europe's most powerful 

launcher. ESA was supplying part of the payload, Meteosat P2, a refurbished 

spacecraft from the preoperational series, designed to bridge a possible gap 

between Meteosat 2 and the first of the operational meteorological spacecraft, MOP-1, scheduled for launch in late 1987. Additional payload elements would be Amsat Phase Ill-C, the second unit of the third generation of 

the amateur radio "Oscar" series, and a telecommunications satellite yet to 

be selected. (ESA release Dec 10/85) 

140 
February 4: Under pressure from the Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC) to define its requirements in the internationally authorized 1,544 to 

1,660.5 MHz-frequency band and to make allocations in this band for commercial mobile-user communications and surveillance systems, the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) indicated satellites might play a key role in air 

navigation, surveillance, and communications in its follow-on generation, 

air-traffic control system. Therefore the FCC was trying to protect the radio 

spectrum required for such services, Aviation Week reported. In addition, the 

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) would review at the 1987 

World Radio Conference the earlier-assigned band, seeking to assure sufficient spectrum availability for civil aviation operators’ future global needs. 

The Special Committee 155 of the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics said it would report at an April 26 ICAO meeting results of its yearlong study intended to define future spectrum operational requirements for 

the year 2010 and beyond for all classes of airspace users. The report called 

for service over both land and water, from the surface to a 70,000-foot altitude, a requirement most easily met by spaceborne systems. 

The FAA had considered spaceborne systems for air traffic communications 

for nearly two decades, but had rejected them as not cost-effective replace 

ments for terrestrial-based facilities (except for transoceanic communications). However, at the urging of the Air Transport Assn. (ATA), the FAA had 

initiated in the early 1970s a joint program with the European Space Agency 

(E%) to explore satellite use for oceanic aircraft communications, resulting in 

contracts with Comsat Corp. for the service and GE to build a satellite; the 

FAA had terminated the program when ATA lost interest. More recently, 

Aviation Week said, the FAA had responded cooly to DOD‘s push for FAA 

adoption of its Rockwell Navstar Global Positioning System, partly because 

of Pentagon-imposed signal accuracy limits of 500 miles (1,640 ft.) for civilian users. 

Currently, commercial applications to the FCC for authorization to offer 

domestic communications- and surveillancesatellite services to users, ranging from trucks to aircraft, had raised serious FAA concerns. FAA officials 

doubted the technical suitability of some of the proposed systems to meet 

airspace users’ demanding requirements. 

The government traditionally had owned and operated the surveillance, 

navigation, and communications facilities the FAA used for air-traffic control. 

If the FCC, under the Reagan Administration policy of commercializing space 

activities, should allocate spectrum currently assigned for aviation to nonaviation use, this could preclude a future optimum global spaceborne-aviation system. Therefore, the FAA task force was studying spectrum needs for 

several types of spaceborne systems, including multifunction satellites, and 

141 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

expected to have recommendations ready for submission to the Future Air 

Navigation System Committee and the National Telecommunications and 

Information Agency, which addressed government frequency-allocation issues. (AvWk, Feb 4/85, 36) 

February 7: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced rules to 

permit new two-engine jetliners to fly lengthy remote routes that had required three- or fourengine planes, but each airline would have to prove its 

aircraft and flight crews met FAA standards. The FAA took the action because 

of the reliability of modern jet engines and because military and business jets 

with two engines had flown across the North Atlantic safely for several years. 

The rules also addressed special provisions for airframe reliability, backu,p 

electrical and hydraulic systems, maintenance, carpcompartment fire protection, and crew training. 

Under current rules, a two-engine plane could be no farther from an airport 

than 60-minute flying time on one engine; the FAA proposal would extend 

that to two-hours flying time on one engine. 

When the rules became final, they would allow Boeing’s two-engine 767 

jumbo jet to fly the most fuelefficient North Atlantic routes, which would 

take flights far from airports in Greenland and Iceland. Boeing had pushed 

hard for the rule change, the Washington Post reported, to expand the sales 

potential of its 767. (FAA Release 5-85; WPost, Feb 7/85, A7) 

March 74: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator Donald 

Engen, citing improvements in scheduling practices and air traffic control, 

told airlines today that on April 1 he would remove minute-by-minute restrictions on the number of flights at airports in Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, and the 

New York City area, the Washington Post reported. He said delays would 

continue to occur but should be reduced and more manageable. 

Before the restrictions, the air traffic system had experienced an unprecedented number of delays, averaging 1,400 daily 15-minute or longer delays 

nationwide the previous August. Between November 1 and January 31,1984, 

average daily delays dropped to 863, a reduction of 46%. Not all delays were 

attributable to airport congestion or air traffic control problems; the FAA 

generally blamed about 60% of them on weather. 

Also likely to contribute to a decrease in delays was the increasing ability of 

the FAA to monitor traffic nationwide through its computer system and to 

redirect planes to less-busy routes. Engen noted that the airlines had indicated they would continue to operate the schedules adopted under the restrictions and would not revert to the bunching of large numbers of 

operations within short time periods. (W Post, Mar 15/85, A16) 

142 
FAA 

lune 7: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced it was using 

sophisticated electronic equipment to identify pilots who were illegally using 

air-traffic control radio frequencies to harass nonstriking United Airlines pilots. The FAA had already initiated enforcement action against the pilots 

responsible for such incidents near Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport 

and the Seattle-Tacoma Airport. The equipment also identified other flight 

crew members who had engaged in such harrassment, and additional enforcement actions were likely. 

The equipment was a tracking device that helped pinpoint the source of 

otherwise unidentified radio transmissions, of which more than 50, either 

jamming a radio frequency by pressing a microphone button or verbal abuse 

over the radio, had occurred since the strike began on May 17. 

FAA Administrator Donald Engen said he would not tolerate misuse of the 

air-traffic control frequencies, which could lead to suspension or revocation 

of a pilot’s license and possibly criminal penalties of up to 10 years imprisonment or a fine of $10,000. (FAA Release 24-85) 

August 28: As a result of a Manchester, England, airline accident in which it 

was believed a wing-mounted engine on the Boeing 737 disintegrated as the 

plane was attempting to take off [see Aviation/Civil Aviation, Aug. 261, the 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was trying to decide today how many 

of about 5,000 Pratt & Whitney jet engines operated by U.S. commercial 

airlines required inspection for possible cracks, the Washington Times reported. Airline officials believed a fire started after the accident when a faulty 

combustion chamber in the plane’s Pratt & Whitney JT8D engine blew apart 

and a hot piece of the combustion chamber pierced the plane’s wing fuel 

tank. 

British inspectors said preliminary investigations into the Manchester accident showed that deterioration in the combustion chamber caused overheating and eventually failure of the part. Investigators said they found “extensive 

cracking” in six of the engine’s nine combustion chambers. 

In addition to use on the Boeing 737, Pratt & Whitney sold the same kind of 

engine for Boeing 727s and McDonald Douglas DC9s. Those planes made 

up about two-thirds of the 3,000 planes operated by the major U.S. airlines. 

The FAA was attempting to arrange the engine inspections without disrupting U.S. airline service and indicated there would be no inspections of newer 

engines because there was insufficient hours on them. Inspections were 

made in one of two ways: an isotope inspection, which was similar to xraying the engine to search for cracks or a visual inspection, which required 

dismantling the engine to get to the combustion chambers. 

An inspection of JT8D engines ordered by the British Civil Aviation Authority turned up serious combustion chamber cracks in five Boeing 737s, and 

the planes were grounded. (W Times, Aug 29/85, 8B) 

143 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

September 12: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced it had 

proposed a regulation requiring that all new transponders installed in aircraft 

after January 1, 1992, be compatible with the new Mode S, ground-based 

radar beacon system to give controllers more accurate aircraft position and 

identification information. 

In October 1984, the FAA ordered 137 Mode S ground stations from joint 

manufacturers WestinghousdSDC-Burroughs and scheduled the first Mode S 

for delivery in the spring of 1987 to the FAA Technical Center in Atlantic City, 

N.J. 

In addition to position and identification information, the Mode S had a 

"selective" address capability, which gave the system its name and provided a 

channel for automatically transmitting weather and other data between airtraffic control facilities and aircraft in flight. 

The FAA already required that airplanes operating above 12,500 feet or in 

designated airport terminal control areas be equipped with a less sophisticated transponder. When triggered by the sweep of ground radar, this equip 

ment sent back a signal that gave controllers a clean and enhanced target on 

their radar displays and also told them the aircraft's identity and altitude. 

A limitation of the current radar beacon system, which Mode S would 

replace, was that ground equipment interrogated simultaneously all aircraft 

in a given area, often resulting in overlapping and garbled signals on radar 

displays. Mode S eliminated this problem by addressing each aircraft on an 

individual or selective basis. 

The purpose of the proposed rule was to promote early installation of 

Mode S transponders, although existing transponders would not be obsolete; 

pilots could continue to fly with that equipment after January 1, 1992, until it 

needed replacement. (FAA Release 48-85) 

144 
FRANCE 

May 37: French President Francois Mitterrand opened today the Paris Air 

Show, stating that the French-led European high-technology program known 

as Eureka was "off to a good start" after gaining approval from West Germany 

and other European partners, FBIS Paris AFP in English reported. France and 

W. Germany had previously disagreed over a US. invitation to participate in 

the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) defense research project. West Germany 

had endorsed the project, but France had rejected it, fearing it would render 

France's independent nuclear deterrent impotent and give the U.S. an unassailable lead in advanced technology. 

In speaking of Eureka, a space research program primarily for civilian uses 

and the development of ultramodern technology in such fields as lasers and 

high-speed computers, Mitterrand repeated his contention that the Eureka 

and SDI projects were not competing for the same goals, but added that 

Bonn's participation in both would necessitate choices in its budget and 

assignment of scientists. 

He also said France was determined to develop a European fighter plane by 

the 1990s and that the European Hermes space plane project was of major 

importance and could tie in with the European Ariane-5 rocket program. 

(FBIS Paris AFP in English, May 31/85) 

Hermes Program 

March 17: France's Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES) space agency 

was planning to select by midyear a prime contractor for the Hermes manned 

shuttle and would open the program to participation by other European 

countries before the end of 1985, Aviation Week reported. CNES had estab 

lished a competition between Aerospatiale and Dassault-Breguet for the Hermes leadership role, and the two companies would make technical 

presentations in April. After review of the data, CNES would make a selection 

within several months. 

Normally the two companies had their separate niches in the aerospace 

field, but CNES had forced them into head-to-head competition over Hermes. In the competition, Dassault-Breguet would draw on expertise gained 

from its Mirage, Jaguar, and Alpha Jet military aircraft and related electronics/ 

avionics systems; Aerospatiale would emphasize its work on military missiles, reentry vehiclehuclear warheads, the Ariane launcher, 

communications satellites, and civil aircraft such as the Concorde and Airbus 

lndustrie A300/A3 10/A320. 

145 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

CNES Director General Frederic d’Allest said several countries had shown 

interest in joining the Hermes program following the European Space Agency’s (ESA) council meeting at which ministers approved Phase B definition 

work for the Ariane 5 launcher [see Feb. 41. Ariane 5 would be capable of 

orbiting Hermes. France planned to retain a 50% share in the Hermes program and open the rest to participation by other European nations. 

The 1985 and 1986 budgets for Hermes totaled $12 million, followed by 

about $20 million in study work in 1987. France would supply most of this 

money in 1985, because other European countries wouldn’t be involved until 

at least October. 

Hermes would carry two to six crew members and be about half the size of 

the U.S. Space Shuttle. Its approximate length would be 59 ft. and wingspan, 

about 33 ft. Payload bay volume would be 377 sq. ft.; diameter of the bay, 9.8 

ft. A typical mission would carry 7,700 to 9,900 Ib. of useful load to a 248.5- 

mile circular orbit inclined 0-30°. Mission duration with four to six crew 

members would be eight days, extending to 30 days with a reduced crew. 

Start of full-scale Hermes development in mid-1988 would permit a first 

flight in 1997, according to CNES scheduling. (AvWk, Mar 11/85, 19) 

October 78 Jacques Louis Lions, president of the French National Center for 

Space Studies, announced today that Aerospatiale and the Dassault-Breguet 

Aviation Company under the center’s auspices would work together over the 

next several years to build two models for the European space shuttle Hermes, FBIS Hong Kong AFP in English reported. The European Space Agency 

(ESA) would likely also sponsor the project, and the center would undertake 

negotiations with European partners who would develop the main Hermes 

subsystems. 

Aerospatiale would lead the project and assemble Hermes components in 

its Toulouse factories; Dassault would be in charge of aeronautical aspects. 

Hermes, about half the size of the U.S. Space Shuttle, would carry two to 

six astronauts and cargo up to 4.5 tons into low earth orbits. (FBIS, Hong 

Kong AFP in English, Oct 19/85) 

146 
During April: In response to a request from the Johns Hopkins University's 

Applied Physics Laboratory to acquire more information on how to predict 

ocean wave behavior, the Wallops Flight Facility's P-3 aircraft participated 

October 1984 in NASA's Seasat Imaging Radar B (SIR-B) experiment to monitor ocean waves while, 140 miles above it, the Space Shuttle Challenger 

produced images of the same waves with its radar. 

Scientists knew what caused waves to swell, but found it difficult to predict 

exactly how they would behave. Researchers hoped they might be able to 

predict through the use of satellite data the occurrence of dangerous waves 

before they caused serious damage to ships and coastal towns. 

Analysis of previous data from the SIR had indicated that a synthetic aperture radar could observe ocean waves from space, but the lack of information 

on the actual directional wave spectrum on the ocean at the time of the SIR 

observations made it difficult to obtain an accurate assessment of the radar's 

performance. 

During Challenger's eightday flight, the P-3 underflew the spacecraft for 

five nights off the coast of Chile to obtain sea surface observations. Each night 

the aircraft flew along several hundred kilometers of the Space Shuttle's 

imaging radar taking sea-surface observations with its complement of remote 

sensing instruments. The P-3's airborne oceanographic lidar provided laser 

elevation profiles of the wave field and the radars (surface contour radar, radar 

ocean wave spectrometer, and advanced applications flight experiment altimeter) measured significant wave height and provided information on the directional wave spectrum. 

Because state of the sea varied over the series of flights from low seas to 

waves with 6-m height and 400-m wavelengths, the data sets collected should 

become classic and provide a basis for the quantitative evaluation of synthetic aperture radars in space. (Inside Wallops, Apr 85, 1) 

October 4: University of Chicago scientists Edward Anden, Wendy Wolbach, 

and Roy Lewis found evidence that continent-sized firestorms 65 million 

years ago raged across much of the earth, blackening the skies with soot and 

possibly triggering a sudden global freeze that wiped out the dinosaurs, the 

Washington Post reported. The event occurred at the time that other scientists 

said a giant asteroid collided with earth, which may have generated enough 

heat to start the fires. 

It was the asteroid theory that led the University of Chicago researchers to 

ask whether a nuclear war could trigger a similar freeze, a phenomenon now 

known as nuclear winter. Their findings suggested that nuclear winter theorists had greatly underestimated the amount of soot that would enter the 

atmosphere from wildfires. 

147 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The researchers found some of the soot, which eventually settled to the 

ground, in the same geologic layers that five years previously gave evidence 

of the asteroid impact. The layer, sampled in regions as far apart as Europe 

and New Zealand, contained an amount of soot, which was pure carbon, 

equal to about 10% of the carbon currently incorporated into all forms of life 

on earth. 

The original impact theory held that an asteroid, probably at least six miles 

wide, hit earth, blasting enough rock dust into the atmosphere to darken the 

sky for weeks. Deprived of sunlight, the ground would have cooled, bringing 

on a global freeze that exterminated not only the dinosaurs but many other 

species all over the world. Paleontologists knew that the dinosaurs died out in 

the most wide-ranging mass extinction the earth had even seen. Scientists 

working on the asteroid impact theory already had calculated that airborne 

rock dust alone would have been thick enough to bring on a devastating 

freeze. 

The discovery that vast quantities of soot might also have been in the upper 

atmosphere indicated that the period of darkness and freezing would have 

lasted longer, perhaps months, because soot washed out of the atmosphere 

more slowly than did rock dust, although it would have been no darker or 

colder than originally thought. 

The finding added two more factors that might haw contributed to the 

extinction-concentrations of fireproduced toxic substances, such as carbon 

monoxide, and the destruction of plants and animals by fire. 

The researchers said the discovery was an accident, resulting from examination of ancient sediments while looking for traces of gases that had been 

part of the asteroid. Instead, they found that the sediments contained about 

10,000 times as much carbon as would have been expected. 

The layer, sampled in Denmark, Spain, and New Zealand, was the one in 

which other scientists previously found unusually high concentrations of 

iridium, an element that is rare on earth but abundant in meteorites and 

asteroids. The scientists thought that when the asteroid hit the earth, the 

impact would have generated enough heat to vaporize the asteroid, sending 

its iridium into the atmosphere where it spread around the world. 

Anders said the impact would have scattered white-hot particles of rock 

dust as far as 800 and possibly 1,200 miles, igniting forest fires over the entire 

area. "Once started," he noted, "such a fire could spread over an entire 

continent, and the resulting winds may disperse the soot worldwide." 

The impact, other scientists calculated, would have left a crater 85 miles 

wide and 20 miles deep. Since no such crater had been found, many scientists assumed the asteroid hit the ocean, vaporizing the water before it hit the 

sea floor. ( W Post, Oct 4/85, A2) 

October 7: NASA announced that its associate administrator for space science and applications, Dr. Burton Edelson, in a speech today at the 36th 

148 
Geophysics 

Congress of the International Astronautical Federation in Stockholm warned 

his audience that the earth‘s environment as was presently known might be in 

jeopardy and called on the world’s scientific community to accelerate its 

study of the planet. “Resources, once thought to be limitless, are slowly 

being depleted,” Edelson said. “Earth‘s atmosphere is changing, and some of 

its life forms are threatened. It is imperative that we, as scientists and engineers, take action now to maintain the quality of life on our planet and 

improve its biological productivity.” 

Edelson cited the many accomplishments of planetary science since the 

beginning of spaceflight 28 years ago. “We have examined most of the planets in the solar system at close range and have performed systematic studies 

of our closest neighbors, Venus and Mars, through telescopes and more 

recently, through data and imagery received from planetabiting spacecraft,” 

he said. “We still lack synoptic, systematic, and temporal knowledge, predictive skills, and an understanding of the mechanisms underlying earth’s global 

processes,” he pointed out. 

Calling for an international study effort, Edelson said, “Our sophisticated 

spacecraft; new air, sea, and spaceborne sensors; and enormous computing 

capability will enable us to measure, monitor, model, and finally begin to 

understand the earth as a system. This mission to planet earth could unlock 

the secrets of life itself . . . and could well prow to be the most important 

ever undertaken by humankind.” 

Edelson called particular attention to the problems of water pollution in 

rivers, lakes, and streams; potential depletion of the ozone layer; growing 

atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide; and a sharp increase in the 

levels of carbon monoxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. “Economic develop 

ment over large portions of the earth have significantly changed the patterns 

of land and water use,” he said. “The results have been mixed-while in some 

cases the benefits have been significant-we have paid a substantial price. 

We must study the land and learn to use it properly.” 

To emphasize the importance of his proposal, Edelson said, “The U.S. 

National Academy of Sciences has reviewed the scientific merit of the global 

habitability concept and has found it to be both sound and worthy. The 

Academy is now participating in the broader efforts of the International 

Council of Scientific Unions in a program called Global Change. NASA and 

several other government agencies, notably the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Science Foundation, also will participate.” Edelson said he envisioned multifaceted investigations with 

oceanographers, meteorologists, biologists, and foresters studying the land, 

sea, atmosphere, and the air-sea and solar-terrestrial environments. 

“This is truly an international challenge,” he concluded, ”involving many 

scientific disciplines. Everyone on earth has a stake in our success.” (NASA 

Release 85-142) 

149 

April 7: In a review of . . . The Heavens and the Earth by Walter McDougall, a reviewer for the NY Times Book Review said that the book operated on 

four levels: as a narrative history of space activity, a political analysis of what 

caused Sputnik 1 and what Sputnik 1 caused, an exposition of the contradictions inherent in the Soviet socialist system and the American free-enterprise 

system, and an essay on the eschatology of what is called the “pursuit of 

power.” Reviewer Alex Roland noted the book was based on a vast published 

literature complemented by archival research in the U.S. and Europe, interviews with many of the key principals, and recent declassification of important material, including National Security Council policy paper 5814.1, the 

first official national policy on space. 

Roland called the book the “most comprehensive history of space activity 

written to date, the most thorough analysis of the political and social forces at 

work. It provides a plausible and compelling interpretation of how and why 

the space age has developed as it has. And it poses an original and stimulating paradigm for analysis of the post-industrial state in a world of continuing 

cold war. With this book:’ Roland concluded, “the history of space activity 

has come of age.” (NYT Book Review, Apr 7/85, 1) 

April 77: A prime time TV series for the first time would offer a comprehensive look at the history of manned U.S. and USSR space flight, the Ames 

Research Center’s Astrogram reported. SPACEFLIGHT, a series of four one 

hour programs sponsored by the Public Broadcasting System and the Du Pont 

Co., would chronicle man‘s achievements in space from the rocket plane that 

first broke the sound barrier to the touchdown of the Space Shuttle orbiter 

Co I u m bia. 

The series’ executive producer, Blaine Baggett, said his staff interviewed 

some 40 key participants in space activities-astronauts, people on the 

ground, scientists, and historians. In addition, the Soviet science attache in 

Washington provided about 10 hours of film footage. Among those interviewed for the series were Chuck Yaeger, first man to break the sound barrier; 

Scott Crossfield, first to travel twice the speed of sound and to pilot the X-15; 

Werner von Braun, who worked on the U.S. rocket program; Alan Shepard 

and John Glenn, first American in space and first American to orbit the globe, 

respectively; and Sally Ride, first American woman in space. 

From the point of view of the USSR, the series sought answers to such 

questions as who the chief designer was of the Soviet space program and why 

the Soviets were first in the early days of space activities. 

SPACEFLIGHT also examined future space plans such as space colonies, 

space stations, and the Strategic Defense Initiative. (ARC Astrogram, Apr 11/ 

85, 4) 

151 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

November 6 Hermann Oberth, considered by some to be the father of 

spaceflight, watched on TV at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) the landing of the Space Shuttle Challenger on mission 61-A, the Washington Post 

reported. Oberth is the last scientist survivor of the group that transformed 

theory into modern space exploration. Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, the Russian 

who worked out some of the early theory of rocket propulsion, died in 1935; 

Robert Goddard, the American who experimented with early rockets and for 

whom GSFC is named, died in 1945. But Oberth, who made the most 

complete analyses of the problems and prospects of human space travel, 

lived to "see it happen." 

In 1932 Oberth wrote a paper in which he not only showed mathematically that it was possible to escape earth's gravity, but also anticipated a host 

of other aspects of spaceflight not seriously approached for the next 30 years. 

Oberth described in the book a spaceship's propulsion system and architectural form down to the rocket engine's nozzles; designed spacesuits and 

methods of eating in weightlessness; conceived of astronauts performing 

spacewalks; proposed space stations in earth orbit as transfer points for interplanetary trawl; considered the problems of weightlessness and motion sickness (which astronauts still faced); proposed that the stations spin slowly to 

create an artificial gravity; and suggested the use of flying shuttles that could 

take off like a rocket, visit the space station, and land back on earth like 

airplanes. 

Oberth also worked out the physics of joining two spacecraft in orbit 

(referred to now as rendezvous and docking), anticipated that photos of earth 

from space would be useful for studying the ground and forecasting weather, 

foresaw that telescopes in earth orbit could gather far better astronomical 

data than those that looked through the atmosphere, and claimed that practical uses for space travel would someday make it a profitable enterprise. 

Working unaware of Tsiolkovsky or Goddard, Oberth wrote the paper as an 

amateur physicist and mathematician while serving as a soldier in the AustroHungarian army during World War I. Oberth's commanding officer sent the 

paper to the War Ministry, where the generals rejected it as obvious fantasy. 

After the war, when Oberth was at the University of Heidelberg, he submitted as his dissertation a longer version of the paper, complete with elaborate 

mathematical formulas proving his ideas. Again it was rejected. 

Eventually Oberth paid to hm the paper published. "The Rocket Into 

Interplanetary Space" gained a wide following and attracted Wernher von 

Braun, who worked as Oberth's assistant and then left to join the German 

military rocket research program at Peenemunde. Von Braun brought Oberth 

to work on the V2 rocket, the first major device based on Oberth's ideas. 

During three years in the 1950s, Oberth joined von Braun in the U.S. where 

he was developing the Redstone rocket. In 1958 Oberth retired to West 

Germany. 

152 
History 

Oberth had concluded in his book that “the foregoing demonstrates that it 

is possible, with present day science and technology, to construct vehicles 

which could attain cosmic speed and that it is probably possible for men to 

ride in these vehicles:’ but that it would take more than a decade to realize 

these possibilities. At GSFC today, Oberth said it had “proven to be much 

more complicated that I thought.” (WPost, Nov 7/85, C1) 

153 

INDIA 

January 23: NASA Administrator James Beggs and U.R. Rao, chairman of the 

Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO), signed a launch services agree 

ment covering the reimbursable launch of INSAT 1C around mid-1986 from 

the Space Shuttle, the MarshallStarreported. A multipurpose satellite, INSAT 

1 C would provide communications and meteorological services to India. 

In addition, the two agreed that an ISRO scientistlengineer would serve as a 

payload specialist during that Space Shuttle mission and discussed other 

possible NASNISRO cooperative activities in space applications and space 

science. (Marshall Star, Jan 23/85, 4) 

lune 75 On the fourth and final day of his US. visit, Indian Prime Minister 

Rajiv Gandhi, accompanied by Vice President Bush, toured the Johnson 

Space Center’s mission control center and then climbed into the commander‘s seat of a Space Shuttle mockup to dramatize his commitment to 

high technology, the Washington Post reported. Later Gandhi said the 

spinoffs of space technology “have become part of our daily lives,” and that 

India needed to keep abreast of technological advances in agriculture, communications, meteorology, and prospecting. 

Earlier in the week, the NY Times reported the U.S. and India were scheduled during Gandhi’s visit to announce a joint space effort that would include 

the launching in 1986 aboard the Space Shuttle of an Indian payload specialist and a satellite that was partly designed to expand the uses of radio and TV 

in Indian villages. 

Candhi’s visit was intended to ease strains with the U.S., reach a series of 

space and technology agreements, and open a nationwide cultural program, 

the Festival of India. The previous year the Soviet Union launched an Indian 

astronaut into space on an eightday mission. ( WpOst, June 16/85, A12, NYT, 

June 9/85, A3) 

I NTE LSAT 

February 77: NASA announced it had scheduled the 8th launch in a series of 

10 lntelsat V-type international telecommunications satellites aboard an Atlas 

Centaur for no earlier than March 7 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. 

NASA had successfully launched six lntelsat V satellites. 

The Atlas Centaur-63 was the 2nd of the new stretched version of the 

vehicle, able to lift from 159 to 227 kg (350 to 500 Ib.) more than the 

previous design for a total of 2,318 kg (5,100 Ib.) NASA had extended the 

first-stage Atlas by about 2.05 m (81 in.) to accommodate more propellant. 

This would be the 1st lntelsat V-A spacecraft launched by an Atladcentaur. 

The lntelsat V-A satellites were similar to the Vs except for improvements 

that increased reliability and boosting communications-carrying capacity by 

25% from 12,000 to about 15,000 simultaneous telephone calls and two TV 

programs. NASA would for several weeks station the satellite over the equator 

at about the longitude of Paris for in-orbit testing; once operational, the 

spacecraft would be in geosynchronous orbit over the Atlantic Ocean. 

Lewis Research Center (LeRC) managed the Atlas Centaur development 

and operations, and the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) managed vehicle 

checkout and launch. (NASA Release 85-22) 

February 77: INTELSAT‘s Assembly of Parties, representatives of INTELSAT 

member nations, rejected a proposal by 21 nations that all INTELSAT parties 

and signatories boycott interconnection discussions with private companies 

planning to launch international satellites and that the U.S. reconsider its 

favorable policy toward non-INTELSAT satellites, Aviation Week reported. 

INTELSAT signatories, telecommunications organizations that operated 

ground facilities and represented INTELSAT member nations in organization 

management, had resolved in April 1983 that diversion of international traffic 

would threaten INTELSAT’s viability. 

A resolution adopted by the assembly urged all signatories and parties to 

“take into account” the boycott and the signatories’ econom ic-viabi I ity resolution and to express opinions on separate systems to the U.S. and at the 

upcoming I NTELSAT assembly. 

U.S. officials had joined the consensus after objectionable language was 

deleted, but said naming a specific nation in the resolution could set a bad 

precedent. As one official noted, “The criticism of the U.S. we expected 

turned out to be expressions of concern by developing countries that compe 

tition could mean increased rates for them.” 

157 

tAGI, I5 JNTENTIONAUII 8uM 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The assembly asked the Board of Governors to submit recommendations 

for separatesystem coordination to the assembly as soon as possible, as the 

U.S.’s Federal Communication Commission was processing five applications 

for private satellite launches. (AvWk, Feb 11/85, 29) 

March 73 The USSR was expected to sign an unprecedented information 

exchange agreement with INTELSAT, with a commitment to join the international consortium within two years, the Washington Post reported, a tacit 

admission that its own Eastern Bloc competitor to INTELSAT-lntersputnikdid not meet all the USSR’s telecommunications needs. INTELSAT was awaiting V.A. Shamshin, minister of posts and telecommunications in the USSR, to 

sign the proposed agreement sent the previous week. 

The U.S., creator of the 21-year-old INTELSAT system and its biggest single 

user, had no legal means to prevent INTELSAT from sharing technology with, 

or granting admission to, the USSR. The Reagan Administration said it would 

adopt a wait-and-see approach to the proposed agreement, which posed no 

security danger because the U.S. used INTELSAT solely for commercial purposes. 

In the past the Soviets had used the INTELSAT system on a limited basis and 

never exchanged technical information with the West nor allowed the Eastern 

Bloc countries access to the system (with the exception of Yugoslavia, which 

was a full member of the consortium). INTELSAT, however, did not encourage 

its members to use the lntersputnik system. (W Post, Mar 13/85, All 

August 27: The Soviet Union signed a memorandum of understanding with 

the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT) to 

formalize its relationship with the 109-member nation global satellite consortium, the Washington Post reported. However, neither the USSR nor INTELSAT indicated that the understanding would lead to full-fledged 

membership for the nation that was the largest nonmember user of the 

satellite network. 

The understanding, which came after seven years of negotiations, laid the 

groundwork for increased use of INTELSAT’s network for global transmission 

of Soviet voice, data, and TV transmissions. If the Soviets increasingly used 

INTELSAT, experts said, it would be to expand their broadcasting system to 

reach Third World countries. 

In 1984 the USSR broadcast 441 hours of TV programming over INTELSAT’s 

satellites, representing 1% of the consortium’s total TV traffic. By contrast, the 

U.S. used INTELSAT TV transmission capacity over 6,884 hours, 14% of the 

organization’s TV traffic. 

INTELSAT had to accept the membership of any nation that belonged to the 

International Telecommunications Union, which included the Soviet Union. 

INTELSAT denied using the Soviet Union as a means to deflect competition 

158 
I NTELSAT 

the organization was facing from entrepreneurs seeking to launch their own 

satellite systems. (WPost, Aug 28/85, G1) 

Satellites 

March 18: NASA announced that it would launch lntelsat V-A (F-lo), first in 

a series of improved INTELSAT commercial communications satellites, by an 

Atlas-Centaur (AC-63) from KSC no earlier than March 19, 1985. The lntelsat 

V-A series had a capacity of 13,500 two-way voice circuits and two TV 

channels. 

Aerospace manufacturers around the world, under the direction of prime 

contractor Ford Aerospace and Communications Corp., had contributed to 

the design, development, and manufacture of lntelsat V-A. These contractors 

and their responsibilities were: Aerospatiale (Francel-designed the main 

member for the spacecraft's modular construction and supplied the main 

body structure thermal analysis and control; GEC-Marconi (United Kingdom)-produced the 11-GHz beacon transmitters used for earth station antenna tracking; Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm (Federal Republic of 

Germany)-designed and produced the satellite control subsystem and the 

solar array; Mitsubishi Electric Corp. (Japan)-contributed the six-GHz and 

four-GHz earth coverage antennas and manufactured the power control electronics and the telemetry and command digital units; Selenia (Italy)-designed and built the six telemetry, command, and ranging antennas, two 

11-CHz beacon antennas, and two 14/11-GHz spot-beam antennas and built 

the command receiver and telemetry transmitter that combined to form a 

ranging transponder for determination of spacecraft position in transfer orbit; 

and Thomson-CSF (Francel-built the 10-w, 11-GHz traveling wave tubes. 

The lntelsat V-A spacecraft would weigh about 4,402 Ib. at separation 

from the Centaur, including the solid-propellant apogee kick motor (AKM) for 

circularization in the geosynchronous orbit. The separated spacecraft weight 

of 4,389 would include 1,963 Ib. of AKM expendables and nine Ib. of 

transfer orbit propellants. 

NASA would use spin-stabilization during the transfer orbit coast to geosynchronous altitude. After burnout of the AKM, NASA would despin the 

spacecraft and deploy the antenna and solar array. In this configuration the 

spacecraft would be about 51 feet wide (measured across the solar panels) 

and 22 feet high. In orbital operation, the spacecraft would be three-axis 

stabilized with the body-fixed antenna pointing constantly at the earth and 

the solar array rotated to point at the sun. 

The INTELSAT global satellite system comprised two essential elements: 

the space segment, consisting of satellites owned by Intelsat, and the ground 

segment, consisting of earth stations owned by telecommunications entities 

159 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

in the countries in which they were located. The space segment had 16 

satellites in synchronous orbit at an altitude of about 25,780 km (22,240 

miles). There were 424 communications antennas at 334 earth station sites in 

134 countries and territories in the ground segment. The combined system of 

satellites and ground stations provided more than 800 earth station-toearth 

station communications pathways. (NASA MOR M-491-203-85-08 [prelaunch] Mar 18/85) 

March 22 NASA announced it had launched on March 22 at 6:58 p.m. EST 

the lntelsat V-A (F-70) by the Atladcentaur 63 from Cape Canawral. Eighth 

in a series of 10 lntelsat V-type international telecommunications satellites, 

the spacecraft would undergo several weeks of on-orbit testing before positioning in geosynchronous orbit. 

The AC-63, second of the new stretched wrsion of the Atladcentaur for 

which Lewis Research Center had dedopment and operation management 

responsibility, had an 80-in. extended first stage enabling it to hold more 

propellants. (NASA MOR M-491-203-85-08 [postlaunch] Apr 29/85; LeRC 

News, Apr 8/85, 2) 

lune 29 NASA announced today the launch by Atladcentaur 64 from KSC of 

the lntelsat V-A (F-111, second in a series of improved International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT) commercial communications 

satellites launched by that vehicle. lntelsat V-A had a capacity of 13,500 

voice circuits compared with lntelsat Vthat had 12,000; lntelsat IV-A, 6,000; 

and lntelsat /VI 4,000. All satellites had two TV channels. 

Figures collected as a result of the INTELSAT-sponsored global telecommunications traffic conference indicated that an lntelsat IV-A satellite would 

haw insufficient capacity by the early 1980s to cope with the traffic and load 

on the Atlantic Ocean primary satellite and on the Indian Ocean satellite. 

Although one solution could have been to orbit another lntelsat IV-A Atlantic Ocean and Indian Ocean satellite, subsequent planning proceeded toward the development of a highcapacity lntelsat V satellite. After an 

international bidding process, the INTELSAT Board of Governors at its Sep 

tember 1976 meeting awarded a contract for development and manufacture 

of seven lntelsat V satellites to Ford Aerospace and Communication Corp. as 

prime contractor and an international team of manufacturers as subcontractors. 

Since that time, the board decided to order two additional lntelsat V satellites and to order six highercapacity lntelsat V-A spacecraft for launch in 

1985 and beyond. 

Members of the international manufacturing team included Aerospatiale 

(France), G EC-Marcon i (United Kingdom), Messerschm itt-Bo1 kow-Blohm 

(Federal Republic of Germany), Mitsubishi Electric Corp. (japan), Selenia 

160 
I NTELSAT 

(Italy), and Thomson-CSF (France). (NASA MOR M-491-203-85-09 [prelaunch] May 27/85, [postlaunch] July 17/85) 

September28 NASA announced that it had launched INTELSAT V-A (F-121, 

10th in a series of 11 lntelsat V-type satellites to be launched in the 1980 to 

1985 period for the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization 

(INTELSAT), from its facilities at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station aboard an 

AtlaKentaur launch vehicle. 

INTELSAT assigned the satellite to the Indian Ocean region to replace 

lntelsat V(F-11, which INTELSAT ordered moved to the Pacific Ocean Region 

where, in combination with lntelsat V (F-8), it would replace lntelsat IVA 

satellites that were running out of stationkeeping propellants. 

INTELSAT awarded Ford Aerospace as prime contractor and an international team of manufacturers as subcontractors a contract for development 

and manufacture of lntelsat V-A satellites. INTELSAT was also considering a 

number of follow-on satellites with modified and expanded communications 

capabilities. (NASA Release 85-134; NASA MOR M-491-203-85-10 [prelaunch] Sept 19/85, [postlaunch] Oct 10/85.) 

161 

JAPAN 

lanuary 72 Japan’s first deepspace probe had escaped earth‘s gravity on its 

way to a rendezvous with Halley’s Comet early in 1986, the Washington Post 

reported. A domestically developed rocket had launched Sakigake (Pioneer) 

January 8 from the Institute of Space and Astronautical Science’s launch site 

at Uchinoura in southwestern Japan. 

Dr. Tamiya Nomura, director of the institute‘s office of project coordination, 

said the probe was 580,000 miles from earth the morning of January 12 and 

was “entering a sphere where the sun’s gravity is dominant.” (WPost, Jan 12/ 

85, A17) 

August 7: Japan nominated three astronaut candidates, one a woman, to fly 

in January 1988 aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia, a UP1 bulletin in NASA 

Current News said. The one selected to fly would become the first Japanese 

in space. 

Those selected were Takao Doi, a researcher at a NASA center; Mamoru 

Mori, assistant professor of nucleonics at Hokkaido University; and Chiaki 

Naito, an assistant at Keio University’s Medical School in Tokyo. Japan’s National Space Development Agency selected them from among 533 applicants. 

The Japanese astronaut would conduct a 12-minute experiment during 

Columbia’s one-week mission. The other two candidates would serve as 

backups. 

The three would take further medical and space simulation tests at Johnson 

Space Center and then undergo training before selection in May 1987 of the 

astronaut to fly on the mission. (UP1 bulletin in NASA Current News, Aug 7/ 

85) 

Launch Vehicles 

March 73 Japan’s highest space policy board, the Space Activities Commission, adopted in a meeting of its four commission members a plan to begin in 

FY 85 development of a rocket booster capable of putting a tweton geostationary satellite into orbit, FBIS, KYODO in English reported. The new 

booster, code named H-11, a two-stage, 240-ton liquid-fueled rocket, 46-m 

high and 4-m in diameter, would dwarf the country’s biggest rocket, N-11, 

whose capacity was up to 350 kg. Officials expected the project to cost 200 

billion yen and take six to seven years to complete. 

The commission also agreed to start work on a science satellite and geostationary weather satellite, both intended for 1989 launch, and authorized the 

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 163 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

design, beginning in FY 85, of a space module that Japan would construct as 

part of an international space station program planned for early in the 1990s. 

(KYODO in English, Mar 13/85) 

164 
February 75: NASA announced it had signed a memorandum of understanding for its materials processing in space research program with Grumman 

Corp. to experiment with directional solidification of gallium arsenide and 

other semiconductor materials and various metals and alloys. The process 

would apply to production of semiconductor crystals and magnets for electrical motors, with initial emphasis on semiconductor materials. 

Directional solidification would use precisely controlled temperatures to 

melt and solidify a material, during which the material’s crystalline structure 

would align in a fashion that should virtually eliminate any compound imperfections. Flawless semiconductor crystals would yield a greater quantity 

and quality of microcircuit chips, leading to higher-speed electronic devices 

that would consume less power and to greater miniaturization. 

The agreement called for an information exchange, with NASA and Grumman Corp. designating personnel for the program. NASA would put up no 

funds for the program; Grumman expected to spend $6 million in the first 

three years. (NASA Release 85-23; W limes, Feb 13/85, 86) 

165 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

During October: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 

announced that its university programs, primarily involving undergraduate 

students, combined futuristic space concepts with realistic engineering design challenges. The first program, cosponsored by NASA Headquarters and 

Ames Research Center (ARC) and Johnson Space Center USC), required students to design a spacesuit glove that would allow astronauts maximum 

flexibility at eight Ib.-per-sq-in., the pressure planned for future extravehicular 

activity. Ten universities responded to a request for proposals, and a team 

from Kansas State University won the design competition. 

The second broader program, entering its second phase of a tweyear pilot 

effort, required universities to adopt NASA advanced space design projects 

for senior design classes. Each university received a grant and was aligned 

with a NASA center that provided guidance, data, and lecturers during the 

academic year and 10-week summer work assignments for three students. 

The initial group of centers, schools, and projects were: ARUUniversity of 

Wisconsin/manned Mars habitat; ARUUniversity of Colorado/geosynchre 

nous space station; Langley Research Center; (LaRC)Nirginia Polytechnic 

Institute/orbital servicing center; LaRUMassachusetts Institute of Technology/ 

lunar basemanned Mars mission; Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFCV 

Georgia Institute of Technology/lunar site preparation; Lewis Research Center 

(LeRC)/U n iversity of Wash i ngtodspace manu fact u ri ng faci I ity; Le RC/U n iversity of MichiganAunar space transportation system; and JSUUniversity of 

Texas and Texas A & Wmanned Mars mission. (NASA Activities, Oct 85, 10) 

December 26: NASA announced the highlights of its 1985 activities, which 

included nine Space Shuttle flights and launches of three Atlas Centaurs, two 

Scouts, and an Aerobee vehicle, its last flight. In 1985 NASA introduced the 

last and lightest-weight Space Shuttle orbiter-Atlantis. McDonnell Douglas 

inaugurated its upper stage booster, the Payload Assist Module D-2. 

Fifty two individuals flew aboard Space Shuttles in 1985. Of this group 19 

were scientists performing observations, experiments, or investigations; 27 

were US. military officers, and six were payload specialists from foreign 

countries (Mexico, Saudi Arabia, France, the Netherlands, and two from West 

Germany). The 52 individuals' combined time in space was nearly 55 days or 

over 880 earth orbits, for a combined travel distance of nearly 22 million 

miles. Six Space Shuttle astronauts spent a total of more than a day in extravehicular activities during the year. 

Two Spacelab missions aboard the Space Shuttle and an encounter by the 

International Cometary Explorer (ICE) with Comet Giacobini-Zinner highlighted the year for NASA's Office of Space Science and Applications. 

PRECEDING PAGE RLA?JK NOT FIEM€D 

167 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

On April 19, 1985, a little more than a year after President Reagan directed 

NASA to develop within a decade a permanently manned space station, 

NASA awarded competitive contracts to eight industry teams for definition 

and preliminary design (Phase B) of elements of the station. NASA signed a 

memorandum of understanding with Canada, the European Space Agency, 

and Japan for cooperation during the definition and preliminary design phase 

of the program. 

NASA's aeronautical research and technology efforts included continuing 

work on such programs as the NMDepartment of Defense X-29 X-wing 

research aircraft, the tilt rotor/JVX aircraft, the advanced X-29 aircraft featuring a forward-swept wing, and the mission adaptive wing that could change 

its curvature. 

In the area of space technology, Langley Research Center completed dew4 

opment, assembly, and testing of a 15-meter hoop column deployable structure and antenna system. Other advances in space technology included 

significant modification to the Space Shuttle orbiter Columbia to measure 

dynamic and thermodynamic characteristics, selection of the reactor thermoelectric power system concept for design and testing for the space station 

space reactor power program, and completion of space construction experiments outside the Space Shuttle orbiter. 

NASA's advances in space tracking and data systems included transition 

from ground network station support for low earth-orbiting spacecraft to use 

of the first Tracking and Data Relay Satellite in geosynchronous orbit. NASA 

had scheduled TDRS-2 and 3 for launch in January and July 1986, respectively. In February NASA completed consolidation of the Deep Space Network (DSN) and later an upgrade of the network that would enable the DSN 

to receiw significantly more images from hyager as it encountered Uranus 

in January 1986. 

NASA's Office of Commercial Programs funded and opened the first five of 

a planned series of centers for commercial development of space, which 

NASA expected would become self-supporting through research collaboration by industry, academia, and gmrnment agencies. (NASA Release 85- 

177) 

Budget 

February 4: NASA Administrator James Beggs, during a press conference, 

reported that President Reagan had requested a NASA budget of just under 

$7.9 billion, reflecting the President's determination to continue America's 

space leadership and to achieve the goal of a permanently manned space 

station. 

168 
NASA 

The budget covered some unforeseen items not addressed by 1985 budgetplanning estimates, including the Congressionally mandated development of 

the Advanced Communications Technology Satellite (ACTS), scheduled for 

launch in 1989, and acceleration of the advanced turboprop propulsion 

system for FY 87 flight testing. 

The budget contained four major appropriations requests: a total of $2.9 

billion for R&D, which included funds for previously approved space science 

and applications programs, development of ACTS, initiation of the orbiting 

maneuvering vehicle program, and promotion of commercial use of space; 

$3.5 billion for space flight, control, and data communications to support 

Space Shuttle production, operations, and tracking and data acquisition (a 

decrease of $92 million from FY 85’s budget plan); $149 million for facilities 

construction (down $1 million from FY 85); and $1.3 billion for research and 

program management. (NASA release Feb. 4/85; NASA press briefing, Feb. 4/ 

85) 

February 6: President Reagan’s FY 86 budget for NASA sought $7.9 billionjust under what it would take to sustain the agency’s programs at current 

levels, the Washington Post reported. At a press conference [see NASA/ 

Budget, Feb. 41, NASA Administrator James Beggs had acknowledged the 

$23@rnilIion budget request for the space station was $50 million less than 

the agency had sought to keep the project on schedule. (W Post, Feb 6/85, 

A17) 

kbruary 28: NASA Administrator James Beggs, in testimony before the Senate science, technology, and space subcommittee, said that projected cost 

Overruns for the Centaur G and G Prime vehicles-development programs 

could run as high as $50 to $60 million, but that the agency did not think the 

problems would affect Galileo and Ulysses mission launches planned for the 

2nd half of 1986, Aerospace Daily reported. Another NASA official testifying 

earlier had estimated the overrun at $30 to $40 million. 

The discrepancy in estimates apparently stemmed from an agreement between NASA and the Air Force calling for a 50-50 sharing of Centaur G 

programdesign and development costs. The Air Force, however, had set a 

$150 million ceiling on basic Centaurdevelopment costs, which had not yet 

been reached. If the overrun surpassed the ceiling, NASA would have to 

absorb the costs. (AD, Feb 28/85, 1 ) 

March 26: The U.S. House Science and Technology transportation aviation 

and materials subcommittee completed its markup of NASA‘s FY 86 authorization, approving a series of changes that resulted in reallocations for several 

aeronautics programs and elimination of proposed funding for obliquewing 

tech no logy, Aerospace Daily reported. 

169 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NASA requested $522 million for aeronautics and space technology in its 

FY 86 budget, of which $354 million was for aeronautical research and 

technology and $168 million for space research and technology. Under the 

proposed changes, NASA rotorcraft systems technology funding would increase by $4 million over the agency‘s request for $20.4 million. Hot section 

engine technology, for which NASA had requested $5.2 million, would increase by $2 million; and the subcommittee restored high-speed aeronautics 

funding. 

The panel approwd a $1.4 million decrease for the fluid and thermal 

physics research and technology program and deletion of the obliquewing 

technology, for which NASA had requested $4.7 million, and of funding for 

altitude wind-tunnel planning. 

The panel based its decision to delete obliquewing technology funding on 

an advisory committee finding that the planned flight portion of the NASA/ 

Navy obliquewing program was one whose design solutions would have 

low payoff to industry. Since the Navy was the only identifiable user, Chairman Dan Glickman (D-Kans.) said, if it was a program worth their while, the 

service should provide the funding. (ND, Mar 27/85, 1) 

April 7: The U.S. House Science and Technology Committee approved President Reagan’s request for a $7.9 billion NASA budget for FY 86, the Washington Post reported, but allocated the funds differently than he had requested. 

By a 32-to-9 vote, the panel decided to retain a subcommittee’s recornmendation to shift $45 million to spare parts procurement for the Space Shuttle in 

order to keep the Space Shuttle assembly line open and thus increase 

chances for a fifth orbiter. The administration requested $2.1 billion in FY 86 

for 14 Space Shuttle flights and delivery of the fourth orbiter, Atlantis; it 

sought no funds for a fifth orbiter. (WPost, Apr 1/85, A9) 

May23: NASA Administrator James Beggs told Congress that the new version 

of the Centaur rocket designed for Space Shuttlelaunched planetary missions would cost about $110 million more ($90 million for NASA; $20 million for the Air Force) than expected [see NASNBudget, Feb. 281, the 

Washington Post reported. 

Wider and shorter than the old-model Centaur to fit in the Space Shuttle‘s 

cargo bay, the new rocket would launch in 1986 two spacecraft toward 

Jupiter. An even shorter version starting in 1987 would launch from the Space 

Shuttle two classified missions for the Air Force. 

Beggs told the House Science and Technology subcommittee on space 

science and applications that “We underestimated the job of integrating the 

Centaur into the shuttle and General Dynamics underestimated the cost of 

changing the configuration of the rocket.” 

The new estimates raised Centaur program costs from $755 million to 

$865 million. (W Post, May 24/85, A161 

170 
NASA 

lune 27: The U.S. Senate passed by voice vote H.R. 1714, the NASA Authorization Bill for FY 86, NASA’s Legislathe Activities Report noted. As passed, 

the bill embraced the concept of a budget freeze at the FY 85 level of $7.510 

billion; however, it also provided for three specific augmentations that totalled $142 million, accounting for a FY 86 growth of 1.9%. 

Among the authorizations for research and development were 

$200,000,000 for the space station, $47Z200,000 for space transportation 

capability development, and $608,400,000 for physics and astronomy. 

Spaceflight, control, and data communications authorizations included 

$941,500,000 for Space Shuttle production and operational capability; 

$1,700,100,000 for space transportation operations; and $745,300,000 for 

space and ground network, communications, and data systems. 

Among the authorizations for space transportation facilities were 

$14,000,000 for construction of an orbiter modification and refurbishment 

facility at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), $3,600,000 for construction of a 

thermal protection system facility at KSC, and $6,500,000 for modification of 

enhanced life support systems testing at Marshall Space Flight Center. (NASA 

Legislathe Activities Report, June 27/85, 1) 

July 1: By voice vote the US. Senate approved a FY 86 NASA authorization of 

$7.6 billion, an increase of $142 million above the 1985 NASA appropriation 

and the House-approved authorization, the Washington Post reported. The 

increase would mainly cover the cost of restoring the Reagan Administration’s 

proposed 5% pay cut for federal employees and provide additional funds for 

booster rockets. The Senate spending ceiling was $234 million below the 

Administration’s request. 

The Senate and House authorization bills were substantially different. The 

Senate approved cuts in specific programs, while the House simply approved 

an across-the-board freeze for the entire NASA budget. (W Post, July 1/85, 

A13) 

Data Tracking and Relay Systems 

lanuary 23: NASA announced that the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) 

would transfer spacecraft tracking and data acquisition operations from its 

Beltsville Tracking Station to its Wallops Flight Facility by early 1986, consolidating the operations to support balloon, sounding-rocket, and aeronauticalflight research. Diminishing need for ground stations due to the new Tracking 

and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) necessitated the realignment. 

TDRSS would consist of three communications satellites in geosynchronous orbit, providing global coverage by earth-orbiting satellites and replacing the worldwide network of ground stations. NASA had launched the first 

171 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

TDRSS satellite in April 1983 and would launch the second about February 

20. GSFC would phase out or transfer to other agencies most of its tracking 

stations. In addition to Wallops, however, GSFC would maintain ground 

stations at Bermuda and Merritt Island, Florida, to support Space Shuttle 

launches from KSC. The White Sands, New Mexico, station was the ground 

terminal for orbiting TDRSS satellities (NASA Release 85-11) 

February 26: NASA announced it was donating a 26-m antenna located at the 

Orroral Valley Tracking Station, Australia, which had ceased operations in 

December 1984, to the Australian University of Tasmania. NASA, which had 

used the antenna in programs such as Skylab, the Apollo Soyuz test project, 

and the Space Shuttle, had offered to assist in antenna dismantling and 

transfer to Hobart, Tasmania. 

The University of Tasmania’s physics department, one of Australia’s major 

centers for astronomy and astrophysics, would use the antenna as part of its 

teaching and research activities, including operation with the Australian telescope under construction in New South Wales to improve telescope performance. 

Researchers would also use the antenna in conjunction with other instruments for very-long baseline interferometry, a system employing a number of 

separate antennas to construct a radio telescope with a high-resolution capability, to obtain more accurate measurements of earth’s surface. Researchers 

would also make the antenna available to NASA for its future geodesy, geodynamics, and astronomy projects. (NASA Release 85-28) 

May 17: NASA announced that Harris Corp. successfully deployed on the 

ground a 50-fOOt antenna system, marking a milestone in NASA’s program to 

demonstrate that large space antenna concepts were feasible. In the test, a 

hoopcolumn antenna unfolded, umbrella-style, from a compact package to 

a combination of thin structural members, quartz filament cords, and goldplated mesh. 

The mesh, serving as a precision reflecting surface stretching across the 

diameter of the supporting hoop, was shaped like a dish but could be made 

flat, spherical, or conical, depending on the intended application. The antenna column was a precise telescoping hub, forming the central structure of 

the antenna, tensing the cords that shaped the antenna surface, and housing 

the electronic feed mechanisms. 

The size of potential large space antennas meant a significant boost in 

effective radiated power from space and an increased sensitivity to weak 

signals from the ground or from space. One potential application was in 

communications, because at that time each earth station had to have a large 

antenna to receive the weak signals transmitted through small antennas on 

satellites. Large antennas in space would greatly reduce the size and cost of 

the antennas required at ground sites. And a few super-antennas placed in 

172 
NASA 

high geosynchronous orbit could cover the globe, instead of the great number of smaller satellites otherwise required. Millions of inexpensive home 

rooftop or land mobile unit antennas could receive satellite signals then 

picked up only by a few very large ground stations. 

NASA believed the 50-foot antenna system was the largest precision antenna designed for space that could be accommodated in existing ground 

electromagnetic test facilities. However, the ultimate deployable space antennas might have 150- to 300-foot diameters. Studies showed that these larger 

antennas required space assembly. (NASA Release 85-76) 

June 6: NASA announced that its deep space network (DSN), as part of a 

French-led international tracking network, would track the first of two international balloon experiments carried aboard the Soviet VEGA spacecraft to 

study beginning June 10 Venus‘s atmosphere. The VEGA 1 and 2 spacecraft 

each would drop an instrumented lander and an instrument-laden balloon 

into the Venusian atmosphere as they approached the planet on their way to a 

March 1986 rendezvous with Halley’s Comet. 

After reaching the equatorial regions of Venus‘s atmosphere, the balloons 

would float free in the middle, most active, layer of Venus’s threetiered 

clouds. The flight plan called for the entry packages, consisting of the atmospheric balloon and a lander, to plunge from a 125-km (78 miles) to a 65-km 

(40 miles) altitude, where a parachute would deploy. The lander would 

separate from the balloon at 63 km (39 miles) and head for the surface. The 

balloon would then inflate and carry its instrument package through the 

atmosphere at an altitude of 55 km (34 miles) for more than two days. 

NASA’s deep space network and other stations around the world would use 

a technique called very long baseline interferometry to measure the balloon’s 

velocity, and therefore the wind velocity, with a precision of about 3 km (2 

miles) per hour at Venus’s about 108 million-km (67 million miles) distance 

from earth. A Soviet internal network would also track the balloons. 

NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory was cooperating with the French National Space Agency (CNES), Paris, in the tracking activity. Scientists believed 

data from the balloons would further their understanding of Venus’s complex 

weather system. (NASA Release 85-87) 

Management and Personnel 

January 17: NASA announced appointment effective January 13, 1985, of 

Frank Penaranda, a NASA exceptional service medal recipient serving as 

special assistant to the associate administrator in the Office of Aeronautics 

173 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

and Space Technology (OART), as deputy assistant administrator for commercial programs, where he would develop and coordinate policies and procedures for implementing commercial programs through NASA's in-house 

organizations. 

Penaranda had joined NASA in April 1969 as a technical program analyst 

with OART; NASA later named him director of the resources and management systems division in 1974 and director of institutional operations in the 

Office of Management Operations in Jan. 1978. Penaranda had previously 

worked for the Defense Atomic Support Agency of the Department of Defense as a nuclear physicist conducting applied research on nuclear radiation 

transport and shielding. 

Penaranda holds an M.S. in physics from Marquette University and a B.S. 

from Manhattan College. He also graduated from Harvard's Advanced Management Program. (NASA announcement, Jan. 17/85) 

April 5 NASA announced that effective today it permanently established the 

office of NASA productivity programs to direct, initiate, coordinate, monitor, 

and evaluate agencywide productivity improvement and quality enhancement initiatives. David Braunstein would continue as the office's director and 

would report to the NASA administrator. 

The office was established to ensure NASA's leadership in the development 

and application of advanced technology and management practices that 

contributed to significant increases in agency and national productivity. 

In making the announcement, NASA Administrator James Beggs said that 

NASA would provide a participative and challenging environment for all 

employees, and it would develop a team approach with its contractors to 

achieve the highest levels of Productivity. (NASA announcement, May 15/85) 

April 12 NASA announced it honored at a KSC reception 200 NASA and 

NASA industrial Quality Circle employees for their volunteer efforts in improving quality, safety, and productivity. Jesse Moore, NASA associate administrator for space flight, read a message from George Burns, president of the 

International Association of Quality Circles, congratulating the employees on 

their outstanding performance. 

NASA selected the honorees under an office of space flight program that 

recognized first-level supervisory and support personnel for their productivity efforts. The Manned Flight Awareness Panel, made up of NASA and industry personnel, managed the program. NASA had over 120 employee teams 

with over 1,000 employees voluntarily participating in Quality Circles. 

Through the program, NASA hoped to foster increased effectiveness through 

improved efficiency in the space and aeronautics research and development 

programs. (NASA Release 85-55) 

174 
NASA 

lune 72 Approximately 200 NASA management officials and contractors met 

June 12 and 13 at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) to discuss initiatives to 

improve quality and productivity in NASNcontractor operations, the Marsha// Star reported. The first NASNHardware Contractors Productivity Conference was at MSFC in April 1984. 

Attendees at the 1985 conference heard an interim report on the status of 

activities implemented as a result of the 1984 meeting and related recommendations. NASA and contractor panels discussed topics such as quality in 

relationship to productivity; productivity and quality initiatives and incentives; efforts toward implementing participative management techniques; 

and improvement in specification, preplanning, and measurement. 

The conference was part of NASA‘s continuing effort to provide national 

leadership in the development and application of advanced technology and 

management practices. During fiscal year 1984, about 85% of NASA’s $7.2 

billion budget was placed with contractors. “It’s very important,” said William 

Reynolds, associate director for management in MSFC’s science and engineering directorate, “that NASA‘s productivity effort include an improved 

relationship with the NASA hardware and service/support contractors.” (Marsha// Star, June 12/85, l) 

lune 77: NASA announced it appointed Dr. Raymond Colladay associate 

administrator for aeronautics and space technology to be responsible for the 

overall management of the agency’s aeronautics, space technology, and terrestrial energy programs including the institutional management of Ames 

Research Center (ARC), Langley Research Center (LaRC), and Lewis Research 

Center (LeRC). On April 18, 1982, NASA had named Colladay deputy associate administrator for the office of aeronautics and space technology; since 

April 17, 1985, he had served as acting associate administrator for that office. 

Colladay began his career with LeRC in 1969, where he conducted analytical and experimental research in advanced high-temperature gas turbine 

engines. In 1974 NASA named him head of the turbomachinery fundamentals section and then temporarily assigned him to NASA Headquarters as 

acting chief of the propulsion branch in the aircraft energy efficiency office. 

Later he served as assistant manager of the LeRC efficiency engine project, 

deputy manager of the advanced propulsion systems office, manager for 

propulsion research and technology, and beginning in 1982 director of the 

research and technology division. 

Colladay received B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees from Michigan State University, East Lansing. He authored or co-authored more than 20 NASA technical reports and journal articles relating to aeronautical and space research. 

(NASA Release 85-93) 

july 71: NASA announced that S. Neil Hosenball, NASA general counsel 

since 1975, would retire on August 2 to become director of the University of 

175 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Colorado’s new Center For Space Law and Policy. Before appointment to his 

current position, Hosenball served as deputy general counsel since October 

1967. Earlier he had been assistant general counsel for procurement and had 

served for four years at Lewis Research Center. 

From 1970 to 1979, Hosenball was a member of the U.S. delegation to the 

United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and headed 

the U.S. delegation at legal subcommittee and committee sessions. 

Hosenball, who received a B.S. degree from the University of Michigan 

and his LL.6. degree from Harvard Law School, was awarded the NASA 

Exceptional Service Medal in 1967, the NASA Distinguished Service Medal in 

1973, the National Civil Service League Career Service Medal in 1980, and 

the Presidential Rank of Distinguished Executive in 1983. 

The Center for Space and Law Policy, established in November 1984, was 

one of a very few such institutions in the world and was intended to guide the 

university in its space research efforts. (NASA Release 85-104) 

july 23: NASA announced that John O’Brien, currently NASA deputy general 

counsel, was appointed effective August 4 NASA general counsel, succeeding S. Neil Hosenball who was retiring. 

OBrien began his career in 1962 with NASA at the Launch Operations 

Center, later Kennedy Space Center (KSC), during the Mercury Program. He 

then served as chief counsel of the KSC and assistant general counsel for 

procurement matters at NASA Headquarters. 

He received an A.B. degree from Niagara University and his J.D. degree 

from Georgetown University. After joining NASA, O’Brien was designated a 

Princeton Fellow in Public Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public 

and International Affairs, Princeton University, and in 1976 received the 

NASA Exceptional Service Medal. (NASA Release 85-108) 

July 23 President Reagan nominated Anthony Calio, who served at NASA for 

16 years, to be administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Washington Post reported. Pending confirmation of 

the nomination by the US. Senate, Calio, who was deputy administrator of 

NOAA, would replace John Bryne. ( WPost, July 23/85, A13) 

September 12: President Reagan announced today his intention to nominate 

William Graham to be NASA deputy administrator to succeed Hans Michael 

Mark, the Administration of Ronald Reagan reported. 

Graham, with R&D Associates since 1971, had served there as director of 

computing operations, division manager, corporate program manager, and 

most recently senior associate. Before joining R&D Associates, he was a 

member of the technical staff, physics department, at the Rand Corp.; project 

officer of the Air Force Weapons Laboratory; and a member of the technical 

staff of the Hughes Aircraft Corp. research laboratory. 

176 
NASA 

Since 1982, Graham had served as acting chairman of the President's General Advisory Committee on Arms Control and Disarmament. He had also 

been a member of the Defense Nuclear Agency Scientific Advisory Group on 

Effects, a consultant to the Defense Nuclear Agency, and consultant to the 

Office of the Secretary of Defense. 

Graham received his B.S. degree from the California Institute of Technology and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Stanford University. (Admin. of Ronald 

Reagan, Sept 13/85, 1073) 

September 20: NASA announced appointment effective October 7, of Richard Barnes to be director of the International Affairs Division. Barnes 

would replace Kenneth Pedersen, who had served in the job since November 

1978 and would spend the following year on sabbatical as research professor 

at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. 

Barnes recently had completed four years as NASA European representative 

based at the American Embassy in Paris, where he was responsible for liaison 

with the European Space Agency and the national space agencies of Western 

Europe on cooperative projects and for identification of potential future joint 

space projects. In 1961 he joined the NASA Office of International Programs 

where he served in various capacities, including deputy director of international affairs, before his Paris assignment. 

Before joining NASA, Barnes was affiliated with the Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc. and served with the Atomic Energy Commission's Division of International Affairs and the Bureau of Ordinance of the Navy Department. 

Barnes received his B.A. degree from Dartmouth College and a master of 

public administration degree from Harvard University. He also graduated 

from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces and served on commissioned 

active duty with the U.S. Navy during the Korean War. (NASA Release 85- 

132) 

October 13: NASA announced that, effective October 13, Carroll Dicus, Jr. 

was appointed chairman of the NASA Board of Contract Appeals and chairman of the Inventions and Contributions Board, succeeding Frederick Lees 

who retired in September. 

From 1968 to 1974 Dicus was an attorney in the chief counsel's office at 

Goddard Space Flight Center and from March 1974 to October 1980 an 

administrative judge on the NASA Board of Contract Appeals. He then went 

to the U.S. Postal Service where he was an associate judicial officer and vice 

chairman of the Board of Contract Appeals. 

Dicus is a graduate of Johns Hopkins University and the University of 

Baltimore Law School. (NASA anno., Oct 85) 

October 15 NASA announced that Edward Frankle was appointed effective 

October 27 deputy general counsel succeeding John O'Brien. 

177 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Frankle had been chief counsel of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center 

since September 1982 and prior to that associate director, policy develop 

ment and administrative legal systems, for the Selective Service System, 

where he was responsible for the development and promulgation of operating regulations for deferment and classification and the selection and training 

of local and appeal board members across the U.S. He served from 1974 to 

1980 as a member of the Office of General Counsel, Department of the Navy. 

Frankle received B.S. and M.S. degrees in aerospace engineering from the 

Catholic University of America and a J.D. degree from Georgetown University School of Law. (NASA anno., Oct 15/85) 

October 78 NASA deputy associate administrator for space science and 

applications Samuel Keller, speaking at a weekly staff meeting, said "We 

expect 1986 will be the most demanding year we've ever had," the Washington Post reported. In January Voyager would encounter the planet Uranus. In 

March the Space Shuttle would fly a mission dedicated to observing Halley's 

comet. In May NASA would launch Ulysses, which would fly to Jupiter and 

use the planet's gravity to "slingshot" itself around the sun, and Galileo, 

which would orbit Jupiter. In August the Space Shuttle would carry the 

Hubble Space Telescope into orbit. The three spacecraft cost $2 billion not 

including launch costs. 

Keller's toughest time would occur in May, the Postsaid, when Ulysses and 

Galileo at the same time would be in the cargo bays of two Space Shuttles on 

their launch pads. NASA would try May 15 to launch Ulysses and then 

Galileo four days later. If anything delayed the May 15 launch, NASA had 24 

days to get the Space Shuttle into space, a launch window that allowed the 

two spacecraft to fly to Jupiter using the least amount of fuel. 

"1'11 be glad when 1986 is over," Keller said. (WPost, Oct 18/85, A21) 

October24 NASA announced that an October 29 conference in Washington 

sponsored by NASA, the Department of Defense, and other government 

agencies would provide a forum for government executives to discuss the 

Reagan Administration's program to increase government efficiency and effectiveness. 

Following welcoming remarks by Dennis Whitfield, chief of staff to the 

Secretary of Labor, and David Braunstein, director of NASA's productivity 

programs, conference participants would be briefed on several perspectives 

on the President's productivity improvement program. Stephen Scholossberg, 

deputy under secretary for labor-management relations, Department of Labor, would then provide a labor-management view of quality and productivi ty. 

In the afternoon, NASA astronaut Bruce McCandless, first human to freely 

maneuver in space without a tether, would speak on the importance of 

178 
NASA 

quality and productivity in the space program. John Franke Jr., assistant secretary for administration, Department of Agriculture, would then give case 

examples of management’s commitment to quality; and Commodore John 

Kirkpatrick, commander, Naval Aviation Logistics Center, would discuss quality improvement through total quality management. (NASA Release 85-146) 

November 25 NASA announced that the U.S. Senate confirmed on November 18 Dr. William Graham to be NASA deputy administrator; Graham, who 

was a founder and executive of R&D Associates, was nominated by President 

Reagan on September 12. 

Graham had served for three years as chairman of the President’s General 

Advisory Committee on Arms Control and Disarmament and previously 

served as a member of the President-elect’s transition team. 

Before founding R&D Associates in 1971, Graham spent six years with the 

Rand Corp. and before that three years active duty at the Air Force Weapons 

Laboratory, Kirtland Air Force Base, as a project officer directing a group 

conducting experimental and theoretical research on strategic system survivability. 

Graham had been a consultant to the Office of the Secretary of Defense 

and served on many international and national boards and advisory groups 

including the National Academy of Science/National Research Council Committee on Undersea Warfare, the Air Force Science Advisory Board Task Force 

on Manned Strategic System Vulnerability, the U.S.-United Kingdom Joint 

Working Group on Atomic Weapons, the Defense Nuclear Agency Scientific 

Advisory Group on Effects, and the Defense Science Board System Vulnerability Task Force and Associated Task Forces. 

His memberships in professional and honorary organizations included Tau 

Beta Pi, the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics, the New 

York Academy of Science, the Council on Foreign Relations, the board of 

directors of the Committee on the Present Danger, the Defense Preparedness 

Association, the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 

In 1959 Graham received a B.S. degree in physics from the California 

Institute of Technology and in 1961 an M.S. degree in engineering science 

and in 1963 a Ph.D. in electrical engineering, both from Stanford University. 

(NASA Release 85-155) 

December 2: NASA announced the appointment effective November 25 of 

Joseph Alexander to deputy chief scientist with responsibility for providing 

assistance to the chief scientist in advising the Administrator and in establishing policy related to scientific aspects of NASA programs and missions. 

7 79 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Alexander joined Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in 1962, where he 

participated in the establishment of NASA’s program in space radio astronomy and conducted studies of the sun, the planets, and the galaxy from earthorbit, lunar-orbit, and planetary flyby spacecraft. In 1970 he became head of 

the Galactic Studies Section where he was responsible for scientific studies 

associated with the Radio Astronomy Explorer satellite program. Following 

leave as a visiting scientist at the Department of Astro-Geophysics at the 

University of Colorado, Alexander became head of the Planetary Magnetospheres Branch and directed a research team conducting both experimental 

and theoretical studies of planetary environments by using instruments on 

board spacecraft such as the Interplanetary Monitoring Probes, Mariner-10, 

Magsat, Pioneer-11, and Voyager 1 and 2. 

From January 1984 until March 1985, Alexander was a senior policy analyst at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy where he 

concentrated on issues related to space science and technology in the civil 

space program. He then returned to GSFC as associate chief of the laboratory 

for extrater restr i a I physics . A member of the American Geophysical Union, the U.S. National Committee of the International Union of Radio Science, and the International Astronomical Union, Alexander received in 1960 a B.S. degree and in 1962 an 

M.A. degree, both in physics, from the College of William and Mary. (NASA 

anno., Dec 2/85) 

December 2 A Federal grand jury today indicted General Dynamics Corp., 

three of its current executives, and its former executive vice president, James 

Beggs, currently Administrator of NASA, for allegedly seeking to defraud the 

Defense Department in connection with producing two prototypes of the 

DIVAD, an anti-aircraft gun for the Army, Time magazine reported. 

The sevencount, 33-page indictment stated that between January 1978 and 

August 1981, while General Dynamics was working on a $41 million program to build the prototypes, it made false statements to the government and 

was guilty of fraud. The indictment charged the company with illegally billing $7.5 million of its expenses to other government accounts, of which $3.2 

million was paid. Along with Beggs, the indictment also named Ralph 

Hawes, division general manager; David McPherson, program director; and 

James Hansen, assistant director. 

Beggs, who took a leave of absence from NASA, denied the charge, saying, 

“I have not been involved in any criminal wrongdoing . . . I do not intend 

to leave, and this is not the first step to a resignation.” A General Dynamics 

spokesman said, “The issue is a highly sophisticated regulatory and accounting matter, which should be resolved in a civil forum, not in a criminal case.“ 

(Time, Dec 16/85, 46) 

The Navy anticipated a series of NROSS satellites with enough launches to 

keep an operating satellite in orbit unless sensor or other changes made 

180 
NASA 

faster launches desirable. NROSS-1’s expected lifetime would be three years; 

an NROSS-2 would depend on needed oceanographic data. The system 

would help battle group commanders predict ocean conditions for antisub 

marine warfare operations, force placement, and plan use of advanced 

weapon systems. (MD, Jan 10/85, 50) 

December4: NASA Administrator James Beggs today took an indefinite leave 

of absence from the agency to fight fraud charges against him [see NASA/ 

Management and Personnel, Dec. 21, the Washington Post reported. With 

White House approval, associate administrator Phi I i p Cu I bertson became 

general manager. 

Although Beggs had refused to resign, White House spokesman Larry 

Speakes said that President Reagan, “while reluctantly acceding to his request for a leave of absence,” asked Beggs to assist in an “orderly transition of 

his responsibilities to his colleagues at NASA to facilitate continuity of management at this critically important agency. Mr. Beggs has agreed to do so.” 

Speakes added that the space program “has been revitalized” under Begg’s 

leadership and “this important record must continue.” 

Putting Culbertson in charge of day-today operations put Begg’s stamp on 

the transition, the Post said. Culbertson was a 20-year NASA veteran, wellknown to the House and Senate committees that dealt with the agency, and 

responsible for planning the agency’s next big project, construction of an $8 

billion permanent space station. 

William Graham, a former planning analyst at the Rand Corp. and chairman for the previous three years of the White House Advisory Commission 

on Arms Control and Disarmament, had been with NASA eight working days. 

Reagan appointed Graham acting administrator, so that Graham could create 

the job of general manager and name Culbertson to the post. 

“Whoever is running the space agency in 1986 has to know where the 

space station stands, what money it needs and who to talk to to keep it on 

track,” said a congressional aide who dealt with NASA. “That’s why Phil 

Culbertson is getting the job of running the agency day-today. He knows the 

issues.” 

In his statement, Beggs reiterated that he is innocent of the fraud charges 

resulting from a Justice Department investigation. “I have concluded there 

was nothing I did then that I would not do again,” Begg‘s statement said. “I 

have not been involved in any criminal wrongdoing or, in fact, of wrongdoing 

of any kind. I am totally confident I will be exonerated.” (W Post, Dec 5/85, 

A3) 

December 5: Speaking to a standing-room-only crowd at NASA Headquarters and all NASA centers via closedcircuit TV, former administrator James 

Beggs said today that federal fraud charges against him were “baseless” [see 

181 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NASNManagement and Personnel, Dec. 21, that he expected to be cleared, 

and expressed thanks for an ”outpouring” of support, the Washington Post 

reported. 

“These charges relate to things that happened in General Dynamics six and 

seven years ago,” Beggs noted and said that he had reviewed the charges and 

believed, “we acted in an entirely ethical, legal and moral sense.“ 

“The charges, therefore, are baseless . . . They are outrageous, ridiculous and I feel confident that once this is brought to trial that 1’11 be completely exonerated of the charges.” 

Beggs also noted that the suits against defense firms were creating a climate 

that would blight the work of NASA and of the defense community. “The very 

adversarial relationship that is being created by the suits against the contractors, the very bad kind of statements that are being made in the press, and 

elsewhere, is going to make our job in the future much more difficult,” he 

said. “Not just here, but in the Defense Department as well.” 

Earlier, the NY Times reported that all top 27 administrators at NASA and 

field installations had sent a statement to Congress and the White House 

endorsing Beggs as “an individual with the highest standards of integrity 

which have earned him the esteem and respect of his colleagues.” The 

statement said he had revitalized the space program and regretted “the untimely interruption of his work,” calling him a man of the “highest integrity, 

totally dedicated to NASA, an extremely able executive.” (WPost, Dec 6/85, 

A16; NYT, Dec 6/85, A5) 

December 5: Having served as NASA deputy administrator for only two 

weeks, Dr. William Graham was not known well by most NASA employees; 

but, as acting administrator replacing James Beggs, Graham had a clear 

opinion of NASA and his opportunity to lead it, the Washington Post reported. Graham, who had a Ph.D. in electrical engineering, said in an interview today that “NASA’s a marvelous organization . . . For a technologist, 

this is like dying and going to heaven.” 

Thus, Graham characterized himself as a professional technologist, which 

his background would certainly indicate. He had worked as a project officer 

with the Air Force Weapons Laboratory in New Mexico, was a founder and 

executive of R&D Associates in California, and had served on numerous 

advisory panels on nuclear weapons, strategic military policy, and undersea 

warfare. However, this emphasis in his career on weapons research and 

military policy aroused some unease at NASA, the Post commented. “He’s 

from the other side of the river,” one NASA official said, referring to Graham’s 

long association with the Pentagon. But Graham had sought to assure Congressional committees recently that his appointment was not designed to 

lead to the “militarization of NASA.” 

182 
NASA 

Graham‘s close ties to the Reagan Administration were seen as possibly 

beneficial to the space agency. And Graham commented that he would 

follow President Reagan’s “very strong and clear space policy.” 

Some associates noted that even as acting administrator they expected 

Graham to “take a strong hand” in agency affairs. Graham had already announced that he intended to meet soon with all the agency’s top executives 

and then visit the research and operations center at Cape Canaveral, Houston, Pasadena, and elsewhere. “I’m a hands-on kind of person,” he said. “I 

like to get out and walk the halls and talk to people.” (W Post, Dec 6/85, 

A29) 

December 6: NASA announced that Acting Administrator William Graham 

confirmed the appointment for an indefinite period of Philip Culbertson, 

associate administrator for space station, to the position of NASA general 

manager. In that capacity he would assist Graham and have specific responsibility for the Offices of Space Science and Applications, Commercial Programs, Space Flight, Aeronautics and Space Technology, Space Station, and 

Space Tracking and Data Systems. 

Culbertson had held his current position since August 1, 1984, coinciding 

with the establishment of the Office of Space Station. Since November 1981 

he had been associate deputy administrator, serving as senior staff advisor to 

the administrator and the deputy administrator and directing the formulation 

of policy, strategy, and planning for the space station. From 1979 to 1981 he 

served as assistant for the Space Transportation System (STS), providing continuous assessment of STS development, acquisition, and operations status 

and otherwise advising the administrator and deputy administrator on STS 

matters requiring policy decisions. 

His earlier NASA assignments included the positions of deputy associate 

administrator for STS/technical, assistant administrator for planning and program integration, director of advanced manned missions, and manager of the 

institutional assessment conducted in 1977. He also served as the NASA 

representative in the 1979 antisatellite treaty negotiations and in 1976 and 

1977 was detailed to the Executive Office for a five-month period as Executive Director of the President’s Committee on Science and Technology. 

Culbertson received a B.S. in aeronautical engineering from Georgia Institute of Technology and served as a commissioned officer in the US. Navy, 

after which he spent four years as a research associate at the University of 

Michigan, where he received his M.S. degree in aeronautical engineering. 

(NASA anno., Dec 6/85) 

December 11: NASKs Thomas DeCair, associate administrator for external 

relations, announced today the appointment of Shirley Green as NASA’s 

director of public affairs. She replaced Frank Johnson Jr., who was appointed 

assistant associate administrator for external relations (special projects). In 

183 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

her new position, Green would be responsible for planning and directing all 

NASA activities that provided information to and responded to inquiries from 

the public and the media. 

Green came to NASA with 20 years’ experience in communications and 

management. Since 1981, as deputy and acting press secretary to the Vice 

President of the United States, she was responsible for planning and coordinating media activities for the Vice President on matters of domestic policy, 

including the task forces on regulatory relief and drug interdiction. She had 

accompanied the Vice President to 61 foreign countries, coordinating all 

media activities. 

Green was a former chairman of public affairs for the Texas Federation of 

Republican Women, press assistant to Congressman Bob Price, and a recipient of the Ten Outstanding Republican Women award in Texas. 

She received a bachelor of business administration degree in 1956 from the 

University of Texas. (NASA Release 85-168) 

December 16 Former NASA administrator James Beggs, General Dynamics, 

and three executives of the company today pleaded not guilty to charges of 

plotting to hide cost Overruns during development of a prototype of the 

DIVAD antiaircraft gun [see NWManagement and Personnel, Dec. 21, the 

Washington Post reported. ”I plead not guilty to each count,” Beggs, a former 

company executive, told US. District Court Judge Ferdinand Fernandez. 

Fernandez scheduled a trial to begin April 8, 1986, although prosecutor 

Randy Bellows said the case was too complex to be heard so quickly. Bellows 

said the government had 2.7 million documents to review. 

Thomas Sullivan, attorney for General Dynamics, told Fernandez that the 

defendants wanted the trial to begin in the spring because a government 

suspension of most contracts with the company until the case was resolved 

had put the defense contractor “in a real serious bind . . . This company 

could be literally . . . put out of business by this suspension,” Sullivan said. 

Attorneys estimated the trial could take more than 12 weeks, with Bellows 

saying he would call at least 70 witnesses. (WpOst, Dec 17/85, A13) 

December 78 NASA announced that H. William Wood, deputy associate 

administrator (Networks), Office of Space Tracking and Data Systems 

(OSTDS), was retiring effective early in January after more than 30 years of 

government service. 

Wood had served in his present post since April 1984. Before that he 

managed the Network Systems program as the division director since 1981. 

Wood was a research engineer at Langley Research Center when NASA was 

formed in 1958; and in 1959 he became the group leader with the Tracking 

and Ground Instrumentation unit for the Mercury Network. His other NASA 

assignments included associate director, Network Systems Division; NASA 

184 
NASA 

senior scientific representative in Australia; and associate director, Operations, in the Network Directorate at Goddard Space Flight Center. Earlier, 

Wood had served several years in the US. Air Force. 

Wood received the NASA Outstanding Leadership Medal and two NASA 

Exceptional Service Medals, and he is a Fellow of the American Astronautical 

Society. In 1955 Wood received a BSEE degree from North Carolina State 

University. (NASA anno., Dec 18/85) 

December 23: NASA announced that Dr. Charles Kupperman was appointed 

effective immediately as executive assistant to the deputy administrator. 

Kupperman came to NASA after serving as executive director of the President’s General Advisory Committee on Arms Control and Disarmament. 

From 1978 to 1981 he was the research associate and defense analyst for the 

Committee on the Present Danger, and he also served as a member of President Reagan’s 1980 presidential campaign and defense transition team. Kup 

perman was a consultant to R&D Associates and taught at the School of 

International Relations, University of Southern California. 

Kupperman graduated Phi Beta Kappa with a B.A. degree in political science from Purdue University, received an M.A. degree in political science 

from the University of British Columbia, and a Ph.D. in international relations from the University of Southern California. He was the author of articles 

on defense, the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT), and national security 

policy for academic and public journals. (NASA Release anno., Dec 23/85) 

December 26: NASA announced that it had named effective immediately 

john Hodge acting associate administrator for space station. 

Hodge became director of the Space Station Task Force on its establishment in May 1982 and was appointed deputy director of the Interim Space 

Station Program Office in April 1984 when the task force completed its work. 

He directed activities that resulted in the initial concepts definition for the 

space station, established program management policies, initiated advanced 

development programs, defined user needs, and organized potential international cooperation. In 1984 NASA appointed Hodge deputy associate administrator for Space Station, coinciding with establishment of the Office of 

Space Station. 

Hodge joined NASA in 1959, after working with Vickers-Armstrong, Ltd. 

and AVRO Aircraft Ltd., as chief of Flight Control, supervising a team of over 

200 technical and administrative personnel and 100 aerospace contractors 

and serving as flight director for Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo flights. 

In 1970 Hodge worked for the Department of Transportation as director of 

transportation systems concepts at the Transportation Systems Center and 

later became associate administrator for Policy, Plans and Program Management before rejoining NASA. 

185 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Hodge received a B.S. degree in engineering from Northampton Engineering College in London and in 1966 the honorary degree of Doctor of Science 

from the City University, London. (NASA anno., Dec 26/85) 

NASA Installations 

Ames Research Center 

February 7: NASA announced that effective January 24, Dr. Dale Compton 

became deputy director of Ames Research Center (ARC), where he had been 

director for engineering and computer systems since February 1983. Compton joined NASA in June 1957, serving as deputy director of astronautics, 

then chief of the space science division and manager of the lnfrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS). Recipient of the NASA Outstanding Leadership 

Medal, Compton earned a B.S. degree in 1957 and an M.S. degree in 1958, 

both in aeronautical engineering, and a Ph.D. degree in aeronautical and 

astronautical engineering in 1969. (NASA Release 85-17; NASA anno., Feb 21 

85) 

During February: Ames Research Center (ARC) announced it had formed the 

information sciences office to do basic and applied research in artificial 

intelligence (AI), automation sciences, and space-related computer science 

technology, with emphasis on applications to the NASA space station. 

NASA had designated ARC as the lead center in AI research, and the new 

office’s research would cover AI programming languages, expert-systems development, knowledge representation and information understanding, machine vision and learning, sensor fusion, and optical processing. 

Space-related computer-science research would focus on symbolic-processing and data-flow architectures; network design, protocols, and simulation; and optical read/write information-storage technology. 

ARC would combine in-house studies, primarily on applied research and 

development of flight experiments to validate and demonstrate the technolcgies being developed, with the work of outside research organizations, such 

as SRI International, Symbolics Inc., Innovative Optics, Inc., Stanford University, University of California at Berkeley, MIX University of Texas, and University of Michigan, on basic research issues to accomplish project objectives. 

ARC would orient research toward the user community, particularly other 

NASA centers, focusing on both technology development for user applications and help to users during implementation. Space station automation 

would be the primary application, and ARC had signed agreements with 

Johnson Space Center and Goddard Space Flight Center to work together on 

this implementation. ARC would also advise on space station automation 

186 
NASA 

through participation on NASA advisory groups such as the space station 

automation study team, space station automation and robotics panel, advanced-technology automation committee, and NASA headquarters space 

station data systems steering committee. (ARC Release 85-6) 

March 12: NASA announced that personnel at Ames Research Center (ARC) 

would break ground March 14 for the numerical aerodynamic simulation 

(NAS) facility building to house the world’s most powerful supercomputer 

system, which was intended to provide a national computational capability 

that would complement NASA‘s experimental facilities in maintaining national preeminence in aeronautical research. Researchers would use highspeed supercomputers in the system to solve complex aerodynamic 

equations describing the fundamental fluid physics and large scale aerodynamic flows associated with aircraft flying in earth’s atmosphere. In effect, 

they would test aircraft configurations by “flying” them in the NAS supercomputer system, reducing both time and costs associated with development of 

new aircraft. 

NAS would also support other research, including computational materials 

and structures, chemistry, and astrophysics; weather predictions; and genetic 

engineering. ARC also intended to make the supercomputer network available to remote users in universities, private industry, and other government 

research agencies via satellite. 

Cray Research‘s Cray 2 supercomputer, with an expected operating speed 

of 250 million calculations per second when working aerodynamic prob 

lems, would be the heart of the initial NAS network when it became operational in mid-1986. NASA intended to incorporate even faster 

supercomputers as they became commercially available, with the aim of 

including supercomputers with up to one billion calculations per second in 

1988 and 10 billion calculations per second in the 1990s. 

In an effort to create a partnership between people and machines that, in 

itself, would advance computer simulation, NASA had architects Hunt and 

Co. design the 90,500-sq. ft. concrete building so as to encourage scientists 

who would use the computers for research to work closely with the people 

who would operate, maintain, and develop the NAS system. Building contractor was Perini Co. (NASA Release 85-37) 

April 2: NASA announced that a group of researchers led by Dr. Lelia Coyne, 

San Jose University, working at Ames Research Center (ARC) discovered new 

clayenergy storage and transfer processes that supported a clay origin-of-life 

theory, which contradicted the theory that organic life arose from an accidental combination of chemicals and energy in a primordial ”soup” on the 

primitive earth. 

Basic to the clay origin-of-life theory were observations suggesting that clay, 

although composed of inorganic material, exhibited lifelike characteristics 

187 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

in its ability to select out certain chemicals and to serve as a catalyst for 

chemical reactions. Some scientists also theorized that clay might be able to 

perform additional chemical functions basic to life including self-replication, 

growth, and transfer of chemical information to other chemical systems. They 

believed that organic chemicals that eventually "learned" to reproduce themselves and create life could have come together in an orderly process that first 

appeared in the structuring and reproductive processes attributed to clay. 

The work at ARC strengthened this theory by finding that clay had the 

ability to absorb, store, and transfer energy, a necessary process of organic 

life. This work introduced a new and important aspect to the clay-life theory-that clay minerals were capable of engaging in energetic processes that 

were necessary conditions if it was to be shown that clay had lifelike properties. 

The NASA-sponsored investigation grew out of 20 years of research at ARC 

in studies of the chemical basis for the origin of life. Other scientists working 

on various aspects of clay research at ARC were Drs. Sherwood Chang, Ted 

Bunch, James Lawless, Noam Lahav, David White, and Glenn Pollock. (NASA 

Release 85-48) 

September 77: NASA announced that the Ames Research Center (ARC) selected Informatics General Corp. and Technology Development of California 

for competitive negotiations leading to an approximately $40 million five 

year contract to provide computational resources for research in largescale 

computational fluid dynamics, aerodynamics design and analysis, computational chemistry, astrophysics, atmospheric modeling, and satellite image 

processing. 

The winning contractor would have to deliver a total system capability 

including the computational facility, operational support, systems engineering, and management. 

The anticipated contract was a follow-on to existing services performed at 

ARC. (NASA Release 85-130) 

October 2: NASA's Ames Research Center (ARC) announced that the world's 

fastest and most powerful supercomputer, the Cray-2, arrived at ARC to assist 

researchers in taking major steps toward simulating actual aircraft flight and 

thus making possible important advances, both in cost savings and performance, in aircraft design. The Cray-2 could perform 250 million continuous 

calculations per second, which was more than three times faster than the 

previous generation of supercomputers. 

The Cray-2 was the first building block in the creation of NASA's Numerical 

Aerodynamic Simulation (NAS) program, planned to provide the world's 

most powerful, large-scale high-speed processor system. In addition to its 

advantages for aircraft design, NAS represented an important national facility 

in such research areas as aerothermodynamics, computational chemistry, 

188 
NASA 

atmospheric modeling, and other computationally intensive scientific applications. 

NASA planned the NAS system as an ongoing project with continuous 

improvements in speed and memory. Its objectives were to establish and 

maintain a leading-edge national computation capability to ensure leadership in computational fluid dynamics and related disciplines, provide an 

integrated processing system capable of a sustained 250 million floatingpoint, operations-per-second processing rate in 1986 and a one billion rate in 

1987, and act as a pathfinder in advanced, large-scale computer systems 

capability. 

The Cray-2 was four feet high and four feet in diameter; its small size was 

made possible by microminiaturization of the electronic circuits and extremely dense packing of the circuit boards. Since the speed of light was a 

fundamental limit on computer speed, super fast machines had to be smaller 

in order to reduce distances that information traveled. Computer scientists 

indicated they expected to get still more speed in future machines by further 

reducing size and adding more parallel processors. 

A main feature of the Cray-2 was its large random-access memory, which 

was 16 times larger than previous supercomputers' memories. The Cray-2's 

memory provided random access from any of the machine's four main processors and any of its high-speed data channels. This meant a user could use 

all or part of this memory quickly, rather than taking hours to access data for 

large calculations. 

Another main feature of the machine was that its tightly-packed, heatproducing electronic components were immersed for cooling in a colorless 

odorless, inert fluorocarbon liquid, the first such design in computer history. 

(ARC Release 85-38) 

Goddard Space Flight Center 

lanuary 74 NASA announced that Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to industry to develop a space platform 

providing five years of on-orbit services to NASA payloads while allowing the 

developer to market it to commercial users, an innovative approach considered a first step toward creating a closer partnership between government and 

industry in space. Industry would finance, develop, own, and operate the 

platform with first use planned in late 1988 and would be free to market the 

platform (totally separate from NASA's plans for a governmentdeveloped, 

permanently manned space station) for materials processing or other manufacturing activities. 

NASA stipulated that the platform be capable of providing services for four 

future projects: the extreme ultraviolet explorer (EUVE), the x-ray timing 

explorer (XTE), a zero-gravity payload, and an as yet unidentified project. 

189 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The Space Shuttle or other launch vehicle would place the commercial 

platform in orbit. Commercial payloads would reimburse the government for 

use of the orbiter and facilities. (NASA Release 85-7) 

Johnson Space Center 

September 72 NASA announced that it had selected Rockwell Shuttle Operations Co. for negotiations leading to award of the $685 million four-year 

space transportation system operations contract (STSOC) at Johnson Space 

Center USC). Follow-on awards could result in a total contract period of 15 

years at a value of about $5.5 billion. JSC would manage the work under a 

cost-plus-incentive/award-fee contract that included incentive fee on sound 

cost management and an award fee on the basis of performance. Other team 

members included Bendix Field Engineering Corp., System Development 

Corp., Omniplan Corp., RMS Technologies, Inc., and System Management 

American Corp. 

Under the contract, Rockwell would have responsibility for six major STSOC functions: project management; maintenance and operations; sustaining engineering; flight preparation requirements and analysis; flight 

preparation production; and direct mission operations, testing, and support. 

Work would be done for such facilities as the mission control center, shuttle 

mission simulator, shuttle avionics integration laboratory, software production facility, central computing facility, and the mockup and integration laboratory. 

The selection represented NASA's consolidation into one contract of work 

previously performed by 16 firms under 22 contracts. 

Other firms submitting proposals were Ford Aerospace and Communications Corp., Space Information Systems Division, Grumman Space Operations Corp., and Lockheed Space Flight Co. (NASA Release 85-128) 

October 7: NASA's Johnson Space Center USC) announced a NASA source 

selection board was evaluating proposals from the industry teams of Boeing 

Aerospace Co. and Wornick Corp.; General Electric, Northrop, and Integrated Systems Analysts; and Hamilton Standard, ILC, and RCA for a single 

Flight Equipment Processing contract (FEPC) that would consolidate work 

being done by 15 firms. NASA planned by the end of October to award an 

initial three-year contract with a tweyear priced option extension. The contract would be cost-plus-award-fee for the first six months; cost-plus-incentive-fee, plus an award fee, for the remainder of the term. Estimated contract 

value at the end of 15 years was $300 million. 

The contract would cover processing Space Shuttle flight crew equipment, 

including operation and maintenance of associated ground systems, primarily at JSC. The winning contractor would be responsible for space suit maintenance and testing before and after flights; failure analysis and repair of 

190 
NASA 

spaceship galleys; operation of the space food production facility; preparation and delivery of food for each mission; medications and equipment for 

medical kits; clothing, personal hygiene and flight kits; tools; radio and TV 

support; and all film and cameras. 

The award would be the second large consolidation contract let in 1985 at 

JSC; on September 12 Rockwell International won the Space Transportation 

System Operations Contract to consolidate JSC Space Shuttle operations. 

USC Release 85-038) 

December 16: NASA announced that Gerald Griffin, director of NASA‘s Johnson Space Center USC), would leave the agency January 14, 1986, to become 

president of the Houston Chamber of Commerce. Robert Goetz, deputy 

director of JSC, would become acting director upon Griffin’s departure. 

Griffin had been JSC’s director since August 1982 and had served with 

NASA for more than 20 years in a number of key positions at three NASA 

centers and in Washington, D.C. Griffin served in the U.S. Air Force and 

worked in the aerospace industry before joining NASA in 1964. 

“It was a tough decision to leave NASA,” Griffin said, but “1’11 depart with 

the comfort that the NASA team of government, industry, and university 

people will continue their outstanding job in space activities for this country. ” 

William Graham, acting NASA administrator, said, “As one of NASA’s key 

senior executives, Gerry has had a long distinguished career. He has received 

many honors and awards in recognition of the contributions he has made 

both to aeronautics and space. We shall all miss him very much and wish 

him great success as he moves on to new accomplishments.” (NASA Release 

85-172) 

Kennedy Space Center 

August 16 Continuing a project begun in 1984, some of the world’s most 

prominent lightning experts gathered during the summer at Kennedy Space 

Center (KSC) to study lightning strikes and their effects, the Spaceport News 

reported. KSC attracted scientists with a variety of research interests because 

it was one of the nation’s areas of highest frequency of strikes and the presence of French experts who had mastered the technique of triggering lightning. 

Taking part in the summer’s project were representatives of NASA, the U.S. 

Air Force’s Wright Aeronautical Lab, the Federal Aviation Administration, the 

U.S. Naval Laboratory, France’s Center for Nuclear Studies, three U.S. universities, and two industry organizations. 

Since late May, the 36 lightning investigators had conducted studies at a 

specially equipped lightning research facility located on the shore of Mosquito Lagoon about nine miles north of the vehicle assembly building. The 

191 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

facility included a launch site for the three-foot rockets used to trigger lightning and two nearby trailers that housed the research teams and their equip 

ment. 

From their control center, the French experts triggered lightning events by 

launching a small rocket that trailed a thin copper wire to an altitude of about 

2000 feet. The wire acted as a trigger, attracting a stroke, which vaporized the 

wire while traveling down an electrical pathway to the ground. Special instruments and cameras near the launch site recorded the strike in detail. 

The triggered lightning events allowed researchers to obtain ground measurements that they could use in atmospheric and lightning research. Re 

searchers might eventually use information from the studies to design 

advanced lightning protection systems for KSC facilities and for greater protection for aircraft such as the Space Shuttle that contained electronic flight 

control systems. 

Other research at the facilities included using a Convair C-580 to obtain 

measurements on a lightning strike; a study to determine how lightning 

strokes gained access to power lines; investigation of the Maxwell Current, 

which developed in a particular pattern before, during, and after thunderstorms; and attempts to obtain three-dimensional photos of lightning strikes. 

In addition to hosting the project, KSC was contributing funding to some of 

the university research. Project managers hoped to attract more participants 

in the future with the promise of research leading to tangible benefits in 

lightning protection and prediction. (Spaceport News, Aug 16/85, 7) 

September 11: Kennedy Space Center (KSC) announced it had extended an 

existing contract with Planning Research Corp. (PRC) to provide engineering 

services for the Directorate of Engineering Development at KSC and at Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB). The $12,421,841 extension brought the total 

contract value to $66,187,413 and extended the period of performance from 

January 1, 1986, through September 30, 1986. 

Under the contract, PRC would design ground-support systems for the 

Space ShuttleKentaur program, which NASA would use to inject space vehicles into interplanetary trajectories after deployment from the Space Shuttle. 

PRC would also provide designs for Space Shuttle launch-support equip 

ment for the Department of Defense (DOD) at VAFB, which would become 

the second launch and landing facility for the Space Shuttle in the mid-l980s, 

particularly for launching DOD payloads into polar orbit. 

Another PRC task under the contract was to provide KSC with designs for 

Space Shuttle cargo ground-support equipment. (KSC Release 186-85) 

September 73: Kennedy Space Center (KSC) selected Boeing Aerospace Op 

erations, General Electric Co., Grumman Technical Service Inc., Hughes 

Aircraft Co., Messerschmidt-Bolkow-Blohm (MBB)/Erno (the West German 

192 
NASA 

firm that produced Spacelab), and McDonnell Douglas Technical Services to 

serve as prime assessment teams to observe payload processing activities, the 

Spaceport News reported. KSC made the selection in connection with the 

initiation of a competitive procurement for a single payload ground operations contract (PGOC) during the Space Transportation System's operational 

period. 

NASA expected to request proposals from the companies near the end of 

1985 or the beginning of 1986 and would award a contract during fall 1986. 

This contract along with those for shuttle processing and base operations 

were the last major contracts to streamline operations as the Space Transportation System matured. The PGOC contract would consolidate operations, 

minimize interfaces, and focus clear responsibility on a single payload contractor at KSC. 

Under the new arrangement, NASA would consolidate work then performed by four KSC contractors into a single contractor with prime responsibility for processing of payloads at KSC, primarily for the Space Shuttle. 

Other contract duties would include sustaining engineering, communications, instrumentation, and telemetry operations, and miscellaneous support. 

(Spaceport News, Sept 13/85, 1) 

November 7: Kennedy Space Center (KSC) awarded ASEA Robotics Inc. a 

$1,143,622 contract to build a robotic development prototype system to be 

installed in the Robotic Applications Development Laboratory (RADL) and 

serve as KSC's control center for robotics, Spaceport News reported. KSC 

currently had two labs for robotics research: Lab A was a test facility for 

training devices, sensor and endeffector development, and small robotic 

projects; Lab B functioned as a control center made up of complex work cells 

and "smart systems" (independent control systems integrated into one coordinated system) for large robotic applications. 

The objective of the new system was to permit engineers to combine 

existing and new technology to create advanced independent and semiindependent machines and machines with independent decision-making 

capabilities or a "computer brain," which could accomplish more on their 

own without stepbystep instructions from human supervisors. The initial 

thrust of the new system would be to develop the technology and techniques 

needed to automatically load and unload hazardous fuels aboard space 

vehicles and payloads during prelaunch ground operations. Future challenges included application of these refueling techniques to other fuels such 

as cryogenic propellants. 

RADL would have an electrically driven articulated robot composed of a 

six-axes arm and interchangeable endeffectors or "hands," a computer with 

user-friendly software, and a vision tracking system. The facility would serve 

as the focal point for combining robotics hardware, algorithms, software, 

I93 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

sensors, and control systems. Leon Davis, a development engineer and electrical lead for the Robotic Control Systems, said of the new system, “This is 

not a manipulator that is teleoperated by a man, but a robot with a computer 

brain capable of memorizing the contours and panels of its intended subject 

and carrying out its functions autonomously.” Because NASA would be asking KSC to design processing facilities for new-generation launch vehicles 

such as the second generation Space Shuttle and the heavy lift launch vehicles, KSC would need these state-of-the-art robotics to provide the most 

efficient and effective processing methods. Hazardous, time critical, and 

repetitive Space Shuttle and payload operations all had potential uses for 

robotics. 

A special feature of the system was a “real time” tracking system using 

”closed-loop” responsive adaptive control commands, feedback, and error 

signals. “Adaptive control” meant that the robot altered its path automatically 

in response to sensory feedback from its environment. The KSC robot‘s servocontrols and software utilities would allow its arm to operate adaptively to 

control positions and orientation of all six axes, not only the endeffector as 

found in standard applications. 

An electrically driven, servo-controlled robot had several advantages over 

hydraulic robots, the major one being that smooth motion, speed, and trajectory controls were possible when the robot handled loads up to 200 Ib. As 

Davis said, “We really don’t have applications for hydraulic robots. Hydraulic 

robots can leak, proving a potential hazard to the tile and other sensitive 

areas of the orbiter.” 

KSC’s robotics research would progress in four phases: phase one was the 

development of the robotic arm in static work cells; phase two proposed 

advancing the robotic capabilities to operate in dynamic work cells; phase 

three would include off-line programming using 3-D graphics and simulated 

work cells; and phase four entertained the possibility of employing artificial 

i n tel I i gence. Possible future ca pa bi I it i es of robots were t h reed i men si onal 

scanning; higher order processing; artificial intelligence; sonic, laser, and 

other ranging systems; and “touch” and mobility systems. (Spaceport News, 

Nov 7/85, 6) 

Langley Research Center 

February 7: NASA announced that Robert Nunamaker, formerly chief engineer at Ames Research Center (ARC), became Langley Research Center’s 

(LaRC) space director with responsibility for advanced space transportation, 

planetary entry, space station and large space antenna research, and for 

LaRC’s atmospheric science program. Nunamaker began his NASA career at 

Lewis Research Center in 1958, where he acquired extensive experience with 

Project Mercury; he joined ARC in 1963. Nunamaker received a B.S. degree 

194 
NASA 

in mechanical engineering in 1957, followed by graduate work at Case Institute of Technology and the University of California at Los Angeles. (NASA 

Release 85-17; NASA anno., Feb 2/85; LaRC Release 85-8) 

july 8: Langley Research Center (LaRC) announced that NASA would sponsor 

an exhibition July 22 through July 30 at the 1985 National Scout Jamboree at 

Fort A.P. Hill, Virginia. The jamboree, celebrating scouting’s 75th anniversary, was expected to draw more than 35,000 U.S. and international scouts 

and leaders and many thousands of general public participants. 

The NASA exhibit, for which LaRC was serving as lead coordinator, would 

include information on subjects ranging from current aeronautics research to 

the Space Shuttle and man’s future in space. A 100-seat theater would have 

video presentations and live programs throughout each day. 

Astronaut Frederick Gregory, a former scout and long-time scouting enthusiast, would participate in the jamboree’s opening program on July 24 and 

would talk with scouts in the NASA exhibition area on that day. 

NASA would sponsor July 24 through 28 model rocket launch demonstrations and presentations on earning the Space Exploration merit badge. (LaRC 

Release 85-38) 

july 23: NASA announced that in a two-andane-half-year effort costing $15 

million it had lengthened and improved its Aircraft Landing Dynamics Facility at Langley Research Center. 

The track, used to test aircraft wheels, tires, and landing gear, used a highpressure water jet system to propel the test carriage along the raiI/track system 

where researchers conducted experiments under simulated runway conditions. Track testing options included choosing between concrete or asphalt 

runway surfaces and among a full range of weather-related surface conditions, including dry, damp, or flooded runways or slush- or icecovered surfaces. Even before the expansion, NASA believed the track to be the only 

facility in the world capable of testing full-size aircraft landing gear systems 

under closely controlled conditions simulating takeoffs and landings. 

Lengthening the track to more than one-half mile increased the facility’s 

maximum test speed from 120 to 250 mph and made possible, for the first 

time, simulated landing tests of all modern aircraft and the Space Shuttle. 

Other facility improvements included a higher capacity water jet system and 

a newly designed high-speed test carriage. The improved catapult system 

produced a 1.7-million-lb. thrust on the carriage, resulting in a 17-g (gravity 

force) acceleration that pushed the carriage in only 400 feet from zero to 250 

mph in two seconds, and the new carriage had a 20-by-40-foot test bay to 

accommodate larger test articles. NASA used ten thousand gallons of water in 

maximum speed run. 

195 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Initial research at the modified facility would study the cornering forces 

and spin-up characteristics of the Space Shuttle main gear tire, which spun 

up from zero to landing speeds almost instantly at touchdown. NASA would 

mount a tire-wheel-brake assembly on the carriage for tests of tire wear and 

applied loads and would run these first tests on the facility's existing smooth 

concrete surface. Later runs would require the touchdown area of the track 

altered to simulate the roughness and grooving of the Space Shuttle runway at 

Kennedy Space Center. NASA would then paint smooth the relatively rough 

runway to determine the best KSC runway characteristics to lessen Space 

Shuttle tire wear. 

Later tests would include a variety of aircraft landing hardware tests, averaging about 75 to 100 runs each. NASA estimated the facility could accomplish 

300 runs a year with as many as six a day during the height of a test program. 

One test program, for example, would compare the performance of radial 

tires, not commonly used on aircraft, to that of conventional bias ply tires. 

NASA would run these tests in conjunction with a Federal Aviation Administration/NASA program to gather information on runway surface traction. 

NASA had scheduled over the next several years test programs that included track tests to develop a data based for the National Tire Modeling 

Program, an analytical computer model to aid in design of new tires, and a 

tire failure study. (NASA Release 85-109) 

Lewis Research Center 

April 77: NASA announced that Lewis Research Center (LeRC) was develop 

ing a liquid droplet radiator intended to solve the problem of dissipating heat 

that builds up inside a spacecraft, allowing a livable temperature for astronauts. Heat removal was currently accomplished through a heavy, bulky, rigid 

metal heat transfer system, which added considerable weight to the spacecraft. 

The LeRC system would use the surface of a liquid coolant to radiate away 

excess heat and save as much as 90% of the current hardware weight. The 

system entailed exposing a moving stream of hot droplets, the diameter of a 

human hair, directly into space, allowing the heat to radiate from the droplets' surface. In the process, a generator would eject the droplets into a 

collector where they would rejoin to form a liquid; the system would then 

recirculate and reuse this coolant. 

Selection or development of a heat transfer fluid with proper vapor pressure and a sufficiently long life was essential to the project. Also crucial to 

system feasibility was development of a micromachining capability to produce holes with 0.002-in. diameters for use in the liquid droplet generator. 

"This is a very advanced concept," Alden Presler, LeRC program manager, 

said. "The technology we're developing here at Lewis will result in a very 

lightweight and compact piece of hardware." (NASA Release 85-53) 

196 
NASA 

April 22: NASA announced Lewis Research Center awarded a $58,291,440 

contract to General Dynamics Corp. to modify three Centaur G vehicles, the 

nation's most powerful upper stage vehicles, to fit into the Space Shuttle's 

payload bay to launch various large spacecraft including the Calileo and 

Ulysses missions, both scheduled for spring 1986. 

The so I e-sou rce, cost-p I us-i n cen t i =fee contract for fabrication, assem b I y, 

test, checkout, and delivery of the vehicles would begin April 1985 and 

continue through October 1987. (NASA Release 85-61) 

May 2: Lewis Research Center (LeRC) researchers were working on improvements in the National Airspace System (NAS) air-traffic control system to 

provide more efficient air transportation in the U.S. and to maintain the U.S. 

position of leadership in civil aviation, the Lewis News reported. 

A major NAS requirement was accurate upper-air wind information, necessary for efficient movement and control of aircraft. Dating back to 1982, LeRC 

recognized this need and proposed and developed, in cooperation with the 

Environmental Research Laboratories of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), an interactive data management and enhancement system (MERIT) to improve significantly the accuracy of 

upper-wind forecasts in the U.S. 

To evaluate the potential of MERIT, the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) 

formed an aviation weather task force of a dozen experts from NOAA, NASA, 

and universities that was fed by Dr. John McCarthy of the National Center for 

Atmospheric Research. Over 18 months at a cost of half a million dollars, the 

task force would examine all aviation weather forecast products concurrently 

with MERIT. If the MERIT system could provide improved upper-level wind 

information (initial tests at NOM showed a 20 to 30% reduction in wind 

error compared to the existing system), it was possible that MERIT could 

become an important contribution to the NAS of the 1990s. (LeRC News, 

May 2/85, 2) 

lune 3: Lewis Research Center (LeRC) announced it awarded Honeywell Inc., 

Avionics Division, a $14,900,000 contract for fabrication and delivery of 

three flight inertial measurement groups (IMG) for the ShuttldCentaur guidance and navigation system, which maintained a fixed reference orientation 

for and measured acceleration of the Centaur. 

Work under the sole-source firm-fixed-price contract would begin in May 

1985 at the contractor's plant in Clearwater, Florida. 

NASA was modifying the Centaur, which had launched domestic and military communications satellites and sent spacecraft to investigate planetary 

systems, to fit into the Space Shuttle. NASA would first use the Shuttle Centaur combination to launch the Galileo and then the Ulysses missions. (LeRC 

Release 85-40) 

197 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

August 26: Lewis Research Center (LeRC) announced today that it would 

open in September the microgravity materials science laboratory (MMSL) to 

help experimenters make better decisions about what is and is not feasible 

for science experiments in space. Such experiments are expected to provide 

knowledge leading to new materials, more efficient use of earth‘s nonrenewable fuel resources, new medicines, advanced computers and lasers, and 

better com m u n i cat ions. 

Providing a capability that existed nowhere else in the world, the new 

laboratory would offer U.S. scientists and engineers a low-cost, low-risk way 

to test new ideas for materials science research in space. Initial research plans 

would support metal and alloy solidification and electronic crystal growth 

studies. The laboratory should give U.S. companies a competitive advantage 

in developing better ground-based materials and/or processing of materials 

through microgravity research. 

The laboratory, along with LeRC’s assignment to develop the power system 

for the proposed space station, would put LeRC into the mainstream of the 

U.S.’s space research efforts. (LeRC Release 85-63) 

Marshall Space Flight Center 

january 29: NASA announced it had selected Grumman Data System Corp. 

for negotiations leading to the award of a contract for a high-speed (Class VI) 

computer system for Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). The fixed-price 

contract would require Grumman to provide hardware, software, documentation, and services for installation and maintenance of a scientific- and engineeringcomputations system in support of MSFC’s programs in thermal, 

electrical, load, and structuraldesign characteristics that influence flight-vehicle and payload performance. 

The five-year contract, to begin no later than August 1985, would cost 

about $42 million and provide for a total lease period, with renewal in 

periods of one to 12 months, not to exceed 60 months. (NASA Release 85- 

15) 

/uly 7: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced that July 1 marked 

the center’s 25th anniversary. MSFC currently managed a budget of about $2 

billion annually and employed some 3,300 people, while thousands more 

worked with numerous aerospace and other high-tech organizations in the 

Huntsville, Alabama, area to support the center’s projects. 

During the 25 years, MSFC had moved beyond its initial role as NASA‘s 

developer of launch vehicles and propulsion systems to that of a scientific 

and engineering organization also responsible for spacecraft and scientific 

experiments. The center was currently responsible for a number of NASA 

programs including the Space Shuttle’s engines, propellant tank, and booster 

198 
NASA 

rockets; the Hubble Space Telescope; Spacelab orbiting research laboratories; the Space Shuttle upper stage systems; and a significant portion of the 

proposed space station. (MSFC Release 85-3 1) 

/uly 3: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced it awarded a threeyear, $35,181,700 contract to the Space Transportation Systems Division of 

Rockwell International for Space Shuttle systems integration work at MSFC, 

Kennedy Space Center, and Vandenberg Air Force Base. The contract called 

for provision of management, personnel, equipment, materials, and resources from July 1, 1985 to June 30, 1988. (MSFC Release 85-34) 

December 79: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced selection of 

Teledyne Brown Engineering for negotiation leading to the award of a fiveyear contract to provide operation and maintenance of the propellants and 

pressurants facilities for the center. Total price for the first three contract years 

was approximately $8.8 million. 

Teledyne Brown would furnish the necessary management, personnel, 

equipment, and materials required to operate and maintain the gaseous 

pressurants equipment and distribution systems, liquid propellants storage 

and transfer systems, fluid transporter services, valve and component refurbishment, and retention of certification status of high-pressure systems, including test stands, wind tunnels, and Department of Transportation 

certification of fluid transporters. (MSFC Release 85-72) 

Wallops Flight Facility 

lune 29: Goddard Space Flight Center announced the Wallops Flight Facility 

would celebrate its 40th anniversary on June 29. The events planned were in 

recognition of the scientific and technological achievements at Wallops, 

which had conducted rocketborne experiments since July 4, 1945, when 

researchers first launched a 17-fOOt Tiamat. 

Since that original flight, Wallops had launched approximately 13,000 

rocket-propelled research vehicles and conducted thousands of aeronautical 

and aircraft tests to obtain information on aircraft and spacecraft flight characteristics and to increase knowledge of the upper atmosphere and the nearspace environment. This research led to major contributions to the U.S.3 

aeronautical and space programs. 

The breakthroughs to supersonic flight by aircraft and to hypersonic flight 

by rocket systems were largely attributed to fundamental aerodynamic research conducted at Wallops by means of aerodynamic models propelled by 

multiple-stage rocket systems. 

199 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Using sounding rockets Wallops personnel developed the technologies for 

measuring atmospheric structure and the space environment, such as temperature, pressure and density, micrometeorite densities, electric fields, energetic particles, and radiation levels. These measurements formed the basis for 

developing design criteria for scientific satellites and manned spacecraft. 

Wallops's researchers also pursued technology development for the 

manned space program, such as manned capsuleescape techniques and 

maximum dynamic pressure tests for the Mercury Program. 

Most recently Wallops was known as a center for the NASA suborbital 

program. Sounding rockets, balloons, and aircraft conducted space science 

and aeronautical research missions. 

The island obtained its name from John Wallops, appointed deputy surveyor of Virginia in the 17th century by Col. Edmund Scarburgh. Wallops 

received a Crown Patent to the island in 1672. At present, the facility, in 

addition to the island, included the mainland area in back of the island and 

the main base (formerly the Chincoteague Naval Air Station) about sewn 

miles northwest. 

In addition to an open house, the day's anniversary events would include 

an Air Force F-15 aerial demonstration and demonstrations in crash/fire/ 

rescue, space sciences, model rocketry, and radio controlled model airplanes. (GSFC Release 85-16) 

Office of Inspector General 

kbruary 7: NASA announced that June Gibbs Brown, appointed NASA's 

inspector general June 1981 by President Reagan, would leave March 10 to 

become vice president of finance and administration and chief financial 

officer of System Development Corp. Prior to her NASA service, Brown 

served as inspector general for the Department of Interior and worked for the 

Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, and had been director 

of the audit division of the US. Navy Finance Center. Brown held bachelor 

and master degrees in business administration and a Juris Doctor from the 

University of Denwr School of Law. (NASA Release 85-17; NASA anno., Feb 

218 5) 

Nowmber 5: NASA announced it has named effective November 3 Lewis 

Rinker deputy inspector general, Office of Inspector General (OIG). In that 

position, Rinker would assist the inspector general in the direction and management of nationwide OIG programs. 

Since joining NASA in October 1980, Rinker served in various management positions, the most recent of which was assistant inspector general for 

technical services and also served as the acting deputy inspector general. 

200 CL3 
NASA 

Before his NASA work, Rinker served in managerial positions with the U.S. 

General Accounting Office and was an industrial engineer and procurement 

analyst with the Air Force Systems Command. 

Rinker received his B.S. degree in engineering from Johns Hopkins University and was doing graduate work at George Washington University. He was a 

senior member of the American Institute of Industrial Engineers and a member of the Association of Government Accountants and the Association of 

Federal Investigators. (NASA anno., Nov 5/85) 

Nowmber 24: NASA announced that Leon Snead was appointed effective 

today NASAs assistant inspector general for auditing (AIGA), Office of Inspector General (OIG). In this position, Snead would provide advice and support 

to the inspector general and managerial direction for the functional develop 

ment, implementation, and supervision of NASNOIG audit activities. 

Before this appointment, Snead was acting assistant inspector general for 

auditing at the Department of Interior. He began his government career in 

1964 with the U.S. Army Audit Agency as an auditor trainee; in 1974 he went 

on to supervisory auditor and then an audit director position with the Department of Treasury. Later he served as division director, branch chief, and 

branch manager at the Department of Energy and regional audit manager 

with the Department of Interior. 

Snead graduated in 1963 from Spencerian College, Milwaukee, with a BBA 

degree in accounting and in 1969 from the University of Baltimore with a ID 

degree. He was a certified internal auditor (CIA) and a member of the Association of Government Accountants (AGA). (NASA anno, Nov 24/85) 

Procurement 

February&?: NASA announced it had selected Dr. Milton Silveira, NASA’s chief 

engineer, as its competition advocate responsible for recommending annual 

goals and objectives, approving organization and personal accountability, 

assuring training, and reviewing noncompetitive procurement to remove constraints to competition. Silveira named David Austin his principal staff member. A NASA management instruction would designate each center deputy 

director as the center competition advocate. 

NASA competitively awarded 72% of its procurements in FY 84, representing a significant increase over 68.8% in FY 83. (NASA Release 85-21) 

April 10: NASA announced selection of RMS Associates for negotiations 

leading to award of a contract for the operation and maintenance of the NASA 

Scientific and Technical Information Facility (STIF), which acquired, organized, processed and stored worldwide aerospace information including 

201 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

published articles, papers, books, and reports. STlF is located near the Baltimore/Washington International Airport. Under the contract terms, RMS Associates would acquire and process documents and data approved by NASA for 

entry into the collection; catalog, abstract, index, announce, and disseminate 

these materials; maintain a supporting reference service; compile specialized 

bibliographies; and provide other technical support. 

The one-year contract, commencing July 1, 1985, and preceded by a onemonth phase in, included provision for two one-year priced option extensions and two one-year unpriced options. RMS Associates estimated the 

one-year contract value at about $5 million, with a total of approximately $15 

million for the first three years. (NASA Release 85-54) 

September 30: NASA announced selection of 150 research proposals from 

small business high-technology firms under a program established by the 

Small Business Innovation Development Act of 1982 (PL 97-219) to stimulate 

technological innovation in the private sector, strengthen the role of small 

businesses in meeting NASA's research and development needs, and contrib 

Ute to the growth and strength of the nation's economy. NASA selected proposals on the basis of their technical merit from the 1,164 submitted and 

expected to award contracts in four to eight weeks. 

Contractors funded under the program would conduct work in two phases: 

first, a six-month fixed-price effort to explore the feasibility of the small 

business-proposed innovations and, if the results warranted, a second phase 

effort of up to two years in duration to proceed further with the technological 

innovation. Commercial firms or government agency programs would fund 

any work beyond the second phase. 

The selections resulted from NASA's third solicitation for Phase I proposals 

in areas of research and development of interest to the agency. NASA's FY 85 

budget included approximately $7.5 million for Phase I, managed by the 

Office of Commercial Programs, NASA Headquarters. (NASA Release 85- 

136) 

November 27: NASA announced selection of 64 research proposals from 

high-technology small business firms for negotiation of Phase II contracts in 

its Small Business Innovation Research program established under Public 

Law 97-219. The contract awards would total approximately $30 million. 

NASA selected the Phase II programs, follow-ons to previous Phase I contracts, from 113 proposals submitted by Phase I contractors in the 1984 program. Phase I included 127 awards selected from 919 proposals. 

Objectives of the Small Business Innovation Research program were to 

stimulate technological innovation, strengthen the role of small business in 

202 
NASA 

meeting federal agencies’ research and development needs, and foster increased private sector commercialization of innovations from federal re 

search and development. The program also encouraged minority and 

disadvantaged business participation. 

In Phase I, NASA awarded six-month fixed-price contracts to explore the 

feasibility of the proposed innovation and the value of conducting further 

research and development. Continuation of the activity into Phase II, which 

could extend up to two years, depended on the merit of the work and agency 

program plans and needs. Selection might also depend on availability of 

funds from the private sector and/or government for development or commercialization beyond the scope of the Small Business Innovation Research program. (NASA Release 85-157) 

Public Affairs 

February 7: NASA announced the following assignments in its public affairs 

organization would become effective February 15: Kenneth Atchison, assistant news chief and NASA internal communications manager; Debra Rahn, 

public affairs officer; Leon Perry, public information officer; Sarah Keegan, 

public information officer; Dwayne Brown, editor, NASA Activities; and Barbara Selby, public affairs specialist. (NASA Release 85-17; NASA anno., Feb. 

2/85) 

/uly 3: NASA announced that Thomas DeCair was appointed effective July 3 

associate administrator for external relations. In this position, DeCair would 

be responsible for policy level management, direction, and coordination of 

the agency’s relationships with public and private organizations both domestic and international. This included the news media, other federal agencies, 

state and local governments, industry, and private individuals. He would also 

serve as the principal advisor to the NASA administrator and other senior 

officials on matters pertaining to NASA’s external relations activities. 

DeCair came to NASA from the U.S. Department of Justice where he 

served since February 1981 as director of public affairs and special assistant 

to the Attorney General. 

DeCair was staff assistant in the White House Press Office and then assistant press secretary to Presidents Nixon and Ford after he graduated from 

Hope College, Holland, Michigan, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa 

as a junior and received his B.A. degree magna cum laude. (NASA Release 

85-102) 

203 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Review Boards 

March 8: NASA announced that, following launch of Atladcentaur 62 carrying the seventh lntelsat V payload, a significant leak occurred in the Centaur 

liquid oxygen (LO,) tank during Atlas and Centaur separation, resulting in 

loss of LO, and precipitation of a series of anomalous events that compromised vehicle performance and caused loss of the mlssion. 

Centaur main engine start and steady-state operation began for the first 

burn sequence; however, the engines burned fuel rich as a result of an 

attempted correction of the LO, loss. Also, Centaur’s first main engine cutoff 

had occurred approximately 11 seconds early, as a result of LO, mass loss 

(approximately 1483 lb.) through the tank opening. After first main engine 

cutoff, the leading LO, ullage gasses (HE and GO,) created a disturbing force 

on the vehicle, causing it to tumble out of control during the ensuing coast 

period. 

During the coast period, the LO, tank pressure vented down to less than the 

hydrogen tank pressure at 1040 seconds, causing reversal and rupture of the 

intermediate bulkhead so that the two tank pressures were essentially the 

same throughout the remainder of the flight. 

Although 2nd Centaur engine start was achieved, the engines shut down 

after less than seven seconds of operation because of inadequate tank pressurization and subsequent engine cavitation. This made it impossible to 

achieve proper orbit, and NASA terminated the mission. 

Following the failure, NASA Headquarters initiated a Flight Review Board 

composed of representatives from the NASA centers, U.S. Air Force, and 

INTELSAT. During the investigation, NASA obtained special assistance from 

Physics International for analytical shock analysis of various blast-shield and 

tank-pressure configurations, General DynamicdFt. Worth Division for 

shaped charge firing tests and consultations, and Pratt & Whitney Aircraft for 

special engine testing to resolve LO, back flow anomaly and special 

postflight reconstructions. 

The investigation teams’ findings indicated that the most probable cause of 

the failure was due to shock induced loads on the LO, tank at high tank 

pressures causing tank failure. Corrective actions taken to clear AC-63 for 

flight would include reduced tank pressures to prior levels, increase in the 

interstage adaptor to blast-shield gap, and a check for ambient flight pressure 

and leaks on each tank. (NASA MOR M-491-203-84-07 [postlaunch] Mar 

8/85) 

lune 4: NASA announced that an eight-member review team at Goddard 

Space Flight Center concluded that the failure of the Global Low Orbiting 

Message Relay Satellite (GLOMR) to deploy from its canister during the April 

1985 Space Shuttle 51-6 mission was due to the failure of two switches 

204 
NASA 

designed to activate bolt cutters on the canister. On June 7 the team would 

issue a final report along with recommendations for a solution to the problem. 

The Northern Utah Satellite (NUSAT) along with GLOMR would be the first 

satellites successfully deployed from canisters aboard the Space Shuttle. The 

door of the GLOMR canister opened, indicating normal battery operation, 

but the bolt cutters would not activate. After a second deployment attempt, 

NASA decided to return GLOMR to earth for evaluation. (NASA Release 85- 

85) 

lune 20: NASA announced that a mishap investigation board had completed 

its report on a March 8 accident in which the Space Shuttle Discovery’s 

payload bay door was damaged and a technician was injured during prelaunch preparations for mission 51-D at KSC [see Space Transportation System/Launch Schedules, March 81. 

In its executive summary, the board reported that “the immediate cause of 

the mishap was the failure of a master link in one of the two redundant hoist 

systems that raise and lower the payload bay access platform.” The report 

then noted, “The mishap can be characterized as the culmination of a series 

of events and conditions that pushed the mechanical components to and 

beyond their limits.” 

In the accident, a payload bay access platform used to provide access to the 

orbiter’s cargo bay fell from its stowed position on a rolling bridge crane. 

Tracing the events and conditions that led to the accident, the board noted 

that “Operators of the payload bay access platforms customarily stowed the 

platforms by raising them until the telescoping tubes contacted the (single) 

upper-limit switch that stopped its upward travel. 

“On March 4, a Lockheed Space Operations Co. (LSOC) technician reported a broken upper-limit switch that had caused the telescoping structure 

to impact the supporting structure. In crane and hoist parlance, this is called 

‘two-blocking.’ The inboard master link failed at this time, and cable overwrap was noted on that portion of the winch. The entire updown portion of 

this system was tagged out with a ‘Do Not Operate’ tag, since only one half of 

the redundant hoist system remained intact. This tag was placed on the 

operating controls along with two other similarly appearing tags, both several 

months old, describing limitations on the operation of the platforms.” 

The board’s summary then noted the platforms were operated at least twice 

and stowed at least once between March 4 and the March 8 accident. “During the stowing operation(s), given the fact of a broken upper-limit switch and 

the standard operating procedure, it is an inescapable conclusion that additional two-blocking occurred. This imparted extremely high loads to the 

master link in the remaining wire rope assembly, fracturing it almost to the 

205 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

point of sufficient separation for the assembly to fall. When the bridge assembly was moved on the morning of March 8, the resulting jolt was enough to 

complete the break, and the platform assembly fell.” 

The board recommended that there be a revision of operating procedures 

and operator training to ensure the upper-limit switches not be used as 

operational stops, of tagout/lockout procedures to prevent unauthorized use 

of equipment that had been identified as unsafe, and of the platform preventive maintenance procedures to meet all KSC and Occupational Safety and 

Health Administration (OSHA) standards; a modification of the design of the 

payload bay access platform to include the addition of an operational stop 

and ‘load sensing device in the wire rope system; and a redesign of the 

telescoping tubes to facilitate the required inspection of critical linkages. 

The board estimated damage to Discovery and access platform at 

$200,000 and noted that the accident delayed rollover to the vehicle assembly building from March 8 until March 23. (NASA Release 85-95) 

Technology Transfers 

February 8: Los Angeles’s Cedars-Sinai Medical Center announced develop 

ment of a new surgical tool, using JPCs excimer (excited “dimer”) laser technology, for one of medicine‘s most difficult and long-awaited procedures-a 

means to clean out clogged vascular passages without surgical intervention, 

the JPL Universe reported. The lasers would be a significant alternative to 

existing treatments-that of angioplasty, in which a balloon catheter 

squeezed blockage out of the way, or bypass surgery. 

A JPL research team with Cedars-Sinai colleagues had developed the new 

laser technology, which used glass-magnetic switches in which a xenon 

chloride-excimer laser produced a uniform beam of energy controlled and 

pulsed to extremely short periods, to overcome the problems of lack of 

precision and control and high heat of current medical lasers. The JPUCedarshinai procedure would allow a fiber-optic catheter, placed nonsurgically 

in the brachial and femoral arteries and threaded to the site of the obstruction, to transmit the laser’s energy to the clogged vessel. The fiber-optic 

imaging system would enable doctors to view the artery on a TV screen as the 

laser cleared the material forming the blockage. The speed of the laser’s 

delivery-10 to 200 billionths of a second bursts of ultraviolet light-allowed 

the laser to cut through arterial plaque with precision and little damage to 

surrounding tissue. 

Although researchers were cautious in predictions of the laser’s medical 

potential, they believed results of experimentation, though not yet done on 

living human patients, signaled additional future medical applications, ranging from removal of kidney stones to changing the eye shape of patients with 

myopia. UPL Universe, Feb 8/85, 1) 

206 
NASA 

May 2: NASA announced that research scientist Dr. Billy Wolverton and 

research chemist Rebecca McDonald at its National Space Technology Laboratory (NSTL), Bay St. Louis, Missouri, had shown that the water hyacinth, 

when used under controlled conditions, was ideally suited for purifying 

domestic and certain industrial wastewaters. In addition to the water hyacinths ability to produce large quantities of fresh water, the researchers determined the plant could be harvested and ground into fertilizers and used to 

produce biogas and fiber. The water hyacinth also showed promise for partially supplying life-sustaining functions for space travel including oxygen, 

food, pure water, and waste treatment. 

Researchers at NSTL had for 11 years tested the vascular aquatic water 

hyacinth (the floating species) as an inexpensive method of treating wastewater. The research led to installation of a simple and cost-effective wastewatertreatment system at NSTL and development communities in Florida, Texas, 

and California. 

More recently, NASA developed an advanced natural wastewater-treatment 

process that combined anaerobic microbial filter technology with the vascular plant wastewater treatment technology to produce an efficient hybrid 

system that used rooted, cold-tolerant plants such as common reed growing 

on the surface of a microbial rock filter bed. The filter reed system had 

advantages over the floating aquatic system because wastewater was exposed 

to the atmosphere only after treatment and higher chemical concentrations 

could be tolerated because of the high surface microbial filter. Although 

NASA developed the system for domestic sewage, the system had shown a 

potential for chemical waste and drinking water treatment. (NASA Release 

85-65) 

May 2: In elaborating on a report that appeared in the Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s UPL) Universe [see NASmechnology Transfer, Feb. 81, NASA issued 

information on a system called the excimer laser, a laser system developed by 

a team of physicians at Los Angeles’s Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and laser 

scientists at JPL to nonsurgically clean clogged arteries with unprecedented 

precision. The system may eventually allow patients with arteriosclerosis to 

avoid coronary bypass surgery. 

JPL scientists originally developed the excimer laser to measure gases such 

as ozone in the earth’s atmosphere. Investigations into its application to 

medicine began a year and a half previously when Cedars-Sinai physicians 

Warren Grundfest, Frank Litvack, and James Forrester, who were conducting 

research into the potential of lasers in cardiology, sought a more precise and 

cooler laser than those currently available for use in medicine. 

They found such a laser in the excimer developed by JPL laser researchers 

Drs. James Laudenslager, Thomas Pacala, Stuart McDermid, and David Rider. 

Working with the Cedars-Sinai physicians and a fiber optics consultant, Dr. 

207 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Tsvi Goldenberg, the JPL team refined the laser for the delicate cardiovascular cleaning procedure devised by the medical researchers. Although the 

researchers were properly cautious in their predictions of the laser's medical 

potential, the results of experiments were encouraging. 

NASA's office of space science and applications funded development of the 

excimer laser. (NASA Release 85-66) 

May 2: NASA announced that Inorganic Coatings, Inc. was providing interior 

corrosion protection to the refurbished Statue of Liberty by means of a primer 

coating known as K-Zinc 531, an aerospace spinoff product developed at 

Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) to protect gantries and other structures 

at NASA's primary launch site, Kennedy Space Center (KSC). 

Because KSC was located on Florida's Atlantic Coast, its launch facilities 

required greater corrosion protection due to constant exposure to salt spray 

and fog. GSFC undertook a research program to develop a coating that would 

not only resist salt corrosion, but also protect KSC launch structures from very 

hot rocket exhaust and the thermal shock created by rapid temperature 

changes during a space launch. The GSFC research resulted in an inorganic 

water-based potassium silicate binder, a compound that provided long-term 

protection with a single application. 

NASA granted in 1981 a license for the coating to Shane Associates, which 

signed an agreement with Inorganic Coatings to allow it to become the sole 

manufacturer and sales agent under the Shane license. Inorganic Coatings 

assigned the trade name K-Zinc 531 to the compound, which was nontoxic, 

nonflammable, and had no organic emissions. The high ratio silicate formulation bonded to steel in 30 minutes and created a hard ceramic finish with 

superior adhesion and abrasion resistance. It required no straining before 

application and could be mixed on site. (NASA Release 85-64) 

May 6: NASA announced that space age technology was in use in the Repub 

lic of Gabon, Africa, where solar photovoltaic power systems installed in four 

rural villages would improve public health and education facilities and lighting and sanitary water supplies. NASA's Lewis Research Center (LeRC) rnanaged the project, which was jointly funded by the U.S Department of Energy 

(DOE) and the Ministry of Energy and Hydraulic Resources of the Republic of 

Gabon; the Gabon government selected the villages to participate in the 

program. 

The project provided a photovoltaic power system, lights, air circulation 

fan, and a refrigeratodfreezer for vaccine storage to each village dispensary 

and a power system, lights, and a color TV and video cassette recorder/player 

to each village school. The villages' sanitary water systems had a newly 

drilled well, a photovoltaic system, a submersible well pump, a water storage 

tank, and a water distribution system that piped water to village fountains. 

Public lighting systems included a power system and sodium vapor lamps 

208 
NASA 

mounted on poles. All systems were instrumented to collect data for performance analyses. 

Total photovoltaic array capacity for all systems was 12.1 kw; output of the 

smallest array was 80 watts for street lights, the largest 3 kw for one water 

pump. Batteries for the solar arrays should last about 10 years before replacement; solar arrays had a life expectancy of at least 20 years. 

According to Tony Ratajczak, project manager at LeRC, ”The goal of DOE 

and the Republic of Gabon, for this project, is to investigate and evaluate the 

economic, social and technical value of photovoltaic power systems in aiding 

progress and improving the quality of life in Gabon.” (NASA Release 85-68) 

During November: NASA announced that three physicians from Washington 

University Medical Center, St. Louis, Misssouri, met the previous month with 

NASA scientists from National Space Technology Laboratories (NSTL) to discuss using remote sensing techniques as an analytical tool for use in the field 

of body scanning known as nuclear magnetic resonance or NMR. Dr. Michael Vannier, radiologist and principal investigator for the project, said NMR 

was already used on a number of organ systems in the brain. However, 

interest had grown in how magnetic resonance imaging might fit into the 

scope of breast diagnostic techniques. So Drs. John Gohagan and Ed Spitznagel, also of Washington University, on behalf of the National Cancer Institute’s Breast imaging Project joined Vannier at the discussions. 

The meeting resulted in a three-year collaborative effort among the Mallinckrodt institute of Radiology in St. Louis, NSTL, and the Kennedy Space 

Center. 

Vannier commented that the union with NASA was vital to maximize the 

potential of NMR scanning. “One of the characteristics of these magnetic 

resonance scanners is that they provide very specific anatomic information 

about the location and size of a tumor. However there are other ways to get 

the same information, one being the use of a mammogram, or breast X-ray.” 

At NSTL, scientists Doug Rickman and Jim Anderson were responsible for 

applying the analytical capabilities to make NMR scans a notable advancement over other methods of X-ray and body scanning techniques. They had 

demonstrated the use of ELAS software to enhance NMR images, thus increasing disease detection accuracy. Vannier explained, “NO one in medicine 

really has the kind of experience with classifying or analyzing these types of 

images this way. That’s why we are using NASA expertise to help us.” 

By incorporating the ELAS software used in processing satellite imagery 

into the system, NMR scans could provide not only information on the 

location and size of a tumor, but also its biological behavior. That is, physicians could determine the status of a mass of tumor directly from the NMR 

image without having to enter the body surgically. 

209 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Close affiliation with pathoiogists while working on actual cases was important in determining whether there had been misclassification on the image processing machines, Gohagan said. “Our goal is to ultimately get the 

kind of discrimination necessary to distinguish different anamolous conditions,’’ he explained. For example, blood clots would appear distinctly different from benign tumors, and a marked difference would be evident between 

benign and malignant tumors. 

Vannier concluded that, as a result of the collaboration, an improvement 

should evolve in the way NMR images are acquired. “I think it will have 

significant influence on what we do in the future,” he said. (NASA Activities, 

Nov 85, 7) 

December 5: NASA announced that a NASA scientist and a Stanford University engineer developed the bone stiffness analyzer, an instrument that might 

aid in treating bone fractures and bone-weaking diseases including osteoporosis, which afflicted millions of the elderly. The two originally developed the instrument, which measured bone mass and stiffness, to help 

scientists combat bone loss That might occur during long-term spaceflights, 

particularly on manned space stations or extended space journeys such as 

trips to Mars. 

The instrument was based on a theory, initially demonstrated by Dr. 

Donald Young, a physiologist at NASA’s Ames Research Center, that bone 

behaved as a structural beam and that welldeveloped concepts for testing the 

stiffness and displacement properties of structural beams could be applied to 

measuring the same properties in arm and leg bones. Dr. Charles Steele, 

professor of mechanical engineering at Stanford University, adapted the instrument for clinical application. 

The analyzer gauged the bone’s resistance to a small amount of pressure 

applied to the forearm or leg bone, while the subject’s arm or leg was 

positioned so the ends were immobile. The instrument’s probe, an electromagnetic “shaker” or iron core wrapped with wire, was placed at mid bone 

and current was run through it, causing the bone to vibrate. A microprocessor then measured the bone’s displacement using algorithms stored in its 

memory, deducing the bone’s stiffness and effective mass. 

Since the analyzer responded quickly-a test took less than one minute 

and did not damage the bone or tissue-the analyzer might have wide applications for screening diseases such as osteoporosis, which weakened bones 

but was usually diagnosed only after a fracture occurred when the disease 

was well advanced. Although the bone analyzer could not be used on the 

spine where osteoporosis often first appeared, it could detect the disease 

long before X-rays, which did not show evidence of change until after at least 

20% bone loss. Steele was planning to adapt the device for use on fingers, 

which also showed early evidence of the bone disease. 

210 
NASA 

Since the analyzer could also monitor a bone’s strength as it healed, the 

device might also aid in the treatment of fractures. The analyzer’s quantitative 

measure of bone strength could replace the inference and guesswork that 

usually was the basis for a decision on removing a cast from a fractured bone. 

After three years of clinical testing on more than 300 subjects, Steele 

believed the device was at a useful level of precision. To find normal values 

for bone stiffness, Young and Steele tested participants in the Stanford Invitational Rugby Tournament in 1984. In the coming year, they would conduct 

more tests on healthy subjects and a data search to find normal “loads,” the 

amount of stresses and strains needed to maintain healthy bones. 

After further tests, Young and Steele planned to use the instrument to create 

an exercise program for maintaining bone strength during the weightless 

environment associated with extended spaceflight missions when bones 

tended to atrophy. 

Young hoped to develop a program efficient enough to place the necessary 

stresses on bones through short periods of daily exercise. “It would be great if 

it could be done in an hour a day,” Young commented. He believed a trampoline-like device, with restraints to hold the body, might be effective. Eventually, the analyzer itself might go into space with astronauts, who could test 

their own bone strength, perhaps determining when they needed to return to 

earth. (NASA Release 85, 163) 

December 23: In order to improve communications among Indonesia’s Eastern Island University’s member campuses, which were spread over 1,600 

miles of ocean, NASA’s Lewis Research Center (LeRC) recently supervised 

installation of a solar power system for a teleconferencing center and earth 

station in the village of Wawotobi. The earth station provided the communications link among Wawotobi, Djakarta, and an earth communications satellite system and helped make the member campuses’ scarce professors, 

research findings, and library resources more widely available to the rapidly 

increasing number of students throughout the region. 

The teleconferencing center, a classroom large enough for 50 people, was 

equipped with a speaker system, microphones, a telecopier, an electronic 

blackboard, and a computer graphics display. The system was interactive and 

could connect with 11 main campus locations of the Eastern Island University 

Association and a conference room in the offices of the Director General of 

Higher Education in Djakarta. 

Purpose of the teleconferencing system was to demonstrate the use of 

satellite communication in developing countries, and the solar power system 

showed the feasibility and practicality of solar (photovoltaic) power systems 

for small earth stations in remote areas. 

Although diesel electric generators generally powered earth stations in the 

absence of conventional power lines, the high cost of diesel fuel and the high 

operation, security, and maintenance costs for diesel generators made use of 

21 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

a photovoltaic system attractive. The total photovoltaic array capacity to 

power the earth station at Wawotobi was 1.5 kilowatts, and LeRC expected 

the battery used in conjunction with the array to last about 10 years. The 

photovoltaic array had a life expectancy of more than 20 years. 

The existing satellite system provided national communications services by 

radio, telephone, and telegraph to the 5000 inhabited islands. 

Hughes Aircraft Co. was prime contractor for the photovoltaic power system, and their subcontractor in Indonesia was P. T. Elektrindo Nusantara. 

LeRC and Hughes would provide operations support for repair, maintenance, 

and spare parts through June 1986, when NASA would turn over complete 

responsibility for the system to PERUMTAL, the Indonesian national telecommunications authority. 

The project completed the renewable energy systems programs managed 

by LeRC for the Department of Energy and the U.S. Agency for International 

Development. Since 1976 LeRC had been responsible for the installation of 

71 photovoltaic power systems in 27 countries and the United States. These 

systems provided power for entire villages for water pumps, grain grinders, 

lights, vaccine refrigerators, schools, highway signs, forest lookout towers, 

insect traps, rural dispensaries, and the Wawotobi teleconferencing center/ 

earth station. (NASA Release 85-176) 

212 
PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA 

February 17: Li Xue, vice minister of the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) 

astronautics industry, indicated in London recently that the PRC wanted to 

compete with the U.S. and West European countries for rocket launches of 

other countries’ satellites, FBIS, Shanghai City Service in Mandarin reported. 

He said the PRC had not decided to launch charges or how to market the 

service, but it was ready to talk to western countries needing launch services. 

(FBIS, Shanghai City Service in Mandarin, Feb 17/85) 

May 30: The Peoples Republic of China (PRC) State Council decided to use 

an international communications satellite over the Indian Ocean to transmit 

TV programs to people in outlying areas, FBIS Beijing XINHUA Domestic 

Service in Chinese reported. Although satellite transmission of TV programs 

covered areas where 62% of the population lived, reception in some areas 

was poor. Therefore, the State Council decided to create a special fund to 

present 50 ground stations to outlying areas and over the next two to three 

years to expand this ground-station network. 

In addition to TV programs, the satellite would transmit newspaper facsimile, educational programs, medical consultations, weather information, and 

computer linkages. (Beijing XINHUA Domestic Service in Chinese, May 301 

85) 

June 6 Scientists from China’s Ministry of Astronautics announced the previous week plans to improve the design of their existing rockets so they could 

launch heavier satellites into geostationary orbits, thus challenging the western nations’ domination of commercial exploitation of space, the New Scientist reported. 

China had a rocket that could put 750-kg communications satellites into 

geostationary orbit, which they used the previous year to launch their first 

such satellite. Jean Vandenkerckhove of the European Space Agency (ESA) 

said the rocket made ”Chinese launch capability equivalent to Europe’s 

Ariane 3 rocket.” 

China’s rocket, the Long March 3, had two liquid-fuel stages and one 

cryogenic stage fuelled by liquid hydrogen and oxygen. Chinese engineers 

said they planned to add extra boosters to allow them to put heavier loads, 

possibly two satellites, into space. The engineers also spoke of plans to 

develop a cryogenic upper stage for the rocket that could launch 2.5-ton 

satellites 35,000 km high into geostationary orbit. That would give China a 

capability close to that of Ariane 4, Europe’s newest rocket. However, Wu Ke 

Li, in charge of Chinese interest at the Paris Air Show where China for the first 

time had an exhibit, would not confirm or deny the plans. 

213 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Western engineers were impressed by China’s existing ability because Long 

March 3 placed their satellite into correct orbit without flight tests, since 

China could not afford such tests. Instead, the Chinese relied on elaborate 

space simulators for checking satellites and launch components. 

Vandenkerckhove said China’s launch facilities were at a disadvantage 

compared with Ariane because the compartment for satellites on Long March 

3 was smaller than on Ariane 3, measuring 2.3 m rather than 2.9 m. However, Yi Zluo Hyang, one of the Long March 3 designers, said, “Our launch 

costs will be lower than any other service, partly because we have lower 

labor costs, but also because we will be supported by the government.” 

During the past year, China had signed cooperative agreements in space 

science and technology with the U.S., W. Germany, France, and Britian; and 

they were pursuing an interest in remote-sensing satellites. (New Scientist, 

June 6/85, 4) 

luly29 Peoples Republic of China President Li Xiannian today made a threehour visit to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the JPL Universe reported. JPL 

Director Dr. Lew Allen welcomed him, then said, “We are aware of the 

ongoing discussions between our governments regarding future space coop 

eration . . . We look forward to cooperative scientific investigations.” 

Xiannian then viewed JPL‘s newly revised multi-media presentation, “Welcome to Outer Space,” which had been translated into Chinese. After the 

show, Allen presented the president with a color photograph of Saturn and its 

moons; Dr. Taylor Wang-the first Chinese-American in space-gave him a 

photographic collage showing Wang in space during his May Space Shuttle 

flight and his drop dynamics module equipment. 

Xiannian completed his visit with a tour of the Spacecraft Assembly Facility 

where he heard about the Galileo mission and saw a model of the spacecraft 

as well as actual pieces of its hardware. UPL Universe, July 85, 1) 

August 5: Weather satellite engineers from the Shanghai Institute of Satellite 

Engineering in the Peoples Republic of China planned to visit the U.S. to seek 

technological help to complete within the next few years assembly and 

launch of China‘s first polar orbit weather satellite, Aviation Week reported. 

The institute was building a primary and backup spacecraft for China’s first 

weather satellite mission and had started preliminary design of a Chinese 

geosynchronous orbit weather spacecraft planned for launch in the early 

1990s. 

The Shanghai Institute of Technical Physics was working on the imaging 

system the weather satellites would use to take cloud photos and collect 

other data comparable to that from the U.S. Tiros weather satellite series. 

Ground test data from the Chinese-designed tape recorder system and 

elements of the gyro system for the new polar orbit weather spacecraft, 

214 
Peoples Republic of China 

however, had not achieved a high enough reliability standard. The weather 

satellite manager planned to visit the U.S. in late 1985 or early 1986 to try to 

procure a U.5-built tape recorder that could fly in the satellite in tandem 

with a Chinese-built recorder to improve reliability of the spacecraft. 

A U.S. space team visiting the satellite engineering institute said the satellite was relatively large, about 4 feet tall and 4.5 feet wide. With solar arrays 

deployed, total spacecraft span was about 30 feet. 

The spacecraft would weigh 1,500 Ib. at launch and be in a 500-mile-high 

orbit at 99O orbital inclination. The Chinese State Bureau of Meteorology, 

Beijing, supplied performance specifications and funding for satellite. 

The Chinese weather spacecraft, like U.S. weather satellites, would transmit data continuously. Any nation with the receivers used for U.S. weather 

data could pick up the Chinese data as well. (AvWk, Aug 5/85, 79) 

October 26: Peoples Republic of China astronautics minister Li Xue said 

China would put their Long March 2 and 3 rockets on the international 

market to provide satellite launching services for local and foreign clients, 

FBIS Beijing XINHUA Hong Kong Service in Chinese reported. The decision 

resulted from the October 21 launch by a Long March 2 rocket of an earth 

surveying satellite and an April 8, 1984 launch by a Long March 3 rocket of 

China’s first experimental telecommunications satellite. 

Li Xue said the recent Long March 2 launch was its seventh consecutive 

success, indicating the two-stage liquid-propellant rocket could reliably put a 

satellite of about two tons into a near-earth orbit from the Jiuquan launching 

center, in addition the Long March 3 launch from the Xichang launching 

center of a satellite into geosynchronous orbit showed China had mastered 

the technology for placing a satellite in that orbit. 

He added that in addition to launch services from the two centers, China 

could provide satellite orbital control and support from the Xian control 

center, which had an ocean-based survey vessel component. And he pointed 

out that China could provide preferential prices for foreign customers, would 

train technicians, and had the capability, through the Chinese People’s Insurance Co., to underwrite satellites that were launched. 

In conclusion, he said that, after the Long March 2 and 3 rockets were on 

the international market, they would promote international technical and 

economic cooperation in the astronautics field and contribute to the maintenance of world peace. (FBIS, XINHUA Kong Hong Service in Chinese, Oct 

2 618 5) 

215 

SATELLITES 

January 70: Four years after cancellation of the National Oceanic Satellite 

System (NOSS), the U.S. Navy had begun to develop a simple, low-cost 

system to monitor ocean conditions routinely from space, Aerospace Daily 

reported. Budgeted at about a third the estimated cost of NOSS, the Navy 

Remote Ocean Sensing System (NROSS) would have nearly the same capability as NOSS by 1989, lacking particularly the synthetic aperture radar, and 

would use many of the ocean observation capabilities NASA’s Seasat program 

demonstrated in 1979. 

The Pentagon had avoided $591.5 million in FY 1981-88 costs by cancelling NOSS (NASA and NOAA contributions would have made the total over 

$1 billion). NROSS would use a single-satellite system with no backup; the 

Navy would resolve later the issue of replenishment satellites. NROSS would 

also use existing or already planned data-processing equipment at the Navy’s 

Fleet Numerical Oceanography Center and the USAF’s Defense Meteorological Satellite Program command and control facilities. 

The Navy expected to spend about $200 million from FY 85 development 

through a launch in 1989, with a NASA contribution of $115 million ($35 

million for the satellite program and $80 million in research). The Office of 

Management and Budget had vetoed use of NOAA’s NOAA-D spacecraft as 

the NROSS bus, so NROSS would use a Block 5D-2 DMSP spacecraft. The 

Navy had planned an Atlas E launch, but was considering a refurbished Titan 

II ICBM. Planners rejected a Space Shuttle launch as too expensive. 

lanuary 25 The Mutual Broadcasting System announced plans to use its 

excess satellite space to deliver messages at rates low enough to compete 

with the postal service, the Washingfon Post reported. The company estimated that telecommunications business from the new Mutual Satellite Services division would generate 50% of its revenue by 1990. Mutual’s principal 

business was the Mutual Radio Network, which owned receiving dishes at 

more than 700 locations nationwide. 

Mutual planned starting in mid-1985 to send audio and data transmissions 

over a little-used portion of the FM radio spectrum to specially tuned radios 

in clients’ offices. Cassette tape recorders attached to the radios would receive voice communications and send them to high-speed printers. Called 

MultiComm, the system would allow any organization to create its own 

private network for sending encrypted audio, data, printed material, or computer software to a number of locations simultaneously. Senders could relay a 

300- to 450-word message to 500 receivers for 25 to 30 cents per recipient, 

compared to a first-class letter at 22 cents. Other electronic mail systems use 

a wire hookup between the company providing the satellite link and the 

PRECEDING PAGE BLATdK NOT FILMED 217 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

message recipient; Mutual would provide the first system in which the signal 

was transmitted by radio. (WPost, Jan 25/85, D2) 

Duringjanuary: A six-man Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) team at the 

South Pole on December 14, 1984, had taken turns talking to colleagues in 

Greenbelt, Maryland, using one of two unprecedented satellite communications links the group had installed over the previous month, the Goddard 

News reported. “The conversation was amazingly audible,” said Tony Comberiate, a GSFC communications expert and member of the South Pole 

satellite data-link project team. ”The folks at Goddard sounded like they were 

just a few feet away.“ 

Although voice communications capabilities from the South Pole using 

Ham radio had existed for some time, the systems were weather dependent 

and usually very noisy. The GSFC group used the 17-year-old Applications 

Technology Satellite (ATS-3) to establish the two-way voice link. The key 

breakthrough was installation of the scientific data link, which enabled daily 

transmittal of information from the Pole, across Antarctica, and to the U.S. 

Before system installation, scientific data from the pole was stored during 

the region’s winter months and shipped out by aircraft from November 

through February. The new system permitted transmission of high-quality 

scientific data by using three existing polar orbiting satellites (a 4th was 

scheduled soon). Each satellite passed the pole about 14 times daily and 

relayed data to McMurdo Sound, which retransmitted it to a geosynchronous 

satellite, which in turn transmitted it to the US. Since the Pole signals were 

too far below the horizon to be acquired by normal communications satellites, the relay route was necessary. Researchers had previously considered a 

communications link from the South Pole, but decided it was too costly and 

impractical, perhaps taking several years and costing an estimated $35 million. The GSFC approach had cost about $250,000 and taken nine months, 

because it used existing satellites, excess equipment, and had support from 

several organizations. 

Scientists could receive daily transmission of reliable data on global 

weather patterns, the magnetospheric cusp, upper atmosphere, and glaciological and seismic studies to name a few. The link also could evolve into a 

data collection network for many of the unmanned observatories (groundbased satellites) scattered throughout Antarctica. (Goddard News, Jan 85, 6) 

March 7: NASA announced plans to deploy for the first time two small 

experimental satellites from Get Away Special (GAS) containers mounted in 

the cargo bay of the Space Shuttle orbiter Challenger during the STS 51-B 

mission scheduled for iaunch in late April. Under the GAS program, NASA 

would deploy for $10,000 each the Global Low Orbiting Message Relay 

Satellite (GLOMR) and the Northern Utah Satellite (NUSAT) in hopes of 

establishing an inexpensive way to deploy small satellites during routine 

Space Shuttle operations. 

218 
Satellites 

Clarke Prouty, technical liaison officer for the GAS program at Goddard 

Space Flight Center (GSFC), said the GAS containers had been upgraded with 

ejection systems for the 51-B mission and that GSFC had developed a motorized door (full diameter motorized door assembly) for the can similar to the 

one first flown on the seventh Space Shuttle mission, which would allow the 

GAS payload to be exposed to space. The door assembly permitted GAS 

container insulation before and after satellite deployment and provided a 

means for keeping the satellite in the container in case of malfunction. GSFC 

had also adapted the spacecraft separation system used in the Delta rocket 

program for the GAS ejection systems. 

The GLOMR satellite, designed and built by Defense Systems Inc. was a 

data relay, communications spacecraft that was expected to remain in orbit 

for about a year. The NUSAT, designed, built, and tested by Weber State 

College, Ogden, Utah, in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration, was an air traffic control radar system calibrator that would measure 

antenna patterns for ground-based radars operating in the U.S. and member 

countries of the International Civil Aviation Organization. 

NASA would first launch the NUSAT, then the GLOMR, at the end of 

Spacelab 3 science activities on the sixth day of the sevenday 51-8 mission. 

Independent user ground stations would operate the satellites following deployment. 

The GAS program was available to anyone wishing to fly a small (for 

containment in 2%- by 5-ft area) scientific research and development experiment. The Space Shuttle had flown 29 GAS containers, including those for 

materials processing, life sciences, biology, seed and crystal growth, and 

cosmic radiation. (NASA Release 85-35) 

March 25: The Arab League’s Arabsat 7 telecommunications satellite, 

launched February 8 by an Ariane 3 from Kourou, French Guiana, experienced control problems during initial in-orbit checkout, but was reported 

stabilized with all systems functioning normally, Aviation Week reported. 

Anomalies in the spacecraft’s gyro package caused the problems, detected 

March 16 by operators at Arabsat‘s Dihrab, Saudi Arabia, ground station 

when the satellite was at its final on-station location at 19O E longitude. 

Investigators were attempting to pinpoint the problem. 

An electrostatic discharge may have caused one of the gyro package anomalies. Although the gyros provided pitch, roll, and yaw information, “we 

never lost control of the satellite: said Michel Duigot, Aerospatiale’s Space 

and Ballistic Systems Division communications satellite system manager. 

“There is redundancy in the satellite because we have two packages of three 

gyros each,” he pointed out. 

The satellite experienced solar array deployment difficulties soon after 

launch, but the arrays eventually extended successfully. Program officials said 

the two problems were unrelated. 

219 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The solar array deployment problems had resulted in minor modifications 

to the solar panels on the No. 2 Arabsat, originally scheduled for launch by 

NASA from KSC in May, but rescheduled for June. 

The 22-member Arab Satellite Communications Organization would use 

the Ardbsat I for national and regional communications and TV broadcast 

requirements. The schedule called for an operational satellite by the end of 

April, and program officials believed this might still be possible. (AvWk, Mar 

25.85, 22) 

March 29 NASA announced that its first Applications Technology Satellite 

(ATS-I), after more than 18 years of service, failed to respond to commands 

to correct its eastward drift from geostationary position over the Gilbert Islands in the western Pacific. Robert Wales, ATS project operations director at 

Coddard Space Flight Center (CFSC), said that the ground control station in 

Hawaii could no longer keep ATS-I at its present location and it would likely 

drift out of useful orbital position during the next six months. 

ATS-I, launched in December 1966 with an expected lifespan of three 

years, most recently had provided a voice and data communications capability to several information networks in the Pacific basin. The pan Pacific 

education and communications experiments by satellite (PEACESAT) program, the major user of ATS-7, would dissolve with the loss of the satellite. 

Program participants had transmitted educational, health, research, technology, and community services through ATS-I to 23 autonomous terminals 

located in Hawaii, Cook Islands, the Mariana and Caroline Islands, Western 

and American Samoa, the Marshall Islands, Melanesia, New Zealand, and 

Australia. 

Some of ATS-7’s notable achievements were the first transmission in 1967 

of fullearth, cloud cover pictures from geosynchronous orbit; first transmission in 1967 of real-time TV pictures (Apollo 4 splashdown); two-way communication tests with commercial airliners to determine aircraft orientation 

effects on satellite communications, a cooperative venture with the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) and the airlines in 1967 and 1968; link-up 

between U.S. and USSR scientists during an atmospheric, sea, and ice condition experiment in the Bering Sea in 1971; transmission of electrocardiographs from Hawaii to New Zealand and from Alaska to the University of 

Washington; and presentation of medical conferences over the PEACESAT 

network. 

The medical world had praised the Alaskan ”doctor call” service provided 

by ATS-I as the first innovative approach to rural medicine in the US. In the 

program, Public Health Service physicians could communicate daily through 

ATS-1 with trained health aides in the remote Alaskan bush country. 

Loss of ATS-1 would leave one other comparable satellite, ATS-3, 

launched in November 1967, in operation. Positioned in geosynchronous 

orbit over the Pacific Ocean south of Mexico, ATS-3 covered the U.S., most of 

220 
Satellites 

the Atlantic Ocean, and a large part of the eastern Pacific including Hawaii. 

(NASA Release 85-45) 

March 29: Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC) qualification 

tests had shown the Star 30C apogee kick motor, designed to place satellites 

in orbits around the earth and manufactured by Morton-Thiokol Inc., was 

ready for production, the Air Force Systems Command (AFSC) Newsreview 

reported. 

Sverdrup Technology Inc., operating contractor of AEDC‘s propulsion test 

facilities, had conducted qualification checks in one of AEDC’s high-altitude 

rocket development test cells at a simulated altitude of about 100,000 feet. 

Test objectives were to demonstrate component structural integrity and to 

determine ballistic performance. Sverdrup temperature conditioned the motors and then test fired them while they spun about their axial centerline to 

simulate spin stabilization during firing in space. 

The Star 30C, designed to be carried by the Space Shuttle, was the propulsion system for the RCA G-STAR satellite. Once in space, it would ignite and 

carry the satellite to its designated orbit. (AFSC Newsreview, Mar 29/85, 6) 

April 4: President Reagan announced that March 31 through April 6, 1985, 

would be National Weather Satellite Week in a proclamation that said, “The 

United States‘ weather satellites have tracked the earth’s weather since April 

1, 1960, and have brought unique benefits to the American people and the 

world. 

“Weather satellites have proven exceptionally valuable in detecting, monitoring, and giving early warning of hurricanes, severe storms, flash floods, 

arid other life-threatening natural hazards, on a local, national, and international basis. 

“The international weather satellite search-and-rescue program has saved 

over three hundred lives since 1982. The achievements of the scientific and 

aerospace communities in developing weather satellites have contributed 

significantly to the United States‘ leadership in satellite technology, international cooperation in space, and an integrated global weather forecasting 

system . . .” 

The proclamation concluded that NASA “has been the world leader in the 

development of experimental and prototypical weather and environmental 

satellites. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has demonstrated outstanding leadership in the management of operational weather 

and environmental satellite systems and programs.” (Admin. of Ronald 

Reagan, Proclamation 5314, Apr 5/85, 421) 

April 22 In assessing the status of the Syncom IV-3 (Leasat 3) satellite that 

was drifting in low-earth orbit after its apogee kick motor failed to push it into 

221 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

proper orbit [see Apr. 181, aerospace engineers said astronauts might be able 

to salvage the satellite, the Washington Times reported. Payload specialists 

originally believed it would be too dangerous to return the satellite to earth 

on the Space Shuttle because of the nearly six tons of highly volatile rocket 

fuel it carried. Jerome Hammack, a spacecraft safety operations expert, said 

deactivating the satellite’s electronic systems would significantly reduce the 

chance of stray sparks igniting the fuel, most of which would turn to gas upon 

descent. To ensure that there was no power going to any of the electrical 

circuits, a spacewalking astronaut would have to cut power circuits running 

to the satellite’s batteries and solar power cells. However, NASA would mount 

a rescue attempt only if Hughes Communications Inc., Leasat 3’s manufacturer, and Hughes’ insurance underwriters agreed to a salvage contract. (W 

Times, Apr 22/85, 2A) 

May 5: In a commencement address today at the George Washington University School of Public and International Affairs, Charles Wick, director of the 

U.S. Information Agency, said that the ”very survival” of the U.S. may depend 

on the extent to which its citizens use and master the tools of mass communications, the NY Times reported. 

“Through the explosion of global satellite communications, a technological ’genie’ has been unleashed which will change forever the way that governments communicate ideas and information abroad,” he said. However, he 

noted that “. . . not all countries believe in freedom of ideas. Not all accept 

the Western tradition that free expression is a basic human right. These 

opposing forces are attempting to persuade other countries, particularly 

those in the third world, that the state, not the people, must decide which 

ideas circulate in their magazines and newspapers and on the TV and radio 

stations . . . 

“Since the 1970s, the Soviet Union has introduced resolutions at Unesco, 

in the guise of a ’New World Information Order; to impose this control of the 

mass media on all nations of the world . . . 

“Unless you and I do a better job of explaining to the world how the free 

flow of information can benefit mankind, other nations will not be persuaded 

to open their borders to the ideas and opinions of others. This could have 

damaging, even fatal consequences for a dangerous world, in which cooperation-and survival-depend so heavily on mutual understanding:’ Wick concluded. (NYT, May 7/85, B8) 

May 7: The European Space Agency (ESA) and the Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced that the U.S. agreed to lend ESA its GOES-4 standby geostationary 

weather satellite as a temporary substitute for ESA’s Meteosat-7 spacecraft. 

Meteosat-7, launched in 1977 with a planned 3-year lifetime, had run out of 

222 
Satellites 

station-keeping fuel and would drift out of view of ESA's ground-station network in July. 

NOAA would move GOES-4, which had been at 140° W longitude over 

the Pacific Ocean, westward by 4O a day to bring it by mid-June to its new 

position at loo W longitude above the Atlantic Ocean. Because ESA group 

equipment was not compatible with the GOES-4 command system, NOAA 

would operate the satellite for ESA from its satellite guidance facilities at 

Suitland, Maryland, and Wallops Station, Virginia. ESA's Meteosat ground 

facilities in Darmstadt would receive data from the spacecraft. 

When NOAA's Atlantic-area GOES-East Satellite lost its imaging capability 

in 1984, ESA's Meteosat-2 provided U.S. weather watchers with weather data, 

including information on the eastern Atlantic hurricane breeding grounds. 

(ESA Release, May 7/85) 

May 24: NASA announced it was negotiating an agreement with Hughes 

Communications, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of Hughes Aircraft Co.) to 

develop jointly plans for a Space Shuttle mission to attempt salvage of the 

Hughes Leasat 3 satellite then in orbit [see Space Transportation System/ 

Missions, Apr. 17. 

As a result of Hughes's negotiations with New York- and London-based 

underwriters insuring Leasat 3, Lloyd's and other European underwriters had 

agreed to proceed with the attempted salvage. Hughes was continuing negotiations with U.S. underwriters. 

Although the joint salvage effort would include activities never before 

attempted, it was based in large part on experience gained by NASA during 

its April 1984 repair of the Solar Maximum Mission satellite and its retrieval 

November 1984 of the Palapa 8-2 and Westar VI satellites. 

Pending an independent review of safety considerations by the Aerospace 

Safety Advisory Panel, the mission would occur during Space Shuttle flight 

51-L scheduled for no earlier than August 24. The salvage plan called for 

modification to the satellite by two of the Space Shuttle crew during rendezvous with it to permit ground command of the satellite. Ground command 

would then perform the activation sequence, normally performed by an 

automatic timer onboard the satellite. Modification made during the rendezvous would bypass all hardware likely to have caused the Leasat 3 failure. 

(Although Hughes had identified satellite activation components and circuits 

as the cause of the failure, the company had not determined, due to limited 

flight data, a specific cause of the failure.) 

In its dormant state, the satellite was experiencing temperatures well below 

the design and test limits of the liquid- and sold-fuel propellant systems, 

electronic units, batteries, and all other components. These factors, combined with the complexity of the modifications by the Space Shuttle crew, 

limited the chances of success. 

223 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Hughes Communications, Inc. would contract with NASA for the costs, at 

that time under assessment, for preparation and execution of the mission. 

(NASA 85-77) 

May 24 NASA had brought under control a $SO-mil!ion weather satellite, 

NOM-8, that had tumbled helplessly in space for nearly a year due to a 

malfunctioning oscillator, the Washington Times reported. 

The defective oscillator gave out during April, allowing NASA and National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists to activate a 

backup oscillator and reprogram the satellite via remote control. NOAA was 

checking and calibrating the spacecraft's instruments before putting it July 8 

into service to transmit daily weather photos and information. (W Times, May 

24/85, 3A; W Post, May 24, 85, A81 

May 29 M. Peter McPherson, head of the Agency for International Develop 

ment (AID), said a U.S.-financed and -built satellite weather-alert system may 

have given Bangladesh up to 24 hours notice of a devastating cyclone that 

killed approximately 10,000 people, the Washington Times reported. The 

advance notice may have saved "a substantial number of lives:' along coastal 

areas of the Bay of Bengal, McPherson said. 

McPherson pointed out that the satellite system in Bangladesh, developed 

in phases since 1978 by NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, and AID warned of the storm. He said Bangladesh technicians had tracked the cyclone for four days and had the capability of predicting landfall and wind speed within 18 to 24 hr. (W Times, May 29/85, 5A) 

May 30: NASA announced it had selected Ford Aerospace and Communications Corp., Western Development Laboratories, to negotiate a cost-plusaward-fee contract for the next generation of Geostationary Operational 

Environmental Satellites (GOES) that would include three spacecraft (GOESI, J, and K) and a two spacecraft option (GOES4 and M). The contract had a 

proposed cost of $221 million and would provide for a series of GOES 

satellite systems, each with a five-year design life, that would contribute to 

continuation of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's 

(NOAA) GOFS program in the 1990 to 2000 era. NASA had scheduled a late 

1989 launch for the first GOES satellite in this new series. 

The contract statement of work covered the satellite bus; imaging, sounding, and spaceenvironment monitor instruments; and flight-support equip 

ment and services to accomplish deployment of the spacecraft into 

geosynchronous orbit from the Space Shuttle. The contract also included 

operations ground equipment and support to ensure compatibility of the 

spacecraft systems with established ground systems operated by NOAA. 

224 
Satellites 

NASA assigned Goddard Space Flight Center responsibility for project 

management. (NASA Release 85-80) 

May 30: NASA announced that NASA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA), and RCA engineers had stabilized the NOAA-8 

satellite after it began tumbling out of control when an oscillator in the 

spacecraft's altitude control system failed. Engineers were continuing a three 

week checkout of the spacecraft to ensure that all calibrations were in order, 

at which time the satellite would be fully operaticnal. 

The satellite carried search and rescue (SARSAT) equipment that would 

resume operation as part of an international program begun in September 

1983 to use satellites to save people in downed airplanes or on ships in 

distress. During the 11 months NOAA-8 malfunctioned, three USSR and one 

US. satellite were picking up distress signals and relaying them to ground 

stations. 

The reactivated NOAA-8 would assume weather data collection that 

NOAA-6 had been doing. NOAA-6 had no search and rescue equipment 

and its infrared radiometer for taking temperature measurements was not 

working. (NASA Release 85-81 1 

Jdy 8: Recently completed agreements between insurance underwriters aad 

Hughes Communications Services acknowledged loss of the disabled 

Leasat-3 spacecraft but established a plan under which Hughes and the 

underwriters would share in communication lease revenues if a plan to repair 

the satellite during the Space Shuttle 51-1 mission was successfuI, Aviation 

Week reported. 

Under the agreement with American and Europeari underwriters who insured Leasaf-3, Hughes would provide the funds, estimated at about $10 

million, for the rescue attempt. If the rescue was successful, Hughes would 

regain the cost of the sa!vage mission through initial lease revenues. The 

agreements recognized a loss of $85 million for the spacecraft and launch 

costs. 

The loss resulted from the failure of the spacecraft on April 13 to activate 

during an automatic deployment sequence after the spacecraft was ejected 

from the Space Shuttle orbiter Discovery's cargo bay [see Space Transportation Systemlhiiissions, Apr. 17. 

Hqhes and NASA were developing equipment and ptocedures to mount 

the rescue attempt. iohnson Space Center had concluded a critical design 

review for rescue hardware such as a worksite, stowage assembly, and the 

capture, handling, grapple, and spinup bars that would be used to stabiiize, 

restrain, and spin the satellite once modifications aimed at restoring ground 

control were made on orbit. The design review also covered components 

Hughes was building, such as the remote power wit, spur! bypass unit, and a 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

checkout box that would be used to test electronic components on orbit prior 

to the rescue attempt. 

Completion of the critical design review enabled NASA to obtain information on the electronic components Hughes was building and to build rescue 

equipment for the mission, conduct vacuum chamber testing, and begin 

training for the salvage mission. 

NASA had already conducted initial neutral buoyancy training in the 

weightless training environment facility and mass simulation tests in preparation for the mission. (AvWk, July 8/85, 24) 

July 23: In its postlaunch report dated July 23, 1986, NASA announced that it 

had launched on September 9, 1980, GOES-D (subsequently designated 

GOES4 from KSC by a Delta 3914 launch vehicle. The GOES (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite) satellites provided near-continuous high-quality day and night observations of earth and its environment, 

including cloud cover; weather; proton, electron, and solar X-ray fluxes; and 

magnetic fields. 

During placement of GOES-4 and its apogee boost motor (ABM) into 

transfer orbit, NASA observed lower than expected temperatures for the ABM 

and decided to fire the motor at second apogee in lieu of the nominal third 

apogee. Performance of the ABM was nominal and resulted in placement of 

the spacecraft in desired drift orbit. GOES-4 arrived September 20, 1980, onstation at the 98' west longitude checkout position. On February 26, 1981, 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) moved 

GOES-4 to the GOES-west operational position at 135' west longitude, 

replacing the ailing GOES-3 spacecraft. NASA modified the ABM thermal 

design for follow-on spacecraft to avoid recurrence of the low temperature 

pro b I em. 

On May 22, 1981, NASA launched GOES-E (subsequently designated 

GOES-5) from KSC on the Delta 3914. Spacecraft performance during transfer orbit maneuvers was nominal, and NASA fired the ABM on the third 

apogee of the transfer orbit. GOES-5 arrived on-station June 5, 1981, at the 

predetermined checkout position of 85' west longitude. On August 5, 1981, 

NOAA placed GOES4 at 75O west longitude where it became the operational GOES-east satellite. 

An additional mission objective for both GOES-4 and 5 was demonstration and assessment of the temperature and moisture soundings from the 

VISSR Atmospheric Sounder (VAS); Goddard Space Flight Center initiated a 

VAS demonstration project to achieve this objective. In 1981 the VAS demonstration project conducted a ground truth field experiment that provided four 

days of simultaneous, highdensity ground-based observations and satellite 

data. This data showed VAS to be a versatile and valuable instrument with 

potential applications beyond the severe local storm discipline. Some of 

226 
Sat el I ites 

these additional areas included hurricane and tropical cyclone research, 

cloud climatology, and diagnosis of moisture patterns and upper-air circulation. As a result of the VAS demonstration project, NOAA made provision for 

geosynchronous soundings a requirement for the next generation of GOES 

satellites. 

Under a 1973 basic agreement, NASA had the responsibility under NOAA 

reimbursable funding to design, engineer, procure, and launch polar and 

geosynchronous weather satellites to implement the U.S.’s operational meteorological satellite program. After on-orbit checkout, NASA handed over the 

spacecraft to NOAA for routine operations. (NASA MOR E-612-80-02 [postlaunch] July 23/85, E-612-81-03 [postlaunch] July 23/85) 

july23: Astronauts James van Hoften and Dr. William Fisher said at a Johnson 

Space Center news conference that they would attempt to activate the Syncom satellite deployed in April from the Space Shuttle, the Washington Post 

reported. Although the satellite was loaded with rocket fuel, the astronauts 

said they didn’t think their mission was any more dangerous than the two 

other rescue missions by astronauts in the previous two years. Because the 

satellite was “armed,” (in the position in which it was ready to fire its engines), the danger was great if the engines ignited accidentally while the 

astronauts were working. 

However, the astronauts indicated the hardest part of their upcoming mission was its awkwardness, not the danger. They said they would attempt the 

rescue on the seventh day of the August 24 Space Shuttle 51-1 mission with 

the orbiter Discovery. Van Hoften would stand in foot restraints at the end of 

the Space Shuttle’s 50-foot-long mechanical arm 35 feet below the satellite to 

affix a capture bar to the side of the satellite, then force the satellite to come 

to a standstill from its once-a-minute spin. 

Fisher, standing in temporary foot restraints fixed to the side of Discovery‘s 

cargo bay, would put two plugs on either side of the arming switch to prevent 

the satellite from accidentally turning itself on. 

Then, standing on opposite sides of the satellite, the astronauts would 

bypass the satellite’s electronics so that flight directors on the ground could 

begin to command it from earth. NASA gave the operation a 50-50 chance of 

succeeding. (W Post, July 23/85, A2) 

luly 26: NASA announced that the International Maritime Satellite Organization (INMARSAT) selected the Space Shuttle to launch July 1988 and mid1989 two communications satellites in INMARSAT’s second generation 

series. The spacecraft would enhance INMARSAT’s existing maritime satellite 

network and the communications services the organization provided to 43 

member nations including the U.S. 

227 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

British Aerospace Corp. would build the spacecraft; Hughes Aircraft muld 

supply the spacecraft communications payload. A McDonnell Douglas spinstabilized upper stage, the PAM-D, would boost the spacecraft from lowearth orbit into a geosynchronous transfer orbit. An apogee kick motor, a 

smaller rocket motor on the spacecraft, would position the spacecraft in a 

circular 22,300-nautical-mile geosvcchronous orbit. (NASA Release 85-111 ) 

July 37: NASA announced that one of the satellites in the COSPASISARSAT 

system, an international program with the U.S., USSR, Canada, and France 

sening as major partners, made possible the rescue of a man 146 miles off 

Cape Henry, Virginia. 

On April 17 jack Boye departed Miami to sail to New York Harbor for the 

dedication of a memorial to Vietnam veteraw of Airborne 173, his wartime 

squadron. Three days into the sail his radio went out, and a storm caused the 

S~OOP’S electrical and electronic equipment and engine to fail and the boat to 

capsize. When the boat rolled over and started fiiling with water, Boye activated an emergency position-indicating radiq beacon that trailed at the stern 

of the boat. 

An orbiting Soviet sea and rescue satellite, one of three USSR and two U.S. 

satellites eqilipped with sea and rescue equipment in the COSPASISARSAT 

satellite system, first received the distress signal and beamed it to the Rescue 

and Command Center at Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, who alerted rescue 

forces. After an electronic search for the distress signal, a Coast Guard aircraft 

located the sloop and requested assistance fran a naval ship in the vicinity. 

The USS Detroit sent a whaleboat with the ship’s doctor to the sloop. 

To date, the COSPASISARSAT system had been instrumental in the rescue of 

more than 400 people. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration managed the 1J.S. portion of the system; Goddard Space Flight Center 

was responsible for system research and development. (NASA Release 85- 

113) 

August 2 NASA announced that a Scout vehicle today launched the Navy 

SOOS-I spacecraft from the Western Space and Missile Center (WSMC) at 

Vandenberg Air Force Base. 

4s a result of a 1962 NGSNDepartment of Defense (DOLI) agreement for 

joint use of the Scout launch vehicle, the U.S. Navy asked NASA to provide 

Scout launches for the Navy Transit and NOVA programs. The Navy reimbursed NASA for the cost of Scout launch vehicles, WSMC launch services, 

and mission support requirements as needed. 

The Navy and other vessels used the Transit program, an operational navigation system, for worldwide ocean navigation. Prior to the August 1 launch 

there were six operating satellites in the system. NASA maintained two Scout 

vehicles on standby status to launch replacement satellites to fill any operational gaps occurring in the system. 

228 
Satellites 

The Navy SOOS-I mission had two Transit satellites in a stacked configuration. lhe spacecraft, which weighed 283 Ib., had orbital parameters of 670 

km, apogee; 554 km, perigee; and 89.83O, inclination. (NASA MOR M490-606-85-01 [postlaunch] Sept 30, [prelaunch] july28/85) 

August 9 A conflict between industrial and developing countries over the 

use of space would likely be the dominant issue at the five-week World 

Administrative Radio Conference that would open August 9 in Geneva, the 

NY Times reported. The meeting was intended to negotiate a plan to avert 

traffic jams in the space used by orbiting communications satellites. 

The conflict existed as a result of the desire of industrial countries to gain 

an advantage from their technical lead with a flexible approach to assigning 

orbital slots and the desire of some developing countries to reserve orbital 

slots years before they might be used. 

Communications experts around the world said the increased use of lowcost satellites to expedite domestic, regional, and world communications 

was leading to a virtual traffic jam in the satellite belt, 22,300 miles above the 

equator. The radio frequencies that gave the clearest signals also were rapidly 

filling. The U.S. and INTELSAT used most of the orbit space and radio spectrum. 

Reagan Administration officials said they would offer a proposal that the 

U.S. refrain for 10 years from using parts of the radio spectrum opened to 

satellite use by a 1979 conference. By staying out of the expanded spectrum, 

U.S. officials said, the US. would reassure lessdeveloped nations that there 

would be radio room for them when their satellite-launching plans matured. 

The U.S. plan would let a country ask for radio frequencies 15 years in 

advance against the current five years. 

The U.S. plan would also establish a requirement that countries with a 

satellite in operation made compensatory payments to countries forced to 

put satellites in less desirable orbits or forced to use less desirable radio 

frequencies. 

The most persuasive aspect of the U.S. proposal was the prospect that 

between 50 and 100 U.S. satellites were at some stage of planning, develop 

ment, or scheduled for launch over the next three years. 

Lessdeveloped countries, particularly those in the tropical zone, wanted 

rigid assignments of radio bands, including the lower frequencies then dominated by the developed nations, because the bad weather common in the 

tropics did not noticeably disturb those frequencies. (NYT, Aug 7/85, D1) 

August 25: NASA said that the GOES-6 weather satellite turned its eye 

toward space for about four and a half hours today before NASA personnel 

reversed it, the Washington Post reported. Located at a fixed point about 

22,000 miles above earth, the satellite transmitted weather photos widely 

used by TV stations and newspapers across the nation. 

229 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NASA repositioned the satellite in a reprogramming effort that required 

transmission of 14 groups of 256 commands each, retiming the revolving 

satellite so that its instruments would come on when facing the earth. 

Since August 1984 when GOES-5 lost its ability to transmit photos because a light in it failed, GOES-6 was the lone fixed-point satellite making 

transmissions. NASA had scheduled for launch in spring 1986 a replacement 

for GOES-5. 

If a failure like the one that occurred on August 25 were to last longer, it 

could have a serious impact on the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) ability to monitor severe storms. (W Post, 

Aug 29/85, A8) 

August 37: During Space Shuttle mission 51-1 astronauts James van Hoften 

and William Fisher spent seven hours and eight minutes, a new record for a 

spacewalk, in the first stage of repair of the Leasat 3 satellite, the Washington 

Post reported. During the walk, they retrieved the 15,000-lb. satellite, fastened Discovery's mechanical arm onto it, disarmed its Minuteman rocket 

motor, and exposed its electronic connections. Later Fisher said he could see 

no evidence of what caused the satellite to go dead after astronauts deployed 

it in April. "There is no evidence of debris on anything that would cause a 

problem. It's clean as a whistle," He said. 

Van Hoften and Fisher were outside the Space Shuttle from about 8:OO a.m. 

to shortly after 3:OO p.m. EDT, breaking by one minute the spacewalk record 

set April 1984 by van Hoften and George Nelson when they repaired the 

scientific satellite Solar Max. 

Although the astronauts accomplished more than half of what was needed 

in the salvage mission, they were planning a four-hour spacewalk on September 1 to finish the job. They would put a "space blanket" over the engine bell 

that served as the Minuteman motor's rocket nozzle to trap more of the sun's 

heat to warm it, because Leasat-3 had been in the cold of space so long that 

its rocket motor was too cold to fire correctly. Then the astronauts would 

install a vertical bar along the 20-foot length of the satellite to serve as a 

handle for van Hoften to spin the satellite and push it away from Discovery 

into space. 

It would then be seven days before the satellite acquired enough power to 

thaw its liquid-fuel tanks and almost two months before the solid-fuel rocket 

motor was warm enough for ground controllers to command it to ignite. (W 

Post, Sept 1/85, A5) 

September 1: Astronauts James van Hoften and William Fisher on Space 

Shuttle mission 51-1 today completed repair of the Leasat 1 satellite, the 

Washington Post reported. Steven Dorfman, president of Hughes Communications Corp., satellite owner, referred to the effort as the "most remarkable 

salvage mission" tried in space. 

230 
Satellites 

During the second day of the salvage mission [see Satellites, Aug. 311, 

astronaut John Lounge, using the Space Shuttle’s mechanical arm, raised the 

satellite 35 feet above the cargo bay and placed its center of gravity on a 

straight line with that of the orbiter Discovery. Outside, van Hoften stepped 

into foot restraints on the end of the arm, and Lounge lifted him to the 

satel I i te. 

Reaching up, van Hoften placed gloved hands on the bar he had earlier 

attached to the satellite and pushed down as hard as he could to start the 

satellite spinning. Three more pushes sent the satellite spinning evenly into 

space over the equator near the west coast of South America where officials 

planned to operate it as a Navy radio relay. 

Although Hughes was still concerned that very cold temperatures might 

have permanently damaged the satellite, it did beam to earth its first signals 

since deployment on April 13. The signals indicated that temperatures in the 

satellite’s outer shell were normal, suggesting that the inner drum holding the 

two onboard rocket engines and more than 7,500 Ib. of rocket fuel might 

have survived the varying temperatures of space and be ready to carry the 

satellite into permanent position 22,300 miles above earth. (WPost, Sept 2/ 

85, A3) 

September 16 Hughes Communications Inc., manufacturer and owner of the 

Syncom 4 satellite launched August 27 from the Space Shuttle Discovery 

during mission 51-1, today declared it a failure due to a faulty cable between 

the satellite’s UHF radio transmission system and its broadcast antenna, the 

Washington Post reported. 

Failure of the $85 million satellite, known as Leasat 4 after its lease to the 

Navy, pushed satellite insurance losses to $234 million in a single week and 

to about $570 million for the past 18 months. Satellites insured for $84 

million and $65 million were also lost that week when Arianespace blew up 

a malfunctioning Ariane rocket. (W Post, Sept 17/85, All) 

September 23: Hughes Communications faced the possibility of a $10,000 

per day fine, up to a total of $5 million, if the Leasat communications system 

was not fully operational by November 30, Aviation Week reported. The 

potential of a fine resulted from the failure of its Leasat 4 satellite following 

deployment from the Space Shuttle Discovery during mission 51-1, reducing 

significantly the likelihood of three Leasat satellites being operational by the 

November 30 deadline. 

Hughes could avoid the fee if the repaired Leasat 3 activated in late October; otherwise the firm had the option of launching a ground spare. Telemetry data from Leasat 3, repaired during the Space Shuttle 51-1 mission, 

continued to confirm the satellite’s functioning. The liquid propulsion system 

was intact, and the solid propellant perigee kick motor temperatures were 

rising toward acceptable levels. However, the satellite could explode when its 

231 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

main rocket fired late in September, and Hughes officials gave it no more 

than a 50-50 chance of reaching geosynchronous orbit. 

Leasat 7 and 2, launched in August and November 1984, respectively, were 

operating according to specifications, and the Navy was leasing them. 

Hughes had to provide the US. Navy with four operational satellites by 

March 31, 1986, to meet the second contract deadline and could at that time 

again face fines for noncompliance. Company officials estimated December 

as the earliest date for a Leasat 5 launch. 

Albert Wheelon, Hughes Aircraft Co. senior vice president and president of 

Hughes’s space and communications group, said the Leasat 4 loss and other 

recent spacecraft losses were having an impact on the industry. “My reading 

is that generally the whole insurance market for satellites has just gone bellyup,” he commented. “I think it‘s going to have a major impact on startup 

companies. I think it‘s going to be a narrowing, both on the operator and the 

development side.” He added that the status of spacecraft underwriters 

would have less of an impact on companies like Hughes, because it could 

provide self-insurance. (AvWk, Sept 23/85, 21 

September 26 NASA announced that its AST-3 communications satellite, 

located at 105’ west longitude, was providing communications support 

through its control center at Malabar, Florida, to American Red Cross and Pan 

American World Health Organization rescue and relief efforts following 

Mexico City‘s earthquake. 

The voice communications link with the outside world was crucial, since 

the earthquake disrupted all other forms of communications in the city. 

George Manno, director of media relations for the Red Cross, said “the ATS-3 

is providing us with the most critical communications link. Although ham 

radio operators have been doing a swell job, they are serving as our backup 

communications system, while we rely primarily on the ATS as our main 

communications vehicle.” 

Immediately after the earthquake occurred, NASA implemented the ATS 

emergency preemption plan; within 24 hours ATS-3 was on the air, giving 

priority to satellite communications traffic for the emergency rescue operations. (NASA Release 85-133) 

October 3: The Syncom I/ communications satellite lost one of its 13 channels, described as an important wide-band channel, and efforts were underway to reactivate it, Defense Daily reported. The US. Navy leased the 

satellite from Hughes Communications Inc., which was under contract to 

provide four such Leasats to the Navy. 

NASA in September 1984 launched Syncom I and I/ from the Space Shuttle 

and launched in April from the Space Shuttle Syncom //I, which failed to fire 

in orbit. The Space Shuttle crew in July repaired Syncom //I, with a reboost 

232 
Satellites 

attempt scheduled for October. NASA launched in July from the Space Shuttle Syncom IV, but its communications failed in orbit. (OD, Oct 3/85, 174) 

October 27: Engineers with Hughes Communications Inc., owner of the 

Syncom 3 communications satellite, sent at 11 :53 a.m. today from the company‘s Guam ground station a radio command to fire the marooned satellite’s 

rocket booster, causing the satellite’s ICBM-type rocket motor to fire for 64 

seconds as planned, the Washington Times reported. The undertaking 

capped the most ambitious space salvage effort ever attempted, the Times 

said, a twoday effort in August by two astronauts aboard the Space Shuttle 

Discovery (see Satellites Apr 22 and Aug 31). The engineers fired the rocket 

without knowing whether it would blow up or work properly after months 

exposed to freezing temperatures. 

“We really nailed it,” said Albert Wheelon, president of the Hughes space 

communications group. “We’ll have it in synchronous orbit round about the 

first of November and then we still have 30 days of checking out the radio 

equipment and all the systems.” 

Insurance underwriters stood to recoup 85% of the insured cost of the 

satellite, a boost for an industry that had lost more than $600 million in the 

past 20 months because of seven satellite failures including Syncom 3. (W 

Times, Oct 28/85, 3A) 

November 7: The Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), Washington, D.C., announced its scientists devised a precise timing system that used highly efficient and relatively small hydrogen maser clocks that the laboratory expected 

would enhance timing in the Navstar Global Positioning System (GPS). 

GPS, a navigational system based on synchronized clocks (accurate to 

billionths of a second), would permit users to pinpoint their position within a 

30-foot radius by measuring differences in the arrival times of radio signals 

received from Navstar’s satellites. And GPS would disseminate the Naval 

Observatory’s master clock time to fleet units for their command, control, 

communications, and intelligence. 

Maser clocks were considered the most accurate clocks available; however 

their bulky size and weight (lighter ones weighed over 500 Ib.) prevented 

their use aboard GPS satellites. Also, the massive, tuned cavity where the 

maser action took place required temperature control and magnetic shielding, which made masers impractical for use in satellites. 

The research team at NRL led by Ron Beard reduced the size of maser 

clocks by a factor of 16 and their weight to 50 Ib. And by making the cavity 

smaller, using different resonant structures, and dielectric (sapphire) loading 

to produce the effect of a larger cavity, NRL “passive” masers (so called 

because they did not oscillate on their own) proved to be as accurate as the 

larger versions. Beard noted that NRCs involvement with masers and the 

233 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

subsequent idea to reduce cavity size came about only after two astro-industrial companies were unsuccessful in meeting GPS’s timing demands. 

NRL built and tested two experimental maser development models and 

two advanced development models. An additional NRL project with Hughes 

Research Laboratories used a Q-multiplier approach to offset the inherently 

higher signal losses in small cavities. 

Research in the NRL maser program included advances in small loadedcavity properties, beam optics, dissociator reliability, quadropole state selection, thermal/mechanical design, magnetic shieldingldesign, and vacuum 

design for space applications. 

The NRLdeveloped technology formed the basis for a $12 million contract 

awarded to Hughes Aircraft Corp. to produce two types of engineering development models of hydrogen-maser clocks. One clock type was for use in 

satellites; the other, for GPS ground stations and possibly ships. (NRL Release 

58-85 R) 

November 30: The U.S. Navy today took control of Syncom 3 from Hughes 

Communications Inc., certifying the satellite as a complete, though tardy, 

success, the Washington Post reported. Space Shuttle astronauts repaired the 

$85 million satellite in space [see Satellites, Aug. 311 by bypassing a failed 

circuit and relaunching it on September 1. Hughes ground controllers then 

tilted the satellite to face the sun, which, with the help of a thermal blanket 

installed by the astronauts, warmed the solid fuel. 

On October 27, Hughes engineers ignited the satellite‘s engines to take it 

up to its intended orbit 22,300 miles above the Pacific Ocean, then Hughes 

and Navy engineers completed a month of testing. 

Following the certification, Hughes president Steven Dorfman commented, “We are meeting all our specifications. Six months later than originally intended, we are going into service.” 

The successful repair turned around a loss for Hughes and its insurance 

carrier, which had paid the company $85 million. Dorfman said the insurer 

would get back $65 million by sharing revenues with Hughes over the satellites’s ten-year lifespan. (WPost, Dec 1/85, A3) 

234 
SEARCH FOR EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE 

(SETI) 

March 22: Dr. John Billingham, chief of the Extraterrestrial Research Division 

at Ames Research Center (ARC) and founder of the ARC-based Search for 

Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI), said at a Lewis Research Center (LeRC) 

ALERT colloquium that study of the earth‘s part in the 15-billion-year cosmic 

evolution held the key to searching for life beyond the solar system, the Lewis 

News reported. “By studying how our own planet formed and how basic 

elements required for life evolved, we can theorize that a similar life-structuring process may be occurring or had occurred elsewhere in the universe,” 

Billingham said. 

As an example, he mentioned the collection of microorganisms scientists 

observed in 3.5-billion-year-old rock formations discovered in the marine 

environment of Western Australia. Scientists could use that data to study 

rock-like formations on other planets that might display a similar evolutionary process. 

Billingham believed that it was reasonable to assume that life, including 

intelligent life, existed in the universe because, with 400 million stars in 

earth’s galaxy alone, the natural cosmic process included formation of planets-a rule, not an exception-and the basic stuff of life existed throughout 

the universe. 

Because the Viking program had failed to turn up signs of life on Mars, SET1 

would focus its sights on life beyond the solar system, Billingham said. To 

accomplish this would require either a manned interstellar vehicle or radio 

telescopes. The former option would require, to reach the nearest star, a fourstage spacecraft weighing 34,000 tons, traveling 3/10 the speed of light and 

using electrical power equal to 500,000 years of earth usage driven by antimatter-hardly a feasible option, he noted. However, researchers could design and build radio telescopes to listen to life from other cosmic sources, he 

said. 

Such a system would make use of the microwave window frequency range, 

a quiet region of the spectrum that provided the best chance of picking up 

extraterrestrial signals. To accomplish this, SETl‘s information system would 

need to develop the technology using the largest radio telescopes to amplify 

the signal (1 to 3 CHz) and to build a signal processing system driven by a 

specially designed SET1 computer. 

Billingham said the biggest challenge facing the SET1 program would be 

identifying the format, frequency resolution, and time of the signals in order 

to recognize and eliminate as much interference as possible, thus separating 

noise from sound manifestations. To determine signals of non-natural origin, 

235 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

SET1 would apply a sequence of logical tests coupled with a huge computerbased storehouse of information that would filter out most of the interference 

signals. 

‘A radio telescope placed in low earth orbit will help eliminate some of the 

interference problems,” Billingham said, “and the prospect of a much larger 

lunar orbiting radio telescope would offer an even more advantageous interference-reducing listening position that would cover a radius of 1,000 light 

years. ” 

SET1 was then preparing its first system radio telescope prototype for testing 

at Arecibo, Puerto Rico, where a 1,000-ft. radio telescope conducted signal 

searches. Once fully operational and in orbit, the new telescope would 

receive signals originating 30 to 40 light years away. 

“Either we are alone or not,” Billingham concluded, “and either has large 

implications. And we wonder, indeed if there is intelligent life elsewhere, 

will it help us understand our own.” (Lewis News, March 22/85, 2) 

236 
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION 

January 29: Regents of the Smithsonian Institution announced they had cancelled plans to construct a new facility at Washington Dulles International 

Airport that would have housed NASA‘s obsolete vehicles, the Washington 

Times reported. The Smithsonian had also expected to display the prototype 

of the French Concorde and numerous other non-NASA aircraft. However, 

the regents had decided the facility was a low priority. 

“I don‘t think the only place to store those aircraft and spacecraft is Dulles,” 

said Smithsonian secretary Kobert Adams. “I would be concerned to take on 

another major construction program at this time.” He concluded that emphasis would be on completing projects already begun. (W Times, Jan 29/85, 

D3) 

April 18: The Smithsonian Institution’s Air and Space Museum received ap 

proximately $400,000 from the Johnson Wax Co., which was needed to 

construct a life-sized, remote-controlled model of a pterosaur, a flying dinosaur that existed in various forms for about 145 million years and became 

extinct about 60 million years ago, the Washington Post reported. The 

Smithsonian had announced the project the previous summer with the caveat 

that it would need corporate funding. “We always planned to do it,” said 

museum deputy director Don Lopez, “but now we can be sure it will be built 

on the scale that we wanted.’’ 

The Smithsonian asked Paul MacCready, a prizewinning aerodynamicist 

whose experiments with pedal- and solar-powered aircraft were known 

around the world and whose Gossamer Condor, a lightweight, pedal-powered plane, hung in the Air and Space Museum, to design and build the 

model. MacCready and a team of experts in paleontology, bird flight, arid 

aerodynamics were experimenting in California with a small, glider version 

of the pterosaur. ?he Smithsonian expected the final version to weigh about 

125 Ib. and have a wingspan of 36 feet, roughly the size of a four-person 

airplane. MacCready would construct the moael of graphite, carbon, and 

epoxy fibers. 

The challenge, a Smithsonian spokesman said, was to design a computerized “brain” for the model to simulate the slight, constant wing movement 

that researchers believed the pterosaur used to maintain its balance. ( WPost, 

Apr 18/85, D2) 

May 8: The Smithsonian Institution announced that “Celestial Images: Astrononiical Charts, 1500-1900,” a special exhibition of 39 rare depictions of star 

patterns and planetary system, would open May 16 at its National Museum 

of American History. 

237 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The exhibition, intended to illustrate a unity of science and art from the 

Renaissance to the 19OOs, would include two woodcuts, the first printed star 

charts with coordinates and scales from which positions of stars could be 

plotted, from the workshop of Renaissance artist and mathematician Albrecht 

Durer (1471-1528). The museum would also display from Lahore, India, a 

17thcentury Islamic celestial globe made of brass and inlaid with silver stars; 

the only extant copy of engraved paper gores (1599) for the first celestial 

globe by Willem Janszoon Blaeu (1571-16381, the first to incorporate the 

Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe’s unexcelled positions for 1,000 stars; and a 

17thcentury celestial atlas by Andreas Cellarius. 

In addition to reflecting artistic styles and conventions of their periods, the 

works represented differing points of scientific and philosophical debate. 

Charts that accurately fixed many constellations and thousands of stars also 

depicted Ptolemy’s view of the earth as the center of the universe. Constellations rendered as mythological figures in one work might appear as Biblical 

figures in another. However, as a result of astronomer’s access to stronger and 

technically improved instruments, the works showed increasing accuracy 

over the 400 years covered in the exhibition. (Smithsonian Institution Release, May 8/85) 

lune 21: “The Dream Is Alive:’ a new IMAX movie that was perhaps the most 

advanced film of its kind ever made, opened today at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum, the Washington Post reported. The 

$3.6 million production, narrated by Walter Cronkite, was the first ever shot 

almost completely on location in space and was an informal sequel to ”Hail, 

Columbia:’ the story of the U.S.’s first Space Shuttle. 

Because the film was shot on three of the most dramatic and action-packed 

Space Shuttle flights of the previous year, it was essentially a video yearbook 

full of special happenings, the Washington Times reported. 

The film showed the rescue and repair of the Solar Max satellite, the 

deployment of the 100-foot-tall solar array that someday could help power 

the space station, launching of two communications satellites, and the first 

spacewalk by an American woman. 

Among what appeared to be special effects produced in Hollywood were 

the immensity of Hurricane Josephine as seen from 200 miles overhead and 

the silence of a satellite drifting noiselessly in the blackness of space. 

The astronauts who shot the footage said the IMAX format came as close to 

capturing the real view and the true feel of spaceflight as any format ever had. 

IMAX expert Graeme Ferguson, who produced and directed the film, said the 

next step was to modify an IMAX camera so it could be taken outside the 

Space Shuttle. (W Post, June 22/85, D1; W Times, June 20185, 3B) 

July 24: In testimony today before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, Smithsonian Institution Secretary Robert McCormick Adams 

238 
Smithsonian Institution 

said the Smithsonian opposed a bill introduced by Sen. Barry Goldwater (RAriz.) that would authorize funds to construct a museum administered by the 

National Air and Space Museum for historic airplanes and spacecraft at 

Dulles International Airport, the Washington Post reported. He said the Institution had more immediate legislative priorities, although it would support 

planning appropriations. In 1976 Goldwater was instrumental in pushing 

funds through Congress for the National Air and Space Museum. 

The bill Goldwater introduced in June called for $42.6 million in government appropriations in FY 89 and beyond, contingent on an equal amount in 

matching donations from the private sector. Adams questioned whether the 

Institution should, or could, raise that much money, particularly because the 

Institution had more pressing fund-raising commitments. 

Although Goldwater was on the Smithsonian’s Board of Regents, he was 

pushing the issue now, Terry Emerson, his legislative assistant said, because 

“its just an interest in priorities.” Emerson noted that politicians had a greater 

sense than did Smithsonian officials of the interest in technology-related 

museums. “Later they’ll come in once they see the overwhelming interest in 

it,” he added. 

“Once enabling legislation is enacted,” Goldwater said, “I believe numerous private individuals and firms will begin a major fund-raising campaign 

that will produce enough matching monies to get the first construction going 

by fiscal year 1989.” 

The Smithsonian’s Board of Regents initially approved in September 1983 

the concept for the air museum, citing insufficient space at the National Air 

and Space Museum and the difficulty of transporting large aircraft and spacecraft to the Mall building. Under the plan, the Federal Aviation Administration would lease 100 acres of its land at Dulles without compensation. 

Proximity to a runway was essential, because many of the aircraft and spacecraft, such as the Concorde and Space Shuttle, were too large to be transported on roads. 

The committee would rule on the proposed legislation in September. (W 

Post, July 25/85, 69) 

September 20: Rep. Norman Mineta, (D-Calif.) introduced legislation today 

for the planning and construction of an expansion of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum at Washington Dulles Airport, the 

Congressional Record reported. 

When introducing H.R. 3403, Mineta said, ”This legislation is proposed to 

solve two major problems confronting the Air and Space Museum. First, as 

my colleagues know, this is perhaps the most popular museum in the world. 

The public’s demand for exhibits and information concerning our aviation 

history is enormous, and growing. We need the additional facilities to respond to this demand. 

239 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

“But why Dulles? Why not build the new facility in downtown Washington? The answer is simple: there is no site large enough for the needs envisioned and of paraniount importance, there is no other site adjacent to a 

major airport. 

‘An airport site is critical because of the second problem we are trying to 

solve, which is how to display objects of the scale of the space shuttle or 

other modern aircraft. lhe museum needs to be at Dulles Airport because 

that is the only site to which these exhibits can be transported md disp!ayed. 

“In particular, this legislation authorizes the transfer to the Smithsonian of 

land at the airport. This bill authorizes a total of $2.4 million in funds for 

planning of the new museum, to be appropriated in the 1986 to 1988 period. 

“In addition, the bill authorizes the appropriation of $42.6 million in 

Federal funds beginning in 1989 to finance half of the cost of actually constructing the museum. These Federal funds would not be available unless and 

until a private fundraising effort has raised an identical amount.” (Cong. 

Record, Sept 20/85, E41651 

Nowmber 8: NASA announced it would transfer on December 6, 1985, the 

title to the Space Shuttle orbiter Enterprise to the Smithsonian Institution’s 

National Air and Space Museum. The NASA Shuttle Carrier Aircraft, a modified Boeing 747, on November 16 would deliver Enterprise to Washington 

Dulles International Airport, where cranes would remove Enterprise from the 

top of the 747 and lower it to Dulles’s tarmac. 

Rockwell Internatl., NASA’s Space Shuttle prime contractor, constructed 

Enterprise, which was the first orbiter built. NASA used Enterprise, Space 

Shuttle orbiter vehicle 101 (OV 1011, to test airframe loads, flight dynamics 

characteristics, and other aspects of the orbiter as it flew through earth’s 

atmosphere. NASA also used Enterprise as a test bed for manufacturing techniques, aerodynamics, and flight control tests, and mating and fit checks for 

the remainder of the Space Shuttle components-the external tank, solid-fuel 

rocket boosters, and mobile launch platforms at both Kennedy Space Center 

and Vandenberg Air Force Base. 

On September 17, 1976, Enterprise rolled out from Rockwell’s assembly 

facility at Palmdale, California, and was first flown on kbruan/ 15, 197i: 

aboard the modified 747 in taxi tests at Edwards Air Force Base. 

There were then five approach and landing tests, commanded and piloted 

alternately by astronaut teams of Fred Haise, Jr. (commander) and C. Gordon 

Fullerton (pilot! and Joe Engie (commander) and Richard Truly (piiot). 

After ground vibration tests, engineers at Kennedy Space Center used Enterprise for fit checks with the other Space Shuttle components and the 

mobile launch systems. More recently, engineer; used Enterprise for fit 

checks at the Space Shuttle launch complex at Vandenberg Air Force Base. 

(NASA Release 85-150) 

240 
Smithsonian Institution 

November 18: The Space Shuttle Enterprise arrived the afternoon of November 18 at Washington Dulles International Airport after a two-hour delay due 

to inclement weather, the Washington Post reported. NASA had announced 

earlier that it would transfer title to Enterprise to the Smithsonian Institution’s 

National Air and Space Museum [see Smithsonian Institution, Nov. 81. NASA 

delayed Enterprise’s takeoff from Kennedy Space Center until an early morning fog burned off so more people along the route could see the craft. 

Enterprise, atop a Boeing 747, was visible to onlookers in Annapolis and 

Baltimore before it began a counterclockwise circuit over Washington’s Capital Beltway. 

Officials at Dulles would store the spacecraft in a temporary shed about 

two miles from the airport terminal until a permanent facility was constructed. (W Post, Nw 19/85, B1) 

241 

SPACE SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS 

lanuary 7': NASA announced it signed with Rockwell Internatl. Corp. a memorandum of understanding (MOU) covering Space Shuttle flight assignments 

for Rockwell's materials-processing laboratory, which flew on STS 41 -D and, 

using the float-zone technique, grew a single indium crystal with a lattice 

structure originating from a crystal seed. The agreement called for Rockwell 

to develop an industrial space-processing program under which research 

institutions and commercial firms would install and operate experiments in 

the modular laboratory. Rockwell designed its fluids-experiment apparatus 

(FEA), the first zero-gravity laboratory for basic and product research in lowearth orbit, to fit in the Space Shuttle's middeck stowage area where crew 

could operate and monitor it. Experiments could range from processing 

applications to liquid chemistry, fluid physics, thermodynamics, crystal 

growth, and biological-cell culturing. 

The laboratory, about the size of a 19-inch TV, could heat, cool, expose to 

vacuum, and manipulate experiment samples that might be gaseous, liquid, 

or solid, and could mix or stir, remove, and change samples during a mission. 

A motion-picture or video camera would record sample behavior and instrument data displays. (NASA Release 85-2) 

lanuary 77: NASA successfully launched today an Aerobee liquid-fueled, 

sounding rocket from White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, marking the 

end of that rocket series, which was the oldest continuous rocket-firing program. NASA's Sounding Rocket Division had launched 536 Aerobees with a 

94% success rate. The Aerobee's reliability made it the workhorse vehicle for 

high-altitude studies. Commenting on the program, Maury Dubin, Goddard 

Space Flight Center (GSFC) physicist, said "virtually everything that's been 

done in space research can be attributed to sounding-rocket technology. The 

Aerobee and other sounding-rocket research precipitated the rise of many 

disciplines, from astronomy to the upper atmosphere." 

The Aerobee program began in 1946 when Aerojet Engineering Corp. 

received a U.S. Navy contract to build the rockets, and the Applied Physics 

Laboratory (APL) had supplied technical direction; Dr. James Van Allen had 

been project director. The Aerobee name, the Bumblebees, derived from a 

combination of Aerojet and APCs series of Navy missiles. NASA had used 

Aerobees extensively during the internatl. Geophysical Year duly 1957 to 

December 1958) to gather information on the atmosphere, cosmic radiation, 

auroras, and geomagnetism. 

The Aerobee rockets consisted of a series of five with each rocket carrying 

as many as six experiments that included equipment such as cameras, vacuum bottles, mirrors, grids, sensing devices, lenses, and other mechanical 

243 PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

units. Most rockets recorded data and simultaneously transmitted it via telemetry to ground stations. The final Aerobee payload tested a new spectrograph that would be flown on NASA’s Astro mission to record extreme 

ultraviolet Dayglow emissions in earths upper atmosphere. 

George Kraft, GSFC flight support section director, said that, although the 

demise of small liquid-fueled sounding rockets was imminent, “sounding 

rockets would continue to be an important element in NASA‘s support of the 

scientific community. They’re virtually the only vehicles that can conduct 

studies in the 40 km (25 miles) to 200 km (125 miles) high zone of the 

atmosphere.” Balloons could trawl only about 50 kni (31 miles) high and 

satellites were ineffective below 200 km (125 miles) high. CSFC’s Wallops 

Flight Facility managed the NASA sounding-rocket program. (GSFC Release 

85-6) 

March 5: The 16th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, March 11-16 at 

Johnson Space Center USC), would highlight exploration programs planned 

by the U.S. and the USSR, including a discussion of major trends in space 

science and the possible role of the space station in planetary exploration, 

JSC announced. Speakers at the special session would include Dr. Geoffrey 

Briggs, director of the Solar System Exploration Division, NASA Headquarters; Dr. V. L. Barsukov, Vernadsky Institute of Sciences; Dr. Eugene Levey, 

chairman of the Planetary Sciences Department, University of Arizona; and 

Dr. Ronald Greely, a planetary scientist from Arizona State University. 

Other sessions of major significance would be the Florensky Memorial 

Symposium on Venus, possibly including results from the Soviet Venusian 

probes, and the Shergotty Consortium, focusing on the debate concerning 

meteorites that may have originated from Mars‘s surface. 

Planners had scheduled 27 regular session with 315 oral presentations 

taken from 497 abstracts published in the official conference proceedings. 

(JSC Release 85-11) 

May 77: Dr. George Wetherill, director of the department of terrestrial magnetism at the Carnegie Institution of Washington, said in an interview with 

the New York Times that his report to appear in the May i7 issue of Science 

discussed his hypothesis that the inner planets of the solar system appeared 

to have been formed when a number of planets, some of them three times 

larger than Mars, repeatedly collided with one another until only one survived in each of the present planetary orbits. 

Wetherill believed the present planets had “lots of brothers and sisters” not 

much smaller than themselves, which collided to form “trial” planets, the NY 

Times reported. “The four we see today [Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars]:’ 

he said, ”are the survivors. One of the final collisions,” he added, “probably 

increased the spin of earth sufficiently to throw off materials that consolidated to form the moon.” 

244 
Space Science and Applications 

Wetherill derived his hypothesis from a computer simulation of what prob 

ably happened after the solar system began to take shape from a rotating 

cloud of dust and gas about 4.5 billion years ago. The analysis took into 

consideration various factors affecting the formation process once some 500 

bodies, each one-third the size of the moon, had formed in the region around 

the sun now occupied by the four planets mentioned above. These factors 

included the gravitational fields around each object, the frequency of near 

misses that would throw the objects into eccentric orbits, and the collisions 

that may have canceled the eccentricity. 

Collisions would have generated enough heat within the earth to melt 

most, if not all, of its interior, allowing heavy material to sink and form earth's 

metallic core. 

Wetherill's calculations assumed that not enough gas was present to affect 

motions of the objects as they sped past one another; many scientists concurred that a violent "wind" blowing out from the sun swept the inner solar 

system clear of gas. 

Each collision would have driven off most of any planetary atmosphere that 

had begun to accumulate, and since impact histories of Earth and knus were 

different, this could account for the differences in their atmospheric abundances of such inert gasses as argon. 

initially, material destined to form the planets was so uniformly spread 

around the sun that their motions were determined by multiple collisions 

much like those of molecules in a hot gas. By the time this material had 

formed into larger bodies, Wetherill said, their mutual gravitational attractions would have become a significant factor. During the ensuing collisions, 

Wetherill believed, the existing planets had acquired 50% of their present 

material; after 100 million years the process was 99% completed. 

Age determinations of moon rocks indicated that the last great crashes, 

enough to produce the lunar seas, did not end until 3.8 billion years ago, or 

several hundred million years after the formative process began. By then, 

however, the impacting bodies were "quite small:' Wetherill said, "about 30 

miles in diameter." What remained in the form of asteroids and meteorites 

was far less than that needed to produce even a small planet. 

Jupiter and the large planets beyond it were not in a region swept clear of 

gas, making their formation histories very different, Wetherill concluded. (NY 

Times, May 11/85, 12) 

May 74 NASA announced its National Space Technology Laboratories 

(NSTL), through its Earth Resources Laboratory, signed a memoraridum of 

understanding (MOU) with the Anthropology Department of the University 

of Colorado at Boulder to use satellite imaging and remote sensing technology to probe the tropical Andean jungles for archaelogical remains in Peru's 

Rio Abiseo National Park. 

245 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Of particular interest in the park were the ancient site of Gran Patajen, the 

subtropical cloud forest, and the park’s diverse ecology. Using sophisticated 

instrumentation that would allow researchers to ”see” through the dense 

vegetation to locate evidence of past settlements in the now uninhabited 

region, researchers would combine data from the Landsat earth resources 

satellite with information gathered by a specially equipped aircraft from 

NSTL. The researchers might also observe and map interesting geographical 

features and variations in vegetation. 

Thomas Lennon, codirector of the university’s Rio Abiseo National Park 

Research Project, said of the undertaking, “NASA’s assistance will enable us 

to take a good look at the 1,060-sq-mile park from above-immensely easier 

than trekking through the jungle on foot. When cultural resources are identified through image analysis, we’ll be able to check it out on the ground. This 

approach allows us to make the best use of the limited researchers as well as 

the time we’ll have in the field.” 

The university, NASA, and a remote sensing team at Peru’s National Agrarian University in Lima would work together to extract information from various sensing devices. An early outcome of the project should be accurate 

uptodate maps of the uncharted parkland. 

The project was one of three archaeological research investigations sup 

ported by NASA‘s remote sensing program administered by NASA’s Office of 

Space Science and Applications, Washington, D.C. In another project with 

the University of Colorado, NASA was examining volcanic destruction of 

cities and vegetation in Costa Rica. In the third project, NASA was supporting 

Richard Leakey of the Leaky Foundation who was searching for evidence of 

human evolution in Kenya, Africa. 

NASA’s work on the projects resulted from its interest in expanding the 

scientific applications of space technology, in these cases to archaeology and 

anthropology, which could benefit from advancements in remote sensing 

technology. (NASA Release 85-73) 

May 17: NASA announced that seven world class gymnasts would undergo 

testing May 20-22 at Johnson Space Center USC) as part of a continuing 

study of the space adaptation syndrome that affected about half the astronauts who had flown in space. Researchers wanted to know if gymnasts were 

less susceptible to the malaise because of their experience of moving and 

spinning in three dimensions. 

The gymnasts underwent baseline testing at JSC in mid-April. A second 

battery of tests would measure their responses in the laboratory and aboard a 

jet aircraft that induced brief periods of reduced gravity. 

Testing was co-sponsored by the U.S. Gymnastics Federation, of which the 

participants were members. They were Kathy Johnson, Patty Gerard, Megan 

Marsden, Krista Canary, Tom Beach, Scott Johnson, and Steve Elliot. (NASA 

Release 85-75) 

246 
Space Science and Applications 

During May: Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) personnel were testing the 

interface of the software in the space telescope data capture facility (ST DCF) 

with other elements of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) ground system, the 

GSFC News reported. The DCF, which had arrived at GSFC ahead of schedule and on target with program costs, would accept science data from the 

telescope’s five instruments through the NASA communications (NASCOM) 

system via the Tracking and Data Relay Satelhte (TDRS) and the NASA ground 

terminal at White Sands, New Mexico. 

William Stalling, head of GSFC’s data capture systems section and project 

manager for ST DCF development, said, ”Within 24 hours of receipt of the 

science data stream from NASCOM, the facility will preprocess the data and 

forward it to the Space Telescope Science Institute (STSI) for further processing and use by scientists.” The DCF had two identical Could 32-87 computer systems and special hardware to provide the science data processing 

requirements. 

The DCF had previously demonstrated the ability to capture the 1.024 

megabit and 4 kilobit per-second data streams, processing the data into user 

data sets, and transmitting them to the Science Institute at the daily required 

volume level of three billion bits of science data. Because the space telescope’s science instrument data were packetized, future refurbishment of the 

space telescope with new instruments would require only table updates in 

the DCF’s software. Also, the DCF had automated quality control that should 

reduce operational costs. (Goddard News, May 85, 3) 

During July After preliminary examination of Spartan 1 data, mission manager Dave Shrewsberry said the spacecraft appeared to have performed well 

during the Space Shuttle 514 mission. Astronauts deployed the spacecraft 

on the fourth day of the mission into a free-flying orbit and retrieved it on the 

sixth day, Goddard News reported. Final evaluation required analysis of Spartan 1’s tape recordings. 

”Although the grapple fixture wasn‘t pointed in the direction we thought it 

would be when we were retrieved,” Shrewsberry said, “that is not a matter of 

concern. The running lights were on and the experiment doors closed, indicating that the program we had computed was completed.” Early indications 

also showed that all six of the Get Away Special experiments turned on 

during the mission. (GSFC News, July 85, 1) 

August I: NASA announced that it had completed with the Italian National 

Research Council’s National Space Plan Office (PSN/CNR) selection of U.S. 

and Italian principal investigators for the cooperative tethered satellite system 

(TSS), which NASA had scheduled for a first flight in 1988 aboard the Space 

Shuttle. The system, using the Space Shuttle as a base of operation, would 

provide a unique reuseable facility remote from the orbiter for space science 

247 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

investigations in the upper atmosphere and in plasmaelectrodynamic interactions. 101 The overall objectives of the TSS program were to demonstrate the 

successful operation of a tethered satellite, perform the initial electrodynamic 

science and plasma investigations, and develop a reusable facility capable of 

supporting a broad range of electrodynamic experiments in the ionosphere. 

On the first TSS mission, a NASAsupplied deployer mechanism would 

send the ltaliandeveloped and -built satellite upward from the Space Shuttle 

orbiter to a distance of as much as 12 miles. The motion of the conducting 

tether across geomagnetic field lines would generate several thousand volts 

of energy to provide a broad range of electrical operating conditions. Re 

searchers could also use the overall system to artifically generate and study 

field-aligned currents and associated plasma effects. 

On the second TSS mission, the satellite would be at the end of a nonconducting tether at 62 miles in the earth's atmosphere, an area previously 

explored only sporadically, mainly with sounding rocket payloads. The tethered satellite would permit investigation of the region on a global scale over 

several days. 

The TSS-3 mission would be a follow-up to the TSS-1 electrodynamics 

mission, with deployment from either the Space Shuttle or the proposed 

space station. 

A memorandum of understanding signed in 1984 by NASA and PSNKNR 

established the TSS program. NASA's Marshall Space flight Center had responsibility for project implementation. 

NASA's office of space science and applications selected Peter Banks, Stanford University (Shuttle Tether Electrodynamic Tether System); Robert Estes, 

Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (Investigation of Electromagnetic 

Emissions by the Tether); Gordon Gullahorn, Smithsonian Astrophysical Ob 

servatory (Investigation and Measurement of Dynamic Noise in Tethered 

Observatory Satellite Systems); Konstantinos Papadopoulos, Science Applications, Inc. (Theory and Modeling of the Tether); and Nobie Stone, Marshall 

Space Flight Center (Research on Orbital Flight Plasma-Electrodynamics). 

PSN/CNR selected Silvio Bergemaschi, lnstituto Meccanica, Padova University (A Theoretical and Experimental Investigation of TSS Dynamics); 

Marino Dobrowolny, lnstituto Fisica Spazio (Research on Electrodynamics 

Tether Effects); and Franco Mariana, University of Rome (Magnetic Field 

Experiment for the TSS Missions). (NASA Release 85-115) 

August 75: A sophomore at Purdue University and a senior at San Francisco's 

Lowell High School designed experiments to be carried on two 1986 Space 

Shuttle Flights, the Washington Post reported. Kentucky Fried Chicken would 

sponsor an experiment in which eggs would fly in orbit to determine 

whether chicken embryos could survive the rigors of weightlessness. The 

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory at the University of California would sponsor 

248 
Space Science and Applications 

an experiment to measure the effects of weightlessness on cell division in 

yeast. 

Greg Delory, 16, said he got the idea for flying baker’s yeast from the first 

Spacelab mission where bread mold was grown in orbit. “The mold was 

supposed to produce spores every 22 hours, but in space it lost its circadian 

rhythm and produced spores all the time,” he said. Delory won a competition 

to design a Space Shuttle experiment while attending the U.S. Space Camp 

under the auspices of Marshall Space Flight Center. 

John Vellinger, 20, who won a competition to design a NASA experiment, 

said, “We hope this will give us some data about the feasibility of raising 

chickens as a food source in space.” (W Post, Aug 15/85, A191 

August 23 The Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s UPL) Geobotanical Remote Sensing Group was developing technologies of spectral analysis to acquire a total 

picture of earth’s vegetation-wild and cultivated, trees and plants-the JPL 

Universe reported. The group was adapting techniques developed for space 

exploration to devise, build, and test spaceborne instruments that would 

work in conjunction with ground-based monitoring, data-recording, and 

analysis devices. 

The group was employing every available technology-radar, microwave, 

and infrared analysis-as well as effective procedures for using them. The 

goal was to develop technology to identify types of vegetation, the area of 

coverage, and general conditions from field to field, area to area, continent to 

continent. JPL was working closely with the University of California in the 

project, particularly the university’s Kearney Agricultural Center, to diagnose 

crop conditions based on factors such as irrigation, insect infestation, and the 

spread of plant diseases. 

In the program, satellites bounced radar off earth‘s vegetation, in a sense 

taking its pulse and temperature. At the same time, ground-based studies 

used, among other techniques, a truck-transported basket like a cherry picker 

to gather radar as well as infrared measurements similar to those from Landsat 

and other earth-surveillance satellites. Particularly helpful to the program was 

JPCs Space Shuttle imaging radar, which was unaffected by darkness or ob 

scuring clouds. The instrument was on an October 1984 Space Shuttle mission and would fly again in 1987. 

Data analysis in the program employed several approaches. In one, analysts 

gave a computer a statistical model and commanded it to survey recorded 

data to seek out similar conditions throughout the globe, thus providing 

insights into vegetation identity and condition. Other studies concentrated 

on the use of physical models to relate spectral data to parameters such as 

green-leaf area and water status. 

Comparison of space-derived and ground-based images and data determined how they differed and how they complimented one another. This 

249 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

permitted monitoring of crop and natural vegetation conditions on a worldwide basis and offered insights into the effects of acid rain and other pollution on crops and forests, in lakes and ponds, and into conditions and 

changes of arid lands. (JPL Universe, Aug 23185, 1) 

During October: The Space Shuttle Discovery on mission 514 was not the 

first NASA orbiter to carry retroreflectors for laser ranging in space, the Goddard News reported. Apollo astronauts in the late 1960s placed reflectors on 

the moon, and NASA launched in 1976 Lageos, a retroreflector equipped 

satellite. Laser ranging had become routine in space and was available for a 

variety of measurement tasks. 

At Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), Crustal Dynamics Project (CDP) 

scientists analyzed data received from satellite laser ranging (SLR) to study 

the movement and deformation of crustal plates that determined earth’s 

shape. The scientists also analyzed data received from lunar laser ranging 

(LLR) to study polar motion and earth rotation, which led to earth’s wobble. 

At GSFC there was an international system of cooperating laser networks. 

All systems, such as the Goddard Laser Tracking Network (GLTN), provided 

data to the CDP through conventional SLR and lunar laser ranging. The GLTN 

consisted of a series of transportable and fixed systems throughout the world 

and other international laser networks also supported the CDP. 

Satellite laser ranging had attained major advances since the inception in 

1965 of the GLTN. Tracking efficiency had improved from 65% in 1981 to 

75% in 1985; instrument accuracy, from 10 cm to 1 cm. 

The laser transmitter and sensitive photomultiplier receiver were the most 

essential equipment in any laser tracking system, because they provided and 

processed the signals from which the measurements were made. Current 

laser transmitters shot short-pulsed beams that lasted 200 trillionths of a 

second, the time it took light to travel about two inches. 

Recently, the Federal Republic of Germany asked GSFC scientists to assist 

in preoperational tests of its new Modular Transportation Laser Ranging System (MTLRS) 1, because GSFC had the Mobile Laser Ranging System 

(MOBLAS) 7 for a calibration standard of comparison. During the daily tests, 

the two systems simultaneously tracked the same satellite, then scientists 

compared data obtained from MTLRS 1 to that from MOBLAS 7. The closer 

the measurements, the better the calibration; MTLRS 1 measured within 1 

cm of the MOBLAS 7. 

MTLRS 1 later would participate with other European and U.S. systems to 

perform satellite laser ranging in West Germany, Italy, Greece, Egypt, Israel, 

and Turkey. (Goddard News, Oct 85, 4) 

November 6: Eighteen European governments agreed today to finance a plan, 

known as Eureka, to increase Europe’s technological presence through development of 10 pilot technology projects, the NY Times reported. Although 

250 
Space Science and Applications 

some observers considered Eureka a counterweight to the U.S.’s Strategic 

Defense Initiative (SDI) program, most of the Eureka projects, ranging from 

high-powered industrial lasers to a diagnostic kit for sexually transmitted 

diseases, were under discussion well before French President Francois Mitterrand proposed them in April 1985 as the Eureka project. 

The agreement was reached at the same time that several European countries were considering whether to support the Reagan Administration’s SDI 

program. Britain agreed in October to full participation in SDI, France had 

withheld support, and West Germany said it would decide before the end of 

the year. 

In the Eureka agreement, ministers from the European Economic Community (EEC), joined by Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Switzerland, 

Austria, and Turkey, said in a seven-page “declaration of principles” that the 

program‘s aim was to “strengthen the basis for lasting prosperity and employment” by furthering “closer cooperation among enterprises and research 

institutes in the field of advance technologies.” 

Widely differing conceptions of how Eureka should work had slowed the 

plan, but the governments finally found ways around several obstacles, including questions on government versus private financing and a secretariat to 

oversee the agreement. Emphasizing that funding should come largely from 

the private sector, the declaration called for “adequate financial commitment 

by participating enterprises.” 

The ten pilot Eureka projects and nations to participate approved by the 

ministers were: production of a standard microcomputer for education and 

domestic use (Britain, France, Italy); production of a new type of computer 

chip made of amorphous, or uncrystallized, silicon (France, West Germany); 

development of a high-speed computer (France, Norway); development of a 

laser for cutting cloth in the apparel industry (France, Portugal); development 

of membranes for water filtration that could be used to desalinate sea water 

(Denmark, France); development of high-power laser systems (West Germany, France, Italy, Britain); development of a system to trace pollutants in 

European air (West Germany, Austria, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, and 

the EEC); development of a European research computer network (West Germany, Austria, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, and 

the EEC); development of a diagnosis kit for sexually transmitted diseases 

(Spain, Britain); and development of advanced optic electronics (France, Italy). (NYT, Nov 7/85, D1) 

November 27: NASA announced that 1986 would be its most productive year 

ever in space science activities, including a variety of “space firsts” and 

several major scientific studies that would be started or continued. To increase the public’s knowledge and understanding of NASA’s scientific programs, NASA’s Office of Space Science and Applications and the Smithsonian 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Institution’s National Air and Space Museum would work together in a yearlong program entitled “1986-A Year for Space Science.” 

The two organizations planned exhibits, audievisual presentations, publications, and a lecture series at the Air and Space Museum and several other 

locations throughout the U.S. In addition, the National Air and Space Museum would carry NASA mission events on W at designated locations in the 

museum. 

Major space science activities in 1986 would include the Voyager 2 encounter in January with Uranus; the culmination of several scientific investigations of Comet Halley; launch in May from the Space Shuttle of Galileo 

toward Jupiter; and also in May launch from the Space Shuttle Challenger of 

the European Space Agency’s Ulysses spacecraft to conduct comparative 

studies of the sun and its heliosphere. In addition, NASA scheduled for 

launch in late summer the Hubble Space Telescope, the largest telescope to 

be placed in earth orbit. (NASA Release 85-159) 

November 29 NASA announced that its National Space Technology Laboratories, working with the University of Colorado at Boulder, uncovered information using remote sensing techniques suggesting a civilization existed 

before the Incas in subtropical Peruvian jungles. The university’s anthropology department requested NSTL collaboration on the investigation because 

of the laboratories’ expertise in satellite remote sensing and image analysis. 

After remote sensing by satellites and aircraft permitted mapping and determining priorities for field investigation sites, Tom Sever, NASA principal investigator, and Tom Lennon, an archaeologist and codirector of the 

university’s Rio Abiseo National Park project, completed a five-day expedition into the jungles of Peru’s Rio Abiseo National Park. 

Remote sensing had discovered Cerro Central, a site including more than 

350 buildings. The previous major point of interest was the ancient site Gran 

Pajaten, which included only 30 buildings. 

“We now know that Pajaten is probably the smallest and least important of 

the sites,” Sever explained. “We are fairly confident that we have approached 

the very edges of a new civilization, and we believe that the farther in we go, 

the higher and more complicated the elevation and architecture and civilization will be.” 

Sever added that the investigation represented in his opinion the best 

example of a remote sensing application to archaeology and perhaps the 

only known means by which to obtain his project‘s objectives. (NASA Release 85-160) 

During Nowmber: Gene Gilbert, a technician in Goddard Space Flight Center‘s (GSFC) Laboratory for Oceans was searching for a way to measure rainfall at sea by using an oil rig, Goddad News reported, in order to assist in the 

development of a system called the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission 

252 
Space Science and Applications 

(TRMM). TRMM could take the form of a satellite or space station attachment 

operational in the mid-1990s to improve upon rainfall sensors that flew 

aboard Nimbus satellites. But developing better sensing capabilities first required accurate ground truth measurements to test the accuracy of remote 

observations. 

Over the years, meteorologists had developed a good picture of weather 

over land masses. But they still needed to know what happened over the 

remaining two-thirds of earth. When putting a collection bucket on a ship, 

Gilbert explained, different locations on deck gave differing results depending on whether the bucket was sheltered from the wind. In addition, the 

ship’s movement gave angular measurement of the rain, not a true vertical 

one. And a buoy was not an improvement. “It may look stationary,” Gilbert 

said, “but it really is not.” Even the largest ones, which were 50 feet across, 

tossed in a storm, splashing and spraying and negating results. 

“What is needed,” Gilbert pointed out, “is a surface that is stationary, 

vibration free, and splash-proof. I think oil platforms could satisfy all those 

conditions.” GSFC‘s Microwave Sensors and Data Acquisition Systems 

Branch in July placed the first rain gauge on a oil producing platform in the 

Gulf of Mexico off Lafayette, Louisiana. “The very next month a hurricane 

knocked out our data transmission antenna,” Gilbert recalled. “But we repaired the damage easily, and we have been getting good data since then.” 

The rain gauge was a teeter-totter with a shot-glass sized cup at each end. 

The cups filled successively with 1/100th of an inch of rain and then dropped 

the measure back into the ocean. Each count was transmitted to the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) and then back to GSFC via NOAA‘s 

data processing facility in Suitland, Maryland. 

“The goal is to demonstrate that using a gauge on an oil rig gives us our 

most accurate ocean rainfall data to date,” Gilbert said. “If it does, we may 

expand to include other oil rigs. Then we will finally have good ground truth 

data for measuring rainfall over the ocean by satellite, at least for those 

oceans that include oil rigs.” (Goddad News, Nov 85/ 2) 

253 

SPACE STATION PROGRAM 

January 17: The Washington Post reported that W. Germany had agreed to 

contribute $900 million over the next decade to participate in an Americanled program to build an $8 billion permanently manned space station for 

initial operations in 1992, the 500th anniversary of Columbus‘s discovery of 

America. The W. Germans would negotiate detailed contracts over the next 

two years to ensure a fair return on their investment and access to spacebased technology, as U.S. restrictions on technology transfer (ostensibly to 

prevent USSR acquisition of sensitive information, the W Post said) had 

increasingly irked European allies. W. German and Italian companies 

planned a special laboratory module that would plug into the U.S.-built 

spacecraft’s main structure for experiments in zero gravity and vacuum conditions. 

A W. German ministerial report had said cooperation embodied in the 

space station program “should be welcomed in W. Germany not just for 

technical and economic reasons, but for political ones, as a transatlantic 

connecting link.” However, the venture had evoked controversy, as some 

European scientists contended that robots could conduct the work planned 

for the space station, and others alleged that a $750 million European investment in 1973 to underwrite Spacelab had attained few research benefits. 

Heinz Riesenhuber, W. German minister for research and technology, said 

that Bonn would also contribute nearly $500 million to develop a more 

powerful and versatile Ariane rocket to achieve some European independence in space travel by the 199Os, although he admitted a major W. German 

investment in the French space shuttle project “Hermes” was impossible. (W 

Post, Jan 17/85, Al) 

January 18: The Washington Post reported that Britain would accept a Reagan 

administration invitation to contribute an expected $300 million to build a 

permanent space station scheduled for launch in 1992, making Britain along 

with W. Germany [see Jan. 17J the first noncommunist industrialized nations 

to participate in the space station program. Geoffrey Pattie, British minister of 

state for industry and information technology who was in Washington to 

consult with lawmakers and Reagan Administration officials about scientific 

cooperation, technology transfer, and telecommunications policies, said Britain would announce the contribution at the European Space Agency’s (ESA) 

Rome meeting [see European Space Agency, jan. 181. 

President Reagan had invited Australia, Canada, Japan, and the U.S.3 Western European allies to join in funding and building the modular space station 

and expected France, Italy, and Japan to announce soon their intention to 

participate. 

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILW 

255 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Pattie said Britain wanted access to technologies to design and build space 

stations as well as the results of research carried out in space laboratories; 

initial space station plans called for biological and physical sciences labs. 

While France and Germany were interested in rocketry research, Britain had 

focused its space expenditures on improving data transmission and expected 

the space station to enhance these technical capabilities. Pattie did note, 

however, that Britain feared the U.S. would impose export controls on some 

of this technology and that technology transfer questions required resolution 

during two years of space station feasibility studies. He emphasized the U.S. 

had to fashion “sensible” restrictions “instead of saying no to [exports ofl 

everything, which is counterproductive to U.S. as well as European interests.” 

(NU, Jan 18/85, All 

February 7: In his “State of the Union” address, President Reagan commented 

on funding requested for activities in space, the Washington Post reported. 

“We have seen the success of the Space Shuttle. Now we are going to 

develop a permanently manned space station and new opportunities for free 

enterprise because, in the next decade, Americans and our friends around 

the world will be living and working together in space. 

“In the zero-gravity of space, we could manufacture in 30 days lifesaving 

medicines it would take 30 years to make on earth. We can make crystals of 

exceptional purity to produce supercomputers, creating jobs, technologies, 

and medical breakthroughs beyond anything we ever dreamed possible.” (W 

Post, Feb 7/85, A161 

February 8: The Lewis News reported that NASA had completed conceptual 

designs for its space station and that industry had submitted proposals for 

definition studies and preliminary designs of various station components for 

which NASA expected to award 18-month contracts in April. NASA would 

award contracts in April 1987 for the next phase of the program-the final 

design, development, launch, and assembly of the station. 

Contrary to most large NASA projects, for which an industrial prime contractor coordinated various aspects of a project, NASA would mrsee the 

entire space station program because the station’s operational life would 

extend mer a long and indefinite period. Johnson Space Center US0 would 

manage the system engineering and integration function; Lewis Research 

Center (LeRC) was responsible for the power system. 

The space station power system was vital for two major reasons: the quantity of electrical power available to gmrned station capabilities and, since 

the power system required large areas of solars cells or mirrors, the size of 

these areas affected station configuration and operation. Plans called for 

initial power demands of 25 kw for housekeeping needs of a crew of six and 

50 kw for experiments and customer applications. Comparing this power 

256 
Space Station Program 

system to the largest previously in space-the Skylab manned-mission system, which generated 16 kw-the magnitude of the power station challenge 

became evident. 

LeRC personnel would consider a variety of power system technologies, 

making selections based on detailed studies of the tradeoffs among options. 

Studies would examine how the options influenced the performance, risk, 

and cost of the power system and space station, with consideration given to 

station growth and satisfaction of later needs. In addition, LeRC had to design 

a system that would be available on schedule, function reliably for an indefinite life with only on-orbit maintenance, be user-friendly, and remain within 

cost limits. (LeRC News, Feb 8/85, 2) 

kbruaty 20: Neil Hutchinson, Johnson Space Center's USC) space station 

program manager, at a U.S. House Science and Technology space science 

and application subcommittee authorization hearing, said that ferrying and 

assembling a space station would require seven Space Shuttle flights over a 

period of nine months to a year, Aerospace Daily reported, and assembly 

would rely on automation and robotics, not Space Shuttle crew extravehicular activities. Assembly would begin with a beam of solar panels and a 904. 

truss structure. Space Shuttle orbiters would dock with the space station 

structure at different points to assemble the facility, using the orbiter's remote 

manipulator system (RMS) arm and a remote arm operated on the space 

station. 

The 3rd and 4th Space Shuttle flights would take up habitation modules; 

the 5th flight would ferry two more sets of solar panels and a 3rd module, 

possibly for logistics. Hutchinson said current planning called for permanent 

manning of the station after the 5th flight; the 6th flight would carry the 1 st of 

two planned laboratories with the baseline configuration producing 75 kw of 

power, which would be completed after the 7th flight. 

Phil Culbertson, NASA associate administrator, said a new program plan 

envisioned a 21-month definition and preliminary design effort beginning in 

April and extending through January 1987, which reflected the lower than 

anticipated funding level of $230 million for space station activities in the 

NASA's FY 86 budget. Of the $230 million, $15 million was for utilization, 

$82 million for advanced development, $52 million for program manage 

mentlintegration, $7 million for operational readiness, and $P4 million for 

systemdefinition contracts. Defense Daily noted that Culbertson said NASA 

would have to "stretch" to meet the $&billion price of the space station and 

that it would ask its contractors to "stretch with US." (ND, Feb 2W85, 1; DID, 

Feb 20/85,227) 

March 73: In a commentary in the Washington Times in response to a US. 

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) study that had asserted NASA's plans 

257 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

for a permanent space station were not scientifically, economically, or militarily justified, Robert Melton, assistant professor at Pennsylvania State University, wrote that the study missed the point of NASA's current efforts to 

define better what should go into the station before proceeding with actual 

design and construction. He wrote that NASA had entered Phase B, the 

definition study of the project, in which contractors would provide NASA 

with thorough analyses of exactly what missions would be carried out in 

what time schedule and with descriptions of necessary equipment and technology together with a breakdown of costs. Such a detailed study was necessary to avoid premature overemphasis on design and to avert technical 

problems as the program progressed. 

Melton argued that the permanent space station was a logical next step 

after the Space Shuttle program and could serve as both a laboratory and 

base of operations for scientific, commercial, and security purposes. The 

space station could also serve as a permanent base for repairing and routinely 

servicing satellites, as a depot for permanently, spacebased orbital transfer 

vehicles capable of delivering and retrieving high-orbit payloads, and as a 

base for building other large structures that would remain in orbit. 

Melton noted that the benefits of a permanent space station would make 

the $8 billion expenditure spread over several years seem a fairly small 

amount, especially when compared to other items in the federal budget. 

However, Melton acknowledged that the OTA study proved NASA had to do a 

better job of defining its space station goals and of impressing upon the 

public the importance of the project. (W Times, Mar 13/85, 2D) 

March 14: NASA announced it had selected six industry teams for negotiations leading to 21-month fixed-price contracts for definition and preliminary 

design (Phase B) of elements for a permanently manned space station. Four 

NASA centers previously did this work. 

The responsible centers and the industry teams selected for negotiations 

were: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) with Boeing Aerospace Co., Seattle, and Martin Marietta Aerospace, Denver; Goddard Space Flight Center 

(GSFC) with RCA Astro Electronics, Princeton, New Jersey, and General Electric Co., Space Systems Division, Philadelphia; and Lewis Research Center 

(LeRC) with Rockwell Internatl., Rocketdyne Division, Canoga Park, California, and TRW Federal Systems Division, Redondo Beach, Calif. In addition, 

NASA would negotiate with Lockheed Missiles & Space Co., Sunnyvale, 

California; McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Co., Huntington Beach, California; and Rockwell Internatl., Space Station Systems Division, Downey California, the proposers for work to be performed under the management of 

Johnson Space Center USC). Negotiators would present a report to the NASA 

Administrator who would then award one or more contracts. 

Although negotiations would determine values of the contracts, the Sep 

tember 14, 1984, Request for Proposal (RFP) indicated that the approximate 

258 
Space Station Program 

value of contracts could be $24 million at MSFC, $27 million at JSC, $10 

million at CSFC, and $6 million at LeRC. 

In addition to Phase B work, NASA required the contractors to study how 

those elements of the space station would change depending on whether the 

station was man-tended rather than permanently manned and to pay particular attention to the recommendations of the NASA advanced technology 

advisory committee that was identifying automation and robotic technologies that could be used in the space station. 

Following completion of the contracts, NASA planned to move into final 

design and development (Phase C/D) of the space station. 

A major objective of the space station program was to involve international 

partners as builders, users, and operators of the space station. The European 

Space Agency (ESA), Canada, and Japan had indicated interest in participating. They would provide their own funding and award definition and preliminary design contracts in coordination with NASA activities. NASA, through 

JSC management, would retain responsibility for overall program definition 

and for systems engineering and integration throughout the program. (NASA 

Release 85-38) 

March 20: Ames Research Center (ARC) announced that Dr. David Black 

would become chief scientist for the office of space station at NASA Headquarters, leaving a position he held as research scientist in the theoretical 

studies branch at ARC since 1972. 

In his new job, Black would ensure that the space station would accomodate the needs of the scientists who would use it, advising Phillip Culbertson, associate administrator for space station, about steps to make the space 

station an accessible research facility for scientists from many disciplines. 

Black‘s appointment coincided with selection of contractors who would 

spend 21 months working out details of space station design [see Mar. 141. 

Since other countries intended to cooperate with NASA in the space station project, Black would work with the agencies representing the interests of 

European and Japanese scientists to coordinate their plans with those of 

NASA. 

Black had been studying scientists’ needs for the space station since April 

1984, when he had joined the task force on scientific uses of the space 

station. That committee brought together 30 scientists from various universities and represented the disciplines that were interested in using the space 

station. Also, Black was serving on a National Academy of Sciences study 

group called “space sciences, 1995-2015,” which was attempting to identify 

the future directions for research in the space sciences, thus identifying 

which technologies would be needed to support future research. (ARC Release 85-14) 

259 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

March 2 7: Aerospace Daily reported that NASA would submit to Congress 

that week the space station automation and robotics study, "Advancing Aut@ 

mation and Robotics Technology for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy: which appropriations legislation enacted in 1984 had directed NASA to 

prepare by April 1. NASA Administrator James Beggs approved the report 

compiled by the advanced technology advisory committee and augmented 

by the work of an automation and robotics panel, SRI International, and 

aerospace contractors. 

The report consisted of two volumes, an executive overview, which outlined major findings and contained proposed goals for automation and re 

botics applications in relation to the initial space station, and a technical 

report, which outlined the potential of automation and robotics technologies 

and would serve a major focus of definition and preliminary design (Phase B) 

space station contractor efforts. 

Under an agreement with the Senate Appropriations Committee the previous April, NASA had funded and managed several studies in automation 

and robotics that had included industry case studies of advanced automation 

and robotics. From these the committee determined what should be incorporated in space station initial operational capability and what the design 

should be so that these elements could be incorporated at a later date. 

The firms and functional areas studied were: General Electric Co., space 

manufacturing concepts; TRW, satellite servicing; Hughes, subsystem and 

mission ground support; Boeing, madmachine interface; and Martin Marietta, automation technology for assembly of the facility. 

Although NASA believed a commitment to the efforts outlined in the committee report would increase space station efficiency and result in significant 

cost savings, a breakdown of actual costs would not be available until NASA 

contractors completed the overall plan for implementation of the automation 

and robotics systems in initial space station studies. 

The report did recommend that automation and robotics be a key element 

of the basis space station program and that the initial space station design 

take into account evolution and growth in robotics. Examples of proposed 

goals for automation and robotics applications for the initial space station 

included a mobile remote manipulator with collision avoidance capability 

and dexterous manipulator systems that could inspect and exchange orbital 

replaceable units. (MD, Mar 21/85, 1) 

March 22:The NASA exhibit entitled "Living, Learning, Working in Space" at 

the 36th Paris Air Show, May 30 through June 9 in Le Bourget, would highlight full-scale elements of a space station, including mockups of working 

and living quarters, NASA announced. 

Audiovisual presentations throughout the 6,900-sq. ft. exhibit area would 

depict life inside a space station. To give viewers the impression they were 

looking out into space from a space station module, NASA would suspend in 

260 
Space Station Program 

a diarama a large model of the power tower configuration space station along 

with models of future U.S. space science programs such as the space telescope and Galileo. Exhibits would also showcase NASA’s latest aeronautical 

research. (NASA Release 85-41) 

March 22: The Canadian government decided to join the U.S. and other 

allies in producing an orbiting space station, agreeing in principle to spend 

up to $600 million over the next 10 years, the Washington Times reported. 

U.S. space officials had encouraged Canada for more than a year to join the 

U.S.-led project, which already had the participation of the European Space 

Agency (ESA) and japan, together expected to spend about $4 billion. 

Canada‘s science minister Tom Siddon said that Canada’s involvement in 

the space station could produce economic benefits valued at more than $2 

billion by the year 2000. (W Times, Mar 22/85, 5A) 

March 29: Tom Rogers, project director of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment‘s (OTA) space station study, said in testimony before the 

U.S. House space subcommittee that OTA in its controversial November 1984 

space station report [see Space Station Program, Mar. 131 never meant to 

oppose development of a space station but only to suggest that its elements 

might be altered for more adequate attainment of space goals, Defense Daily 

reported. 

“I want to make it clear that OTA remains convinced that there is a strong 

rationale for some long-term habitable infrastructure in a low earth orbit. . . In other words, OTA is very positive about the principle behind the President‘s call for a ’space station‘ and Congress’s decision to fund a ‘space 

station’ line item in NASA’s budget,” Rogers said. However, he pointed out 

that OTA’s concerns about the space station centered on its cost and the fact 

that there was no proper assessment of long-range U.S. space goals, which 

made it infeasible to determine what elements should make up the station. 

“To be more certain that the facilities actually constructed are the ones 

most likely to lead to optimum space development, they must be Constructed 

with an eye to the nation’s long-range civilian space goals and objectives,” 

Rogers testified. “Unfortunately, the only space goals discussed to date are 

those formulated by the space community itself; there has been little broadbased discussion and agreement on a set of long-range goals for the United 

States.” He recommended particularly that, in parallel with NASA’s Phase B 

station studies, “Congress seek independent studies suggesting goals and 

specific objectives for the nation’s future activities in space, studies conducted primarily by people outside the space community.” 

Rogers then outlined OTA’s alternatives for the space station program. 

These included using the $3 billion in foreign funding as part of the $8 

billion station cost, not as an addition; using private investment to pay for 

elements of the station; increasing use of the human-tended approach and 

261 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

automatiodrobotics to reduce station costs; examining alternative station 

designs costing less than “the canonical $8 billion”; developing the orbital 

maneuvering vehicle and any reusable orbital transfer vehicle “in close concert with those in the private sector who look forward to using them to 

provide satellite support services,” thus reducing NASA’s costs; and having 

contractors work to performance specifications rather than to detailed engineering specifications for other than ‘#cutting edge” technologies. (LID, Mar 

29/85, 162) 

April I: NASA announced it had submitted to the U.S. Congress today a 

report by its Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) that said 

automatidn and robotics would be significant elements of the NASA Space 

Station program and that the initial Space Station design should accomme 

date evolution and growth in these technologies. 

The report, required under Public Law 98-371 that appropriated FY 85 

NASA funds, noted that all Space Station elements, including the core station 

and associated unmanned platforms, vehicles, and ground facilities were 

candidates for the technologies, necessitating accelerated R&D in automation and robotics. The Automation and Robotics Panel, which assisted the 

Advisory Committee in a six-month study led by the California Space Institute, said that a desired level of funding for automation and robotics research 

would be 13% of the total Space Station costs; a minimum acceptable level 

was 7%. An augmented research program, the report said, would result in 

improved productivity from the initial station and much greater productivity 

from later versions of the Space Station. 

The report also said successful incorporation of automation and robotics 

into the Space Station program could lead to deployment of a new generation 

of flexible and adaptable space systems, which could provide the U.S. with 

new methods of generating and exploiting space knowledge in commercial 

activities and thus preserving U.S. leadership in space and industrial systems. 

Other report recommendations included: development of criteria for incorporating automation and robotics technology in the Space Station; verification of automated equipment performance, including terrestrial and space 

demonstration to validate technology for Space Station use; use of automation techniques to enhance NASA’s management capability; establishment of 

measurements to verify inclusion of automation and robotics in the Space 

Station; development of a program for technology transfer to US. industries; 

and design of satellites and payloads accessible from the Space Station to 

accommodate service and repair by robots. NASA would incorporate report 

recommendations into the Phase B definition and preliminary design contracts [see Mar. 141 it was negotiating with industry teams. 

The Advisory Committee, made up of personnel from NASA Headquarters 

and centers, would continue to monitor automation and robotics develop 

ments and would report semi-annually to Congress. (NASA Release 85-46) 

262 
Space Station Program 

April 7: NASA overcame the final obstacle to achieving four-way international 

cooperation (the U.S., Europe, Japan, and Canada) on the U.S. manned space 

station when NASA and The European Space Agency (ESA) compromised in a 

memorandum of understanding (MOU) on wording in three areas: technology transfer, nondiscriminatory access for European users to the Space Station, and station elements that would be candidates for European 

participation, Aviation Week reported. NASA Administrator James Beggs and 

ESA Director General Reimer Lust resolved at an early March meeting the 

differences over wording concerning technology transfer and European user 

access. A compromise formulated by W. Germany and approved in late 

March by ESA members resolved the issue of which components would be 

open to European development. 

”The final step for Europe is approval of the MOU by ESA’s council, which 

has its next meeting at the end of April,” Michel Bignier, ESA director of space 

transportation systems, said. “I don’t foresee any difficulties there because the 

ESA member delegates have been informed of the negotiations and are aware 

of the final wording.” 

Bignier went on to say NASA accepted “certain small nuances” concerning 

nondiscriminatory access for Europe to the station and that both sides made 

compromises on the issue of which elements would be included for European cooperation. And he added that ESA “basically accepted NASAs proposed text” on technology transfer for the Phase B memorandum but said the 

wording would not apply to follow-on agreements covering hardware development. “We felt this was not as critical an issue in Phase B as it will be in the 

later Phase C/D,” Bignier explained. 

Philip Culbertson, NASA associate administrator for the Space Station, said 

international participation in the station was essential to overall US. planning 

for the facility. “The investment of our potential partners from around the 

world will give the station a significantly greater capability than we in the 

US. could provide alone,” Culbertson said. “We believe we will end up with 

a capable Space Station for all of us to use.” (AvWk, Apr 1/85, 16) 

April 8 I. V. Franklin, manager of future projects at British Aerospace Dynamics Group’s Space and Communications Division, said at a recent international space meeting in Italy that British Aerospace had completed 

preliminary definition of a 50- by 60-foot-long, 24,250-lb. unmanned platform that Europe could develop as part of its Columbus space station program, Aviation Week reported. The platform would use a long beam as a 

common backbone that would contain docking ports for standardized plugin payload and resources modules. A single Space Shuttle flight would carry 

the basic platform into orbit, and the company envisioned that astronauts 

could assemble it in six hours of extravehicular activity. 

Franklin said the company would submit the platform proposal to the 

European Space Agency as one of the work packages in Europe’s Columbus 

263 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

program. “The space platform is of particular interest to Europe, following 

President Reagan’s invitation for international participation in the space station program,” Franklin continued, “because it represents an element with 

relatively few direct interfaces to the rest of the program. Although it is not a 

’core’ component, it would be an important component of the space station 

complex and [a component] in which there would be substantial European 

user interest. The platform provides a point for reducing space operation 

costs at a price that Europe could afford.” 

In addition to evaluating the platform in low earth orbit in conjunction 

with the U.S. manned Space Station, British Aerospace also considered the 

platform in a polar, sun synchronous orbit. The polar-orbiting platform offered possibilities for earth observation and earth resources missions. U.S. 

officials had encouraged European development of the polar platform to 

supplement low earth orbit activities performed on board the manned Space 

Station and its associated free-flying elements. 

“The polar platform does not need to work with a manned space stationand indeed, it cannot until a station facility is available in polar orbit:’ Franklin said. ”The platform can be man-tended by a polar orbiting shuttle, 

although the shuttle’s altitude is well below that of the platform.” 

This problem could be Overcome by using the platform’s on-board propulsion to deorbit and dock with the Space Shuttle for payload replacement, 

repair, and maintenance and then return to the operational altitude. 

Franklin concluded that the concept of a polar space platform was justified 

by the led of user interest in both Europe and the U.S. and by the relatively 

favorable economics when compared with other systems. “The polar platform does not require use of a manned space station, and it therefore is not 

paced by development of the space station,” he noted. (AvWk, Apr 8/85,60) 

April 12: Reiichi Takeuchi, chief of Japan’s science and technology agency, 

said Japan had decided to take part in the U.S. space station beginning with 

the preliminary design stage, FBIS, KYODO in English reported. He said the 

Japanese would sign with NASA Administrator James Beggs a memorandum 

on the decision when Beggs visited Tokyo early in May. The agreement 

would cover two years of work, at which time, Takeuchi said, the two countries would probably sign a similar document for later stages of the project. 

Takeuchi noted he expected the U.S. would ask Japan to design the laboratory room of the Space Station, scheduled for operation in 1992. He estimated the cost at 200 to 300 billion yen. Under the memorandum, the U.S. 

would provide Japan with technical information on how the Space Station 

would be used. (FBIS, KYODO in English, Apr 12/85) 

April 15 NASA announced it selected McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Co. 

and Rockwell InternatL’s Space Station Systems Division for fixed-price con264 
Space Station Program 

tracts for definition and preliminary design (Phase B) of the structural framework and other elements of a permanently manned Space Station. Johnson 

Space Center USC) would manage the 21-month contracts, which had an 

estimated value of $27 million each. NASA previously announced other 

industry teams selected for negotiations for definition and preliminary design 

of other Space Station elements [see March 141. 

In addition to work on the Space Station structural framework, the JSC 

contracts would cover interface between the Space Station and Space Shuttle; 

mechanisms such as the remote manipulator systems; attitude and thermal 

control; communications and data management systems; plans for equipping 

a module with sleeping quarters, wardroom, and galley; and plans for extravehicular activity. (NASA Release 85-56) 

April 76 NASA announced that its Administrator, James Beggs, and Canadian 

Minister of Science and Technology, The Honorable Tom Sidden, signed on 

April 16 a memorandum of understanding to conduct a cooperative program 

for detailed definition and preliminary design (Phase 6) of a permanently 

manned Space Station. Under the memorandum, the countries for the next 

two years would conduct parallel Phase B studies and exchange information 

on their work. Canada, which had approved $8.8 million for the first year of 

Phase 6, would study a space construction and servicing system, a solar array 

for a platform or as a potential auxiliary power source for the Space Station, 

and a remote sensing facility. 

At the signing, Administrator Beggs said that ”we are pleased Canada has 

become an international partner in [this] phase of the Space Station’s development. We look forward to working with our friends in Canada, Europe, and 

japan in building a firm foundation for future cooperation on a permanently 

manned Space Station to serve the needs of the free world in developing the 

peaceful uses of space well into the next century.” 

Separate agreements would cover cooperatiw efforts during development, 

operation, and use phases of the Space Station. (NASA Release 85-58) 

May 5 The text of a joint declaration made public today at the end of a sevennation economic conference in Bonn, West Germany, contained a statement 

concerning space activities, the NY Times reported. The text read: “We 

welcome the positive responses of the member states of the European Space 

Agency (ESA), Canada, and Japan to the invitation,of the president of the 

United States to cooperate in the United States manned space station program on the basis of a genuine partnership and a fair and appropriate exchange of information, experience, and technologies. Discussions on 

intergovernmental cooperation in development and utilization of permanently manned space stations will begin promptly. We also welcome the 

conclusions of the ESA Council on the need for Europe to maintain and 

265 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

expand its autonomous capability in space activity, and on the long-term 

European space plan and its objectives.” (NM, May 5/85, A16) 

May 9: NASA announced that NASA Administrator James Beggs and Japanese 

Minister of State for Science and Technology, Reiichi Takeuchi, signed that 

day in Tokyo a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the conduct of a 

cooperative program concerning detailed definition and preliminary design 

(Phase B) of a permanently manned Space Station. 

Under the MOU, the U.S. and Japan would conduct and coordinate mr 

the next two years parallel Phase B studies and exchange information. Japan 

would study an experimental module that had pressurized workspace and an 

exposed workdeck. Cooperation during the space station’s development, op 

erations, and use phases would require separate agreements. 

In a speech that day to the Federation of Japanese Economic Organizations, 

Beggs outlined initial uses of the space station and reported on specific 

projects undertaken by other countries participating in space station develop 

ment. He then noted, “. . . in negotiating with our potential partners, 

NASA has emphasized that we view the space station as a potential long-term 

international partnership-one that should last for decades. Any nation that 

joins with us in such a full partnership must be prepared to make significant 

investments in the station, and also be prepared to help operate and use it. 

“We expect our partners to continue to shoulder responsibility for owning 

and maintaining their portions of the facility, while continuing to enjoy the 

overall benefits our joint efforts will make possible. And we expect their 

contributions to remain a permanent part of the station’s infrastructure.” 

Beggs then added, “To cement our long-term relationships, the United 

States will provide partners with assurance on equitable access to all of the 

space station’s facilities. We also will protect their technology and intellectual 

property and ensure them suitable roles in the station’s management and 

operation.” (NASA Release 85-71, NASA Note To Editors, May 8/85) 

May 19: NASA announced its Administrator James Beggs and the Director 

General of the European Space Agency (ESA) would sign June 3 at the ESA 

pavillion at the Paris Air Show a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for 

the conduct of a cooperative program for detailed definition and preliminary 

design (Phase B) of a permanently manned space station [see Space Station 

Program, Apr. 11. 

The cost of the Phase B studies carried out by European industry under ESA 

management, together with the corresponding technology program, 

amounted to 80 million accounting units or $64 million at the current rate of 

exchange. Cooperation during the space station’s development, operations, 

and use phases required separate agreements. (NASA Release 85-78) 

266 
Space Station Program 

July 72 : Marshall Space Flight Center awarded a $139,000 follow-on contract 

to Martin Marietta Corp. to study a system for reclaiming unused propellant 

from Space Shuttle external fuel tanks and transferring it to an orbiting space 

station, Aerospace Daily reported. Martin Marietta Corp's New Orleans, Louisiana, manufacturing facility would perform the work on the preliminary 

design study. The contract followed one let in February 1984 and valued at 

$250,000 to examine the basic "propellant scavenging" concept. 

The system under study would consist of two to four propellant collecting 

or scavenging tanks in an aft cargo carrier affixed to the rear of the Space 

Shuttle external tank. After Space Shuttle launch and cutoff of the main 

engines, residual liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen would drain from the 

external tank into the collection tanks aided by a thrust system designed for 

zero-gravity conditions. Once filled with fuel, the scavenging tank assembly 

would separate from the aft cargo carrier as a self-contained, remote-controlled vehicle with its own propulsion system. 

After the vehicle moved into position beside the space station, technicians 

aboard the station would send an orbital maneuvering vehicle (OMV) to 

bring it to the space station fuel depot for transfer of the reclaimed propellant 

to permanent tanks. When out of fuel, the scavenger vehicle would return to 

earth in the Space Shuttle cargo bay for reuse on later missions. 

The proposed system would be capable of reclaiming and transporting up 

to 25,000 Ib. of propellant per mission, depending on the Space Shuttle 

payload. Unused fuel on Space Shuttle missions to date had ranged from 

9,500 to 28,300 Ib. of the total 1.6 million Ib. of propellant carried by the 

external fuel tank on each flight. It was currently estimated that the space 

station would require some 250,000 Ib. of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen propellants each year. 

Martin Marietta said the proposed system would result in reduced costs for 

transporting the cryogenic fuels to the space station; the company estimated 

the system could provide propellants at an average cost of approximately 

$350 per Ib. NASA had studied other methods of scavenging fuel from the 

Space Shuttle external tank but found them to have a higher cost per Ib. or to 

provide fewer opportunities for transporting the cryogenic fuels to the station. 

WD, July 12/85, 61) 

During July: Yvonne Clearwater, in an article in Psychology Tiay, described 

the work of the Space Human Factors team, an interdisciplinary team of 

which she was a member, to determine what could make the proposed space 

station a congenial habitat for living and performing highly sophisticated 

work. The team-representing psychology, architecture, and engineeringwas defining what "habitability" meant in space by looking at the critical 

relationships among environment, psychological well-being, and performance. 

267 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Clearwater said the team would begin by developing architectural and 

interiordesign guidelines based on behavioral research. NASA contractors 

and development engineers at Johnson Space Center would then use the 

guidelines in designing and building the space station. 

The team would then turn to examining social and psychological issues 

such as crew selection, training, and support; organization and management; 

and operations planning. Although recommendations would focus on the 

physical and social-psychological environments separately, the team had to 

consider all the factors together in the planning process, because they interacted in the real world, whether on earth or in space. 

In contrast to the Soviets, who placed a high priority on the mental wellbeing of their space crews, NASA originally had focused on technological 

engineering rather than behavioral science. In addition, the early astronauts 

had little interest in psychological support or intervention; reportedly the first 

seven U.S. astronauts announced they would not tolerate psychologists. 

Clearwater pointed out, however, that NASA had grown more sophisticated 

and more sensitive to the fact that body-mindenvironment interactions affected the health and performance of people. The formation of the Space 

Human Factors Office at Ames Research Center reflected NASA's commitment to psychological as well as physical health of space workers. 

The challenge was to troubleshoot the proposed space station systems and 

settings while they were still being developed conceptually by, first, identifying the environmental conditions likely to be significant stressors; second, 

defining the kinds of psychological, emotional, and behavioral problems 

these could produce; and finally, showing how such problems might affect 

work performance. 

Clearwater concluded that by defining and meeting human needs in space 

environments, it might be possible to create more supportive places for living 

and working on earth. (Psychology Tiday, July 85, 34) 

October 25 NASA selected the dual keel reference configuration, a modification of the power tower concept, for the proposed permanently manned 

space station, the Spaceport News reported. It was called the dual keel 

because of twin vertical booms that would provide the framework for attachment of other structures. The concept's primary attributes were that it would 

provide better customer accommodations and servicing, increased attachment area, and a more versatile design for growth based on future require 

ments and changing station roles. 

Another change in space station planning was placement of the pressurized modules near the station's center of gravity to increase the amount of 

space available for experiments, such as crystal growth, that needed a microgravity environment. 

NASA selected the dual keel configuration from a variety of layouts devised 

by teams of contractors working on tweyear space station definition and 

268 
Space Station Program 

preliminary studies. Overall space station shape and module placement were 

just two of the many significant technical decisions program officials had 

made since the space station definition period began in April 1985. 

NASA would conduct over the next three to five months a series of reviews 

to narrow design choices so that it could select by early 1986 a baseline 

structure for the proposed space station. Contractor teams would spend the 

second half of the study phase doing space station subsystem preliminary 

designs, leading to start in mid-1987 of the planned development phase. 

(Spaceport News, Oct 25/85, 2) 

October 25: NASA earmarked about $3.2 million in FY 86 funding for continuing work on the proposed space station at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) 

to define processing requirements, evaluate maintenance and resupply activities, and assess facility needs, the Spaceport News reported. The funding, 

an increase over the previous year, would pay for studies to further the Phase 

B definition and preliminary design effort expected to continue through early 

1987. NASA planned for the early 1990s the first launch of a space station 

element. 

KSC studies were intended to identify ground processing options and 

launch preparation concepts. In addition, KSC contractors were evaluating 

what facilities were needed for processing the station elements and payloads. 

KSC was also studying how NASA should approach the ongoing maintenance and resupply activities that would support continuous on-orbit operations. 

KSC space station activity in FY 86 was expected to require the equivalent 

of about 180 NASA and contractor workers. (Spaceport News, Oct 25/85, 2) 

November 77: European Space Agency (ESA), Japanese, and Canadian officials the previous week expressed concern about NASA's expectations of how 

the costs of operating the proposed space station should be shared, as fears 

increased that the US. Congress or the Office of Management and Budget 

might slip the planned 1993 operational date for the $10 to $13 billion 

facility, Aviation Week reported. The officials were meeting with NASA managers to lay the groundwork for critical space station decisions due by December that would determine what type of contribution they would make to 

the basic $8 billion U.S. investment. 

The international space officials were unanimous in their view that the 

non-U.S. contribution to the station's operational costs should be largely 

amortized through open access and use of their respective portions of the 

station system-not through funding transferred to the U.S. As the discussions 

progressed, the possibility of a space station schedule delay to help cut the 

U.S. budget deficit in FY 87 became a growing factor. 

269 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Sen. Slade Gorton (R-Wash.), chairman of the Senate science subcommittee, and Rep. Don Fuqua (D-Fla.), chairman of the House Science and Technology Committee, both influential space supporters, were cautioning that 

congressional action on the FY 87 NASA budget could trim space station 

funding and delay the project's 1993 planned operational date by a year or 

more. 

Fuqua told a meeting of the Washington Space Business Roundtable, a 

group formed to foster space commercialization, that a slip now, while undesirable and likely to drive up costs later, could be absorbed by the program 

more easily than one later when the hardware phase was underway. (AvWk, 

Nov 11/85, 18) 

November 75: NASA's Lewis Research Center (LeRC) announced it had 

awarded a total of $8.7 million in contracts to Sundstrand Corp., Grurnrnan 

Aerospace Corp., Boeing Aerospace Co., and Harris Corp. for advanced 

development contracts for definition and preliminary design (Phase B) of the 

power system for the proposed permanently manned space station. 

A major technical issue in Phase B was determination of whether photovoltaic arrays or a solar dynamic (heat engine) system should supply solargenerated power for the space station. Photovoltaic arrays were the accepted 

system for electricity production in manned and unmanned space missions. 

However, the space station's electrical power requirements were ten times 

greater than any mission flown to date and would necessitate arrays of ap 

proximately one-half acre for the initial station. Therefore, there was interest 

in solar dynamic systems because of their higher overall efficiency and relatively smaller size. 

In a solar dynamic system, an alternator driven by a turbine in a heat 

engine cycle produces electricity. Focusing the sun's rays by means of a 

concentrating mirror into a heat receiver heats the engine gas or liquid. The 

system operates as a closedcycle heat engine, and a radiator cools the 

working fluid and rejects waste heat into space. 

Su ndstrand Corp., under its $1,010,3 03 cost-pl us-fi xed-fee contract, wou Id 

study the magnitude of possible chemical and thermal degradation in the 

working fluid of an organic rankine cycle engine. Under its $1,010,000 costreimbursement contract, Grumman would study solar dynamic waste heat 

radiator technology. Boeing Aerospace Co., under its $3,117,059 cost-plusfixed-fee contract, would study the heat receiver/storage unit and identify and 

recommend testing required for concept verification. And Harris Corp., under its $3,619,870 cost-sharing contract, would generate conceptual designs 

for the solar dynamic dish concentrator, as well as identify and test materials, 

identify and recommend testing required for concept verification, perform 

engineering designs, fabricate the concentrator, and conduct verification and 

testing. (LeRC Release 85-77) 

2 70 
SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (STS) 

Civilian in Space Program 

February 21: NASA and the Council of Chief State School Officers announced that 10,690 teachers applied for a Space Shuttle flight. The Council 

was responsible for application and screening processes; NASA would 

choose the teacher to go into space. 

The Council’s review panel would screen all applications to eliminate 

those not meeting basic requirements and forward the remaining applications to statereview panels to select two teachers per state by May 1, 1985. A 

national panel would then review applications of the approximately 118 

nominees (two per state plus the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin 

Islands, territories and trusts, and Department of Defense and independent 

schools) to recommend 10 semifinalists to NASA’s spaceflight participant 

evaluation committee. 

All nominees would attend a teacher-workshop and orientation program 

from June 24 to 28, 1985, in Washington to learn of current developments in 

the aeronautics and spaceeducation program and to undergo further evaluation and screening; 10 semifinalists would report to JSC for thorough medical 

examinations, indepth briefings, and interviews by NASA’s evaluation committee. 

NASA’s administrator and the evaluation committee would select a primary 

and a backup candidate to undergo training. NASA had not decided on a 

specific flight opportunity, but was aiming to fly the teacher on a mission in 

late 1985. 

California had the greatest number of applications, 926. (NASA Release 

85-26) 

May 3: NASA announced that the Council of Chief State School Officers 

(CCSSO) had that day named 114 elementary and secondary school teacher 

nominees in the NASA Teacher in Space Project. Selection followed the 

review of more than 10,000 applications [see Space Transportation System/ 

Civilian in Space Program, Feb. 21 1. 

Dr. William Pierce, CCSSO executive director, said after announcing the 

names that “It is a great pleasure for the Council to be involved in this historic 

project. The calibre of the applications from teachers throughout the country 

has been truly impressive. If their applications are any indication, we can be 

proud of the quality of teaching that occurs in the classrooms of the elementary and secondary school teachers who applied for this unique educational 

opportunity.” 

NASA would host the 114 nominees at a national workshop, June 22-27, in 

Washington, D.C., during which NASA would discuss current developments 

271 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

in the space program and provide information and training on NASA educational materials available for the classroom. At the workshop a national review panel would interview the applicants to determine the 10 semifinalists. 

(NASA Release 85-67) 

lune 14 NASA announced finalists in its Teacher in Space Project would 

arrive in Washington, D.C., beginning June 22 to attend a national conference sponsored by NASA and the Council of Chief State School Officers 

(CCSSO) as part of the selection process in the program. Through June 27 the 

114 elementary and secondary school teachers would hear from NASA officials and other experts in space science and exploration, including discussions about their responsibilities if chosen to fly aboard the Space Shuttle, 

and participate in workshops sponsored by NAWs educational affairs division to provide a hands-on learning experience about NASA and its programs. During the week, a national selection panel would interview the 

finalists. 

On june 25 the teachers would attend a reception on Capitol Hill with 

members of Congress and on June 26 meet with President Reagan. (NASA 

Release 85-92) 

july I: NASA and the Council of Chief State School Officers announced 

today the 10 finalists in the NASA Teacher in Space Project. The finalists 

would travel July 7 to Johnson Space Center for medical examinations and 

initial spaceflight suitability testing. The NASA Spaceflight Participant Committee would then interview the teachers in Washington, D.C., submitting 

results of the examinations and interviews to NASA Administrator James 

Beggs who would select the primary and backup candidate. NASA had tentatidy scheduled the teacher for a January 1986 Space Shuttle flight. 

Finalists were Kathleen Beres, Kenwood High School, Baltimore, Maryland; Robert Foerster, Cumberland Elementary School, West Lafayette, Indiana; Judith Garcia, Thomas Jefferson School for Science and Technology, 

Alexandria, Vi rgi n ia; Peggy Lath laen, Westwood Elementary School, 

Friendswood, Texas; David Marquart, Boise High School, Boise, Idaho; 

Sharon Christa McAuliffe, Concord High School, Concord, New Hampshire; 

Michael Metcalf, Hazen Union School, Hardwick, Wrmont; Richard Methia, 

New Bedford High School, New Bedford, Massachusetts; Barbara Morgan, 

McCalI-Donnelly Elementary School, McCall, Idaho; and Niki Wenger, kndewnder Junior High School, Parkersburg, West Virginia. (NASA Release 

85-99) 

jury 19: Vice President George Bush announced that Sharon Christa 

McAuliffe would be the teacher to go into space in january 1986 aboard the 

Space Shuttle. McAuliffe, a social studies teacher at Concord High School, 

272 
STS 

Concord, New Hampshire, was the finalist in the NASA Teacher in Space 

Program that was announced by President Reagan in August 1984. Her backup was Barbara Morgan of McCall-Donnelly Elementary School, McCall, 

Idaho. 

McAuliffe proposed that, while in space, she would gather information for 

a personal journal, "just as the pioneer travelers of the Conestoga wagon days 

kept personal journals. My journal would be a trilogy. I would like to begin it 

at the point of selection through the training program. The second part would 

cover the actual flight. Part three would cover my thoughts and reactions after 

my return:' McAuliffe said. 

Vice President Bush, in his announcement of the selection at a White 

House ceremony in the Roosevelt Room, where McAuliffe was accompanied 

by the other nine finalists selected from among 11,416 applicants, said, 

"We're here today to announce the first private citizen passenger in the 

history of spaceflight . . . We're honoring all [the teacher applicants] today, 

and we're doing something else because the finalists here with me and the 

more than a hundred semifinalists will all in the months ahead serve as a link 

between NASA and the nation's school system." 

McAuliffe, a teacher of 15 years and the mother of two children, would 

work a year for NASA. She and Morgan would report in September to Johnson Space Center for 114 hours of training over four months. 

The Washington Post reported that a top NASA official said McAuliffe was 

an early favorite of the 20-member selection panel. The official said "the 

judges thought McAuliffe appeared to be a good team player and-vital to 

her image-making duties-stood out as a good communicator," the Post reported. (NASA Release 85-107; Admin of Ronald Reagan, July 19/85, 913; W 

Post, July 22/85, Al) 

September 6 NASA today invited Rep. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who chaired the 

US. House science and technology subcommittee on space science and 

applications, to be a congressional passenger on an unspecified flight of the 

Space Shuttle, the Washington Post reported. Nelson, who represented the 

district in which the Kennedy Space Center launch site was located, later 

held a news conference at his office in Melbourne, Florida, to announce 

acceptance of the invitation. 

The first congressional Space Shuttle passenger on an April 1985 flight was 

Sen. Jake Garn (R-Utah), chairman of the committee that oversaw NASA 

spending. 

Although Nelson, unlike Garn, had no flying experience, he was an outspoken supporter of the space program. ( W hst, Sept 6/85, A8) 

september 9: Christa McAuIiffe, first teacher as well as private citizen to fly 

onboard the Space Shuttle, and backup Barbara Morgan arrived September 9 

273 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

at Johnson Space Center USC) to begin their training program, the JSC 

Roundup reported. Reporters, photographers, and Tv crews accompanied 

the two as they arrived at building 100 to receive their identification badges. 

Mission commander Francis "Dick" Scobee that afternoon welcomed 

McAuliffe and Morgan at a meeting with the crew of mission 51-L, scheduled for launch in January 1986. Other 51-L crew members were pilot 

Michael Smith and mission specialists Ronald McNair, Ellison Onizuka, and 

Judith Resnik. 

JSC personnel the next day measured them for flight suits, helmets, and Gsuits. McAuliffe said she would be allowed to select either a jumpsuit or a 

standard flight suit to take home with her following her flight. 

After a food tasting and rating session, in which food lab manager Dr. 

Charles Bourland asked McAuliffe and Morgan to taste about 40 food and 

drink items and rate them on a scale of 1 to 9, both teachers commented on 

their surprise in finding space food so flavorful. They would have several 

more opportunities for taste tests before McAuliffe selected her flight menu. 

Other first-week activities included orientation briefings by management 

and training officials and familiarization tours of training facilities and mission control. 

Asked by a reporter how drastically her life had changed since her selection, McAuliffe said that other than having the opportunity to fly onboard the 

Space Shuttle and the accompanying publicity she didn't perceive that much 

difference. She pointed out that as a teacher for a long time she had to gather 

material and present information to students daily. 'As I see it, I'm doing 

basically the same things, only my audience has changed." USC Roundup, 

Sept. 27/85, 7) 

October 2 NASA announced that live classroom lessons and scientific demonstrations, which would be broadcast live around the country, would be 

filmed for use in educational products which were just some of the activities 

planned by Christa McAuliffe, the finalist in the NASA Teacher in Space 

Project, for Space Shuttle mission 51-L. 

The first live lesson, entitled "The Ultimate Field Trip," would allow students to compare daily life on the Space Shuttle with that on earth. McAuliffe 

would take viewers on a tour of the orbiter, explaining crew members' roles, 

showing the location of computers and controls, and explaining experiments 

being conducted on the mission. She would also demonstrate how daily life 

in space was different from that on earth in the preparation of food, movement, exercise, personal hygiene, sleep, and the use of leisure time. 

The second lesson, called "Where We've Been, Where We're Going," 

would help the audience understand why people use and explore space by 

demonstrating the advantages of manufacturing in the microgravity environment, explaining technological advances that evolved from the space program, and projecting the future of humans in space. 

274 
STS 

Also during the flight, McAuliffe would participate in activities that would 

be filmed and later used in educational products. Possible activities included 

demonstrating earth magnetism by photographing and observing the lines of 

magnetic force in three dimensions in a microgravity environment; demonstrating Newton‘s first, second, and third laws in a microgravity environment; 

discussing why products might or might not effervesce in a microgravity 

environment; encouraging creative works from students that reflected their 

interpretation of the space program/experience; explaining the use of simple 

machinedtools and the similarities and differences between their uses in 

space and on earth; showing the effect of microgravity on plant growth, 

growth of plants without soil (hydroponics), and capillary action; and demonstrating chromatographic separation of pigments in a microgravity environment. 

In addition, McAuliffe would assist mission specialists conducting three 

Shuttle Student Involvement Project experiments that would fly onboard the 

Space Shuttle. The experiments dealt with using a semipermeable membrane 

to direct crystal growth, studying chicken embryo development in space, and 

the effect of weightlessness on grain formation and strength in metals. (NASA 

Release 85-139) 

October 4 NASA announced today that Rep. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), chairman 

of the subcommittee on space science and applications, would fly as a 

payload specialist aboard Space Shuttle mission 61-C scheduled for launch 

no earlier than December 20. 

NASA said it was willing to schedule flights for the chairmen of its four 

Congressional appropriations and authorization subcommittees in connection with their NASA oversight duties. Sen. Jake Garn (R-Utah), chairman of 

the subcommittee on HUDhndependent agencies, was a payload specialist 

the previous April aboard mission 51-D. 

NASA assigned Nelson to mission 61-C after reassigning Gregory Jarvis, a 

Hughes Communications, Inc. payload specialist, from that flight to mission 

51-L which was scheduled for launch January 22, 1986. Hughes’s decision 

not to launch its Syncom IV-5 spacecraft on the December mission eliminated the need for a company payload specialist on that flight. Jarvis would 

conduct experiments in fluid dynamics on the January flight. (NASA Release 

85-141) 

October 24 NASA announced today that an American journalist would fly 

on a Space Shuttle mission in late 1986 as the second in a series of communicators to be selected as part of the agency’s Space Flight Participant Program. 

The first candidate selected under this program was Christa McAuliffe, a 

classroom teacher scheduled to fly in January 1986. 

2 75 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

In today's announcement NASA said it would select the journalist, like the 

teacher candidate, after a nationwide competition conducted by professionals representing a broad spectrum of individuals in the candidates' field. The 

competition would be limited to full-time working media representatives 

(U.S. citizens) with five or more years' experience covering or commenting 

on the news for U.S.-based audio, video, or print media. Demonstrated ability to communicate clearly and effectively to mass audiences in both broadcast and print media would be the basis for evaluation of applications, 

although it was not necessary for the candidate to have worked professionally 

in both. 

The selection process would first require identification of eight candidates 

from each of five regions in the U.S.; from the 40 regional nominees, a 

National Selection Panel would recommend five for final consideration by 

the NASA Space Flight Participant Evaluation Committee composed of seven 

senior NASA officials. 

The five semifinalists would undergo medical examinations and receive 

briefings on the spaceflight experience at the Johnson Space Center. Based 

on results of the physicals and subsequent interviews, the evaluation committee would recommend a primary and backup candidate to the NASA Administrator who would approve the final selection. 

The Association of Schools of Journalism and Mass Communication in 

cooperation with the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication and a Journalism Advisory Committee comprised of representatives from 16 professional journalism organizations including the American 

Newspaper Publishers Association, Radio Television News Directors Association, American Society of Newspaper Editors, National Association of Broadcasters, Society of Professional JournalistdSigma Delta Chi, and the National 

Newspaper Association would administer the competition. (NASA Release 

8 5- 14 7) 

November 26: NASA announced that students in classrooms throughout the 

continental U.S. would have an opportunity to observe various aspects of 

Space Shuttle mission 51-L and to listen, look, and learn from NASA's 

Teacher in Space, Christa McAuliffe, during her flight on Challenger. A few 

students would also be able to question McAuliffe about the mission. 

W viewers with satellite dishes would be able to access the live lessons 

directly from the RCA satellite Satcom F-2R, Transponder 13. The Public 

Broadcasting Service, as a result of an agreement with NASA, would carry the 

live lessons via the satellite Westar IV, Transponder 12. PBS would offer the 

programs to member stations after requesting that they preempt regular instructional TV or classroom programming to carry the lessons live. 

McAuliffe would teach two lessons on the sixth day of the flight [see Space 

Transportation SystedCivilian in Space Program, Oct. 21; the first at approximately 11 :00 a.m. EST, the second at about 1 :00 p.m. EST. 

276 
STS 

Classrooms with access to a satellite dish or cable network that carried 

NASASelect would also be able to participate in a “Mission Watch,” which 

covered aspects of the entire Space Shuttle flight from the day before launch 

through the conclusion of the mission. Barbara Morgan, backup for 

McAuliffe, would moderate the Mission Watch broadcast. (NASA Release 

85-156) 

December 6: The Johnson Space Center‘s USC) Space News Roundup conducted an interview with Christa McAuliffe, selected by NASA to be the 

teacher in space, and her backup, Barbara Morgan. When asked to give her 

impressions of JSC, McAuliffe said, “Big. Wry big . . . But that‘s one of the 

messages we want to get across. There are, what, 100 astronauts in the 

program, but thousands of employees here . . . And we’ve gotten so much 

information. When I’m 62, 1‘11 finally read the last piece of paper that I bring 

back from here.” 

The Roundup reporter questioned the two teachers about the national 

attention they had received, the effect it had on them, and the possibility of 

moving into different careers after the flight. McAuliffe commented, “Oh, but 

you’re talking to a teacher. I didn’t choose my career so I could get monetary 

rewards. My God, I never would haw gone into teaching . . . A year of this 

is going to be fun and I’m enjoying what I’m doing. I see it as an extraordinary 

year out of my life . . . We don’t see this as a stepping stone to something 

else. When I go into a radio or TV station, I am looking at everything that is 

happening and I can’t wait to tell my kids what happens in a TV studio, 

because I have newr been in one before.” 

Morgan then said that one of the funny things that had happened since 

beginning their training was that, “all of a sudden we are being asked questions as if we are the experts on the Space Shuttle.” McAuliffe agreed, noting 

that she received a phone call from a reporter asking her what she believed 

was the cause of a problem the previous summer with the orbiter Challenger. 

In answer to the question, “What message will you take to people after this 

experience?” McAuliffe said, “That space is for everybody. It‘s not just for a 

few people in science or math, or for a select group of astronauts. That‘s our 

new frontier out there, and it‘s everybody’s business to know about space.” 

USC Roundup, Dec 6/85,3) 

Crews 

January 77: NASA announced the assignment of Sen. Jake Garn (R-Utah), 

chairman of the Senate subcommittee overseeing the NASA budget, as a 

payload specialist on Space Shuttle mission 51-E, a fourday flight using the 

orbiter Challenger to deploy the second Tracking and Data Relay Satellite 

277 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

(TDRS) and the Canadian Telesat I communications satellite. The flight was 

scheduled for launch February 20, 1985, from KSC. Garn was in preliminary 

training at Johnson Space Center and would soon begin training with the 

other members of the crew. 

The NY Times reported that Garn’s activities in space would include research on space sickness and, if he did not become sick in orbit, he might be 

made ill as part of the experiment. 

NASA astronauts assigned to the flight included Karol Bobko, commander; 

Donald Williams, pilot; mission specialists M. Rhea Seddon, S. David 

Griggs, and Jeffrey Hoffman; and French payload specialist Patrick Baudry. 

(NASA Release 85-9; NYT, Jan 18/85, A131 

January 29: NASA announced Space Shuttle crews for flights in November 

and December 1985. 

Francis Scobee would command orbiter Atlantis flight 51-L in November 

to deploy the third NASA Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TDRS) and 

relaunch one of the communications satellites retrieved during flight 51-A; 

Michael Smith would pilot; Judith Resnick, Ellison Onizuka, and Ronald 

McNair would serve as mission specialists. 

Michael Coats would command the orbiter Columbia flight 61-C in December carrying Western Union’s Westar 7 and RCA’s Satcom KU-2 satellites 

for launch, 3M Corp.’s Material Sciences Laboratory 3, and the EASVACCESS 

space manufacturing experiment. The pilot would be John Blaha; mission 

specialists, Anna Fisher, Norman Thagard, and Robert Springer. 

NASA also assigned Vance Brand, commander, and S. David Griggs, pilot, 

for flight 61-D/Spacelab 4 in January 1986, and Jon McBride, commander, 

and Richard Richards, pilot, for flight 61-VAstro 1 in March 1986. (NASA 

Release 85-14) 

kbruary IS: NASA announced the astronaut crews for two upcoming Department of Defense (DOD) Space Shuttle missions, including the 1st from Vandenberg AFB. 

Robert Crippen (Capt., USN) would command mission 62-A, scheduled 

for launch no earlier than Jan. 29, 1986, from Vandenberg. Other crew 

members named were Guy Gardner (Lt. Col., USAF), pilot; and mission 

specialists Dale Gardner (Commander, USN), Jerry Ross (Maj., USAF), and R. 

Michael Mullane (Lt. Col., USAF). 

Crippen had flown with John Young on the orbiter Columbia’s maiden 

flight in April 1981 and was commander of STS-7, 41-C, and 414. Dale 

Gardner had served as a mission specialist on STS-8 and 51-A; Mullane on 

Karol Bobko (Col., USAF) would command mission 51-J, scheduled for 

launch September 1985 from KSC. Ronald Grabe (Lt. Col., USAF) would 

41-D. 

278 
STS 

serve as pilot; David Hilmers (Maj., USMC) and Robert Stewart (Col., USA) as 

mission specialists. 

Bobko had served as pilot on STS-6 and would command 51-E scheduled 

for launch in March; Stewart had flown as mission specialist on 41-8 and 

had been the 2nd person to fly the manned maneuvering unit on that flight. 

(NASA Release 85-25) 

March 6: NASA announced new crew assignments for the STS 51-D mission 

set for late Marchearly April would be Karol Bobko, commander; Donald 

Williams, pilot; M. Rhea Seddon, Jeffrey Hoffman, and S. David Griggs, 

mission specialists; and Charles Walker (McDonnell Douglas) and Sen. E. 1. 

“Jake” Garn, payload specialists. NASA would assign the originally announced 51-D crew of commander Daniel Brandenstein, pilot John 

Creighton, and mission specialists Shannon Lucid, John Fabian, and Steven 

Nagel to a future mission. 

The Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES) and NASA had agreed to 

reassign payload specialist Patrick Baudry (France) from the 51 -E mission to 

STS 514, as the earliest flight opportunity with adequate middeck experiment stowage capability for the French medical experiments. As a smnday 

mission, 51-G would also offer more time for data collection. 

For fluid-transfer experiments designed to assist Hughes Aircraft in the 

refinement of their satellite design activities, NASA would assign a Hughes 

payload specialist to the 51-1 flight to substitute for the lost opportunity on 

51-D. Hughes would announce later whether John Konrad or Gregory Jarvis 

would fly the mission scheduled for early August. 

Preservation of the year’s flight and crew training schedules had necessitated the changes. Bobko’s crew had to fly soon in order to preserve subsequent training schedules for the 51-J dedicated Department of Defense 

(DOD) mission, the first flight of the Atlantis orbiter. 

The reassignment was consistent with NASA’s crew selection policy of 

separating crew from payload flight assignments except in the case of Spacelab and dedicated DOD missions, for which substantial crew/payload interaction was required. (NASA Release 85-34) 

April 24: NASA announced it selected Dr. F. Drew Gaffney, an associate 

professor of medicine and cardiology and director of echocardiology at the 

University of Texas Health Science Center, Southwestern Medical School, 

Dallas, and Dr. Robert Phillips, a veterinarian and professor of physiology 

and nutrition at Colorado State University, to serve as payload specialists for 

the initial Spacelab Life Sciences (SLS-1) flight. NASA also selected Dr. Millie 

Hughes-Fulford, an associate professor of biochemistry at the University of 

California Medical Center, San Francisco, and a medical researcher at the 

Veterans Administration Medical Center, to serve as a payload specialist for 

2 79 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

SLS-2. Dr. Hughes-Fulford was the first woman to sene as a prime payload 

specialist for a Space Shuttle flight. 

The flights were intended to imprave significantly knowledge about living 

beings in the space environment and were a major step in preparing men and 

women for life aboard the space station scheduled for launch in the early 

1990s. 

NASA would shortly select for the SLS-2 mission a second payload specialist, who would then train with the three already announced. (NASA Release 

85-62) 

May 4: NASA announced that Sultan Salman Abdelazize AI-Saud, an Arabsat 

payload specialist scheduled to fly on the 514 7day Space Shuttle mission 

in June, would conduct 70mm photography over Saudi Arabia, 35mm photography of a fluids experiment, and would participate in the French posture 

experiment. AI-Saud's flight was part of a reimbursable agreement with the 

Arab Satellite Communications Organization cavering the launch of the 

Arabsat 1 B communications satellite. 

AI-Saud would use the 70mm camera to take pictures on daylight orbital 

passes aver Saudi Arabia and the 35mm camera to document such phenomena as surface tension effects on mixed fluids in the absence of gravity. His 

other activities would include photography of the new moon in a lunar 

crescent observation and assisting the French payload specialist as a test 

subject in the French experiment. 

At a May 28 news conference at Johnson Space Center, AI-Saud said his 

flight was bound to imprave diplomatic relations between the U.S. and the 

Islamic world, the Washington Post reported. "You will have 800 million 

Moslems and 155 million Arabs glued to their TV sets watching an American 

spaceship carrying an Arab into space," he commented. 

NASA selected AI-Saud, nephew of Saudi's King Fahd, from hundreds of 

Saudi applicants. He had logged more than 1,000 hours in jet aircraft. 

Other crew for the mission were Daniel Brandenstein, commander; John 

Creighton, pilot; Shannon Lucid, John Fabian, and Steven Nagel, mission 

specialists; and Patrick Baudry, French payload specialist. Backup payload 

specialist for Arabsat was Abdulmohsen Hamad AI-Bassam. (NASA Release 

85-69; W PbSt, May 29/85, A121 

May 31: NASA announced that Frederick Hauck would command Space 

Shuttle flight 61-F scheduled for no earlier than May 15, 1986, to deploy the 

Ulysses (International Solar Polar) spacecraft and David Walker would command the Galileo mission 614 scheduled for no earlier than May 21, 1986. 

The Galileo spacecraft would explore the environment of Jupiter and its 

moons. 

Hauck first flew as pilot on Space Shuttle flight 7 in June 1983 and was 

commander in November 1984 of mission 51-A, for which Walker was pilot. 

280 
STS 

Other 61-F crew members would be Roy Bridges, pilot, and mission specialists David Hilmers and J. Mike Lounge. Other mission 61-G crew members would be pilot Ronald Grabe and mission specialists John Fabian and 

James van Hoften. 

The Ulysses mission would be the first to use the liquid-fueled Centaur 

upper stage; the Galileo mission would also use the Centaur upper stage. 

(NASA Release 85-82) 

June 77: NASA announced that Loren Shriver, pilot of Space Shuttle mission 

51-C, would command mission 61-1 scheduled for launch from KSC no 

earlier than July 15, 1986. The pilot would be Bryan OConnor, also scheduled to fly as pilot on mission 61-B in November 1985. Mission specialists 

would be William Fisher, also scheduled as a mission specialist on 51-1 in 

August 1985; Mark Lee, making his initial flight; and Sally Ride, who flew 

June 1983 on STS-7 as the first U.S. woman in space and then again October 

1984 on 414. USC Release 85-027) 

June 79 NASA announced it assigned Robert Cenker, a senior staff engineer 

at RCA Astro-Electronics, as a payload specialist on Space Shuttle mission 

61-C scheduled for launch on December 20, 1985. Cenker would support 

deployment of the Astro-Electronics-built RCA Satcom Ku-Band-1 communications satellite from orbiter Columbia and perform experiments with an 

infrared camera developed at RC& David Sarnoff Research Center and manufactured at Astro-Electronics. 

During his 13-year career at RCA, Cenker held a number of engineering 

positions in the Satcom program that included work on spacecraft design, 

integration and test scheduling, cost control, and launch site activity planning. 

During November NASA would launch the first RCA Satcom Ku-Band 

satellite, KU-2, on Space Shuttle mission 61-B. Three RCA Satcom Ku-Band 

satellites would complement the operating Satcom C-Band system in providing distribution of Tv services to customers in metropolitan areas. (NASA 

Release 85-90) 

lune 79 The crew of Space Shuttle Discovery on mission 514 designated 

Stewn Nagel as the 100th American to reach space, the Washington Times 

reported. Before that flight, 96 Americans on 48 missions dating back to 

1961 had flown in space. 

There were five Americans aboard the Space Shuttle, but commander Daniel Brandenstein decided Nagel took the 100th honor because three Americans sat in front of him on Discovery’s flight deck. “Shannon Lucid was the 

first runner-up,” Brandenstein said. “She got to space three inches ahead of 

Steven Nagel.” To mark the occasion, which was televised back to earth, 

Brandenstein presented Nagel with a cake that had “100th” written on it. 

281 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

"I'm not sure if that's true," Nagel said. 'Although I sat three inches behind 

Shannon, my nose is about three and a half inches longer than hers is." (W 

Times, June 20/85, 3A) 

September 79: NASA announced that John Young would command Space 

Shuttle flight 61-J scheduled for launch August 1986, Vance Brand mission 

61-K scheduled for September 1986, and Donald Williams mission 61-1. 

Other crew for the 61-J mission, during which astronauts would deploy 

the Hubble Space Telescope, were pilot Charles Bolden Jr. and previously 

named mission specialists Kathryn Sullivan, Steven Hawley, and Bruce McCandless. 

S. David Griggs would pilot mission 61-K, and other crew would be 

mission specialists Robert Steward, Owen Garriott, and European Space 

Agency astronaut Claude Nicollier. NASA previously assigned payload specialists Michael Lampton and Byron Lichtenberg to the mission. 

Remaining mission 61-1 crew would be pilot Michael Smith and mission 

specialists James Bagian, Bonnie Dunbar and Manley "Sonny" Carter. 

NASA also announced that Norman Thagard would replace John Fabian on 

mission 61-G scheduled for May 1986 during which crew would deploy the 

Galileo interplanetary spacecraft. Fabian was leaving NASA; he had not announced his plans. James Buchli would replace Thagard on mission 61-H in 

June 1986. (NASA Release 85-131) 

September 19: Saudi Arabian Prince Sultan bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz AlSaud, the first Arab in space on the June 1985 Space Shuttle flight 614, was 

in Washington to give interviews, attend receptions, and pay courtesy calls 

on government officials, including President Reagan, as part of a goodwill 

tour, the Washington Post reported. 

The prince commented that his flight, coming as it did during Ramadan, 

the holiest month in Islam, was a spiritual ascent. "I remember being up in 

space and I'd read a verse from the Koran and then get up and go to the 

window . . . It's quite an experience when the sun rises and sets every 45 

minutes. First you notice countries. Then you start paying attention to continents. And by the fifth day all you can see is one big blue ball tumbling in 

front of you." 

Dispensing, under the circumstances, with the ritual facing of Meccaafter checking first that it would be acceptable to Moslem scholars-the 

prince nevertheless prayed five times a day and fasted for part of the flight in 

observance of Ramadan. 

He also commented, "I had a small experience after I came back from 

space. ! always jogged over the same area in Houston, sometimes 15 miles a 

day, but when I came back and jogged over the same course, I noticed at least 

50 percent more things in nature." 

282 
STS 

When the prince returned to Saudi Arabia after the flight he received a 

ticker-tape parade. “There were religious old people, women, men, children, 

helicopters throwing ticker tape, people touching you,” he said, “Saudi Arabians have never done this before. Our people are usually not so emotional 

as to throw ticker tape. But the Saudies will always surprise you.” The Post 

also noted that his face was on thousands of T-shirts and he received hundreds of letters a day. 

The prince pointed out to the reporter that, “I am a bachelor. I don’t drink 

and I’m a nonsmoker, but I’m not boring. No way am I boring.” ( WPost, Sept 

19/85, C1) 

October 1: NASA announced today the selection of Dr. Samuel Durrance, 

associate research scientist in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at 

Johns Hopkins Uniwrsity, and Dr. Ronald Parise, manager of Advanced Astronomy Programs at Computer Sciences Corp., to serve as payload specialists on Space Shuttle mission 61-E, for an ultraviolet astronomy mission 

known as Astro-1 scheduled for launch March 6, 1986. Dr. Kenneth Nordsieck, associate professor at Washburn Observatory, University of Wisconsin, 

would serve as the backup. 

The Astro-1 mission would study HalIey’s Comet and other celestial ob 

jects through three ultraviolet astronomical instruments. In addition, a special 

visible-light, wide-field camera was incorporated into the payload to augment the Halley‘s Comet studies. The payload specialists, all experienced 

astronomers, would make decisions during the mission to ensure the best 

possible scientific return. 

The payload specialists were each members of one of three science teams 

that developed the ultraviolet instruments. Durrance and Parise would operate the ultraviolet instruments; astronaut mission specialists would operate 

the instrument pointing system (IPS), dedoped by the European Space 

Agency (ESA) for precise aiming at celestial targets and first flown in early 

August 1985 on Spacelab 2, on which the three instruments were mounted. 

NASA scheduled the Astro-1 flight to coincide with the Halley encounter 

missions by ESA, the USSR, and Japan. Dr. Burton Edelson, NASA associate 

administrator for space science and applications, said, “The opportunities for 

science synergism between Astro-1 and the armada of Halley encounter 

spacecraft are significant. The scientific study of Halley’s Comet will be an 

internationally coordinated effort.” 

In addition to the Halley’s observations, the Hopkins Ultraviolet Telescope 

on Astro-1 would study faint astronomical objects such as quasars, actie 

galactic nuclei, and normal galaxies in the far ultraviolet range; the Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope would record imageintensified photos of faint objects 

such as hot stars and galaxies in broad ultraviolet wavelengths and with a 

283 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

wide field of view; and the Wisconsin Ultraviolet Photopolarimetry Experiment would study the polarization of hot stars, galactic nuclei, and quasars. 

The instruments would make a total of 200 to 300 observations during the 

mission, the first of three in a series scheduled for launch within the next two 

years. (NASA Release 85-137) 

Nmmber 8: The Indian Department of Space announced today the selection of two Indian astronaut candidates, one of whom would fly aboard the 

Space Shuttle carrying India's INSAT-1C satellite, FBIS Delhi Domestic Sew 

ice in English reported. The candidates were N.C. Bhatt of the Indian Space 

Research Organization, Bangalore, and P. Radhakrishmam of Vikram 

Sarabhai Space Center, Trivandrum. 

The chairman of India's Space Commission, Professor U. R. Rao, said the 

commission would select one of them to fly on the mission scheduled for 

July 1986. (FBIS Delhi Domestic Service in English, Nov 8/85) 

Nowmber 77: European space program managers were urging the creation of 

a science astronaut classification to distinguish crew members with scientific 

backgrounds from other payload specialists who flew on the Space Shuttle, 

Aviation Wee& reported. European managers were using the science astronaut designation for Ernst Messerschmid, Reinhard Furrer, and Wubbo Ockels, the European crew members who flew aboard Space Shuttle mission 

61-A with West Germany's Spacelab D-1 [see Space Transportation System/ 

Missions, Oct. 301; NASA used its regular payload specialist designation for 

the three. 

"There has to be a difference between some senator or Arab prince and the 

qualified scientists who fly aboard the shuttle," said Ulf Merbold, crew interface coordinator for the D-1 mission. "We demand that the science astronaut 

concept be developed so that these proficient crew members can be designated for such a flight," said Hans-Ulrich Steimle, Spacelab D-1 mission 

manager at the German aerospace research establishment. "Instead, NASA 

now has become involved in running a travel office for visiting dignitaries, 

and this is counterproductive when you want to perform a serious science 

mission." 

German officials said they might raise the issue again when planning was 

finalized for a follown Spacelab D-2 mission targeted for 1988. (AvWk, 

Nov 11/85, 24) 

December 27: NASA announced that its Administrator selected Dr. Charles 

Chappell of Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Dr. Dirk Frimout of the 

European Space Agency (ESA) to serve as alternate payload specialists for the 

first Earth Observation Mission (EOM), which would use the Spacelab scheduled for launch on the Space Shuttle orbiter Atlantis in the latter half of 1986. 

284 
STS 

Chappell and Frimout would serve as backups to flight payload specialists Dr. 

Byron Lichtenberg and his alternate, Dr. Michael Lampton. 

Chappell was chief of the Solar Terrestrial Div., Space Science Laboratory at 

MSFC and was responsible for directing a research group that studied the 

physics of the sun-earth environment. He sed as mission scientist for the 

lo-day Spacelab 1 mission, during which 70 investigations were carried out. 

Frimout was the senior engineer supporting European researchers who 

would have experiments on the mission, and he had served as ESA crew 

coordinator and operations manager for Spacelab 1. 

Chappell and Frimout would train with the flight crew and serve as members of the mission management team in the Payload Operations Control 

Center during the flight. They would communicate directly with the crew on 

orbit, assist the payload operations team during normal operations, and aid 

in trouble shooting problems and in changing crew procedures when necessary. They would also advise the mission scientist, Dr. Marsha Torr, of the 

possible impact of problems and timeline changes. 

The EOM flight was the first in a series of Space Shuttle missions primarily 

dedicated to measuring solar irradiance and the chemical composition of the 

earth’s stratosphere and mesosphere during an 11-year solar cycle. NASA 

would refly several instruments originally carried on the Spacelab 1 and 3 

missions to accomplish these measurements. 

The mission would use the short version of the Spacelab module, in which 

a single Spacelab pallet and special support structure would hold instruments 

that required exposure to the space environment. The mission would consist 

of 15 experiments conducted in six disciplines-atmospheric science, solar 

physics, plasma physics, earth resources, astronomy, and life sciences. The 

international mission included experiments sponsored by Belgium, France, 

Japan, Federal Republic of Germany, and the U.S. ESA would provide operations support for the European investigations. 

The Investigators Working Group (IWG), which consisted of the principal 

investigator for each of the mission experiments, recommended alternate 

payload specialist candidates for selection by NASA’s administrator. (NASA 

Release 85-179) 

External Tank 

Nowmber 27: The U.S. Senate awarded Martin Marietta Corp. the United 

States Senate Productivity Award for the state of Louisiana for manufacturing 

improvements and costs savings in production of the Space Shuttle’s external 

tank, Defense Daily reported. The Senate cited the company for its innovative 

across-the-board productivity program that included plant modernization, 

285 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

installation of automated production processes, and development of an employee participation program that led to a number of improvements in the 

manufacturing process. 

“Estimates are that this increased productivity will save NASA and ultimately the American taxpayer more than a billion dollars over the long run,” 

said Louisiana Senators J. Bennett lohnston (D) and Russell Long (D) in a joint 

statement. The two also cited the “flawless performance” of the tanks in 

Space Shuttle missions to date. (D/D, Nov 27/85, 142) 

Launch and Landing Facilities 

February 7: NASA and the U.S. Air Force completed for the first time Space 

Shuttle vehicle stacking at Vandenberg AFB’s Space Launch Complex-6, the 

Marshall Star reported. Begun January 12, the stacking consisted of inert 

solid-fuel rocket-motor segments, an external tank, and the orbiter Enterprise. 

Unlike facilities at KSC where NASA stacked the Space Shuttle in the vehicle 

assembly building and rolled it to the launch pad, at Vandenberg NASA and 

the Air Force stacked the Space Shuttle vehicle on the launch mount (pad). 

Workers at Vandenberg rolled a mobile service tower and a shuttleassembly building to the launch mount, then brought booster segments to the 

launch complex from the booster facility and lifted them into place by a 

mobile servicetower crane. This first vehicle stacking at the Vandenberg 

launch complex was part of facilityverification testing before the first Space 

Shuttle launch from the complex in early 1986. 

Col. Walter Yager, commander of the Air Force shuttle assembly task force, 

said minor problems had occurred, but “that‘s why we have facility verification. Wk want to ensure properly working systems before we start handling 

actual flight hardware.” Fit and function checks, payload operations, and 

launch-processing simulations would complete facility verification. (Marshall 

Star, Feb 7/85, 1) 

April 72: Three quarters of a million gallons of water flooded Space Launch 

Complex-6 at Vandenberg AFB during a March test to determine whether the 

system, intended to suppress sound waves from the Space Shuttle during a 

launch, would operate properly, the Air Force Systems Command (AFSC) 

Newsreview reported. Sound waves, reflected off the launch mount and 

flame ducts, could seriously damage the orbiter and its payload. 

To prevent such damage, nozzles on the mount would begin spraying water 

into the three pad exhaust ducts seven and a half seconds before the Space 

Shuttle’s main engines ignited. By ignition time, the spray system would 

286 
STS 

reach its full flow rate of 985,000 gallons per minute and maintain that rate 

for nearly 30 seconds before tapering off after the Space Shuttle left the pad. 

Although Vandenberg officials had tested the spray system six times previously, the March test was the first time the nonflying prototype orbiter Enterprise, inert solid-fuel rocket boosters, and an external tank were in place on 

the mount during a test. Remotely controlled by the launch control center, 

the splash pattern of the gravity-fed water system resulted in no water splashing up into the main engines, where ice might form before ignition. The 

system sprayed water exactly where it would be needed at launch-down 

into the flame ducts and out over the concrete pad surface. 

George O’Gorman, site manager for complex-6, said most of the complex’s 

construction work was complete, although some modifications were scheduled before the orbiter Discovery would arrive in September for launch in 

January 1986. 

The Air Force expected to make about four Space Shuttle launches a year 

by the late 1980s from Vandenberg AFB. The facility could handle as many as 

ten launches a year. (AFCS Newsreview, Apr 12/85, 3) 

April 15: The turnaround clock began running when the Space Shuttle Discovery left the KSC launch pad at 8:59 a.m. April 12 and stopped 70 hours 

and 35 minutes later when NASA declared the orbiter Challenger, configured 

for launch of the Spacelab 3 mission, “hard down” on the pad, the KSC 

Spaceport News reported. 

The tightly coordinated effort began approximately one minute after Discovery’s launch. After launch control center‘s firing room 1 issued the command for automatic washdown of the pad structures, an operational TV scan, 

ordnance system resistance checks, and statusing fire and leak detectors 

commenced operation. About 15 minutes after launch, when it was certain 

the Space Shuttle would not return to the launch site, a convoy of waiting 

vehicles moved into action. 

Workers dumped small cryogenic (hydrogen and oxygen) tanks at the 155- 

foot level of the fixed service structures (FSS). Two Lockheed and EG&G 

teams inspected in minutes the hydrogen and oxygen farms, high-pressure 

hydrogen gas battery, and the gaseous battery beneath the pad, clearing the 

way for another team to safe and secure the oxygen and hydrogen farms. 

Following dumping of the cryogenic tanks, two other teams began a level-bylevel quick-look inspection of the FSS and rotating service structure, setting 

the stage for safety and security procedures, including configuring purge line 

valves and doors, making environmental checks in the mobile launch platform (MLP), and checking operation of elevators. At the same time, others 

rem& ordnance from the external tank vent arm and tail service masts, 

secured guard rails where necessary, and cleared the pad for entry of general 

repair crews. 

287 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Some damage was anticipated during a launch. In this case, pins had 

melted off some of the solid-fuel rocket booster holddown posts on the MLP; 

burnaway (or sacrificial) plates needed repairing; FSS light bulbs had blown 

at various levels; and some SRB waste residue was present. A 40-foot piece of 

waterpipe at the 95-foot level of the FSS, part of the Firex system, was bent at 

a 90° angle. 

The KSC integrated control schedule called for removal of the MLP by 7 

p.m. the day after launch and for it to be at the doors of the vehicle assembly 

building NAB) by midnight. To accomplish this, workers had to mount sew 

ice platforms, disconnect waterpipes, and move flame deflectors. They also 

serviced the hydrogen burn pond and its several igniters. 

On schedule, the crawlerhransporter crew moved into position to begin 

the return of the MLP to the VAB. At 11 :30 p.m. April 13, crawler 1 and MLP 1 

reached the entrance of high bay 3; at 12:17 the next day the crew started the 

journey to the pad with Challenger. The Space Shuttle was “hard down” on 

the pad at 6:25 a.m. April 15. (KSC Spaceport News, Apr 26/85, 4) 

May 3: Effective today Lockheed Corp. reassigned six officers of its Lockheed 

Space Operations Co. at Kennedy Space Center after a six-month corporate 

investigation of the management practices and work procedures used to 

process the Space Shuttle for launch, Aviation Wk reported. E. Douglas 

Sargent replaced A.R. Schroter as president of Lockheed Space Operations 

Co. and became program manager of the Space Shuttle processing contract, 

David Owen replaced W. John Denson as deputy program manager and 

became executive vice president of the space operations company, and 

David Dickenson replaced Ronald Petersen as vice president and director of 

Kennedy Space Center operations. 

Although the replaced Lockheed managers had previously received unfavorable management evaluations, the management realignment came as 

NASA completed a report on its investigation of a March 8 incident in which 

a work platform fell in the Orbiter Processing Facility, damaging the orbiter 

Discmry and injuring a workman [see Space Transportation System, Launch 

Schedules, Mar. 81. The report would assign a large part of the responsibility 

for the accident to Lockheed safety and quality control procedures. 

However, a NASA official said the platform incident did not precipitate the 

realignment. He said a Lockheed Corp. investigating team, which had analyzed Lockheed’s performance at KSC since the previous October, had made 

detailed recommendations on how to streamline and improve performance. 

Also, after receiving a grade of excellent in the award fee evaluation during 

the transition period when Lockheed took over Space Shuttle processing 

work previously done by 15 separate contractors, NASA gave Lockheed a low 

score in the next evaluation period of April 1 to September 30, 1984. 

Lockheed’s basic space processing contract with NASA ran through Sep 

tember 30, 1986, and there was a priced option period for three more years. 

288 
STS 

The two priced contracts were worth $2.5 billion; three additional unpriced 

threeyear options could bring the contract life to 15 years and value to more 

than $6 billion. NASA said it had no plans to recompete the Space Shuttle 

processing contract. (AvWk, May 13/85, 14) 

May 75: NASA announced it was discussing with representatives of the Chilean Government possible arrangements for landing support for the Space 

Shuttle in the event of an emergency during launch from Vandenberg Air 

Force Base. The discussions were consistent with arrangements made with 

other countries since 1981 supporting launches from Kennedy Space Center 

(KSC). 

Space Shuttle operational planning provided for emergency landing op 

tions for all phases of the flight to protect the lives of the crew and the 

integrity of the space vehicle. Since the first launch of the Space Shuttle from 

KSC, NASA had plans for each mission for trans-Atlantic landing sites (TAL) 

and contingency landing sites (CLS) in addition to the primary landing sites. 

This was consistent with relevant international agreements relating to the 

rescue and recovery of astronauts in distress and return of the space vehicle. 

Space Shuttle launches, scheduled to begin from Vandenberg in early 

1986, required one or more trans-Pacific landing (TPL) and CLS sites in the 

Pacific Basin. NASA had determined that Mataveri Airfield on lsla de Pascua 

(Easter Island) could serve as a Space Shuttle TPUCLS in the event of an 

emergency. 

A Chilean contractor was working on preliminary designs for minor improvements at the airfield, which would be necessary in the event an agreement was reached. Improvements would be in accordance with existing land 

use statutes and regulations on the island. Any actual improvements were 

contingent on final agreement with the Government of Chile. (NASA Release 

85-74) 

lune 72: Chilean government member Admiral Jose Toribio Merino said today that he favored accepting the NASA request to build a Space Shuttle 

emergency landing airfield on Easter Island and that it was essential to build a 

port for the operation of larger and faster ships, FBlS Santiago Radio Chilena 

in Spanish reported. “If someone offers to extend the Easter Island airport,” 

Merino said, “we should accept because Chile does not have the money to 

do it.“ 

The need to supplement the project with the construction of a port for 

security reasons was a new element added by Merino to the NASA proposal. 

Merino explained that the operation of an international airport near the sea 

called for fast ships to act in case a plane went down in the ocean. It was 

imperative to have a port for the operation of such ships, and Easter Island 

289 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

had only a small bay, he said. "If someone offers to build a port, I would let 

them," he added. 

In referring to criticism of the project because of possible military uses of 

the airfield, Merino said that those who said that about the project were 

"ignorant people who were politicians in the past but not now." (Santiago 

Radio Chilena in Spanish, June 12/85) 

/me 21: For the first time since the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz project, liquid-hydrogen rocket fuel flowed through the lines at Kennedy Space Center's launch 

pad 39-8, the Spaceport News reported. Nearing its January 1, 1986, deadline for completion of pad B renovations and improvements, NASA was 

entering final work stages including functional testing for such installations as 

the new 100-foot-rall flare stacks that would replace the old burn pond for 

disposal of vented gaseous hydrogen. NASA planned first use of pad B for the 

51-L Space Shuttle mission scheduled for launch no earlier than January 22, 

1986. 

One of the flare stacks, 26 inches in diameter, would vent off and burn 

gaseous hydrogen from the Space Shuttle's external tank and the orbiter fuel 

cells service system; the other, 18 inches in diameter, would handle hydrogen 

from the Centaur upper stage, the facility storage tank, and the mobile 

launcher platform. 

Also new to the complex were two rooms on the rotating service structure, 

one of which was designed for storage of equipment used in the payload 

changeout room in order to avoid the necessity for temporary removal of the 

equipment from the site for each launch. The other was a new clean room/ 

suit changing room. 

Another major new item was the rolling beam that would supply liquid 

hydrogen to the Centaur upper stage. Plans called for use of the Centaur 

upper stage during the Galileo and Ulysses missions scheduled for May 

1986. 

Work began on pad B renovations about seven years previously; total cost 

would be approximately $150 million. (Spaceport News, June 21/85, 4) 

ju/y 26: Chilean toreign Minister Jaime del Valle announced that Chilean 

and US. delegations reached agreement on extending the Easter Island airfield for Space Shuttle emergency landings, FBlS Santiago Radio Chilena in 

Spanish reported. Del Valle said Chile received favorable answers from the 

U.S. gowrnment to two major questions raised by Chile and that he would 

recommend the Chilean president approve the project. 

Earlier Del Valle had said that a possible agreement with NASA on the 

extension of Mataveri Airport would not imply the surrendering of Chilean 

sovereignty over the airfield nor would it constitute the establishment of a 

foreign military base on Chilean territory. Del Valle was quoted as saying, 

"On the ew of the beginning of formal negotiations, I want to reaffirm to the 

290 
STS 

country that the agreement proposed by the United States refers exclusively 

to the emergency landings of space shuttles of the type that are currently in 

operation. It is appropriate to note that the possible emergency landings at 

Easter Island include only those isolated flights originating in California and 

those taking off from Cape Canaveral, which take a different orbit.” 

Del Valle concluded the earlier statement by saying the “cultural, archee 

logical, and ecological structure of the island will be preserved.” (FBIS Santiago Radio Chilena in Spanish, July 2/85, July 26/85) 

August 2: Kennedy Space Center (KSC) service and contractor personnel 

completed within 90 days installation of a launch environment instrumentation system (LEIS) for Space Shuttle launches at Vandenberg Air Force Base, 

the Spaceport News reported. The LEIS, a 400channel instrumented system, 

was designed to acquire data on the environment in the vicinity of the launch 

pad and support facilities during launch. 

The system’s transducers measured in the launch pad vicinity pressure, 

acoustics, strain, vibration, and temperature for use in determining baseline 

data, sources of problems, and possible solutions. Such equipment at KSC, 

for example, pinpointed engine gas leaks during the first mission of the 

orbiter Challenger and provided design measurements of the overpressure 

problem that occurred during the first Space Shuttle launch. 

The KSC engineering development directorate, with the assistance of Planning Research Corp., completed design, management, and integration of the 

system, which Fairchild Weston Systems Inc. built under the direction of KSC 

for the Air Force. Fairchild began work on the system in March 1984 under a 

$4,549,256 contract. (Spaceport News, Aug 2/85, 7) 

August 3: NASA announced that the governments of Chile and the U.S. 

signed agreements concerning use of Mataveri Airport on lsla de Pascua 

(Easter Island) as an emergency landing site for the Space Shuttle. The intergovernmental agreements provided the basis for contingency planning for 

launches of the Space Shuttle from Vandenberg Air Force Base beginning in 

March 1986. This planning was consistent with arrangements already in 

place to support launches from the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). 

Space Shuttle operational planning had to provide for emergency landing 

options for all phases of a flight to protect the lives of the crew and the 

integrity of the space vehicle. The Vandenberg launches would also hm a 

requirement (analogous to those from KSC) for one or more trans-Pacific 

landing sites in the Pacific Basin. Although the probability of a contingency 

Space Shuttle landing was extremely remote, identification and preparation 

of suitable contingency landing sites was consistent with prudent operational 

planning. 

A Chilean contractor had ,prepared designs, in accordance with existing 

land use statutes and regulations on the island, for improvements at the air 

291 
Astronautics and Aeronautics. 1985 

field that were necessary to support a Space Shuttle landing. These improvements included an extension of the existing runway and associated lighting 

system, construction of a storage building, and enhancement of certain permanent and temporary navigation equipment in the area. The modifications 

would not affect the historical treasures for which lsla de Pascua was known. 

As part of the agreement, the two countries would undertake enhancement 

of the existing program of scientific cooperation in the exploration and use of 

outer space for peaceful purposes, thereby building upon a long and successful relationship of technical cooperation in this arena. (NASA Release 85- 

11 7) 

October 77: The information gathered by several Space Shuttle missions 

underscored the need for improved weather forecasting at Kennedy Space 

Center (KSC). NASA along with the U.S. Air Force developed a plan to 

improve the quality of weather data available at KSC as well as the manner in 

which it was presented to the forecaster, Spaceport News reported. 

KSC officials recently held a ribbon cutting ceremony at the Range Control 

Center on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station to inaugurate the new Cape 

Canaveral Forecast Facility (CCFF), marking completion of a $3 million threeyear effort by NASA, the Air Force, and contractor Pan Am World Services. 

The facility was the first important tool for improving the efficiency of the 

weather forecaster during launches and landings of the Space Shuttle. 

The facility housed a system called MIDDS, meteorological interactive data 

display system, which animated and overlaid data from various forecasting 

tools in color graphic displays. For example, a forecaster could begin with 

display of a current satellite picture; over that he could place a color enhanced radar display of shower activity. Next he might add a graphic presentation of indications from wind towers around KSC; and over that he could 

display locations of lightning potential as well as where lightning was striking 

cloud-teground. Motion added to the entire composite picture would illustrate trends in weather activity over a period of time. 

The system could overlay maps of upper wind data or barometric pressures 

collected from weather balloons or sounding rockets. The forecaster could 

also display figures from the data network of other weather stations around 

the country or the world. 

Although the console was at the Cape Canaveral facility, the new rotating 

antenna was at Patrick Air Force Base to compensate for the blind spot 

directly above the radar. A National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration radar located in Dayton Beach supplemented the Cape radar. A forecaster could call up a current graphic display of any official weather radar in 

the U.S. 

A lightning location and protection (LLP) system would show cloud-toground strikes up to 100 miles away, from which antennas were located ten 

miles north of the vehicle assembly building and at Melbourne Regional and 

292 
STS 

Orlando International Airports. These antennas supplemented an existing 

network of 30 area field mills that detected lightning potential. 

NASA officials hoped within five years to ham at the facility a clear air 

doppler radar, of which there were only six in the country. It would reduce 

the number of wind towers needed and improve forecasting efficiency. In the 

meantime, Space Shuttle weather officer Scott Funk said, “We haven’t tapped 

the full potential of the new MlDDS system. Most weather forecasters haw 

never seen anything like this. But there are still a number of potential capabilities the system has which we will add next year.” (Spaceport News, Oct 11/ 

85, 7) 

Nowmber 22: The successful landing test on October 30 of a new nosewheel steering system on the Space Shuttle Challenger on mission 61-A 

meant that the orbiter Columbia would resume Space Shuttle landings on the 

concrete runway at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) when it returned following 

mission 61-C, the Washington Post reported. All Space Shuttle landings 

since April had been at Edwards Air Force Base, where the long desert 

runways allowed pilots to roll to a stop without excessive brake use. 

At KSC crosswinds tended to push the orbiter toward the edges of the 

narrow runway after the spacecraft touched down, which pilots countered by 

making “preferential” use of brake assemblies on the landing gear under the 

Space Shuttle’s wings. By braking on one side or the other, pilots kept the 

orbiter on the runway. But a landing in April shredded three of the orbiter‘s 

tires and burned out a brake assembly. NASA built the new nosewheel steering mechanism into the orbiter so the pilot could steer the spacecraft without 

using his brakes. 

Challenger Commander Henry Hartsfield said after the Challenger landing 

that he was “very pleased” with the assembly, but recommended one more 

test on the concrete runway at Edwards Air Force Base. (W Post, Nov 22/85, 

A21) 

December 9: NASA officials confirmed a schedule calling for the next Space 

Shuttle orbiter to land at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Aviation Week reported, as a result of the successful hard-surface runway landing December 3 

at Edwards Air Force Base by the orbiter Atlantis on mission 61-8. The 

landing was the first on a concrete surface since the orbiter Discowry damaged its brakes and tires while landing April 19 at KSC. 

NASA scheduled the orbiter Columbia on mission 61-C to land at KSC 

following its planned December 18 launch. Columbia was equipped with 

the necessary nosewheel steering system upgrades and would use steering 

instead of brakes as a primary control method for the KSC landing. 

During the December 3 landing, control inputs by mission commander Lt. 

Col. Brewster Shawl Jr. appeared to cause Atlantis to float slightly just before 

293 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

landing on the 15,000 ft. runway. The orbiter's wheels touched down approximately 2400 feet from the runway threshold, and Shaw applied only light 

braking during a 17,759-ft. landing roll. 

NASA slightly altered the Space Shuttle post-landing processing in an effort 

to remm Atlantis from the runway as soon as possible to allow the Air Force 

to reopen it for aircraft use. Normally personnel rem& the orbiter's brakes 

in parallel with other close-out tasks before towing the vehicle back to 

NASA's Ames-Dryden Space Shuttle processing area at Edwards. They left on 

the brakes so that Atlantis could be md to an apron area at the end and off 

to the side of the runway. H.W. Widick, chief of the Space Shuttle Integration 

Div., said a preliminary inspection of the brakes did not reveal any damage 

and that mrall condition of the orbiter was good. (AvWk, Dec 9/85, 23) 

December 13: Kennedy Space Center (KSC) director Dick Smith and Lockheed Space Operations Co. president Doug Sargent today hosted a dedication ceremony for KSC's launch pad B after six years of modification at a cost 

of $150 million, the Spaceport News reported. NASA would use pad B, the 

second of the two complex 39 launch pads to undergo modification from the 

Apollo configuration, to support Space Shuttle and Shuttle Centaur upper 

stage launches. First launch from the modified pad would be Space Shuttle 

mission 51-L, scheduled for January 22, 1986. 

NASA first used pad B in May 1969 for the Apollo 10, third manned Saturn 

V/Apollo launch. Its last use was for the launch of the Apollo/Soyuz mission 

in July 1975. 

Pad modifications included a new Centaur rolling beam, permanent orbiter weather protection system, TV camera floodlights and a TV camera system, boxcars, upgrading of the payload changeout room, a cost-saving 

lighting system, variable speed motors for loading liquid oxygen, and hydrogen flare stacks. 

Although there were currently minor differences between pads A and B, 

the work underway at pad A would eventually make the two functionally 

identical. (Spaceport News, Dec 20/85, 1; Kennedy Space Center Release 

242-85) 

launch Schedules 

lanuary 8: NASA announced it had agreed with the U.S. Air Force to delay 

the first Space Shuttle launch from Vandenberg AFB, originally scheduled for 

October 15, 1985, until no earlier than January 29, 1986. 

NASA and Air Force officials had conducted in December 1984 an extensive review of Vandenberg Space Shuttle launch-facility readiness, the De 

partment of Defense (DOD) payload, and impact of the orbiter Challenger 

294 
STS 

tile problems on the Space Shuttle program schedule. They had decided to 

delay launch to maintain the current Space Shuttle manifest and to insure 

adequate margin in development of the DOD payload for the initial Vandenberg launch. 

NASA and the Air Force agreed that the orbiter Discovery would be deliw 

ered to Vandenberg in early September 1985 instead of May; NASA would 

use Discovery for two flights from KSC in mid-1985 to accommodate the 

impact of tile problems on the schedule and would deliver other Space 

Shuttle flight hardware (filament-wound cases and external tank) as soon as 

possible to Vandenberg to provide maximum schedule flexibility for the 

earliest launch. 

The Air Force had corrected problems with pipe welds and cleanliness at 

the Vandenberg launch site and was conducting ground systems tests with 

the orbiter Enterprise in preparation for initial checkout. NASA had delivered 

an external tank and solid-fuel rocket booster skirt ahead of schedule. 

NASA was completing the remainder of the 1985 Space Shuttle manifest 

with commercial and DOD payloads and would release a manifest covering 

August 1985 through 1989 in the near future. 

In reporting the delay, the Washington Post noted that Vandenberg was the 

only base from which Space Shuttles could fly into north-south orbits crossing the poles, an orbit ideal for surveillance and other earth-watching spacecraft because they could fly wr the entire globe once every 18 days. (NASA 

Release 85-4; W Post, Jan 9/85, A9) 

lanuary 23: NASA postponed for 24 hours the first classified Space Shuttle 

flight, scheduled for launch the afternoon of January 23, as freezing temperatures threatened to cause severe icing on the external fuel tank, the Washington Post reported. Officials said ice chunks could drop off, damaging the 

Space Shuttle, and also that NASA staff was conducting inspection of fuel and 

water pipes to determine if they had frozen shut. 

The Department of Defense (DOD) had classified nearly all aspects of the 

mission. The crew consisting of Navy Capt. Thomas Mattingly, AF Lt. Col. 

Loren Shriver, Marine Lt. Col. James Buchli, AF Maj. Ellison Onizuka, and AF 

Maj. Gary Payton would not conduct the traditional prelaunch news conference nor hold one after landing. The US. Air Force would not disclose how 

long the crew would stay in orbit or what flight path they would take on the 

premise it might help the USSR determine mission purpose or interfere with 

the mission. 

Previously the Washington Post had reported that Challenger would carry 

into orbit a sigint (signals intelligence) satellite that could intercept telemetry 

from Soviet missile tests. The Associated Press later had reported that the 

satellite could pick up radio, ground-tespace communications, and longdistance telephone calls made by microwave relay. Defense Secretary Caspar 

Weinberger would not comment on the reports’ accuracy. 

295 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The USAF had not filed a flight-path plan with the United Nations, and the 

location of two ships that would recmr the solid-fuel rocket boosters was 

also secret. There would be no public air-to-ground communications during 

the flight. (W Post, Jan 23/85, A3) 

January 30: Tile work on the orbiter Challenger had remained the “pacing 

item” in meeting NASA’s next scheduled Space Shuttle mission, 51-E, set for 

no earlier than February 20, Aerospace Daily reported. Randy Stone, 51-E 

lead flight director, said at a press briefing that NASA would make an assessment at KSC and that he didn’t know “what the slip will be or if there is one.” 

Stone had indicated work on the orbiter originating from adhesion prob 

lems with thermal protection tiles was progressing well; however, workers 

still needed to attach owr 300 tiles before NASA could mm the orbiter to 

the Vehicle Assembly Building for mating with the external tank and solidfuel rocket boosters. If all went well, NASA would launch Challenger February 20 from KSC and land it there at about 9:21 am EST February 24. (AD, 

Jan 30/85, 1) 

February 6: NASA announced it had delayed for at least a week the February 

20 Space Shuttle flight that would carry Sen. Jake Garn (R-Utah), because of 

thermal tiles problems and a backlog of paperwork, the Washington Post 

reported. A chemical reaction in the thermal tiles’ adhesive on the orbiter 

Challenger‘s underside had caused about 4,000 of the more than 30,000 tiles 

to loosen during return to earth on the orbiter‘s last flight. Although NASA 

had replaced all but 47 of the faulty tiles, it had not certified the repair work. 

(WpOst, Feb 6/85, A12) 

February 7: NASA announced it had scheduled the 51-E Space Shuttle mission from KSC for no earlier than March 3, 1985, with landing on March 7, 

1985, at KSC. 

The 7th flight of the orbiter Challenger would include deployment of the 

2nd Tracking and Data Relay Satellite CTDRS-B) and Telesat Canada’s Anik 

C1 communications satellite and the French echocardiograph and postural 

experiments. 

Mission 51-E crew would be Karol Bobko, commander; Donald Williams, 

pilot; mission specialists M. Rhea Seddon, S. David Griggs, and Jeffrey Hoffman; and payload specialists Patrick Baudry and Sen. E. 1. “Jake” Garn (RUtah). 

Thermal protection system refurbishment [see Space Transportation System/Launch Schedules, Feb. 61 had necessitated the delay from February 20. 

NASA had yt to accomplish step measurements, gap filler installation, and 

tile-bond and quality wrifications. 

NASA said the current 51-E launch date did not affect the planned March 

19 launch date of the Space Shuttle 51-D mission. (NASA Release 85-20) 

296 
STS 

February27: NASA announced plans for a March 4, 1985, Space Shuttle 51- 

E launch from KSC, with a landing at KSC on March 8. NASA based its launch 

decision on flight readiness-review results. The completion of cargo integration and orbiter-systems testing necessitated additional time in the schedule. 

The current 51-E launch date would not change the planned launch of STS 

mission 51-D, which was planned for no earlier than March 19, to retrieve 

the Long-Duration Exposure Facility and to launch the Navy Syncom satellite. 

(NASA Release 85-27) 

February 27: NASA announced a new launch date of no earlier than March 7 

from KSC for the 51-E Space Shuttle mission with landing at KSC on March 

11. 

Routine checkout of the Tracking and Data Relay Satellite had disclosed 

that one cell in a 24-celI flight battery would not accept a charge. Rescheduling the launch would permit battery repair and retesting. The three nickelcadmium batteries would supply full power to the satellite during 

orbital-flight, solareclipse periods when its solar panels could not provide 

the required electrical power. Final checkout of the Space Shuttle orbiter 

systems was progressing satisfactorily. 

The 51-E launch date would cause an STS 51-D launch date of no earlier 

than March 22. (NASA Release 85-29) 

February 28: The Washington Times, in its report on the Space Shuttle 51-E 

mission delay, said that NASA Administrator James Beggs had indicated the 

delay might be a week or two. 

In announcing earlier delays, NASA had said they would not alter the 

planned March 19 launch of the 51-D Space Shuttle mission, Aerospace 

Daily reported. However, in announcing the new 51-E launch date, NASA 

said the current 51-D mission launch would slip three days. (W Times, Feb 

27/85,4A; ND, Feb 28/85, 1) 

March 1: NASA announced cancellation of the March 7 Space Shuttle Challenger flight due to problems associated with the Tracking and Data Relay 

Satellite (TDRS-B). NASA officials determined that, in addition to repairing 

the previously announced problem with one cell of the TDRS’s 24cell flight 

battery, it was necessary to remm the TDRS-B from the Challenger cargo 

bay in order to repair a timing problem that became apparent during testing 

of the TDRS-1 then in orbit. Under certain operational conditions, the timing 

circuits could cause errors in the system switching sequences, interrupting 

user support. Tests run February 27 and 28 at spacecraft contractor facilities 

confirmed the problem. 

Although NASA and its contractors had developed procedures to operate 

the TDRS-1, these procedures were not acceptable for multiple spacecraft 

297 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

operations, requiring modifications for TDRS-B and subsequent spacecraft. 

Because the TDRS spacecraft had encryption devices to protect the system 

from interfering signals, NASA could not provide further technical detail on 

the problem. 

NASA expected a delay of sewral weeks for modifications, at which time it 

would remanifest TDRS-B. 

NASA would place the Anik-C (Telesat-I) satellite scheduled for the STS 

51-E mission on the Discovery STS 51-D mission and delay retrieval of the 

Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF) from the 51-D mission to a future 

Space Shuttle flight. (NASA Release 85-31) 

March 8: An accident at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) today damaged the 

Space Shuttle orbiter Discovery and injured a technician, forcing delay in the 

orbiter's next flight originally scheduled for March 29, the Washington Post 

reported. The accident occurred about 8 a.m. when the bucket of a "cherry 

picker" crane howring over Discovery fell, hitting a Lockheed technician 

who was on a work platform and then striking Discovery, which was horizontal on the floor of the orbital processing facility. 

The 2,500-lb. bucket broke the technician's leg and injured his shoulder, 

then fell onto the closed left-hand cargo bay door, which was so thin and 

made of such light-weight material that it could not be opened on earth 

without elaborate supports to keep it in a fixed position. The bucket made 

two holes about three feet apart in the heat protection tiles insulating the 

door and damaged the door's structure. 

A NASA spokesman said an investigating board would determine the cause 

of the accident, extent of the damage, and impact on the flight schedule. 

Officials speculated that NASA would haw to replace the 2,400-lb. door, 

which would require shipment of a new door from the manufacturer and as 

many as three or four days of work to complete installation. (W Post, Mar 9/ 

85, A2) 

March 73: The NY Times reported that NASA officials said the next Space 

Shuttle mission would not occur until mid-April as a result of the time 

needed to repair two one-foot-sq. punctures in one of the cargo bay doors of 

the orbiter Discowry. NASA officials said Discowry would definitely fly the 

mission, although they had considered substituting Challenger. Rockwell 

Internatl. was fabricating the replacement material for the punctures and 

would fly the material to Cape Canaveral that day or the next. 

Although NASA could not set a launch date until it had completed repairs, 

unidentified sources said that, if all went well, launch would be about April 

19. (Nfl March 13/85, A14) 

March 27: NASA announced a launch date of no earlier than April 12, 1985, 

for the 51-D Space Shuttle mission, with two windows for launch on that 

298 
STS 

date: from 8:04 a.m. to 8:18 a.m. EST and from 8:45 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. EST. 

The orbiter Discovery would land April 17 at approximately 8:14 a.m. EST at 

KSC. 

During the mission, crew would deploy the Canadian Telesat (Anik C1) and 

the Hughes Syncom IV (LEASAT) and operate the McDonnell Douglas continuous flow electrophoresis system. (NASA Release 85-43) 

During March: NASA announced it had scheduled for no earlier than March 

3 from KSC the launch of Space Shuttle mission 51-E, which was the 15th 

Space Shuttle mission and the orbiter Challenger's 7th flight. The Challenger 

was scheduled to land on March 7 at the 15,000-foot Space Shuttle landing 

facility at KSC. NASA previously announced the flight crew [see Feb. 7J. 

Challenger would carry the heaviest cargo taken into space by a Space 

Shuttle; total weight of the payload bay and cabin payloads would be nearly 

53,400 Ib., almost 15,000 Ib. heavier than the previous record set on Space 

Shuttle mission 5 1 -A. 

After liftoff and insertion into orbit, the crew would prepare to deploy the 

Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TORS-B)/inertial upper stage (IUS). Following release, the crew would maneuver Challenger to a safe distance and 

obsew the IUS perigee kick motor firing, placing the TDRS in geosynchre 

nous transfer orbit. 

Following IUS first-stage burn of about 2 minutes 26 seconds, which would 

then drop off, the TDRSAUS second stage stack would coast for six hours on 

the way to geosynchronous orbit altitude of 22,300 miles. Once there, the 

IUS second stage would fire for 1 minute 49 seconds to stabilize the TDRS in 

geosynchronous orbit and the IUS would drop off. 

The IUS was an advanced solid-propellant, -stage booster designed to 

carry heavyweight payloads into orbits higher than the Space Shuttle could 

reach. NASA first used the IUS on the STS-6 mission for launch of TDRS-A. 

Changes to the IUS since then corrected problems that developed during the 

STS-6 mission. The IUS first stage developed about 46,500 Ib. of thrust, the 

second stage about 18,500 Ib. 

On the second day, the crew would use the Challenger's orbital maneuvering system (OMS) engines to raise their orbit to ah 180 miles for deployment during the 22nd orbit of the 7,347-lb. Telesat-1 (Anik C-1) and its 

payload assist module (PAM). (NASA Release 85-24) 

April 2: NASA Administrator James Beggs, testifying today before the U.S. 

House HUD and independent agencies appropriations subcommittee on 

NASA's FY 86 budget request, said that orbiter processing constraints at 

Kennedy Space Center (KSC) made it difficult for NASA to consider adding 

Space Shuttle flights to get the year's planned commercial launches back on 

schedule, Aerospace Daily reported. 

299 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

When asked by Chairman Edward Boland (D-Mass.) if reports were true 

that NASA was considering launching three commercial satellites on Deltas 

rather than the Space Shuttle to get the Space Shuttle's manifest back on 

schedule, Beggs responded that it was an option the agency "had to look at" 

but one that probably would not be exercised. He said NASA talked to several 

Space Shuttle customers about flying payloads on Deltas and some were 

interested. Another option NASA considered was adding another Space Shuttle flight to the manifest, but orbiter processing constraints posed problems. 

"We just can't push the orbiters through the processing facility quickly 

enough:' he said, although NASA still "may be able to squeeze another 

launch" into the year's manifest. 

He pointed out the hardware for another flight was available and NASA 

proposed building a third orbiter processing facility high bay and Space 

Shuttle tile facility at KSC with FY 86 funds. (AID, Apr 3/85, 1) 

April 5: NASA announced a new Space Shuttle manifest for 41 Space Shuttle 

missions through December 14, 1987 that included nine flights for the remainder of 1985, 15 flights in 1986, and 17 flights in 1987. 

Highlights for 1985 included the first Atlantis flight in late September for a 

Department of Defense mission; a Spacelab 3 flight in late April, Spacelab 2 

with extensive European Space Agency participation in July, and another 

Spacelab flight in October dedicated to W. German scientific investigations. 

Also during 1985 NASA would deploy communications satellites for Hughes, 

AT&T, RCA, Mexico, Australia, Canada, and the Arabsat consortium. 

In 1986 the first launch of the Space Shuttle from Vandenberg Air Force 

Base would occur. The first liquid-hydrogen-powered Shuttle Centaur upper 

stage would be used to deploy Ulysses (formerly the International Solar Polar 

Mission), and the Galileo mission to Jupiter (also using the Shuttle Centaur) 

and the Hubble Space Telescope flight would be launched. 

NASA said launch dates of missions to deploy the second Tracking and 

Data Relay Satellite (TDRS-B) and to retrieve the Long Duration Exposure 

Facility (LDEF-1) were under review. Also, NASA assigned Kathryn Sullivan, 

Steven Hawley, and Bruce McCandless as mission specialists for the Hubble 

Space Telescope flight on mission 61-J in August 1986. (NASA Release 85- 

50) 

April 24: NASA announced it selected April 29, 12:OO noon EDT, for launch 

of STS mission 51-B, the Spacelab 3 flight, and Dryden Flight Research 

CentedEdwards Air Force Base, California, as the primary end-of-mission 

landing site, with KSC as an alternate. Landing was set for May 6 at 12:03 

EDT. 

NASA selected Dryden over KSC for the landing as a result of problems 

encountered during the STS 51-D mission when the orbiter Discovery's 

right-hand braking systems locked causing a tire to blow out. Landing condi300 

c 4 
STS 

tions had included a crosswind-the first experience at KSC of such conditions-and a higher-than-usual sink rate. A landing at Dryden would provide 

a greater safety margin for Challenger‘s tires and brake systems due to the 

availability of the unrestricted lakebed and the smoother surface. 

The decision to land at Dryden for the next flight only would enable 

engineers to determine what corrective actions were appropriate before returning to the KSC runway for nominal end-of-mission landings. (NASA Release 85-63) 

During April: NASA announced it had scheduled for launch on April 12 from 

KSC the remanifested Space Shuttle 51-D mission with landing on KSC’s 

Space Shuttle runway after the fiday 78-orbit flight. 

NASA originally scheduled mission 51-D for March 1 for deployment of 

NASA’s Long Duration Exposure Facility, but cancelled the 51-E Challenger 

mission and revised the 51-D cargo to include LEASAT-3 and the Canadian 

communications satellite Anik C-1. Other payloads were the continuousflow electrophoresis system and the American echocardiograph experiment 

[see Apr. 121, two middeck student experiments, and two Getaway Special 

canisters. (NASA Release 85-47) 

July 12: Space Shuttle mission 51-F was aborted today at three seconds 

before liftoff when the orbiter Challenger‘s onboard computer automatically 

shut down the main engines, Spaceport News reported. Seconds after main 

engine start, main engine No. 2 lost redundancy to operate the chamber 

coolant valve. NAWs ground rule restricted launching without an operating 

backup system in that area of the main propulsion system. Although the valve 

did assume its proper position after a command from a backup system, the 

loss of redundancy resulted in a major component failure flag being sent to 

the orbiter‘s computers. 

Challenger Commander Gordon Fullerton later thanked the Kennedy 

Space Center team on behalf of the crew, saying the team acted quickly and 

professionally and that at no time did the crew feel apprehensive. In answering a Washington Post reporter‘s question later, Fullerton said, “We all have 

mixed emotions here, but we’re thankful the system worked the way it 

should. It was the longest three seconds I’ve ever experienced.” 

Launch operations manager Thomas Utsman said that crews would strip 

parts of the malfunctioning engine and that engineers had identified four 

different parts that could have failed when they should have been pumping 

fuel from the hydrogen tank into the engine chamber. 

When the liquid-fuel engines ignited, valves that fed fuel into the chambers 

were fully open so engines could attain speed instantly. Just before liftoff, the 

valves were partially closed to cool engines slightly and pwnt too much 

fuel from entering the chamber. The valw on main engine No. 2 failed to 

close partially, signaling the computer to shut down the system. 

301 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The first Space Shuttle abort occurred June 26, 1984, when an onboard 

computer shut down two of Discovery’s three engines four seconds before 

liftoff. That abort triggered an investigation that led to a complete overhaul of 

Discovery‘s main engines. NASA had to move Discovery back to the Vehicle 

Assembly Building where its cargo was rem& and placed aboard another 

orbiter that flew into space two months later. 

“We don’t think the engine valve itself failed the way a valve failed the 

[other] time we had a launch abort,” Space Shuttle program manager Robert 

Lindstrom said. “I really believe there’s a fair likelihood we’ll get off again in 

another week.” 

The delay did haw an impact on the mission’s objectives. The infrared 

telescope in Challenger‘s cargo bay could be operated successfully only in a 

completely dark sky. Had the flight left on schedule, the sky would have been 

dark for most of the following seven days until a new moon. 

NASA had scheduled the next Space Shuttle launch using the orbiter Discovery for August 24. It was not immediately clear how the Challenger‘s 

abort would affect that mission. (Spaceport News, July 19/85, 1; W Post, July 

13/85, A3) 

July 15: NASA announced it had rescheduled for July 29 launch of Space 

Shuttle mission 51-F with the orbiter Challenger and delayed by as much as 

two weeks the previously scheduled September 19 maiden voyage of the 

orbiter Atlantis that was to carry a secret Pentagon payload into orbit, the 

Washington Post reported. 

The July 12 Challenger launch abort forced NASA to design a new schedule that maintained a Discovery blastoff for August 24, delayed another 

Challenger mission from October 3 to early November, and kept a November 

27 Atlantis flight and a December 20 Columbia mission. 

Kennedy Space Center (KSC) work crews had rem& three parts from 

Challenger‘s No. 2 engine that engineers suspected could have triggered 

computers into ordering all three engines to shut down on the launch pad. 

One was a valve that failed to close when it should haw, a second was a 

hydraulic actuator that ordered the valve to close, and the third was a controller that sent commands to the actuator. 

“We still suspect the actuator, and nothing we’ve found suggests anything 

else,” KSC spokesman Hugh Harris said. “We are replacing all three parts and 

continue to analyze and test the parts we remove.” 

NASA would test fresh parts on the pad, leading to a July 23 flight readiness 

review. This included electronics and leak checks of parts like pumps, turbines, and valves, not a test-firing of the engines. 

The delay meant a July 30 flight readiness firing test for Atlantis would take 

place September 12, which would delay Atlantis‘s maiden flight from Sep 

tember 19 to late September at the earliest. (W Post, July 16/85, A4) 

302 
STS 

August 14: NASA cleared today the Space Shuttle's main engines for launch, 

making possible an August 24 launch of Discovery, the Washington Post 

reported. Laboratory tests and a thorough examination of one of Challenger's 

engines, which prematurely shh down shortly after a July 29 launch, showed 

that it was not damaged during launch and that a pair of heat sensors, which 

mistakenly indicated the engine had overheated, caused the shutdown. 

NASA had fitted Discovery with new heat sensors that engineers believed 

were vastly superior to the ones that failed on Challenger. 

Dominick Sanchini, executive vice president of Rocketdyne, which built 

the hydrogen-fueled engines, said, "Our analysis has verified what we felt 

right along was the probable failure mechanism. We're convinced that the 

sensors we haw now have resolved the problem we saw on the last flight." 

(W Post, Aug 15/85, A81 

August 24 Sudden squalls almost on top of the launch pad early today forced 

postponement for at least a day of Space Shuttle mission 51-1, the Washington Post reported. A series of unforecasted thunderstorms blew in from the 

mainland directly across the flight path, and dark thunderheads surrounded 

the launch pad for five miles in almost every direction. NASA aborted the 

launch five minutes before liftoff. 

NASA officials were concerned not only about the Space Shuttle climbing 

through rain and lightning but also about the crew's ability to see the KSC 

runway in case they had to make an emergency landing the early minutes of 

the flight. Rain could damage the orbiter's tiles, and lightning could harm its 

computers and guidance systems. 

NASA rescheduled Discoven/'s launch for between 7:57 and 8:11 a.m. EDT 

August 25. Among the factors necessitating that launch window were the 

position of the satellite planned for salvage and timing of deployment of three 

communications satellites. If an August 25 launch was impossible, there 

were launch opportunities the following three days. 

NASA had announced earlier that highlights of the eightday mission included an attempt to repair and salvage the LeasaUSyncom /V-F3 satellite 

and deploy it for normal operation, and deployment of the ASC VPAM-D for 

the American Satellite Co., the AUSSAT VPAM-D satellite for the Australian 

government, and the Leasat /V-F4 satellite for the U.S. Navy. The physical 

vapor transport of organic solids (PVTOS) experiment sponsored by 3M Corp. 

would also fly on the mission. 

PVTOS was the second of some 70 experiments the 3M Corp. planned to 

conduct aboard the Space Shuttle mr the next ten years. On the 51-1 

mission, solid materials would vaporize into a gaseous state to form thick 

crystalline films on selected substrates of sublimable organics. Researchers at 

3M would study crystals produced by PWOS for their optical properties and 

other characteristics that might ultimately have important applications to 

3M's businesses in electronics, imaging, and health care. 

303 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The company's first experiment, flown in November 1984, dissolved mate 

rials that led to a solid crystalline product. (NASA Release 85-118; W Post, 

Aug 25/85, A31 

August 25: A computer failure 25 minutes before launch today forced postponement for at least two days of Space Shuttle mission 51-1, the NY Times 

reported. Launch crews planned to replace the malfunctioning computer, 

inspect the Space Shuttle's fuel plumbing, and try to launch Discovery on 

August 27 at 7:02 a.m. EDT. 

At 7:15 the Space Shuttle crew and Johnson Space Center USC) flight 

controllers almost simultaneously noted warnings that a backup guidance 

and control computer was registering errors. This came as the backup computer was undergoing a final check to see that its programs agreed with those 

driving the Space Shuttle's four main Computers. 

NASA halted the launch countdown while engineers at Kennedy Space 

Center and JSC examined data retrieved from the malfunctioning computer 

and compared it with data from one of the regular computers. They concluded that the trouble was an apparent failure in the computer, which could 

not be remedied in time for a launch. 

That the computer worked perfectly in tests before August 25 and worked 

in tests after the failure, although it showed signs of trouble, puzzled engineers. NASA was about 99% sure that it was a hardware failure, although 

only an inspection of the computer by JSC engineers would determine the 

exact nature of the problem. 

It was the second postponement in two days for the Discovery and its crew 

of five, and NASA officials were growing concerned that Discovery might not 

reach orbit in time for repair of the crippled Leasat 3 satellite. Any delay 

beyond August 29 would cancel the repair effort, and the crew would have to 

confine themselves to deploying three communications satellites in the first 

three days of the mission. The flight would thus fall short of the eight days 

then planned. 

Arnold Aldrich, manager of the Space Shuttle program at JSC, said NASA 

would not reschedule beyond August 29 any attempt to repair Leasat 3, as 

that would have too disruptiw an effect on other flights scheduled in the next 

few months. 

If it had been only a matter of replacing the computer, the delay would have 

been a day. Howr, the need to inspect insulated ducts that carried liquidhydrogen to the Space Shuttle's three main engines necessitated the twoday 

postponement. After NASA had pumped the Supercooled fuel into the Space 

Shuttle system two consecutiw mornings and drained it again, there was a 

chance that the contractions and expansions caused by the alternating freezing cold and Florida heat might have damaged the engines, which in extreme 

cases could cause them to explode in flight. (NM, Aug 26/85, All) 

304 
STS 

Nowmber27: NASA announced that it had agreed with the U.S. Air Force to 

delay the first Space Shuttle launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base until 

mid-July 1986. NASA originally scheduled this mission, STS 62-A, for no 

earlier than March 20, 1986. 

Under Secretary of the Air Force Edward “Pete” Aldridge, Jr. said, “There 

are no major problems at the Vandenberg site. We have repeatedly stated that 

safety and quality would not be sacrificed for schedule. Our decision reflects 

our continued commitment to this philosophy.” 

Aldridge added that, “We have had to make some facility modifications 

because of what we learned from routine Air ForcdNASA operational readiness inspections. We have also added time to the schedule to allow for better 

preparation and evaluation of the operational systems tests and we have 

extended the training period for the launch crew of this historic, first West 

Coast shuttle mission. 

”This revised schedule will permit us to complete ongoing modifications, 

inspections, rework and operational testing with higher confidence than 

could be permitted with the March 20 schedule,” he added. “It also minimizes the potential for conflict with the NASA Ulysses and Galileo planetary 

missions scheduled in May.“ 

NASA Office of Space Flight associate administrator Jesse Moore concurred, adding, “NASA agrees completely with the Air Force regarding Vandenberg. Our first commitment is to the safety of the crew and the reliability 

of the vehicle and launch systems. The development of the Vandenberg site is 

proceeding very smoothly. This readjustment gives us all more time to carry 

out our commitment to safety and reliability.” 

The decision to delay meant NASA would deliver the orbiter Discovery to 

Vandenberg around March 1, 1986, and NASA and Air Force officials would 

continue to evaluate the STS 62-A schedule in order to establish after January 

1 a firm launch date. (NASA Release 85-158) 

December 77: NASA said today it postponed the December 18 launch of the 

Space Shuttle Columbia on mission 61-C for 24 hours because tired workers 

had fallen behind in countdown tasks, the Washington Post reported. “Essentially there were too many tasks to complete and too little time to complete 

them,” NASA spokesman George Diller said. “We felt it was more prudent to 

delay than to take a chance on making a mistake.” Diller added that crews 

used up more than eight hours of contingency time built into the countdown 

as they worked through the night December 16 to complete checkout of the 

engine compartment. 

NASA rescheduled the launch for 7 a.m. December 19. (WPost, Dec 128/ 

85, A17) 

December 79: A hydraulic pump in a booster rocket attached to the Space 

Shuttle Columbia failed today, halting the launch countdown 14 seconds 

305 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

before liftoff and delaying STS mission 61-C until early in 1986, the NY 

Times reported. The shutdown came four seconds before ignition of the three 

main engines. NASA had called for a delay of 54 minutes earlier in the 

morning when clouds moved over the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). 

NASA aborted the countdown when a computer on the ground sensed that 

a pump on one of the Space Shuttle’s solid-fuel rocket boosters was spinning 

at 86,000 rpm, exceeding the turbine’s “red line” limits by almost 7,000 rpm. 

The device, described as a hydraulic power unit, provided power so the 

nozzle of the solid-fuel rocket booster could pivot slightly in flight, helping to 

control the direction of the orbiter‘s ascent. NASA officials indicated there 

was a backup pump on the booster, but that, if a single pump failed before 

liftoff, safety precautions called for abort of the countdown. 

That particular hydraulic power unit had flown twice before on the resuable solid-fuel rocket boosters, NASA officials said, and similar devices had 

flown up to four times before requiring replacement. It was the first failure in 

the Space Shuttle program of that particular part. 

NASA would have to repair or replace the failed pump and said it had 

rescheduled the launching for January 4, 1986, so there would be no interference with the holidays. The delay until January would also allow NASA to 

avoid paying the Air Force to keep open its Eastern Test Range at Cape 

Canawral and paying launch pad workers tripletime pay for working between Christmas and New Year‘s, the Washington Post reported. “The team is 

obviously disappointed,” said Robert Sieck, director of Space Shuttle operations at KSC. “But we’re going to isolate the problem and fix it and get on 

with the launch process.” 

NASA said the delay would haw no impact on the 16 Space Shuttle missions, including 61-C, that it had scheduled for 1986. (NY Times, Dec 20/85, 

B10; W Post, Dec 20/85, A2) 

Main Engines 

February 7: NASA announced award of a $2,374,800 fixed-price contract to 

Stearns Catalytic Corp. to modify a test stand at the National Space Technology Laboratories (NSTL), Hancock County, Mississippi, to give NSTL a third 

test position to static-fire individually Space Shuttle main engines. The structural, mechanical, and electrical modifications would begin no later than 

March 1985 for completion in a year. 

Space Shuttle mainengine testing had begun at NSTL in June 1975, using 

test stands A-1 and A-2 for singleengine testing of flight and nonflight 

engines. Later NASA used the 8-2 test position to certify the main propulsion 

system in a series of threeengine cluster firings. The additional test position 

would support projected increases in mainengine test requirements, including increased turbopump production rates. NASA would initially use the new 

306 
STS 

6-2 position to test new and mrhauled engine turbopumps using a testbed 

engine. 

NASA had originally used the 6-2 test stand in the 1960s to flightcertify 

the Apollo/Saturn V space vehicle’s first stage. (NASA Release 85-19) 

July 30: NASA announced that, based on a review of engine data following 

the July 29 Space Shuttle mission 51-F launch, Marshall Space Flight Center 

and Kennedy Space Center engineers believed that failed sensors-not an 

engine failure-were the probable cause of the main engine No. 1 shut down 

[see Space Transportation System/Missions, July 291. 

The data suggested the high-pressure fuel turbopump on that engine performed normally, because there were no indications the pump was running 

hot. If the pump were running hot, Johnson Space Center flight engineers, 

who monitored engine performance during ascent, would have expected to 

see changes in the position of an oxidizer valve indicating an increased flow 

to supply the pump with more power. Data showed the valve position did not 

change. A second data indication of normal pump performance was present 

in the engine discharge pressures, which were monitored by ground controllers and the main engine controller. 

Based on these indications, NASA engineers reviewing the cause of the 

engine shutdown tentatively concluded that the main engine controller was 

receiving faulty data from failed sensors. Resistance measurements taken by 

the engine controller provided an indicator of pump temperatures, because 

the resistance increased as the temperature increased. The controller logic 

was able to distinguish, within certain limits, a valid reading from one that 

indicated the sensor wire, a very thin wire, was broken or had otherwise 

failed. 

The controller recognized the bad reading from the Channel B sensor; the 

reading from Channel A, howewr, drifted, indicating a temperature rise 

above the redline limit. Because of the failure mode in the second sensor, 

which gave readings above the redline limit but below those that would 

cause the controller to disregard them as unreasonable and thus indicative of 

a sensor failure, the engine controller believed there was a possible pump 

problem and shut down the engine. 

A temperature sensor on main engine No. 3 also failed. Because there was 

a history of these temperature sensors failing on previous Space Shuttle 

flights, NASA decided to dewlop a new sensor for use on future Space 

Shuttle flights beginning with mission 51-1. 

Until such time as NASA confirmed this explanation by an examination of 

the engine and its various systems, NASA would not launch another mission. 

Howaner, the agency did not anticipate that this would result in a delay in the 

next mission. 

The call “abort to orbit” used to describe the action ordered for the July 29 

Space Shuttle flight was the preferred type of Space Shuttle launch “abort” in 

307 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

that it gave the crew, the orbiter, and the ground controllers time to review 

options and to ascertain that the crew and orbiter were in good condition. In 

nearly all cases, the abort-toorbit contingency would allow completion of 

most of a particular mission's flight requirements. 

Once NASA determined that an orbiter was in a safe orbit (minimum 

would be about 105 nautical miles circular), then the crew and ground flight 

controllers could begin to assess the impact on planned mission activities. In 

the case of mission 51-F, the orbit achieved was 106 by 146 nautical miles, 

40 miles short of the planned designations; the orbiter was at a velocity of 

25,760 feet-per-second, which was 110 feet-per-second less than planned. 

NASA determined all abort modes based on the weight of the orbiter, the 

inclination of the desired orbit, and other characteristics. Each mode had a 

specific applicable time and duration during the ascent phase, and crew and 

ground controllers practiced these contingency situations regularly. (NASA 

Release 85-114) 

September 4: NASA announced that Lewis Research Center (LeRC) and Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) were pursuing a 10-year program scheduled 

for completion in 1991 to improve Space Shuttle engine performance, reduce 

operational costs, and develop advanced engine technology for future space 

travel. 

Although the Space Shuttle propulsion system had performed well for a 

number of space missions, it incorporated state-of-the-art technology at the 

time of its development some 15 years before, so NASA believed the engine's 

operational life and performance levels could be improved. According to 

Stanley Marsik, LeRC's Space Shuttle main engine technology program manager, "The current engine represents the first generation of reusable engines. 

In a way, the first reusable space engine can be compared with the Model-T 

automobile. Now that we have experienced numerous flights with this engine, we have learned how to improve its life and performance. We now are 

working towards advancing the technologies necessary to support those improvements." 

In the age of reusable Space Shuttle engines, demands would increase for 

higher performance with lighter weight components, resulting in higher op 

erating pressures and temperatures and increased mechanical vibrations and 

fuel flow turbulence. The system also severely taxed engine components 

such as turbine blades, bearings, seals, fuel ducting, and combustion chambers. 

Engineers were studying new high-temperature, high-strength metal alloys 

and other advanced materials such as new protective coatings and combustion processes. Researchers using advanced computer modeling techniques 

studied loads on turbine blades and fuel flow, and examined the use of 

hydrostatic ball bearings where a film of gas would separate the bearing from 

metal surfaces, resulting in no metal-temetal contact. 

308 
STS 

Engineers were developing new methods of measuring wear and deterioration, so parts would be replaced only when necessary, and studying ways to 

monitor engine health by means of a series of computerconnected diagnostic sensors on the engine to signal deviations from normal performance and 

to facilitate more economical on-the-ground maintenance. 

The two centers had formed ten disciplinary groups to work with some 130 

different technology elements of engine design. Rocketdyne Division of 

Rockwell Internatl., engine manufacturer, and other NASA contractors and 

several universities were supporting the program. (NASA Release 85-122) 

September 6: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced it had scheduled for September 12 at Kennedy Space Center a 20-second on-the-pad test 

firing of the Space Shuttle orbiter Atlantis’s three main engines to verify the 

flight readiness of Atlantis-the fourth and newest of the Space Shuttle orbiter 

fleet. 

The flight readiness firing in a launchday environment would exercise the 

Space Shuttle’s main propulsion system and computer programs to demonstrate the proper integration of all elements prior to the first Atlantis launch 

scheduled for October 3 for mission 51-J. Engineers had previously test fired 

each engine individually at NASA‘s National Space Technology Laboratories. 

On September 9 a firing simulation would kick off preparations for the test. 

The one-day test would check out critical flight and ground computer systems that controlled the actual engine firing and give the Space Shuttle 

launch team a chance to re-review test procedures. 

Countdown for the flight readiness firing would begin at 4:OO a.m. September 10, with the clock at the T-43 hour mark, and culminate with the 20- 

second static firing. 

Three days of preparations would precede the firing countdown, including 

purging the external tank with inert gases, installing special firing instrumentation, and mounting a radiation shield on the deck of the mobile launcher 

platform to protect the solid-fuel rocket boosters and external tank structures 

during the test firing. Total flight readiness firing, including pre- and post-test 

activities, would span six days and require support from personnel and operations from various NASA centers including MSFC and Kennedy and Johnson 

Space Centers. 

Events leading to the September 12 engine firing would be nearly identical 

to those that preceded an actual Space Shuttle launch, with built-in holds 

distributed throughout the countdown at the same times they occurred in an 

actual launch countdown. 

An automated ground launch sequencer would control the final nine minutes of the countdown. The sequencer performed the final series of events in 

a specific order, monitored various measurements of out-of-tolerance conditions, and detected system malfunctions for which it would automatically 

stop the countdown. 

309 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Following the test, technicians would inspect externally and internally the 

three main engines to verify their readiness for flight. These post-firing activities would take about 11 days. (MSFC Release 85-44) 

Management 

March 7: Construction was proceeding at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) toward the October completion of the Shuttle Processing Contract (SPC) logistics facility to house approximately 190,000 items of Space Shuttle program 

stock, including orbiter fuel cells, various electrical components, tires, 

brakes, windows, nuts, bolts, and washers then stored in three KSC warehouses and four areas of Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, the Spaceport 

News reported. NASA would consolidate seven Lockheed Logistics Directorate departments and its own Launch Support Services Directorate at the 

facility, with 500 Lockheed and NASA employees working in 75,000 sq. ft. 

(about a quarter of the total) set aside for office space. 

The Lockheed-managed facility would be KSC's first automated logistics 

warehouse for storage of flight hardware and SPC ground-support equipment. 

An automated inventory system would interface with the Shuttle Inventory 

Management System (SIMS) and a manual system. Retrieval procedures 

would require four roboticized forklifts to find and fetch items, an automatic 

conveyor, and a manned, three-story high forklift. 

As part of the SPC agreement, Lockheed selected Austin Co. as the facility's 

architectural and engineering firm and builder at a basic design and construction cost of about $16 million. (Spaceport News, Mar 1/85, 1) 

April 72: National Space Transportation System manager Dr. Glynn Lunney, 

who was a member of the Space Task Group that inaugurated US. manned 

space flight, announced he would leave NASA in the near future, the Johnson 

Space Center Space News Roundup reported. 

Lunney, whose career almost exactly spanned the period of U.S. efforts in 

space, began his government service in 1958 with the National Advisory 

Committee for Aeronautics, NA!jA's predecessor, at Lewis Research Center. 

He then moved to the Space Task Group and with it to Houston when it 

became the Manned Spacecraft Center. Later he became head of the mission 

logic and computer hardware section, chief of the flight dynamics branch, 

flight director for the Gemini program, and, in July 1968, one year before the 

first manned landing on the moon, chief of the flight director's office. He then 

served as special assistant to the manager and then manager of the Apollo 

spacecraft program. 

With the advent of the Space Shuttle program, he became manager of the 

Space Shuttle payload integration and development program responsible for 

310 
STS 

directing the planning and implementation for all payloads and payload 

carriers in that program. 

Since 1981 he served as manager of the National Space Transportation 

Systems Program with responsibility for overall systems management and 

integration of all elements of the program. 

Among the awards received by Lunney were the Lawrence Sperry Award, 

the Arthur S. Fleming Award, the Louis W. Hill Space Transportation Award, 

the Allan D. Emil Memorial Award, the W. Randolph Lovelance II Award, 

three NASA Group Achievement Awards, two NASA Distinguished Service 

Medals, an Outstanding Leadership Medal, Senior Executive Service designations, and an honorary doctorate of laws from the University of Scranton. 

Lunney was a Fellow of the American Astronautical Society and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. USC Space News Roundup, Apr 

12/85, 1) 

April 29: NASA and the Defense Department (DOD) with White House 

concurrence abandoned any consideration of transferring the management of 

Space Shuttle operations to a commercial venture or quasi-public corporation for the foreseeable future, Aviation Week reported. The decision would 

thwart plans of commercial ventures that had sought the combined Space 

Shuttle managemendmarketing role. The Shuttle Operations Strategic Planning Group, a team made up of officials from NASA, DOD, the White House, 

and private enterprise, said ”. . . the suggestion that the space shuttle 

should or could be transferred, sold or leased to private enterprise for its 

operation, marketing and future development is simply not a viable alternative for the foreseeable future.” 

Although some commercial space officials called the group’s study a 

“whitewash,” others believed the decision could introduce more Space Shuttle launch and cost stability, a critical issue with a large segment of commercial space ventures that needed Space Shuttle transportation no matter who 

was managing it. 

DOD Space Shuttle military spaceflight requirements, including the p 

tential for Strategic Defense Initiative Space Shuttle activity, were key ele 

ments in the decision not to take management of the program away from 

NASA. 

As a result of the decision, NASA would have to create a new management 

structure in order to get the Space Shuttle out of existing developmentoriented management. ‘As the shuttle evolves and the flight rate increases,” 

the strategic planning group said, “organizational realignments within NASA 

will become necessary to ensure that NASA’s R&D and shuttle operations do 

not detract from one another but are mutually supportive.” (AvWk, Apr 29/ 

85, 42) 

31 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

July 26: In an administrative realignment reflecting the maturation of the 

Space Shuttle program, NASA announced the appointment of Arnold Aldrich, a 26-year NASA veteran and head of the Space Shuttle projects office at 

the Johnson Space Center USC), to manager of the National Space Transportation System (NSTS). He would fill the vacancy left when Glynn Lunney 

retired in April. 

The Level II NSTS organization at JSC would assimilate the projects office, 

consolidating all program elements under Aldrich. With this combined responsibility, Aldrich would take charge of integration of all Space Shuttle 

program elements including flight software, orbiter, external tank, solid-fuel 

rocket boosters, main engines, payloads, payload carriers, and Space Shuttle 

facilities. His responsibilities would also include directing the planning for 

NSTS operations and for management of orbiter and government furnished 

equipment projects. NASA named Richard Kohrs, who was acting program 

manager, and Lt. Col. Thomas Redmond, U.S. Air Force, deputy managers. 

In a related move, Thomas Utsman, head of Space Shuttle management 

and operations at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), would become deputy director of KSC, with NASA dividing shuttle management and operations into two 

primary organizations: Shuttle engineering and Shuttle operations. The engineering directorate, headed by Horace Lamberth, would expand to include 

skills necessary for sustaining engineering of the orbiter. The operations 

directorate, headed by Robert Sieck, would retain all functions necessary to 

manage day-today Space Shuttle processing and its logistical support. 

NASA would transfer later in the year from Johnson Space Center to KSC 

launch support services and orbiter thermal protection system manufacturing 

contracts, functions closely associated with KSC responsibilities for Space 

Shuttle maintenance and launch preparation. At the beginning of 1986, KSC 

would take over logistics responsibility for spare parts refurbishment and 

procurement and would assume sustaining engineering responsibility for 

orbiter subsystems. (NASA Release 85-112) 

july29: NASA officials said they might alter Space Shuttle launch countdown 

procedures to avoid the type of last-second problem that forced postponement of mission 51-F earlier in July [see Space Transportation System, 

Launch Schedules, July 121, the NY Times reported. 

Jesse Moore, NASA associate administrator, said in an interview that “We 

want to minimize the chances of a needless shutdown. There may be a way 

to soften up some of our criteria. “Before you take off on an airplane the pilot 

normally tries all his flaps and hydraulics,” Moore said. “We don’t have a 

chance to do that on the launch pad right now, and we want to perform those 

kinds of checks.” 

Moore indicated new procedures being considered for the countdown 

included increasing the amount of time allowed for the Space Shuttle’s computers to verify the correct functioning of the engine valves and broadening 

312 
STS 

the criteria under which they were meant to operate. Moore added that 

criteria for safety would not change. The new procedures would add “no 

risk” to crew members, he said. 

The consideration of new procedures likely reflected growing confidence 

in the Space Shuttle as well as concern about foreign competition for 

launches. NASA officials said Space Shuttle launches must proceed smoothly 

and regularly if the program is to be a commercial success and that the 

current schedule called for one launch a month, eventually going to one 

every two weeks. (NYT; July 29/85, A8) 

November 5: NASA announced selection of Boeing Service Internatl., Inc. 

and United Technologies Corp. for negotiations leading to award cf a single 

contract for flight equipment processing at the Johnson Space Center (JSC). 

The contract, cowring a basic period of three years plus a single priced 

option for an additional two years, would be for services expected to begin in 

January 1986. Follow-on awards could ultimately result in a total contract 

period of 15 years. 

JSC would manage the work under a cost-plus-incentidaward-fee contract 

arrangement that would include incentive fee on sound cost management 

and an award fee on the basis of performance. 

The contractor selected after final negotiations would be responsible for 

receipt, launch preparation, and postlaunch activities related to the overall 

processing of crewrelated flight equipment required to support the Space 

Transportation System program. The contractor would processhesupply individual equipment items in preparation for launch and would operate and 

maintain assigned facilities and support equipment required for successful 

equipment processing. Equipment covered under the contract included extravehicular mobility units (spacesuits), food and medical systems, communications equipment, display and control equipment, and other miscellaneous 

items. 

The competitive procurement consolidated under one contract work previously performed by 16 firms under 19 contracts. (NASA Release 85-149) 

December 5: NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) announced signing today 

with Rockwell Shuttle Operations Co. a cost-plus-incentidaward-fee contract for Space Transportation System operations (STSOC) [see Space Transportation SystedManagement, Sept. 121. JSC estimated the first two years of 

the contract, starting January 1, 1986, to be valued at $378,536,000 and the 

follow-on two-year extension option from January 1, 1988 through December 

31, 1989 at about $374,320,000 for a possible four-year total of 

$752,846,000. 

Rockwell’s STSOC tasks would include project management; maintenance 

and operations of mission control center-Houston, shuttle mission simulator, 

shuttle avionics integration laboratory, software production facility, and the 

313 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

central computing facility; sustaining engineering; flight preparation requirements and analysis; flight preparation production; and direct mission operations and testing and support for Space Shuttle operations at JSC. 

The Rockwell team included Bendix Field Engineering Corp., System Development Corp., Omniplan Corp., RMS Technologies, Inc., and System 

Management American Corp. USC Release 85-05 1) 

December 78: NASA announced that it had selected Boeing Aerospace Op 

erations to receive the Flight Equipment Processing Contract (FEPC) at Johnson Space Center (JSC). Wornick Co. was a Boeing subcontractor. The 

three-year award with a two-year priced option would begin in January 1986 

at an estimated total cost of $76.5 million. The contract also included provisions for two additional unpriced, fiveyear extensions. JSC would manage 

the work under a cost-plus incentidaward-fee contract arrangement, which 

included incentive fee for sound cost management and an award fee based 

on performance. 

Under the contract, Boeing would assume responsibility for receipt, launch 

preparation, and postlauch activities relating to the overall process of crewrelated flight and flight-type equipment required to support the Space Transportation System program. The contractor would process and resupply 

individual flight equipment items, which supported the flight crew in its 

daily operation of the orbiter vehicle, and would operate and maintain sup 

port equipment required for the successful processing of the flight equip 

ment, which included extravehicular mobility units, food and medical 

systems, communications equipment, and other miscellaneous items. 

In addition to Boeing, NASA conducted final negotiations with Hamilton 

Standard Management Services, Inc. The selection of Boeing for the contract 

represented the consolidation into one contract of work currently performed 

by 16 firms under 19 contracts. (NASA Release 85-174) 

Military Applications 

lanuary 18 The expected January 23 flight of the orbiter Discovery would be 

the first of 15 Space Shuttle flights devoted wholly to military purposes, 

Science reported, increasing the visibility of the military role in the program. 

Discovery would carry a reconnaissance satellite designed to intercept a 

wide variety of electronic communications, radar signals, and telemetry from 

intercontinental ballistic missile tests. After several orbits, the Space Shuttle 

would discharge the satellite from its payload bay and a booster rocket would 

push it to an altitude of about 35,000 km, where it would "park" over the 

USSR. 

314 
STS 

NASA estimated about 30% of Space Shuttle flights over the next 10 years 

would be military missions, although NASA's civilian budget had paid almost 

all basic costs of the Space Shuttle and associated launch and servicing 

equipment (estimated at more than $15 billion). In addition, military needs 

had dictated that the Space Shuttle have unusually large wings, rugged thermal protection, an unusually large payload bay, and unusually powerful 

engines; however, the Pentagon had borne none of these added costs. Although some NASA expenditures were for items serving both military and 

civilian functions, such as improved engines for both the orbiter and a rocket 

booster and onboard experiments in flight aerodynamics, plasma physics, 

astronomy, biology, chemistry, and radiation, NASA paid for all these projects 

without any Department of Defense assistance. (Science, Jan 18/85, 276) 

january24: NASA launched today at 2:50 p.m. EST the Space Shuttle Discovery mission 51-C with its five-man military crew to carry out secret military 

objectives, the NY Times reported. NASA, which had delayed launch due to 

subfreezing temperatures [see STS/Launch Schedules, Jan. 231, did not announce liftoff time until nine minutes before launch. One and a half hours 

after launch, Houston Mission Control reported the Space Shuttle had 

reached its intended orbit, the altitude and position of which were secret. 

How long the astronauts would remain in orbit was unknown; although 

most Space Shuttle flights lasted five to eight days, the apparent Discovery 

mission to launch a single satellite might limit it to three or four days. 

Discovery carried a 32,000-lb. propulsion, inertial upper stage capable of 

boosting a large satellite to 22,300 miles above the equator south of the 

USSR. This was the first test of the rocket system since a predecessor had 

misfired on a Space Shuttle mission in April 1983. 

Many newspapers had already published reports, based on information in 

the aerospace trade press and other unclassified documents, that the secret 

payload was an electronic spy satellite. Both the U.S. and USSR had engaged 

in electronic eavesdropping from orbit for several years, and the USSR had 

obtained many of the plans and engineering information for the earlier U.S. 

electronic reconnaissance satellite Rhyolite. The Carter administration had 

cancelled an advanced version of Rhyolite, the Argus, but the Reagan administration had revived the project. Most reports described the Discovery's 

payload as the most advanced and sensitive form of orbital electronic spying. 

The Air Force began an investigation to find the officials or contractor 

employees who had provided information about the secret payload aboard 

Discovery, the Washington Post reported. Inquiries were not aimed at news 

organizations, Michael Burch, a Department of Defense (DOD) spokesman, 

had said. When questioned about a photo of an early-warning satellite pub 

lished on the cover of Aviation Wee&, Burch said the picture should not have 

appeared. However, the Pentagon later acknowledged that the Air Force had 

315 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

given the photo to the magazine after determining it was unclassified. Burch 

refused to say what action the government would take if it could identify 

those who leaked information on the Space Shuttle mission. 

Brig. Gen. Richard Abel had previously warned reporters not to speculate 

about the Space Shuttle's cargo. After the Washington Post had reported it 

was an intelligence satellite intended to eavesdrop on the USSR, Defense 

Secretary Caspar Weinberger had said the story might have given "aid and 

comfort to the enemy." Abel later had told a Univ. of Georgia journalism 

class that little or nothing in the Post story was not available from public 

sources. 

Aviation Weeks January 21 issue had described the Pentagon's next generation of early-warning surveillance satellites, which would monitor missile 

and spacecraft launches from Soviet territory and be protected against Soviet 

laser weapons. (NYT, Jan 25/85, Al; W Post, Jan 25/85, A3) 

lanuary 27: The first military mission of the Space Shuttle ended the afternoon of January 27 when Discovery landed, in excellent condition with only 

minor damage to a dozen heat protection tiles, at KSC surrounded by the 

same secrecy in which the mission had begun, the Washington Times reported. The five-man crew had blown bosuns' whistles and rung ships' bells 

in greeting to flight controllers; however, in keeping with the flight's secrecy, 

the public did not hear the salute. 

During the flight, a $50 million rocket booster called IUS, which had failed 

on its only previous Space Shuttle assignment, had successfully propelled a 

satellite from the Space Shuttle's lowsarth orbit to a listening post 22,300 

miles high. NASA would use the IUS on its next flight, scheduled for February 

20, to boost a communications satellite to a 22,300-mile high orbit. 

Discovery's return was a surprise, as observe!s had believed it would stay 

up another day, possibly two. NASA had ordered the ship home early, apparently because weather conditions for a KSC landing had deteriorated. 

Sources reported the crew had released a spy satellite during the first 10 

hours of the mission. The Air Force said only that the rocket carrying the 

Space Shuttle's cargo to higher orbit "successfully met its mission objectives" 

and would not confirm reports that the cargo was an advanced spy satellite, 

first of a new generation capable of intercepting radio, radietelephone, and 

digital communications from ground and space, or the satellite's orbit parameters. 

Four private planes had violated the security zone around KSC during 

preparations for Discovery's landing, the Washington Post reported the Air 

Force as saying, the 8th time in 15 Space Shuttle missions that planes had 

violated restricted airspace during launch or landing. The Federal Aviation 

Administration had suspended the flying licenses of some violators for up to 

90 days because of dangers posed by intruding pilots. The problem had 

316 
STS 

grown so serious that the Air Force had improved the security zone around 

KSC. (W Post, Jan 28/85, All A3, A9; W Times, Jan 28/85, 3A, Jan 29/85,4A) 

February 5: In a speech today to the Washington chapter of the National 

Security Industrial Association, NASA Administrator James Beggs addressed 

the issue of NASA's role in assisting the Department of Defense (DOD) in 

national defense. After touching on the media attention given the recent 

secret launch of a military payload, Beggs said the fuss "stemmed, I believe, 

from a misapprehension that the nation's civilian space program was about to 

be taken over by the military. As one news organization put it sternly: 'The 

line is being crossed.' 

"Well, let me set the record straight:' he continued. "Nothing could be 

further from the truth. On the last mission we did what we always try to do. 

And that is to satisfy our commercial customers, be they civilian or military." 

Beggs went on to trace the history of U.S. military aeronautical develop 

ments and pointed out that many of the early astronauts were former military 

pilots and that almost 100 military detailees worked at NASA, mostly at 

Johnson Space Center USC). He also referred to other shared assets, including 

the KSC launch facilities, and to the aerospace technology that the military 

employed, practically all of which stemmed from a NASA-developed technology base. 

Beggs concluded by saying NASA and DOD's Space Shuttle program coop 

erative efforts began in 1969 and that DOD had priority on the Space Shuttle 

manifest for missions of national security. "Our challenge is to continue to 

work together to secure our future, on earth and in space." (NASA Release 

85-18) 

March 29 The Teal Ruby experimental spacebased aircraft detection system, 

which had encountered technical problems, would fly on the Space Shuttle 

around March 1986, Defense Daily reported. Defense Advanced Research 

Projects Agency (DARPA) Director Dr. Robert Cooper said DARPA had run 

into expected problems with the Teal Ruby flight sensor caused by heat leaks 

in the cryogenic system. The leaks posed two problems: they prevented the 

temperature of the instrument from getting low enough to provide necessary 

high sensitivity and threatened the one-year nominal life of the system. 

Cooper said the DARPA had found all leaks except one. 

Teal Ruby was the first largescale demonstration of a two-dimensional, 

staring mosaic infrared detector array and lightweight telescope optics. Its 

goal was to establish the technology base for future spacebased infrared 

surveillance systems capable of detecting aircraft and other low threshold 

targets against the earth's clutter background; it would dewlop a comprehensive radiometric background database and space qualify the advanced technologies embodied in its design. Teal Ruby would be the primary payload of 

the Air Force space test program satellite P80-1. (D/D, Mar 29/85, 167) 

317 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

lune 27: The first test of a Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) component on 

June 19 ended in failure when crew members of the Space Shuttle Discovery 

found themselves 180° out of position to receive an Air Force signal beamed 

at them from Maui, Hawaii; another beam of laser light was sent on June 21 

from the same spot, and it successfully bounced off a reflecting mirror on 

Discovery, which was flying at 17,500 miles per hour and 230 miles high, the 

Washington Post reported. 

It was not clear why Discovery was out of position for the first attempt or 

why the crew had not realized it in time to correct it. Flight directors at 

Johnson Space Center took the blame for what the newspaper called easily 

one of the worst navigating mistakes in more than 20 years of American 

manned space flight. 

After the successful attempt, the Air Force noted the test was not intended 

to solve any of the most difficult problems of setting up an SDI defense 

system, nor was it the first laser tracking test. Air Force Lt. Col. Thomas Meyer, 

manager of the laser test program, said the experiment was more a test to see 

how the atmosphere distorted the laser beam than a test of the beam’s ability 

to track the Space Shuttle, as atmospheric distortion could limit the usefulness of ground-based lasers against targets in space. 

In the June 21 attempt, the laser beam “painted” a blue-green light on the 

nose of Discovery for at least two-and+ne-half minutes, three times longer 

than the minimum time set by the Air Force. So tight and steady was the 

beam that it never wavered from the nose of orbiter, which measured 110 feet 

from nose to tail. “We were able to pulse the beam and change the size of the 

beam from a fine point a quarter of an inch across to a beam 30 feet across at 

the point where it tracked the shuttle:‘ Meyer said. “We did everything we 

wanted to do.” 

Discovery’s crew observed from the port windows the beam shining on 

them, which they could do without danger to their eyes due to the low power 

output of the four-watt beacon. 

“We demonstrated today that we can track a fast-moving target with a laser 

on the ground:‘ Meyer said. “Our next step is to perform the same kind of test 

with rockets fired to an altitude of 260 miles to see if ground-based lasers can 

stay with them all the way to altitude.” 

A far more difficult and important goal than tracking objects with lasers 

was the Pentagon’s plan to develop more powerful lasers as weapons. The 

Defense Department would test a 2-million-watt laser soon at White Sands 

Missile Range, and it was building a 5-million-watt laser. ( WPost, June 20/85, 

A3, June 22185, A3) 

September 5 NASA and the U.S. Air Force announced today that the Space 

Shuttle Atlantis would take off October 3 on its maiden voyage to carry a 

secret payload into orbit, the Washington Post reported. On board Atlantis, 

the fourth and final Space Shuttle in NASAls fleet, would be commander Karol 

318 
STS 

Bobko, pilot Ronald Grabe, mission specialists David Hilmers and Robert 

Stewart, and payload specialist Air Force Maj. William Pailes. 

Pailes, who has a master's degree in computer science and is an accornplished pilot, would be on board to tend the classified cargo. (WPost, Sept 6/ 

85, A12) 

September 9 Astronauts aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis, scheduled October 3 for its maiden voyage, would deploy two defense satellite communications system (DSCS-Ill) satellites to support all three military services and to 

carry a single channel transponder used to transmit emergency messages 

from the president to nuclear forces, the Washington Post reported the Federation of American Scientists said on September 9. 

The group said the classified mission could be determined by anyone 

including the Soviets, who carefully scrutinized public documents, and that 

it was revealing the payload because keeping the mission secret "inhibits 

public awareness and discussion of U.S. military activities in space." 

The group indicated it found reference to the satellites in various military 

publications, the most recent of which was a December 28, 1984, issue of 

Defense Daily that said two DCSCs would "be launched together next year 

on a single space shuttle mission, apparently on the Atlantis mission . . ." 

(W Post, Sept 10/85, A5) 

October 4: The military crew of the Space Shuttle Atlantis on mission 51-J 

deployed today two communications satellites for Department of Defense, 

the NY Times reported, citing reliable sources. After release from the Space 

Shuttle, the satellites, known as Defense Satellite Communications System 

(DSCS Ill) and weighing a ton each and measuring 38 feet long with solar 

panels extended, rocket engines boosted them to a point 22,300 miles above 

the earth. 

According to General Electric Co., which built the satellites but would not 

confirm their presence on the Space Shuttle, both satellites were strengthened to withstand radiation from distant nuclear blasts and had a device to 

send emergency action messages from the President to the nation's nuclear 

forces. 

The Department of Defense (DOD) scheduled Atlantis to land at Edwards 

Air Force Base on a date that was classified; NASA and DOD said they would 

announce the time of landing 24 hours in advance. (NY Times, Oct 5/85, 

A4 6) 

October 6 As five military officers on the Space Shuttle Atlantis orbited earth 

on the secret 51-J mission, a debate was growing in the U.S. over how much 

secrecy was necessary in the civilian-run space program and what the military's role in it should be, the NY Times reported. 

319 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Proponents of an expanded role for the Defense Department (DOD) said 

the U.S. needed to counter a growing Soviet threat in space. They pointed 

out that the USSR launched four to five times as many spacecraft a year as the 

U.S., with the majority of missions devoted to military objectives, and that 

Soviet military officers had logged years in space, while the US. military had 

logged days. 

Critics of an expanded DOD role said the U.S. already had an advantage in 

military space technology. They said U.S. systems worked better and lasted 

longer, pointing out the USSR was still trying to perfect a vehicle similar to 

the Space Shuttle. The critics also argued that the U.S. military’s assertions 

about the Soviet Union were often veiled excuses to try to edge civilians out 

of the astronaut corps and to classify the most mundane Space Shuttle payloads. This goal of secrecy, they said, was not heightened security but was 

intended to protect DOD’s plans and programs from public scrutiny. 

The debate was likely to become more vocal, the Timessaid, as the military 

expanded its manned space activity when secret military missions would 

account for 25 to 30% of all Space Shuttle flights in the next decade. 

Carl Sagan, professor of astronomy and space sciences at Cornell University, said there was a “fundamental tension” between open scientific inquiry 

and “the necessarily closed world of military activities . . . As military 

programs expand,” he said, “there’s a huge deflection of resources, financial 

and intellectual, from peaceful uses into the production of weapons.” 

Daniel Graham, a retired Army lieutenant general who formerly headed 

the Defense Intelligence Agency, disagreed, saying the military had been at 

the forefront of U.S. space exploration since its earliest days. “The myth since 

the Eisenhower Administration is that there’s a distinction between military 

and civilian matters in space,” he said. “That‘s a pretense that a lot of people 

in NASA would like to believe, that all their activities are sweetness and 

light,” he insisted. 

However, even military proponents saw emerging tensions in the manned 

space program, the Times reported. William Gregory, editor of Aviation Week 

& Technology said in an editorial, “The original legislation creating [NASA] 

specified a civilian space program, separate from the military . . . That line 

is being crossed now not so much as a formal policy change as out of simple 

economic necessity. The shuttle needs the military as a customer to spread 

the system’s overhead costs.” 

Some critics feared that NASA’s charter for free and open dissemination of 

scientific information was eroding as the military’s role grew. Scientists ineffectually protested last year when NASA announced that its Defense Department Affairs Division would review and possibly censor images from a large 

camera and radar carried on a civilian Space Shuttle mission. 

“There’s a real question of how the decision was made to move the space 

agency from being open to substantially closed,” the Times quoted Morton 

Halperin, director of the Washington office of the American Civil Liberties 

320 
STS 

Union. “What‘s at stake is the public’s right to participate in the process of 

making government policy.” (NY Times, Oct 6/85, Al) 

October 7: The Space Shuttle Atlantis on mission 51-J landed just after 10 

a.m. today at Edwards Air Force Base, ending a fourday flight operated under 

secrecy rules imposed by the Department of Defense (DOD), the Washington 

Post reported. “Of course, I can’t say anything about our mission,” said flight 

commander Karol Bobko, an Air Force colonel and one of five military men 

on the mission, “but I can say Atlantis performed superbly its first time in 

space. I’ve flown Challenger, Atlantis, and Discovery now, and I think that 

NASA really has quite a fleet of orbiters and that we have a great national 

asset here,” he added. 

NASA ground operations manager Fritz Widick said Atlantis was in “excellent condition” at the end of the 1.7 million-mile flight, although engineers 

were inspecting an underside area of the left wing to see if tile-insulation 

damage might have exposed its aluminum mainframe to reentry heat. Such 

heat might have discolored a region along the portside engine pod under the 

Space Shuttle’s tail. 

Widick said Atlantis’s brakes came through the 190 mph landing on the 

lake-bed with only “minor damage” to one of four brake assemblies on the 

main landing gear. 

Bobko appeared to apply minimum braking after landing into a stiff 

headwind that brought Atlantis to a stop on the center line halfway down the 

15,000-foot desert runway. 

Fewer than a dozen reporters and about two dozen NASA employees were 

present for the landing, an event that usually drew hundreds of spectators, the 

NY Times reported. The military gave just 24 hours notice of when the 

mission would end and had barred members of the public from watching. (W 

Post, Oct 8/85, A3; NM, Oct 8/85, C3) 

October 70: The US. Air Force announced today the military cargo that 

would fly aboard the first Space Shuttle flight launched from Vandenberg Air 

Force Base, citing as its reason public interest in the mission, the NY Times 

reported. The move was considered a major step toward making available 

more information about the entire flight, including views of the poles as seen 

during the Space Shuttle‘s polar orbit. 

Air Force Maj. Ronald Rand said the Department of Defense (DOD) ap 

prod dissemination of information about the payload because it was experimental and not designed to carry out an operational mission. He said there 

were two payloads: an assembly of six space physics experiments that would 

remain in the Space Shuttle’s open cargo bay and an experimental airplanedetecting experiment. 

“In light of the mounting Congressional and public interest in this historic 

first manned polar orbit and first west coast shuttle mission, we’ve made an 

32 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

exception to our policy with the understanding that we’ll continue to protect 

performance data and results of these two experiments,” Rand said. “This 

doesn’t mean we’ve changed our policy of classifying DOD payloads.” 

Flying aboard Discovery, which was scheduled for launch March 20, 1986, 

would be Comdr. Robert Crippen of the Navy; pilot Guy Gardner; astronauts 

Jerry Ross, Dale Gardner, and Richard Mullane; Under Secretary of the Air 

Force Edward Aldridge; Air Force Maj. John Brett Watterson; and a DOD 

specialist to tend the cargo. (NM, Oct 11/85, A6) 

Missions 

March 5: NASA confirmed successful launch on January 24 from KSC of the 

Space Shuttle with a Department of Defense inertial upper stage deployed 

and an aggregation of red blood cells experiment for the University of Sydney 

completed. Spacecraft orbital parameters were classified. The mission had 

lasted three days, one hour, and 33 minutes, with landing at KSC. 

Unusually cold weather, causing icing on the external tank, had delayed 

launch for one day. (NASA FOR M-989-51-C [post flight] Mar 5/85) 

April 72: NASA launched today at 8:59 a.m. from KSC the Space Shuttle 

Discovery mission 51-D, the 16th launch in the Space Shuttle program and 

the fourth flight of Discovery, the NY Times and Washington Post reported. 

Discovery carried a crew of seven, including Sen. Jake Garn (R-Utah), chairman of the Senate subcommittee responsible for the NASA budget. 

The launch followed a last minute repair for a salt water leak on the 

McDonnelI Douglas Corp. experiment, the continuous flow electrophoresis 

system to produce an unidentified hormone that couldn’t be manufactured 

on earth. Also, launch came 55 minutes later than scheduled and 55 seconds 

short of postponement because of clouds between 14,000 and 30,000 feet 

above the launch pad. Astronaut John Young, flying a training plane through 

the clouds, encountered rain. KSC officials then delayed launch because they 

did not want to risk getting the spaceship wet, which might cause erosion of 

critical heat-shielding material. When skies lightened and dried at 8:50, 

NASA resumed the countdown with no further interruption. 

After launch, Discovery reached an elliptical orbit ranging in altitude from 

185 to 286 miles, one of the higher courses achieved by the spacecraft. 

Discovery’s crew besides Sen. Garn were Air Force Col. Karol Bobko, making his second Space Shuttle flight, commander; Navy Comdr. Donald Williams, pilot; Dr. M. Rhea Seddon, Jeffrey Hoffman, and Navy Capt. David 

Griggs, mission specialists; and McDonnell Douglas Corp. engineer Charles 

Walker, payload specialist. 

322 
STS 

The astronauts deployed during early evening of launch day the Canadian 

Anik C-7 satellite, which then moved to a higher equatorial orbit. They 

would deploy on April 13 the Hughes Aircraft Co.’s Leasat 3, which the 

Department of Defense would lease and the Navy operate as part of a military communications network. The remainder of the mission would be devoted to medical experiments and a test of how mechanical toys behaved in 

space. 

Dr. Seddon began the first of the mission’s medical tests by taking echocardiograms of three of the crew members. There were no reports on Sen. Garn’s 

medical tests. In an effort to determine the causes and effects of space motion 

sickness, the Senator wore a waist belt with two stethoscopic microphones to 

record sounds his stomach and intestines made during digestion. His head 

and chest were wired to record electrical signals from his brain and heart; 

other instruments would measure the way his bones grew and shrunk in zero 

gravity. Also, he would perform exercises aimed at inducing nausea. (NY 

Times, Apr 13185, Al; W Post, Apr 12185, A6, Apr 13/85, All 

April 77: NASA terminated today efforts by the crew of the Discovery 51-D 

mission to revive the U.S. Navy’s Syncom IV-3 (Hughes Corp.3 Leasat 3) 

satellite, the Washington Post reported. Troubles with the satellite became 

apparent the morning of April 13 after astronauts M. Rhea Seddon and Jeffrey 

Hoffman completed commands that deployed the satellite from the Space 

Shuttle’s cargo bay. The satellite‘s engine, which would lift it into a permanent 

geostationary orbit 22,300 miles above earth, failed to fire. A fault in the 

satellite’s timing mechanism (which would direct the satellite through a series 

of steps to put the satellite into permanent orbit) apparently caused the 

fa i I u re. 

Johnson Space Center flight director John Cox said that NASA‘s best guess 

was that the “postdeploy sequencer (timer) never was activated. The reason 

we think so is that the antenna should have popped out about a minute and 

20 seconds after deployment, and the satellite should have been put into a 

15-rpm spin to stabilize it. Neither of those things happened.” 

Engineers at Hughes Aircraft Corp., satellite manufacturer, tried to simulate 

the conditions of the satellite failure in hopes of duplicating what had hap 

pened. “One of the astronauts might be able to get close enough to the 

satellite to move the lever to start the timing mechanism, then get out of there 

and inside in enough time to be far away from the satellite when the engine 

fires,” said Marvin Mixon, Hughes vice president. 

Astronauts maneuvered the Space Shuttle about 45 miles ahead of the 

satellite in order to take pictures of it; however, they could not draw too close 

because the satellite’s main engine contained 7,370 Ib. of solid rocket fuel, its 

second-stage engine had 4,092 Ib. of nitrogen tetroxide and dimethyl hydrazine fuel. The satellite also carried 352 Ib. of hydrazine for controlling its 

position in orbit. 

323 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NASA made the decision to extend the flight from five to seven days, and 

on April 15 the Discowry crew cannibalized plastic covers from flight manuals, parts of a window screen, nylon straps, and other paraphernalia in the 

spacecraft to fashion flyswatters to attach to Discovery‘s robot arm for an 

attempt to fire the satellite‘s engine. Seddon sewed the plastic covers together 

to form cones that the astronauts wuld attach to the arm in order to flip the 

arming lever. 

On April 16 astronauts Jeffrey Hoffman and S. David Griggs went on histo 

ry‘s first unrehearsed spacewalk to rig Discovery’s mechanical arm with the 

flyswatter devices. The two spent more than three hours in Discovery’s open 

cargo bay putting the extension “hands” on the 50-foot-long arm. 

At about 8:OO a.m. April 17, commander Karol Bobko and pilot David 

Williams manuevered Discovery to within 30 feet of the satellite. Then Seddon swatted at the four-in.-long power switch. Although she hit it at least 

twice-once so hard that part of the plastic broke-the lever didn’t move. 

Following the unsuccessful attempt, ground controllers order the Space 

Shuttle to move away and abandon the rescue attempt on the off-chance that 

the contact somehow might haw activated the satellite’s internal timer, which 

would cause its rockets to fire. 

Underwriters who had insured the satellite said the failure to either recover 

the satellite or boost it into an operational orbit would be a serious blow to 

the satellite underwriters business, Defense Daily reported. “If we have another major claim,” James Barrett, president of International Technology Underwriters, said, “the market would be very seriously injured by a total loss.” 

Hughes said the satellite was insured for between $80 and $85 million, and 

the space insurance market had already suffered three losses over the past 

year. (W Post, Apr 15/85, Al, Apr 16/85, All Apr 17/85, A7, Apr 18/85, Al; 

NYT, Apr 16/85, All Apr 18/85, 870; USA Today, Apr 16/85,3A; W Times,Apr 

18/85, 1A; D/D, Apr 16/85, 257) 

April 79: The Space Shuttle Discowry’s crew on mission 51-D landed the 

orbiter at 8:54 a.m. EST April 19 at KSC, a return characterized by the worst 

damage in 16 Space Shuttle missions-a burn-hole in a wing, two failed 

brakes, two blown tires, and at least 123 broken heat-shield tiles, the Marshall Space Flight Center‘s Star and the Washington Post reported. NASA 

scheduled the mission to last five days, but extended it by two days to give the 

crew a chance to correct a malfunction in the Hughes Leasat 3 satellite. 

The damage to Discwry could set back preparation for its next mission 

scheduled for June 12. NASA would have to replace protective tiles, probably 

damaged when the Space Shuttle lifted off through the rain [see Apr. 121. 

“There’s little question that we suffered more severe damage on this landing 

than on any other so faf Space Shuttle launch director Robert Sieck said. 

Concerning the brakes, Sieck said, “Brake damage we’ve seen on previous 

flights. Brake failure is something we’ve never seen.“ 

324 
STS 

NASA had waved off Discovery for a 7:16 a.m. landing because of rain over 

Cape Canaveral. One orbit later, Discovery headed down to KSC, where 

NASA told Commander Karol Bobko to land on runway 33 instead of 15 

because of sun glare. Bobko landed with no headwind to slow him, touching 

down at 231 mph, the fastest any Space Shuttle had landed. 

As Discovery rolled down the three-mile concrete runway, it encountered a 

nine-knot crosswind and began veering to the right. When Bobko corrected 

for the wind by braking one side, the strain apparently caused one of the 

inboard brake assemblies to lock. Moments later the inboard brake assembly 

on the other side also locked, causing rubber to burn. 

A burn-hole the size of a dinner plate nearly penetrated through aluminum 

on the Space Shuttle’s left wingtip where a landing flap apparently dislodged 

several protective tiles. 

Regarding the Leasat 3, a Hughes representative said initial belief that a 

lever failed to release was in error [see Apr. 181. Once Discovery had maneuvered to within 10 feet of the satellite, the crew reported the lever had 

released. The crew successfully snagged the lever twice to ensure it was fully 

released, and reported the only change in the satellite’s status was a slowing 

from two to one revolution per minute. 

The first congressional observer in space, Sen. Jake Garn (R-Utah), had 

difficulty negotiating the steps down to the runway and required assistance 

into the van that took the crew to the dispensary for medical examinations. 

There had been some controversy over his presence on the flight, including a 

NY Times editorial that said, “Having pressured NASA to give him his space 

trip, Mr. Garn is now indebted to the agency. That‘s a pity for those whom he 

represents in supervising NASA’s budget and its request to build an $8 billion 

space station.” However, Garn commented that “I’m carrying my own 

weight. I knew I had to prove myself . . . I’ve dealt with NASA for 10 years. 

I’m working on the space station right now, setting policy.” (Marshall Star; 

Apr 24/85, 1; W Post, Apr 11/85, B1, Apr 20185, Al; NM; Apr 20185, 22) 

April 29: NASA launched at 12:02 p.m. EDT today from KSC the Space 

Shuttle Challenger mission 51-8 carrying seven astronauts, Space!ab 3, 24 

rats, and two squirrel monkeys for the most intensive science mission to date, 

the Washington Post reported. Launched 17 days after Discovery left the same 

launch pad, the Challenger flight bested the previous “turnaround” record of 

34 days. 

Challenger carried the oldest crew ever to fly in space. Marine Col. Robert 

Overmyer, commander, was 49; Frederick Gregory, pilot, and Taylor Wang, 

payload specialist, were 44; Don Lind, mission specialist, was 54; Lodewijk 

van den Berg, payload specialist, was 53; William Thornton, mission specialist, was 55; and Norman Thagard, mission specialist, 41. The crew called the 

flight one by scientists for science. “This mission marks the first time that 

325 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

scientists who designed their own experiments will be executing those experiments in space,” said Lind, who had been waiting 16 years for the flight. 

The five scientists would work in around-theclock shifts on the 15 experiments inside the European-built Spacelab. 

Before liftoff NASA decided not to have the crew launch two Get-Away 

Special satellites, one a student experiment and the other a Pentago payload, 

because a ninevolt battery had failed on the last Space Shuttle flight. Ground 

tests showed that three other batteries from the same batch failed after 18 

hours in vacuum. The satellites would return to the ground with the Space 

Shuttle. 

The crew successfully deployed a satellite intended to calibrate air traffic 

control radars on the ground, but encountered difficulties when trying to 

deploy a U.S. Navy satellite that would locate drifting weather buoys. The 

satellite would not mow from the cargo bay despite repeated signals to 

trigger deployment. 

Later the crew discovered they had no fresh water from their galley faucet 

and had to bypass the faucet and reconnect themselves to their water supply 

using an all-purpose hose carried for such emergencies. Other problems 

ranged from an overheated hydraulic system power unit to a urine collection 

device that one crew member said sprayed water “all over the place.” 

The monkeys and rats appeared to be doing well. Four of the rats had 

surgical implants in their hearts to record changes in heartbeat and blood 

flow. The others were testing cages and equipment for future animal experiments. The monkeys were on a shakedown flight to determine how they 

tolerated living in orbit. If they didn‘t get nervous or frightened in space, later 

flights would carry squirrel monkeys with surgical implants to test for space 

sickness and heart changes. (W Post, Apr 28/85, Ala, Apr 29/85, A3, Apr 301 

85, A7) 

May2: The waste products of two monkeys and two dozen rats continued to 

float through the cabin of the Space Shuttle Challenger [see Space Transportation System/Missions, Apr. 291, forcing crew members to rearrange their tight 

schedules and operate in full surgical gear to clean up, the Washington Post 

reported. “Be advised we now have feces in the crew compartment and it 

isn’t much fun, guys:’ commander Robert Overmyer said to the mission 

control center in Houston. “How many years did we tell them these cages 

would never work?” 

With TV cameras recording the activity, Overmyer and mission specialists 

William Thornton, Norman Thagard, and payload specialist Lodewijk van 

den Berg, wearing surgical smocks, glaves, and masks, floated about the 

Spacelab cabin using vacuum cleaners to suck the waste out of the cabin air. 

At one pont Thagard said, “Even the vacuum cleaners aren’t enough.” 

The problems began on the day after liftoff with feeding the animals food 

and water. One rat had to be hand-fed a gelatin bar to get water into him; 

326 
STS 

when physician-astronaut Thornton tried to press food bars into the cage, the 

bars would crumble and a cloud of tiny particles would scatter in the cabin. 

“I’m not exaggerating:’ Thornton told mission control, “but there are food 

particles flooding out of every crack in those cages. I don’t see any way we 

can stop this except if we had a seal over the entire cage.” Monkey and rat 

feces also leaked out of the cages. 

The five scientists also could not deploy a French-built camera, intended to 

survey for 17 hours hot stars in distant galaxies, because an airlock hatch 

failed to open. And physicist Taylor Wang was unable to run an experiment to 

test behavior of drops of fluids in weightlessness because circuit breakers 

continually popped open. Nine of the 15 Spacelab experiments were running 

even better than hoped, and the crew described the monkeys and rats as “real 

clean and real happy.” 

On May 1, however, one of the monkeys got spacesick. “We can tell by the 

way he’s behaving that one of our monkeys is not feeling well:’ said Dr. Paul 

Callahan of Ames Research Center. “The other monkey was under the 

weather his first day in space but he‘s adapted very well since, which is an 

almost identical reaction we get from human astronauts.” Callahan noted 

“Monkey No. 1” was not eating and drinking normally, seemed to have a 

headache, and was generally lethargic and dispirited. “He’s just not moving 

around and the other monkey has begun to do somersaults.” 

Eleven of the Spacelab experiments were running by that time, although 

mission specialist George Fichtl said “One is a hit-and-miss kind of thing and 

three look very doubtful.” He added the astronauts had proposed to give up 

on the French-built widefield camera and that it was doubtful NASA would 

extend the mission to give the crew additional time to try to deploy it. 

On May 2 Fichtl explained that the rats’ and one monkey’s vigorous movement, which was “much more than expected:’ was likely the main reason 

their waste was escaping the cages. “We designed those cages with an airflow control to keep the waste in the cages:’ he explained. “Our best guess 

now is that the animals are so spirited and are enjoying weightlessness so 

much that they induced turbulence in the cage that’s too turbulent to contain 

the waste.” 

The problems with the animals cast some doubt over future animal flights 

on Spacelab, the Washington Postcontinued. NASA had scheduled for 1986 

a flight to carry 48 rats and four squirrel monkeys. However, Spacelab mission manager Joseph Cremin insisted that research on animals was crucial to 

the future of the permanent space station where men and women would have 

to work in orbit for months at a time. (WPost, May 1/85, A3, May 2/85, All, 

May 3/85, A3) 

May 6: Commander Robert Overmyer landed the Space Shuttle Challenger 

today on a lake-bed runway at Edwards Air Force Base, after it had caused two 

327 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

sonic booms that triggered burglar alarms and calls to police, the Washington 

Of the 15 experiments flown on Spacelab 3, 12 apparently operated successfully and two at least partially so. Among the successful experiments was 

photography of the Northern and Southern lights, which sent streaks of brilliant flashes at the extreme latitudes near the north and south polar regions at 

that time of year. Challenger’s crew photographed 18 auroras. Another successful device was a laser spectrometer that for the first time measured from 

orbit the ozone layer that protected the earth from the sun’s ultraviolet light. 

Crew members were able to restore two experiments that had initially been 

inoperable. One was an experiment to study the dynamics of droplets of 

fluids in weightiessness, the other an instrument that counted and measured 

cosmic rays striking Challenger in orbit. They were unable to deploy the 

widefield camera intended to study the ultraviolet light of hot stars. 

The afternoon of the landing NASA personnel removed the monkeys and 

rats in their cages for a flight to Kennedy Space Center, where researchers 

would kill and dissect the rats to examine their vital organs under a microscope for changes caused by weightlessness. 

Physician/astronaut William Thornton said they had brought back two 

monkeys that were even friendlier than they were before the flight-”Those 

primates are part of the crew right now,” he commented. During the flight, 

one of the monkeys experienced motion sickness for several days, requiring 

Thornton to feed it by hand. On May 4 the Greensboro News & Record 

reported that Thornton said, “Our feeding crisis is over. I wouldn’t haw 

believed the effect of a caring human hand.” 

However, on May 14 Overmyer told reporters at Johnson Space Center that, 

“NASA has a problem that NASA has to solve if we’re going to fly those cages 

again:‘ the W Post reported. “I never dreamed that all that stuff would come 

out of those cages and escape into our atmosphere” [see May 21. He added 

that the experience with the animals “never took away the luster” of space 

flight, a sentiment echoed by pilot Frederick Gregory, an Air Force colonel 

who became the first black astronaut to take the Space Shuttle’s controls. (W 

Post, May 5/85, A4, May 6/85, A3, May 7/85, All May 14/85, A3; Greensboro 

News & Record, May 4/85’ A4) 

Post reported. 

lune 77: NASA launched today from KSC Space Shuttle Discovery mission 

514 with a crew of seven, including Saudi Prince Sultan Salman Al-Saud 

and Patrick Baudry from France, for the 18th Space Shuttle flight, the Washington Post reported. 

Earlier NASA had announced that mission 514 would carry the automated directional solidification furnace (ADSF), Spartan 1, and the French 

echocardiograph (FEE) and posture (FPE) experiments. The objective of the 

ADSF was to provide a technology demonstration of the capability of the 

equipment to perform directional solidification of a magnetic composite 

328 
STS 

material and to study the role of gravitydriven phenomena in such processing. The apparatus used for the directional solidification experiments was a 

specially designed furnace that melted a sample contained in a quartz tube 

one cm in diameter and 35 cm long. A furnace module (a heater with an 

integral quench block) moved along the four tubes in the experiment so that 

the manganese-bismuth alloy samples melted and solidified at a controlled 

rate. Electric resistance provided the heat; the quench block was liquid 

cooled. In that first flight, all four samples were the same alloy with only the 

solidification rate changed to allow a better understanding of that aspect of 

the process. 

Spartan 1 was the first of a continuing series of low-cost free flyers designed 

to extend sounding rocket experiment capabilities. The Spartan 1 objective 

was to map the X-ray emissions from the Perseus Cluster, the nuclear region 

of the Milky Way galaxy, and the Scorpius X-2 (SCO-X-2). NAS4 had flown 

the Spartan 1 instrument several times on sounding rockets; the resulting 

information led to the need to obtain greater viewing time of the selected 

targets, thus permitting more detailed studies with greater resolutions. The 

crew would deploy the Spartan 1 from the Space Shuttle and retrieve it using 

the Canadian-built remote manipulator system. After deployment, the Spartan 1 would perform scientific observations for up to 40 hours via an onboard 

microcomputer controller that commanded all pointing sequences and satellite control. There was no command or telemetry link; when observing sequences were complete, the satellite "safed" all systems and placed itself in a 

stable attitude for retrieval. 

The objectives of the FEE and FPE, a part of a cooperative program with 

France, was to obtain on-orbit data regarding the response of the cardiovascular and sensorimotor systems to weightlessness. French payload specialist 

Patrick Baudry would perform the experiments with participation from other 

crew members including the Arabsat payload specialist. The USSR's July 

1982 Salyut mission had also flown the FEE system. 

By 4:30 p.m. June 17, Discovery's crew had successfully deployed a Mexican satellite, Morelos-7, the first of two identical satellites, which headed for 

a position 22,300 miles above the equator west of the Galapagos Islands. It 

would beam TV programs to the most remote regions of Mexico. (NASA 

Flight Operation Report M-980-514 [prelaunch] June 5/85, NASA MOR 

E-420-51 4-16 [prelaunch] June 7/85, MOR E-420-514-17 [prelaunch] 

June 5/85, MOR E-420-51 -G-18 [prelaunch] June 13/85, MOR-989-51 -G 

[postflight] July 3/85; W Post, June 18/85, A3) 

Duringlune: NASA announced that the Space Shuttle mission 514 would 

carry three communications satellites, a deployablehetriwable Spartan 1 

spacecraft, and six Get Away Special canisters. The orbiter Discovery would 

fly several middeck experiments including one for the Strategic Defense 

Initiative (SDI) organization and a materials processing furnace. 

329 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The Mexican spacecraft, Morelos-A, was a version of the Hughes HS 376 

satellite, a number of which had already been deployed from the Space 

Shuttle. Morelos-A was the first of two domestic communications satellites 

that would provide advanced telecommunications to the more remote parts 

of Mexico. 

Arabsat-A, owned by the Arab Satellite Communications Organization 

and built by Aerospatiale, would provide telecommunications links between 

the member nations. 

A U.S. domestic communications satellite owned by American Telephone 

and Telegraph (AT&T), Telesfar 3-0 would provide telecommunications services to the continental U.S., Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. 

All three spacecraft would first springeject from the orbiter's cargo bay, 

then on each a small attached payload assist module would ignite about 45 

minutes after deployment to propel the satellites to transfer orbits out as far as 

22,300 miles above earth. A second small rocket motor would then fire on 

each spacecraft to circularize the orbits, placing the spacecraft in geosynchronous orbits. 

Three of the six Get Away Special canisters contained West German payloads for study of materials processing in space and behavior of liquid propellants. A fourth canister contained a U.S. Air F0rcdU.S. Naval Research 

Laboratory investigation of the ultraviolet radiation environment in space. A 

fifth canister had a package of nine student experiments in biological and 

physical sciences. A Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) investigation of a 

developmental heat transfer system was in the sixth canister. A capillary 

pumped loop (CPL) experiment, it was the first flight of a CPL two-phase 

thermal control system. The advanced development and flight experiments 

section of the thermal engineering branch at GSFC developed the CPL (NASA 

Release 85-83) 

july 29: NASA launched from KSC at 5:OO p.m. EDT today Space Shuttle 

mission 51-F with the orbiter Challenger carrying Spacelab-2. The flight was 

the eighth for Challenger and the 19th Space Shuttle mission. The flight 

commander was Col. C. Gordon Fullerton, who served as pilot on the third 

Space Shuttle mission. Air Force Col. Roy Bridges, Jr. was pilot; mission 

specialists were Dr. Anthony England, a geophysicist; Dr. F. Story Musgrave, a 

physician; and Dr. Karl Henize, an astronomer who at the age of 58 was the 

oldest American to travel in space. Payload specialists were Dr. Loren Acton, 

a solar physicist at the Lockheed Palo Alto Research Laboratory, and Dr. John 

David Bartoe, an astrophysicist at the Naval Research Laboratory. 

Approximately 5 minutes and 45 seconds after launch onboard computers 

shut down Challenger's center engine (SSME 1) due to failure of the orbiter's 

two high-pressure, fuel tu rbo-pu m p discharge tern peratu re sensors. Challenger was 70 miles above earth at the time, about 50 miles below the orbit 

considered safe for a manned spacecraft. 

330 
STS 

The two remaining main engines ran smoothly and burned about a minute 

and 10 seconds longer than originally planned, putting the Space Shuttle into 

a lower-than-scheduled orbit. 

The crew then used two auxiliary engines to raise the orbit in steps from an 

initial 122 miles to 194 miles at 10:30 p.m. the night of launch. The crew also 

dumped as much as 4,400 Ib. of fuel to achieve the higher orbit. 

In explaining the problem with SSME 1, NASA associate administrator Jesse 

Moore said the onboard sensors first indicated that the center engine might 

be overheating four minutes after liftoff, the Washington Post reported. 

"Computers then ordered the center engine fuel pump to bypass one valve 

and use another to feed fuel into the combustion chamber," he said. Two 

minutes later computers again sensed that the fuel pump was overheating 

and automatically shut down the center engine.The mission control center in 

Houston also received indications of dangerously high temperature readings 

on a second engine and instructed the crew to disconnect a backup sensor to 

prevent the second engine from shutting down before the spacecraft reached 

orbit. 

The crew encountered the next problem when attempting to operate a $60 

million telescopepointing device. The instrument pointing subsystem (IPS) 

and its four solor telescopes were one of 13 experiments carried on the 

European-built Spacelab-2. Mission specialist Henize told mission control 

that the pointing attempts were "rather dismal," the NY Times reported. 

Lee Briscoe, flight director, elaborated to reporters. "It appears that we are 

able to find the sun, find the stars, get into what we call a rough track mode," 

he said. "But we never appear to get into a fine track and actually finish the 

total tracking." 

Since the problem appeared to be with the computer programming that 

drove the unit, NASA radioed up a new wrsion of the programming. However, it initially failed to correct the problem, and NASA told the crew to try 

harder. Eventually the IPS operated successfully after the crew inserted a 

series of software patches developed at Marshall Space Flight Center. NASA 

extended the mission duration by one day to allow additional collection of 

engineering and scientific data. 

The Spacelab-2 aboard Challenger was the second of its two verification 

test flights and consisted of an igloo attached to a lead pallet, the IPS 

mounted on it and a two pallet train behind, with an experiment special 

support structure. Experiments conducted during the Spacelab-2 mission 

were in the fields of life sciences, plasma physics, infrared astronomy, highenergy physics, solar physics, atmospheric physics, and technology. Experiments were located on the IPS, the three pallets, the special support 

structure, the orbiter middeck, and one on the ground (NASA FOR M-989- 

51-F [postflight] Sept 27/85, [prelaunch] July 9/85; NASA MOR M-977-51- 

F-03 [prelaunch] July 1/85; Wfost, July 30/85, Al, July 31/85, A3; NYTJuly 

31/85, 84) 

33 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

August 6: The orbiter Challenger on Space Shuttle mission 51-F landed at 

12:46 p.m. PDT today on Edwards Air Force Base‘s Mojave Desert lake-bed 

runway, the Washington Post reported. During the flight, Challenger circled 

the earth 127 times, a distance of a little over three million miles. 

Technicians stood by at the runway to remove immediately the heat sensors 

from Challenger‘s main engines to check a NASA theory that the sensors 

caused the premature shutdown of the center rocket engine during the July 

29 launch. NASA was confident enough that the sensors would be found at 

fault that it had equipped Discovery’s engines with redesigned sensors before 

moving it August 5 to the launch pad. 

During the mission, Challenger became an orbiting astronomical observatory with more than $72 million of telescopes and other instruments to study 

the sun, stars, and distant galaxies. The NY Times reported that Dr. Burton 

Edelson, NASA associate administrator, said, “We met more than 80 percent 

of all science objectives of this mission. We‘re absolutely delighted.” 

Dr. Eugene Urban, chief mission scientist, added, “Ewryone has collected 

tantalizing new data. It‘s going to take a long time before this data is analyzed 

and really fully appreciated. We’w made some interesting new observations, 

and some have been wry spectacular.” 

Jesse Moore, NASA associate administrator, commented that the orbiter 

appeared to be in good shape after the landing, the eighth for the Challenger. 

“It was a beautiful landing:’ he said. “The tiles looked very good. The brakes 

look excellent. The orbiters continue to be magnificent flying machines.” (W 

Post, Aug 7/85, A3; NYJ Aug 7/85, All 

August 27: NASA launched Discovery on Space Shuttle mission 51-1 today 

through the worst weather of the Space Shuttle program, the NY limes 

reported. After two postponements in three days because of bad weather and 

a computer failure, Discovery barely got off the ground before the darkening 

clouds moved over the launch pad and the rain descended in torrents. 

“We could see large holes in the system 50 or 100 miles across so we 

prayed for the breaks that would let us thread the needle when the time 

came:’ launch director Robert Sieck said later. “We had two things in our 

favor: There was no lightning in the cloud cover, and most of the rain was 

south of the launch pad, not right over it.” 

Launch directors gambled that rain would not be falling on the pad at liftoff 

time, which was delayed three minutes to make sure the gamble was the right 

one. As heavy rain fell on the press site three miles to the west, Discovery 

roared away from the pad through a hole in the clouds and sped into the air 

10 minutes before the pad was pelted with rain. 

Commanding the flight was Air Force Col. Joe Engle, who commanded the 

second Space Shuttle test flight in 1981 and on August 26 turned 53. Air 

Force Lt. Col. Richard Covey was pilot; mission specialists were John Lounge, 

Dr. James van Hoften, and Dr. William Fisher. 

332 
STS 

A malfunction encountered two hours into the flight forced the astronauts 

to deploy a day early one of the three satellites in the orbiter‘s cargo bay. 

During a cargo inspection by remotely controlled cameras, a shield that was 

to protect Australia’s AUSSAT 1 from direct exposure to sunlight stuck in a 

partly open position. An astronaut then used the Space Shuttle’s mechanical 

arm to nudge the sunshade completely open so they could release the springloaded satellite. Any delay of more than six hours could have resulted in 

radiation damage to the exposed satellite’s electronics. 

Less than five hours after deploying the Australian satellite, Discovery’s 

crew deployed ASC 7 for the American Satellite Co. The second deployment 

marked the first time a Space Shuttle crew deployed two satellites in one day. 

(NY7; Aug 28/85, D18) 

August 28: Already far ahead of their work schedule, astronauts aboard 

Discovery on Space Shuttle mission 51-1 began preparing tools they would 

use in an attempt to revive the US. Navy Leasat 3 satellite, the Washington 

Post reported. 

Mission planners had hoped the satellite repairs could be made during an 

August 30 spacewalk, but they added another spacewalk for August 31 because ground tests showed that the Space Shuttle crippled robot arm could 

not work fast enough to complete the repair job in one day. 

“It appears we are faced with a two-EVA (extravehicular activity) plan:’ 

flight director Bill Reeves said. He blamed a failed circuit that prevented 

Discovery‘s robot arm from operating in an automatic mode. Reeves noted 

that ground tests showed that the robot arm, when operated manually, would 

need about 75% more time to maneuver the Syncorn 3 satellite and that it 

would take two 6-and-a-half hour spacewalks to complete the repair. 

Mission specialists Dr. James van Hoften and Dr. William Fisher spent 

about four hours August 28 checking out electronic gear they would use to 

repair the satellite. 

Mission specialist john Lounge would work the robot arm from inside the 

cockpit, while van Hoften and Fisher worked outside on the satellite. The 

robot arm would play a crucial role, holding van Hoften in place while he 

worked on the satellite 35 feet above the cargo bay. 

Lounge would also use the robot arm to help van Hoften turn the satellite 

so Fisher, standing in foot restraints inside the bay, could remove a panel and 

disengage a timing lever, then plug two electrical cables into the panel and, 

in effect, jump start the satellite. (W Post, Aug 29/85, A3) 

August29 Astronauts aboard the Space Shuttle Discovery on mission 51-1 

took time August 29 to observe Hurricane Elena, the Washington Post reported. Commander Joe Engle took photos of the storm, a dense white 

circular mass that stretched across almost half of the Gulf of Mexico, and 

noted a second storm in the western part of Gulf. 

333 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Among the contingencies NASA faced was the possibility that the storm 

could strike the Houston area and knock out communications with the Johnson Space Center. A NASA spokesman said they could quickly switch operation to the Goddard Space Flight Center. 

The crew also that day launched the Syncom IV-4 satellite, which was 

almost identical to the satellite the crew would attempt August 30 to salvage. 

(W Post, Aug 30185, A3) 

September3: Discovery and its five-man crew on Space Shuttle mission 51-1 

landed at 9:16 EDT today at Edwards Air Force Base after a sevenday mission 

[see Aug. 271, the Washington Post reported. During the mission, the crew 

deployed AUSSAT- 1 for the Australian government, ASC-1 for the American 

Satellite Corp., and Leasat 4 for Hughes Communications (reports indicated 

Leasat 4 had lost its UHF communications link). In addition, the crew successfully retrieved and repaired the Leasat 3 originally deployed on STS 51- 

D. 

Later Hughes issued a statement saying “Leasat 3 is under full control by 

Hughes’ ground command, and telemetry data continued to confirm the 

good health of the satellite. The liquid propulsion systems are intact and the 

solid propellant perigee kick motor temperatures appear to be rising gradually toward acceptable levels,” the JSC Roundup reported. 

Jesse Moore, NASA associate administrator for space flight, said after the 

mission that “I would have to characterize this mission as near to perfect as 

you can get. It was a perfect mission from the outset, one that shows America’s space program at work.” 

Moore added that he hoped there would be only two more Space Shuttle 

landings in California before pilots could resume landing in Florida. NASA 

switched to Edwards Air Force Base landings after brakes failed and a tire 

blew out in an April landing on Kennedy Space Center’s concrete runway. (W 

Post, Sept 4/85, A7; JSC Roundup, Sept 13/85, 1) 

October 3 NASA launched at 11:15 a.m. today from KSC the Space Shuttle 

Atlantis, the maiden voyage of the orbiter and the 21 st mission in the Space 

Shuttle program, on mission 514, a secret flight for the Department of Defense (DOD), the NY Times reported. The secrecy was part of DOD‘s efforts 

to make it difficult for the Soviet military to monitor the Space Shuttle takeoff 

and find out the identity and mission of the payload. Despite these precautions, it was widely reported that a primary goal of the flight was to launch a 

pair of $100-million military communication satellites. DOD apparently 

planned to station the satellites, designated DSCS Ill for Defense Satellite 

Communications System, 22,300 miles above earth, where they would relay 

messages to U.S. military forces around the world. 

334 
STS 

The commander of Atlantis was Air Force Col. Karol Bobko, flying his third 

Space Shuttle mission; the pilot was Air Force Lt. Col. Ronald Grabe. Other 

crew members were Maj. David Hilmers of the Marine Corps, Army Lt. Col. 

Robert Stewart, and Air Force Maj. William Pailes. The first four were members of NASA's astronaut corps; Pailes was an Air Force pilot assigned to the 

mission to assist in deploying its secret payload. 

In accordance with security rules, NASA gave out little information about 

the flight. There were no space-to-ground communications released to the 

public and no postlaunch news conference. Nearly five hours after the 

launch, mission control in Houston said, "On the maiden voyage of Atlantis, 

the crew is doing well and all systems on board the orbiter are performing 

satisfactorily." NASA officials said it would issue no other status reports during the mission, which might last a week or more. 

Atlantis was the lightest and most advanced of the four orbiters. In its 

planning and construction, engineers removed minor design flaws found in 

earlier versions and incorporated the latest in electronic technology and 

light-weight, high-strength structural materials. NASA strengthened Atlantis 

mainly so it could withstand more vigorous launchings from the Air Force's 

facility at Vandenberg Air Force Base. These launches, which would take the 

Space Shuttle into orbits around the earth's poles, required greater thrust from 

the Space Shuttle's engines. 

Although the mission was devoted to the military, NASA officials said there 

was a civilian experiment on board to study exposure of the orbiter and its 

crew to cosmic rays, which were extremely high-energy particles from space 

that bombarded the earth and the orbiting Space Shuttles. (NY Times, Oct 31 

85, A18, Oct 4/85, 85) 

October 30: NASA launched at noon today from KSC the Space Shuttle 

Challenger on mission 61-A, a planned sevenday flight carrying Spacelab 

D-1 (for Deutschland) and the largest Space Shuttle crew ever, the NY Times 

reported. The West German Aerospace Research Establishment paid NASA 

$65 million to have the 22nd Space Shuttle and ninth Challenger flight 

devoted fully to the Spacelab experiments. 

Americans on board were commander Henry Hartsfield, jr.; Air Force Lt. 

Col. Steven Nagel, pilot; and mission specialists Dr. Bonnie Dunbar, a biomedical engineer, Marine Corps Col. James Buchli, and Air Force Col. Guion 

Bluford, jr., who had a doctorate in aerospace engineering. The two West 

Germans in the crew were Dr. Ernst Messerschmid and Mr. Reinhard Furrer, 

both physicists. The eighth crew member, Dr. Wubbo Ockels, a physicist 

from the Netherlands, represented the European Space Agency (ESA), which 

provided several scientific instruments in the Spacelab. The Europeans had 

prime responsibility for conducting the experiments; Bluford and Dunbar 

would assist them. 

335 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Spacelab D-1, designed, built, and checked out in Europe, was flown to 

KSC for installation in Challenger's cargo bay. The West German space agency's center in Oberphaffenhofen, near Munich, controlled scientific operations during the flight; ground control for flying the Space Shuttle was in 

Houston, as usual. Spacelab D-1 carried 76 experiments on racks that lined 

its walls. German researchers designed most of the experiments, which were 

for German and other foreign universities, research institutes, and industrial 

enterprises as well as ESA and NASA; other experiments were from France, 

Spain, Italy, Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, and the U.S. All 

experiments were intended to take advantage of the weightlessness of space 

to study various processes that were normally affected by gravity. The Washington Post reported that West German officials said Spacelab was a major 

step toward what they hoped would be a larger laboratory module attached 

to the permanently manned space station that NASA envisioned for the 

1990s. 

Most experiments were in materials processing. Along two sides of the 

Spacelab, the experiments were in racks containing small furnaces for heating metals and making alloys that were lighter and stronger than anything 

produced in full gravity of earth. Other materials processing experiments 

would study the flow of liquids in weightlessness; yet others would grow very 

pure and large crystals that could lead to improvements in electronic semiconductors. 

In a variety of life sciences experiments, the crew would study the growth 

of plants (corn and lentils) under microgravity conditions. Other studies were 

on how embryos of frogs and insects developed in weightlessness. Crew 

would use tadpoles for tests on how weightlessness might affect the develop 

ment of vestibular, or balance, organs in vertebrates. 

EWs vestibular sled ran down a pair of rails in Spacelab's center aisle. 

Experimenters would accelerate and tilt crew members riding in the chairlike device to test how the human balance system in the inner ear responded 

to weightlessness and a moderate gravity force, because it was thought the 

inner ear, which relied on gravity to function normally, might be the source of 

astronauts' motion sickness. 

Crew would use instruments in the cargo bay outside the Spacelab for 

navigation tests, such as synchronization of atomic clocks in space with those 

on the ground, checking for any discrepancies caused by weightlessness, and 

precise distance measurements by radio signals between the Space Shuttle 

and the ground. 

To accommodate the crew of eight, NASA installed an extra sleep station, 

bringing the total to four. Crew would conduct laboratory work in shifts 

around the clock. 

Despite early concern over the condition of the Space Shuttle's steering 

jets, mission control gave the Challenger the go-ahead for orbital operations. 

Later the mission control flight director said a valve malfunction prevented 

336 
STS 

the flow of fuel through one line to Challenger’s steering jets, but NASA 

considered an alternate line sufficient for regular operation to maneuver 

Challenger. 

Flight controllers also reported erratic temperature readings on one of the 

three fuel cells that generated electricity, but with crew supervision the affected unit was operating at full strength. (NASA Release 85-145; NASA 

MOR M-989-61-A [prelaunch] Oct 28/85; NY Times, Oct 31/85, B13; W 

Post, Oct 31/85, A301 

November 2 At the halfway point in Space Shuttle mission 61-A in which 

the orbiter Challenger carried Spacelab D-1 [see Space Transportation System/Missions, Oct. 301, a slow air leak in one of Spacelab’s vacuum chambers developed, but flight controllers in Houston did not consider it serious, 

the NY Times reported. Terry White, a public affairs officer at Mission Control, said the oxygen leak was so slight that, “provided there are no additional 

fluctuations, we have enough gases to go to the end of the mission.” 

After encountering some Spacelab equipment malfunctions during the 

mission’s first two days, Challenger’s crew indicated they had achieved encouraging success with nearly all of the Spacelab‘s 76 scientific experiments 

on the effects of microgravity on metals, biological growth, and human 

physiology. Mission planners in Houston and scientists at the West German 

science control center near Munich were studying the possibility of extending the flight by a day to permit more time for experimentation. 

The crew reported preliminary results showing that, as expected, seedlings 

growing in the virtual absence of gravity developed roots that curved in odd 

directions. “The roots, lacking gravity, do not seem to know which way to 

go,” a crew member commented. In another experiment, the Bacillus subtilis 

bacteria showed a higher rate of growth than anticipated. Mission control 

scientists said this “may be taken as an indication that bacteria do react 

differently in space.” Most of the studies in processing metal alloys and 

growing crystals for electronics were still underway, so results were unavailable until completion of the mission. 

Earlier in the mission, crew member Dr. Ernst Messerschmid, a West German physicist, reported being “disoriented” when he awoke, a symptom of 

the space motion sickness that had plagued nearly half of all Space Shuttle 

astronauts. (NYT, Nov 3/85, A27) 

November 6 The Space Shuttle Challenger on mission 61-A landed at 9:44 

a.m. today at Edwards Air Force Base, the NY Times reported, before an 

estimated audience of 9,000. “The bird fspace flight, said at a post-landing 

news conference. “The brakes look like it‘s in good shape,” Jesse 

Moore, NASA’s associate administrator good coming in and we are very, very 

pleased with the results of the nosewheel steering test.” 

337 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

During the landing, Challenger commander Henry Hartsfield tested a new 

steering mechanism built to reduce tire and brake damage that had occurred 

during several Space Shuttle landings. An orbiter had not landed at Kennedy 

Space Center (KSC) since the previous April, when both main landing gears 

collapsed and one tire blew out. The test called for Hartsfield to engage the 

new steering mechanism seconds after the nosewheel touched down on the 

runway so he could steer Challenger 20 feet off course and then bring it back 

to the centerline. One more successful test later in the year would clear 

orbiters to resume landing in December at KSC. 

Officials in West Germany, which paid NASA $64 million to fly Spacelab 

D-1 on Challenger, called the mission “highly successful” and predicted that 

90 to 95% of all the science studies would be completed. Earlier, a West 

German official at the science control center near Munich said only one 

study, a heat diffusion test on a sample of salt, would be unfinished by the 

time Challenger returned to earth. 

Crew members Dr. Bonnie Dunbar, Col. Guion Bluford Jr., Dr. Ernst Messerschmid, Dr. Reinhard Furrer, and Dr. Wubbo Ockels did not attend a 

postflight press conference, the Washington Post reported, but traveled to 

Dryden Flight Research Center where researchers would run tests on them to 

determine how well they readapted to gravity after a week in weightlessness. 

Later the five would go to Kennedy Space Center for more elaborate tests. 

The European Space Agency (ESA) announced after the flight that it was 

particularly satisfied with results from Spacelab D-1, on which ESA had 38% 

of the payload in terms of critical resources (mass, energy, and crew time). All 

ESA facilities on Spacelab D-1-the Space Sled, for studies of man’s behavior 

under microgravity conditions; the Biorack, a multi-purpose facility for biological investigations of microgravity and cosmic radiation effects on life 

forms; and the Fluid Physics Module, for studies of basic fluid phenomena in 

space-performed perfectly with no operational or technical failures. (NASA 

FOR M-989-61-A [postflight] Nov 8/85; NYT, Nov 7/85, A21; WPost, Nov 

6/85, A4; ESA release Nov 11/85) 

November 26: NASA launched at 7:29 p.m. today from KSC the Space Shuttle Atlantis on mission 61-8 to practice methods for building a space station 

and to launch three satellites, the Washington Post reported. People more 

than 400 miles away in South Carolina and Key West, Florida, saw the 

launch. There had been only two other previous U.S. night launches: in 1972 

when the Apollo 17 crew left for the moon in the middle of the night and in 

1983 when the Space Shuttle Challenger departed in early morning. 

Nine minutes after launch, mission control reported Atlantis was in a 

secure orbit about 200 miles high, and launch director Gene Thomas said 

the countdown was the smoothest yet in the Space Shuttle program. 

Crew onboard Atlantis were Lt. Col. Brewster Shaw, commander; Lt. Col. 

Bryan O’Connor, pilot; mission specialists Dr. Mary Cleave, Maj. Jerry Ross, 

338 
STS 

and Lt. Col. Sherwood Spring; and payload specialists Rudolfo Neri Vela 

(Mexico‘s first astronaut) and McDonnell Douglas engineer Charles Walker. 

During the mission the crew would launch Mexico’s Morelos B satellite, 

Australia’s AUSSAT 2, and RCAs Satcorn KU-2. Jerry Ross and Sherwood 

Spring would also take two long spacewalks to assemble 93 aluminum struts 

into a &-foot beam and six 12-foot beams into a 64-lb. inverted pyramid to 

test techniques that might be used to build the proposed permanently 

manned space station. Following each spacewalk, the mission specialists 

would disassemble and stow the beams. Cameras would record every move 

so that later a computer could reduce the photos to a motion study that 

engineers would use to determine how construction work could best be 

performed in the zero gravity of outer space. (NASA Release 85-153; W Post, 

Nov 27/85, A3) 

November 27: Astronauts aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis on mission 61-8 

today launched satellites for Mexico and Australia, the Washington Post 

reported. 

The crew launched Mexico’s Morelos B in the morning, just hours after 

liftoff. Morelos B was a Hughes 376 satellite, a standard design used by many 

foreign national and private companies, Kennedy Space Center‘s Spaceport 

News said. It would provide telephone, TV, and wire services to Mexico 

through a total of 22 transponders. A PAM-D payload assist module then 

boosted the satellite to geosynchronous orbit 22,300 miles above earth. The 

satellite would drift, unused, until it reached it final stationary position in 

1989. Mexican officials chose to store Morelos B in orbit because launch cost 

for the satellite could increase to four times the amount that Mexico paid to 

NASA for today’s deployment. Payload specialist Rudolfo Neri Vela, the first 

Mexican astronaut, was onboard to observe satellite deployment. In June 

1985 crew in the orbiter Discovery deployed the first Morelos satellite. 

At 8:20 p.m. the Australian satellite AUSSAT 2 spun out of the Atlantis’s 

cargo bay. “We got a good deploy,”.said mission specialist Sherwood Spring, 

who supervised the satellite’s spring ejection. “It looked like it might have 

gone a second early,” he added. AUSSAT 2, also a Hughes 376 satellite, was 

the second of three operations satellites for the government-owned Australian National Satellite System. It had eleven 12-watt transponders and four 30- 

watt transponders to provide domestic communications to Australia’s 

15-million population. Australia would also use the satellite to improve maritime and air traffic control communications, relay digital data for business 

purposes, provide standard telephone communications, and direct satellite 

to home TV broadcasts. A PAM-D would also boost the satellite to geosynchronous orbit. In August 1985 the Discovery crew deployed the first AUSSAT. 

Mission commander Brewster Shaw had tested all systems aboard Atlantis 

and reported that one of four videotape recorders was not working. Mission 

339 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

control gave him permission to take apart an electronic cabinet to look for a 

wiring flaw, but Shaw said he could not see anything that was obviously 

wrong. Later, following directions from the ground, Shaw cycled a circuit 

breaker and reported, “Bingo. That seems to get power to VTR1.” (W Post, 

Nov 28/85, A28; Spaceport News, Nov 22/85, 4) 

November 28: Crew aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis on mission 61-B 

celebrated Thanksgiving in space today, saying it was one of the best Thanksgivings they ever had, the Washington Times reported. It was the first U.S. 

manned spaceflight during that holiday since the third Skylab flight in 1973. 

The crew’s main job for the day was deployment of the 4,144-lb. SATCOM 

KU-2 satellite owned and operated by RCA American Communications 

(RCA Americom). The uninsured $50 million satellite was the last of three 

KU-brand domestic communications satellites that operated in the 12 to 14 

gigahertz range. It had 16 operational transponders and six spares, each 

transmitting 45 watts of power, more than the 12 to 30 watts used for C-Band 

transponders. 

The payload assist module (PAM) on the satellite was instrumented with 

radio frequency telemetry that would downlink data to ARIA (advanced 

range instrumentation aircraft) during burn of the solid-fuel rocket motor, a 

mission requirement for this first flight of a PAM-D2, the Kennedy Space 

Center Spaceport News explained. The uprated upper stage was identical to 

the PAM-D, except for size and weight. The spinup would be noticeably 

slower due to the larger mass and inertial components of the payload. NASA 

designed PAM-D2 to place up to 4,200 Ib. in geosynchronous orbit, compared to the 2,800-lb. PAM-D version. 

The crew’s dinner menu-chicken consomme, smoked turkey, cranberry 

sauce, green beans, corn, pasta, butter cookies, and lemonade-sounded 

traditional, but the turkey was preserved before launch by irradiation, sealed 

in foil, and had to be heated in a device similar to a toaster oven. Crew added 

warm water to the consomme, vegetables, and pasta to make them edible. 

(W Times, Nw 29185, 3A; Spaceport News, Nw 22/85, 4) 

November 29 Astronauts Jerry Ross, an Air Force Major, and Sherwood 

Spring, an Army Lieutenant Colonel, aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis on 

mission 61-B took 40 minutes to erect a 45-foot-high tower with 93 aluminum struts and 33 joints, the Washington Post reported. After breaking down 

the tower and stowing the parts, they assembled a 400-lb. inverted pyramid 

out of six 12-foot-long aluminum beams. They built and broke down the 

pyramid eight times in less time than they were given for six. By the end of 

their task, they were assembling the pyramid in nine minutes and breaking it 

down in less than six minutes-three minutes faster than their first assembly 

and disassembly. By 9:30 p.m. they had done in four hours a job given them 

to complete in five. 

340 
STS 

NASA referred to the first activity as ACCESS (assembly concept for construction of erectable space structures), researchers at Marshall Space Flight 

Center explained, and the second as EASE (experimental assembly of structures in extravehicular activity). Together they were the first flight demonstration of construction of large space structures, so called because they were 

distinguished by different assembly methods and physical characteristics. 

The astronauts used no tools in the construction, rather they snapped together prefabricated components to form the EASVACCESS structures. 

EASVACCESS should provide NASA with valuable on-orbit construction 

experience as well as a comparison of assembly rates and techniques used in 

space to those used during simulations on the ground and in neutral buoyancy water tank tests. The activity should also help evaluate potential assembly and maintenance concepts and techniques for the proposed space station 

and identify ways to improve erectable structures to ensure productivity, 

reliability, and safety. 

Tv views at NASA Headquarters showed the astronauts trading places 

twice during their work and appearing in almost complete control of a job 

that had never been done before in space. Ross had the only complaint, 

saying his gloved hands were sweating and that he was using too much 

oxygen. 

When the two had finished assembling the six required pyramids, astronaut David Leetsma at mission control told them to take a break. “I’d be 

willing to do at least one more:’ Ross replied. “It feels good to do some good 

hard work.” The two then proceeded to begin work again. 

Spring once hit his feet against the tower, and Ross by mistake hit a switch 

with his hand that turned on an outside light, the only “accidents” that 

occurred during the exercise, although they triggered a warning from Atlantis’s commander Brewster Shaw, Jr. “You guys are going great but just remember to be careful. The way that thing shakes up there, it‘s not going to be easy 

to chase anything down if it breaks loose:’ he cautioned. ( WpOsf, Nov 30185, 

Al; Marshall Space Flight Center Release 85-60) 

December 7: Astronauts Maj. Jerry Ross of the Air Force and Lt. Col. Sherwood Spring of the Army today stepped outside the Space Shuttle Atlantis on 

mission 61-B for the second construction exercise in the weightlessness of 

space [see Space Transportation SystedMissions, Nov. 301, the NY Times 

reported. To TV viewers on earth, the two appeared to manipulate with ease 

the heavy structures they were building, although both were sweating and 

breathing heavily after the first 20 minutes of work. Two hours into the 

spacewalk, they reported that though their hands, feet, and backs were moist 

with sweat, they were working comfortably. 

The purpose of today’s spacewalk was the same as previously, to test the 

efficiency of techniques to build a 45-foot-high aluminum tower. However, 

341 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

the astronauts changed the way they worked and had the assistance of astronaut Dr. Mary Cleave, who was operating the Space Shuttle’s 50-foot mechanical arm. She moved the men from place to place as their work required. 

Later in the exercise, the Washington Post reported, Ross and Spring took 

turns stringing cable along the four-story metal frame they had constructed, 

just as future crews might lay cable for a space station. They also removed 

parts of the tower and replaced them with other parts, simulating a space 

repair. 

NASA officials commented after the first spacewalk on November 30 that 

the work had proved more taxing than expected, perhaps because the astronauts’ gloves, unlike the rest of their spacesuits, were not air-conditioned and 

could not carry away excess heat. Most of the work had entailed repeated 

squeezing and twisting with the hands. Ross and Spring said after the exercise that they would not want to repeat it before having a day of rest. They 

indicated that the activity had left their hands so numb and fatigued that they 

had trouble fastening the airlock of the Space Shuttle as they reentered it. 

NASA officials did note they were favorably surprised by the astronauts’ 

rapid improvement in performance as they learned from successive repetitions of the exercise. (NU, Dec 2/85, 86; W Post, Dec 2/85, A3) 

December 2 In their last full day aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis on 

mission 51-8, the crew concluded an array of experiments and prepared for 

their scheduled landing at Edwards Air Force Base, the NY Times reported. 

Answering questions radioed from reporters at Johnson Space Flight Center, 

the astronauts reported progress not only in working out space station construction techniques, but also in developing a gravity-free pharmaceutical 

factory to be based on the proposed space station. 

Payload specialist Charles Walker of the McDonnell Douglas Corp. was in 

charge of the experiment for development of a space-based factory for purification of a human hormone produced by genetically engineered bacteria. 

Astronauts on previous flights had tested the basic purification technique, 

called continuous-flow electrophoresis in a gravityfree environment; the current experiment simulated an actual production run of the hormone, which 

might prove useful in treating certain forms of anemia. 

During the questioning, astronauts Lt. Col. Sherwood Spring and Maj. Jerry 

Ross acknowledged that they were extremely fatigued after each of their 

spacewalks and that their hands were stiff and numb after the practice assembly, manipulation, and disassembly of a 45-foot-long truss and a pyramidal 

module. Nevertheless, the two deemed the exercise a success. “We don’t 

know yet what this will mean for a future space station:’ Spring commented, 

“hut it‘s a start. Personally, it was really exhilarating for me out there, face to 

face with the universe.” (NM, Dec 3/85, C3) 

342 
STS 

December 3 The Space Shuttle Atlantis on mission 61 -B landed at 1 :33 

p.m. Pacific time today on the concrete runway at Edwards Air Force Base 

before 6,700 spectators, the NY Times reported. NASA selected the concrete 

runway because a week of rain had left scattered puddles on the usually dry 

lake bed runways. 

’Atlantis looks beautiful,” Jesse Moore, NASPls associate administrator for 

space flight, said after the landing. Apart from “a few dings” around the ship’s 

nose and landing gear, he added, there appeared to be “no unusual damage. ” 

It was the second mission for the Atlantis, the newest in NASPls fleet of four 

orbiters. The crew described all aspects of the flight as highly successful. 

(NYT, Dec 4/85, B6) 

Revenues 

lanuary 15: During NASPls general management status review, the office of 

space flight reported on the agency objective to undertake a pricing and 

marketing strategy that would capture for the STS a dominant percentage of 

the planned free-world, commercially launched payloads, as measured 

yearly by payments for launch reservations, through the end of CY 88. 

R. Wisniewski, assistant associate administrator, noted that a NASA recommendation for fullcost recovery sent to the White House would likely undergo close scrutiny. He anticipated strong competition as NASA marketed 

the Space Shuttle capability, with 28 to 36 STS launches of the approximately 

58 planned payloads through 1988; Ariane would capture a sizeable portion 

of the remaining launches. Wisniewski reported $140 million in Space Shuttle receipts in FY 84 and predicted $188 million in Space Shuttle revenue in 

FY 85. (GMSR Report, Jan 15/85, 35) 

February 7: NASA Administrator James Beggs told the US. House Science 

and Technology Committee that the agency’s launch service’s market position had eroded “very severely” and that he had to be “a little bit pessimistic” 

about NASA’s ability to hold a lion’s share in the future, Aerospace Daily 

reported. Beggs made the comment in response to a question about the need 

for a 5th Space Shuttle orbiter. 

During the previous 14 months, NASA had won five new commercial 

launches; The European Space Agency‘s (ESA) Ariane, five. Beggs said the 

Europeans were “coming along very aggressively” in using the Ariane 4 and 5 

vehicles to improve launch capabilities and that agreement by ministers attending the ESA council meeting [see European Space Agency, Feb. 41 to 

further Ariane 5 development “was significant.” (AD, Feb 7/85, 1) 

343 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

kbruary 25: NASA Administrator James Beggs criticized the Air Force and 

NOAA for plans to launch some satellites aboard surplus Titan II missiles 

rather than using the Space Shuttle, saying it would cost NASA $500 million, 

the Mshingron Post reported. “You know the old syndrome:’ he said, ”if it 

wasn’t invented here [at the Air Force] it can’t be all that good . . . I don’t 

like it. It is not good for our short-term future and makes it that much more 

difficult for us to get on an ewn footing in the next five years.” 

The controversy had begun with an Air Force decision to refurbish and 

rededop obsolete Titan II intercontinental ballistic missiles to launch up to 

12 Air Force satellites that NASA had assumed would be flying on the Space 

Shuttle. 

When NOM heard of the Air Force decision, its acting administrator, 

Anthony Calio (a former NASA official), had contacted the Air Force about 

launching Over the next seven years three advanced weather satellites, called 

Metsats, into polar orbit. When questioned, Calio had said the Air Force 

offered a deal that would save NOAA $90 million-it would cost $100 million to redesign the Metsats to fly on the Space Shuttle and $105 million in 

launch fees versus an Air Force charge of $115 million for the three Titan II 

launches, resulting in a net saving of $90 million. “This agency has a budget 

of $1 billion a year so we’re talking about 10% of our annual budget. This is 

strictly a business deal,” Calio concluded. 

Beggs responded that he always assumed the Air Force and NOAA would 

use the Space Shuttle, although they had not signed a formal agreement. He 

said he did not believe NOAA would save that much and that the Air Force 

would bear the refurbishment cost to redevelop the Titan II, estimated by 

Beggs at $100 million. 

“I believe what we’re talking here is a savings to NOAA and a net loss to the 

U.S. Treasury,” Beggs said. ‘7 think this whole scheme should be looked at 

vvry carefully by the administration and by Congress.” And he mentioned his 

concern that the Air Force plan could set a dangerous precedent. (W Post, 

Rb 25/85, Al) 

May 27: A fare war had broken out in space, fortune reported, and Arianespace, a consortium of European gmrnments and private companies that 

operated the European-built Ariane rocket, was grabbing communications 

satellite launches away from the U.S. Space Shuttle by aggressively underpricing it. Although NASA had launched 30 satellites, nine aboard the Space 

Shuttle, over the previous four years and the Ariane less than 12, the Europeans would become major competitors, Fortune predicted. 

A Space Shuttle launch cost $25 million; Arianespace charged $24 million. And Arianespace had cut that price by as much as $3 million to lure 

some U.S. customers. Arianespace officials said its throwaway rockets were 

more efficient at the single task of launching satellites than was the complex 

Space Shuttle, which NASA had designed to perform a range of scientific and 

344 
STS 

military missions. “Using the shuttle for launching satellites:’ Charles Bigot, 

director of Arianespace, said, ”is like flying a supersonic Mirage jet fighter 

when all you need is a puddle jumper.” 

American entrepreneurs who wanted to get into the satellitelaunching 

business complained that prices charged by both Arianespace and NASA 

were ridiculously low as a result of government subsidies. Transpace Carriers 

Inc., for example, held the rights to buy the Delta rocket from its manufacturer McDonnell Douglas Corp., but couldn‘t launch a satellite for less than 

$45 million. 

The U.S. Department of Transportation, which wanted to encourage private 

Companies like Transpace Carriers, was encouraging President Reagan to set 

Space Shuttle launch rates high enough to make the commercial launches 

profitable. So the future of the launch business, Fortune said, would rest with 

President Reagan’s decision on Space Shuttle pricing-and on Arianespace’s 

reaction. If Reagan boosted Space Shuttle launch fees, it would please entre 

preneurs anxious to get into the space business. But that would also give the 

Europeans a bigger opening into the space business than they’ve had so far. 

(Fortune, May 27/85, 138) 

August I: The White House announced that it had sent Congress a new 

Space Shuttle pricing policy that entailed, starting October 1, 1988, auctioning the Space Shuttle’s cargo bay to commercial and foreign customers at a 

minimum rate of $74 million for a full bay, the Washington Times reported. 

This meant that owners of three satellites could share a mission and pay 

NASA a little less than $25 million apiece or about $1 million more than they 

presently paid for Space Shuttle launches. However, if demand for shuttle 

space exceeded its availability, the auction system would drive prices up 

ward. Europe’s Arianespace SA charged $25 million for a launch. 

President Reagan, who earlier had suggested that space should be open to 

private enterprise and that the Space Shuttle might be turned over to industry, 

directed NASA under the new policy to establish auction procedures “to 

ensure maximum return to the government and equitable treatment for all 

potential launch customers.” The President also told NASA to review annually Space Shuttle costs and the effectiveness of its pricing policies and report 

its findings and recommendations to the president‘s national security adviser 

and the director of the Office of Management and Budget. 

The new policy represented a victory for NASA and defeat for the Transportation Department and Secretary Elizabeth Hanford Dole, who had argued 

for a full-bay price no lower than $129 million in order to encourage private 

industry to get into the launch vehicle business on its own, the Washington 

Two companies wanted to compete with NASA and Arianespace. General 

Dynamics signed a letter of intent with NASA to use the Atlas-Centaur rocket, 

and Transpace Carriers Inc. signed a similar letter to use the Delta rocket to 

Post reported. 

345 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

launch satellites. Both companies said they could not compete with a Space 

Shuttle price of less than $40 million to send up a single satellite. 

The Transportation Department argued for a higher Space Shuttle launch 

price to improve private industry’s bargaining power. But NASA said a higher 

charge would send customers to Arianespace, which had booked more than 

a third of the world’s future commercial satellite launch traffic. (W Ernes, 

Aug 2/85, 1OC; W Post, Aug 7/85, A3) 

September 77: Hughes Communications Inc. said today it would negotiate an 

approximately $180 commitment with NASA for launch by the Space Shuttle 

of six communications satellites, including two for a new Japanese network, 

after receiving proposals from NASA and from Arianespace for its expendable 

Ariane launch vehicle, Aerospace Daily reported. Hughes indicated selection of the Space Shuttle was based solely on cost and was not related to the 

recent Ariane 3 failure [see European Space Agency, Sept. 121. 

Space Shuttle flights scheduled for December 1987 and May 1988 would 

launch HS-393 Ku-band satellites that Hughes was building for the Japan 

Communications Satellite Co. UCSat). Hughes reserved between 1988 and 

1990 four slots for placement of HS-393s over the U.S. 

Hughes Communications owned 30% of JCSat, a joint venture licensed the 

previous June by Japan’s Ministry of Post and Telecommunications to construct and operate a two-satellite system to serve Japan. The Japanese trading 

companies C. ltoh and Co. Ltd. and Mitsui and Co. Ltd. owned 40% and 

30%, respectively, of the joint venture. (AD, Sept 18/85, 1) 

October 18: A controversy between the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) and NASA [see Space Transportation System/Revenues, Feb. 251 appeared over when NOAA agreed to launch meteorological 

satellites (Metsats) into orbit in return for which NASA would give NOAA a 

discount for carrying the satellites into orbit aboard the Space Shuttle, the 

Washington Post reported. 

A deal between NOAA and the Air Force that would have saved NOAA $90 

million in launch costs never went through, in large part because NASA and 

NOAA began working behind the scenes to bury the hatchet, the Post said. 

The previous week NASA Administrator James Beggs sent Anthony Calio, 

NOAA administrator, a letter outlining a deal governing three Metsat 

launches starting in 1989. 

NASA agreed to share with NOAA the $80 million cost of modifying the 

Metsat for a Space Shuttle launch, to put a Metsat on a Space Shuttle within 

three months after NOAA asked for it, and to shave $6.5 million off the $105 

million in feed NASA ordinarily would charge NOAA for the three launches. 

“We gave them a good price,” Beggs said. “They’re on the shuttle at what 

essentially is our cost for launching them.’’ (WPost, Oct 18/85, A21) 

346 
STS 

October 29: The U.S. House Appropriations Committee deleted $7.2 million 

in FY 86 funds requested by the Air Force to initiate a $350 million program 

to refurbish Titan I1 ICBMs for use as space boosters, Defense Daily reported. 

The committee warned that the Titan I1 launchers could “only have a 

further impact on the Shuttle and result in a less efficient use of Shuttle 

facilities” and pointed out that the Air Force had “not been able to demonstrate why the expensive Titan II refurbishment program is critical to the 

defense of the nation.” 

The Committee also noted that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration dropped its plans to launch some payloads on the Titan II in 

favor of launching them on the Space Shuttle [see Space Transportation SystedRewnues Feb. 25 and Oa. 181, “bringing into question whether Titan II 

is costeffective on a per launch basis:’ the committee said. It also cited 

classified reasons for its action. (D/D, Oct 29/85, 305) 

Nwmber 12: Frederic J.P. d’Allest, chairman of Arianespace, told the US. 

Senate science, technology, and space subcommittee the previous week that 

his firm offered satellite insurance at lower than market rates to those using 

the Ariane rocket to launch their satellites, the Washington Times reported. 

The insurance covered only the booster phase of a satellite launch. 

Arianespace charged between 11 and 13% of the total value of the launch 

for insuring an Ariane launch from lift off to geostationary orbit, that portion 

of the flight under Arianespace’s control. Satellite operators had to go to 

commercial insurance markets to obtain coverage for the rest of a satellite’s 

operation. 

More than $600 million in losses from the failure of sewn satellites in 

almost two years had resulted in a tightened insurance market that was 

seriously threatening commercial space projects. Satellite insurance firms 

had cut back on the amount they would commit to insure launches, while 

boosting premiums to more than 20% of the total insured value of the 

launch. The subcommittee before which d’Allest testified was investigating a 

possible federal role in easing the insurance problem. However, commercial 

underwriters warned the subcommittee that the federal government should 

stay out of the insurance business. 

“In my viewy James Barrett, president of International Technology Underwriters, said, “there is no role for government to play in this commercial 

market. Intervention can only disturb normal market processes.” He noted 

the solution to the problem was impraved reliability of satellite manufacturers and launch agencies. “Insurance . . . cannot compensate for unacceptable levels of reliability:’ he commented. (W Times, Nov 12/85, 7C) 

December 12: NASA announced it reached agreement with the Department 

of Defense (DOD) on a pricing and reimbursement policy for DOD use of 

347 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

the Space Transportation System during the period FY 89 through FY 91. The 

agreement established an average price of $60 million (in 1982 dollars) for 

each DOD launch, an average which was based on the estimated cost to fly 

and an exchange of launch and range support services between DOD and 

NASA. 

The price reflected a fixed-base component of $30 million for each 

planned flight and an incremental component of $30 million for each actual 

flight. The annual fixed-based component total-$270 million a year, based 

on DOD projections of nine equivalent flights-would be paid regardless of 

the number of actual flights, while the $30 million incremental component 

would be paid for each actual flight. 

By combining a fixed annual charge with a low variable cost per flight, the 

agreement insured that NASA would be able to cover its funding needs and 

DOD would continue to rely on the Space Shuttle as DOD’s primary space 

launch vehicle. (NASA Release 85-169) 

Scient if ic Research 

january 14: NASA announced that Space Shuttle flight 51-C would carry the 

first of two experiments to investigate effects of different diseases on red 

blood cell aggregation and blood viscosity. The experiment was originally 

scheduled for mission 51-A in November 1984 but withdrawn due to orbiter 

weight and center-of-gravity considerations. The Department of Defense 

(DOD) had agreed to add the experiment to 51-C, a dedicated DOD mission. 

Called aggregation of red blood cells (ARC), the experiment would determine rate of formation (kinetics) and internal structure and organization 

(morphology) of red cells and the thickness (viscosity) of whole blood at 

high- and low-flow rates. Healthy donors and donors with various medical 

conditions such as heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, and cancer would 

provide blood samples. Researchers would compare results obtained in microgravity with results from a simultaneous and identical ground-based experiment to determine what effects gravity had on the kinetics and 

morphology of the blood and, therefore, whether researchers could use 

information obtained in microgravity to formulate new diagnostic tests or 

improve existing tests for the benefit of clinical research and medical practice. 

Flight hardware, weighing about 165 Ib. and installed in three middeck 

lockers in the crew cabin, would consist of a container housing a blood 

pumphtorage subsystem, parallel plate slit capillary viscometer, photo/optical subsystem, thermal control system, pressure transducer, and an electronics equipment package to provide automated control and data acquisition. A 

348 
STS 

crew member would activate the experiment; the electronics package would 

automatically operate all other procedures. Running time would be about 

eight hours. 

Dr. Leopold Dintenfass of the Kanematsu Institute (Department of Medical 

Research), Sydney, Australia, had developed the experiment and experiment 

hardware. Marshall Space Flight Center had responsibility for the flight experiment. 

After landing, data from the flight experiments would be delivered to Dintenfass for analysis and comparison with ground-based experiment data. 

(NASA Release 85-6; NASA MOR E-420-51-C-21 [prelaunch] Jan 23/85) 

January 18: NASA announced that the Department of Defense (DOD) had 

agreed that Space Shuttle mission 51-C, scheduled for launch January 23, 

1985, from KSC, would carry the Australian aggregation of red blood cells 

[see Jan. 141 and shuttle storable fluid management demonstration (SFMD) 

experiments. NASA had scheduled both for previous missions, but withdrawn them due to orbiter-weight and center-of-gravity considerations. 

The SFMD, a joint NASAMartin Marietta Aerospace/U.S. Air Force experiment, would test how weightless fluids behaved in transit from one tank to 

another to demonstrate the transfer of fluids planned for servicing and maintaining spacecraft in orbit. Space Shuttle crew would manually operate the 

experiment, consisting of 13-in.diameter clear acrylic supply and receiving 

tanks, with a series of valves in which pressurized air would force fluid to and 

from transparent tanks, a video tape recorder and 35mm still camera photographing the operation and an accelerometer measuring any motion caused 

by the orbiter that affected the experiment. (NASA Release 85-10) 

February 74: NASA indicated it might remove squirrel monkeys from an April 

30 Space Shuttle flight because the species carried a herpes virus known to 

cause cancer in some subhuman primates, the NY Times reported. 

Research had shown the virus could not survive in high-order primates, 

including humans, and NASA officials emphasized it was not one of the 

forms known to cause a variety of ailments in humans. The agency had spent 

more than a year trying to assess the risk possibilities to astronauts. (NM, Feb 

14/85, 88) 

March 22: Adm. James Watkins, speaking to reporters after a ceremony during which astronaut Thomas Mattingly was promoted to commodore and 

named to head the Navy Space Program Office, said that a Navy oceanographer who had traveled on a Space Shuttle flight the previous fall had brought 

back "some fantastically important" information that would make it easier for 

U.S. submarines to hide in the world's oceans, the Washington Postreported. 

349 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Watkins said the oceanographer, whom he would not name but was known 

to be Paul Scully-Power, a civilian who worked at the Naval Underwater 

Systems Center, New London, Connecticut, said the information was vital in 

trying to understand the ocean depths. When asked if satellite technology 

might not be hastening the day when submarines could be tracked from 

space, Watkins acknowledged that technology was opening some doors on 

submarine tracking. However, he pointed out that the question was whether 

doors opened on detecting submarines faster than doors opened on learning 

about the oceans depths. He added that “we’re still ahead of the game in the 

latter category. 

“So the ability to track submarines-we don’t see that as being a threat to 

our forces until the turn of the century or later, depending on what kind of 

breakthroughs we might find at the end of this decade or into the next:’ 

Watkins concluded. (W Post, Mar 22/85, A101 

March 27: NASA had scratched four squirrel monkeys scheduled to be carried into orbit by the Space Shuttle Challenger in April because NASA found 

they had a form of herpes that could be transmitted to the astronaut crew, the 

Washington Post reported. 

The monkeys’ herpes, called Herpes Samirii, was not the virus transmitted 

sexually by humans, but was unique to New World primates whose natural 

habitat was the rain forests of South America. Researchers suspected the virus 

of causing cancer in lower mammals such as rats and therefore classified it as 

potentially cancerous in humans. NASA replaced the monkeys with those 

from colonies bred to be virus-free. 

Four monkeys recruited from the National Institutes of Health and one 

from Harvard Uniwrsity had been in training since January for their flight on 

the second mission of Spacelab, scheduled for April 29 at the earliest. Dr. 

Arnauld Nicogossian, NAWs chief of space medicine, said they were looking for a sixth monkey even though only three might be flown. “One of the 

monkeys in training is too small and will haw? to be replaced, and it will be 

nice to haw a backup when the time comes for them to go into orbit:’ he 

said. 

In space the monkeys‘ cages would haw their own oxygen and food and 

water supplies in the Spacelab portion of the Space Shuttle’s cargo bay, which 

was shut off from Challenger‘s cabin by an airlock. The upcoming flight was a 

shakedown cruise for the monkeys to ascertain that their cages functioned 

properly and to make sure the monkeys wouldn’t get frightened or injured 

during launch or return to earth. (Washington Post, Mar 27/85, A20) 

April 12: NASA announced that the American Flight Echocardiograph (AFE), 

sponsored by the life sciences division of NMs space science and application office (OSSA) and developed by the medical sciences division at Johnson 

350 
STS 

Space Center, would fly on STS 51-D, the first of three planned flights of the 

equipment with follow-on activity determined by data results. 

The objective of AFE was to obtain data on in-flight cardiovascular changes 

during space flight. Most changes seemed to result from the shift of body 

fluids out of the legs and into the chest and head in weightlessness. The brain 

apparently detected this shift and interpreted it as an increase in blood 

volume. Normal responses to this “overload” were an increase in urination 

and a decrease in thirst, reducing blood volume from an acceptable level. 

Other effects of weightlessness included changes in heart size, an increase 

in the amount of blood pumped by the heart, and a decrease in the resistance 

to the flow of blood through the arteries. Most of these latter changes were 

normal responses to weightlessness; however, when combined with the reduced blood volume, they made effective functioning on return to earth 

difficult. 

Determining the important cardiac and vascular changes during adaptation 

to weightlessness and during the readaptation to gravity after a flight would 

reveal how the cardiovascular system responded to unusual stresses. This 

would be valuable in the development of more effective countermeasures to 

the detrimental effects of spaceflight and in understanding the functioning of 

the circulation in general. 

The AFE equipment used very high frequency sound waves (echocardiography) to obtain in vivo cardiodynamic structural and functional data. A 

probe held next to the skin sent high-frequency sound waves (ultrasound) 

through the skin and into the body. It then detected their reflections, or 

echos, from organ surfaces. The electronic circuitry of the echocardiograph 

calculated the distance travelled by the ultrasound pulse from the delay 

between the transmission of the pulse and the detection of its echo. 

Dr. M. Rhea Seddon, a co-investigator on the project, had trained to use the 

AFE to image her own heart from several different angles. Every day in flight 

she would record her own echocardiogram and those of up to three other 

crew members as time and circumstances permitted. Dr. Seddon would ob 

tain the first echocardiogram as soon as possible after orbital insertion and 

midway through and prior to sleep on the first flight day. 

During the three flights on AFE, NASA planned to acquire data on about 10 

crew members, along with pre- and postflight data. (NASA MOR E-420-51- 

D-14 [prelaunch] Apr 12/85) 

April 72: NASA announced that the Phase Partitioning Experiment (PPE), 

sponsored by the microgravity science and applications division of the office 

of space science and applications (OSSA) and developed and managed by 

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), would fly on STS 51-D in a locker used 

by payload specialist Sen. Jake Garn, who would take sole responsibility for 

the operation of the PPE. 

351 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Phase partitioning was a selective yet gentle and inexpensive technique for 

the separation of cells and proteins. It required establishing a two-phase 

system by adding various polymers to an aqueous solution containing the 

materials to be separated (two-phase systems were similar to the immiscible 

liquids oil and water). After establishment of such two-phase polymer systems, the biological materials they contained tended to partition into the 

different phases. 

Theoretically, phase partitioning should separate cells with significantly 

higher resolution than was obtained in the laboratory. Performing the experiments in orbit should provide a long-term weightless environment that would 

help control the separation of the phases and obtain better fractionation of 

biological cells. Although the interaction of the cells and phases could be 

done in a slower and more controlled manner in weightlessness, there remained the problem of combining the phase emulsion back into the two 

separated phases without the effects of gravity. The PPE would examine this 

problem through two methods: natural coalescence and preferential wetting 

to localize the separate phases. 

The PPE equipment was a small hand-held unit weighing 427 g (one Ib.). 

MSFC researchers fabricated the unit from plastic materials with transparent 

sides so that there were 15 separate small chambers, each with its own 

stainless steel mixer ball, allowing for simultaneous study of a number of 

experimental variables. After shaking the unit to achieve an emulsification of 

the phases in the chambers, photographs over the next 45 minutes would 

record the progress of the separations. The PPE operator would note transient 

phenomena not recorded by the camera. Researchers hoped the procedure 

could be repeated three times during the flight. (NASA MOR E-420-51-D13 [prelaunch] Apr 12/85) 

April 12 NASA announced that a protein crystal growth (PCG) experiment, 

sponsored by the microgravity science and application division of the office 

of space science and applications (OSSA), would be flown on STS 51-D in a 

middeck locker used for the McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Corp.’s continuous flow electrophoresis system (CFES). CFES payload specialist Charles 

Walker would operate the PCG experiment. 

Detailed knowledge of their composition and structure was extremely important to understanding the nature and chemistry of proteins and Douglas’s 

ability to manufacture and/or modify them for medical uses. However, for 

most complex proteins, it was not possible to grow on earth crystals of 

sufficient size and quality to allow analyses by X-ray or neutron diffraction 

techniques. Researchers believed growth of such crystals would be possible 

in the weightlessness of orbital spaceflight where gravitydriven convection 

currents were minimized and where the crystals remained suspended during 

their growth cycle. The PCG experiment hardware would accomplish this. 

352 
STS 

After reaching orbit, Walker would manipulate the small PCG unit to mix 

about 30 pairs of solutions. Near the end of the flight, he would prepare the 

unit for reentry and stow it in the equipment locker. Upon return to earth, 

NASA would send the unit to MSFC for analyses by the principal investigator. 

Results of the analyses would determine the schedule for further flights. 

(NASA MOR E-420-51-D-15 [prelaunch] Apr 12/85) 

May 29: Dr. Paul Scully-Power, the first oceanographer to orbit the earth, said 

today at a Baltimore meeting of the American Geophysical Union, that he 

had observed previously undetected spiral currents in many parts of the 

world’s oceans while he was aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger, the NY 

Times reported. Oceanographers at the meeting said these eddies introduced 

an entirely new dimension to studies of ocean dynamics. 

Scully-Power had seen the eddies, for example, throughout the Mediterranean and between the east coast of the US. and the Gulf Stream; they were 

typically about 25 miles wide, far smaller than large eddies observed in the 

Gulf Stream. It was the great prevalence of these swirls, whose origin was yet 

unexplained, that astounded scientists. 

ScullyPower said he did not know how long each eddy survived, but 

guessed it might be days or weeks. Nor did he know how deeply into the 

ocean they extended. 

At the meeting, Scully-Power displayed one photograph of five such spirals 

in the eastern Mediterranean, all aligned in a single row. (NY7; May 31/85, 

A15) 

lune 19: NASA announced that it signed today with Instrument Technology 

Associates (ITA) an agreement for ITA to develop for use on the Space Shuttle 

flight hardware consisting of a standardized experiment module (ISEM) payload carrier, a turn key module for use by any commercial firm, government 

agency, research organization, or educational institution wishing to conduct 

experiments in a microgravity environment. An organization could purchase 

or lease all or part of the ISEM. 

Under the agreement, NASA would provide ITA with two Space Shuttle 

flights to obtain data and validate the ISEM design. NASA had scheduled for 

late 1987 the first ISEM test that would carry a payload for the Bioprocessing 

and Pharmaceutical Center of the Philadelphia University City Science Center. 

ITA would design the ISEM to be compatible with the proposed space 

station with the idea that initial users of the module would progress to larger 

and more sophisticated payloads to fly in the future aboard the station. 

(NASA Release 85-94) 

353 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

August 1: Astronauts aboard the orbiter Challenger on Space Shuttle mission 

51-F released today a six-and-a-half-foot-long drum-shaped satellite, the 

Plasma Diagnostics Package, from the orbiter's payload bay, shot it with a 

looping beam from an electron gun, and then retrieved it with the Space 

Shuttle's 50-foot mechanical arm, the NY Times reported. 

One purpose of the demonstration was to study the electrical effects the 

Space Shuttle had as it moved through the electrically charged gases of the 

ionosphere, effects which occasionally caused the Space Shuttle to emit a 

soft golden glow. Researchers considered solving that riddle important to the 

success of future mission, which would carry sensitive instruments that the 

aura might disturb. 

Another goal was to achieve a better understanding of the aurora, known in 

the northern hemisphere as the northern lights, which was a disturbance in 

the atmosphere that created bright lights in the night sky over polar regions. 

The astronauts reported seeing flashes of light as the beam followed natural 

magnetic lines to the satellite, the Washington Post reported; the newspaper 

said scientists on the ground called the demonstration "a fabulous success." 

(NYT Aug 2/85, D14; W Post, Aug 2/85, A4) 

October 14: Wesley Hymer, a biochemist at Pennsylvania State University 

and one of 20 researchers who analyzed tissue samples from 24 rats flown 

aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger in April, said today the rats suffered 

significant reductions in the release of growth hormones, the NY Times 

reported. The findings could signal a problem for astronauts, in that weightlessness could affect the ability of special cells in their pituitary glands to 

produce growth hormones that govern development and maintenance of 

muscle and bone tissue. 

Richard Grindeland, a researcher at NASA's Ames Reseach Center, reported 

the previous month that the same rats lost bone and muscle strength. Grindeland said that they "were limp, like dishrags," and that dissection revealed 

"very drastic changes" in bone and muscle strength. However, researchers 

would need more test results before they could link growth hormone reduction to muscle and bone atrophy, Hymer said. But he added, "I think there's 

probably a good chance that there is a relationship." 

After a battery of tests that included implanting normal rats with growth 

hormone cells from the space rats, Hymer noted a reduction of up to 50% in 

release of the hormone. "Something is radically changed in those pituitary 

glands as a result of the space flight:' Hymer said. And he added, "I think the 

surprising thing was these changes occurred so quickly. They happened in 

seven days in flight." 

However, Hymer said researchers did not know if astronauts suffered the 

same kind of changes. "I can tell you that there are data that show that the 

blood levels of growth hormones in the astronauts from Skylab were reduced 

by a significant amount:' Hymer said. 

3.54 
STS 

Hymer planned to send growth hormone cells, some of which would 

contain inhibitory and stimulatory chemicals, on a Space Shuttle flight the 

following September. He said he also would like to see similar experiments 

on primates. (NYT Oct 15/85, C8) 

December 70: Marshall Space Flight Center announced that NASA’s first 

experiments to construct large structures in space were a success [see Space 

Transportation System/Mission, Nov. 30 and Dec. 21. EASE (Experimental 

Assembly of Structures in Extravehicular Activity) and ACCESS (Assembly 

Concept for Construction of Erectable Space Structures) carried out by astronauts Jerry Ross and Sherwood Spring “went exactly as we had planned, and 

all experiment and Space Transportation System objectives were met:’ said Ed 

Valentine, mission manager for the EAWACCESS payload flown on Space 

Shuttle mission 61-8. Those objectives included gathering data to compare 

assembly rates and techniques in space to those used during simulations on 

the ground and in neutral buoyancy water tests, evaluating potential space 

station assembly and maintenance concepts and techniques, and identifying 

ways to improve erectable structures to ensure productivity, reliability, and 

safety. 

“Preliminary data obtained from live downlink TV looks very good:’ Valentine explained. “But we won’t be able to make a complete analyses until we 

see the rest of the data:’ which was in the form of videotape and film shot 

while Ross and Spring performed the construction tasks. 

Once the data were analyzed and reported, Valentine said, it would give 

large space structure designers baseline data on the two construction ap 

proaches studied. “They can then determine which approach would be ap 

propriate for a particular task,” he explained. 

On December 11 Valentine said he would meet for a debriefing with the 

Space Shuttle crew and principal investigators. Then in about three weeks the 

principal investigators would receive the videotape and film shot during the 

experiments, and Valentine would publish a final report in about three 

months. (NASA Release 85-66) 

December 18 Marshall Space Flight Center’s (MSFC) Materials Science Labe 

ratory would make its first spaceflight on Space Shuttle 61-C, scheduled for 

launch on December 18, the Marshall Star reported. Using a mission peculiar 

equipment support structure (MPESS) in the payload bay, the Materials Science Laboratory-2 (MSL-2) would provide accommodations for three experiments in materials processing-the MSFC-managed Electromagnetic 

Levitator (EML) and Automated Directional Solidification Furnace (ADSF) 

and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory-Managed Three-Axis Acoustic Levitator 

(3AAL). 

The electromagnetic levitator experiment would allow scientists to study 

the effects of materials flow during solidification of a melted material in the 

355 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

microgravity environment. Six samples would be suspended in the electre 

magnetic field of a coil and melted by induction heating from the coil's 

electromagnetic field. 

The ADSF consisted of four furnace, or sample, units. The experiment 

would investigate the melting and solidification process of four different 

materials for later comparison to s-.rnples of the same materials processed on 

earth. 

In the 3AAL experiment, 12 liquid sampies would be suspended in sound 

pressure waves and rotated and oscillated in a low-gravity nitrogen atmosphere. Investigators would study the degree of sphericity attainable and 

small bubble migration similar to that having to do with the refining of glass. 

The standard switch panel in the orbiter aft flight deck would provide 

activation, deactivation, and status monitoring capability. (Marshall Star, Dec 

18/85, 2) 

During December: NASA scheduled for launch on December 18 the Space 

Shuttle Columbia, making its first journey into space in two years, on mission 

61-C, the 24th flight of the U.S. Space Transportation System. Robert Gibson 

would command the flight, his second trip into space. Charles Bolden, on his 

first spaceflight, would pilot; mission specialists would be Franklin ChangDiaz, a physicist born in Costa Rica and the first American of Hispanic origin 

to fly in space, and Steven Hawley and George Nelson, both making their 

second spaceflight; and payload specialists would be Robert Cenker of RCA 

and U.S. Rep. Bill Nelson of Florida, chairman of the House subcommittee 

on space science and applications and the second congressional observer to 

fly in space. 

During the mission, the crew would deploy RCA's Satcom KU-2communications satellite, the second in a series of three, with its payload assist module 

D-2 (PAM D-2) upper stage. The crew on mission 61-C in November deployed Satcom KU- l. 

Also onboard Columbia in the payload bay would be the Materials Science 

Lab-2 (MSL-2) [see Space Transportation Systemhcientific Research, Dec. 

181, the first Hitchhiker (HHG-1) payload, the RCA Infrared-Imaging Experiment (IR-IE), and 12 Get Away Special (GAS) experiments in specialized 

canisters mounted to a GAS beam attached to the payload bay. 

Hitchhiker G-1, a more sophisticated version of the GAS concept, consisted of a baseplate on which small pzyloads were mounted directly or 

enclosed in canisters. The carrier for the first time provided small payloads 

with access to the orbiter's 1400-watt power supply and to ground communications. 

Hitchhiker G-1 experiments would study experimental capillary pumped 

loop heat transport systems (sponsored by Goddard Space Flight CenterGSFC), provide film images of the environment around the Space Shuttle (Air 

356 
STS 

Force Geophysics Laboratory), and study the effect of the Space Shuttle environment on coated mirrors (Perkin-Elmer Corp.). 

The GAS Bridge was a beam supporting 12 G.4S canisters that were 

mounted across the orbiter’s cargo bay. The beam consolidated the canisters 

into a single easy-to-load and unlead unit. Experiments in the GAS canisters 

would: 

measure the effect convection had on heat flow in a liquid (General 

ElectridPenn State University); 

determine the behavior and physiological effects of microgravity on brine 

shrimp cysts (Booker T. Washington Senior High School, Houston, Texas); 

measure the 0 and 0, terrestrial nightflow emissions (National Research 

Council of Canada); 

measure the dynamics of a vibrating beam in the zero-gravity environment 

(U.S. Air Force Academy); 

determine how unprimed canvas, prepared linen canvas, and portions of 

painted canvas reacted to space travel (Vertical Horizons); 

0 determine the biological effects of neodymium and helium-neon laser 

light on desiccated human tissue undergoing cosmic radiation bombardment, determine cosmic radiation effects on medications and medical/surgical materials, perform analysis of contingencies that developed due to zero 

gravity in blood typing, and evaluate laser optical protective eyeware materials that were exposed to cosmic radiation (St. Mary’s Hospital, Laser Laboratory, Milwaukee); 

measure galactic and extragalactic contributions to the diffuse ultraviolet 

background radiation, and develop and demonstrate an advanced Get Away 

Special carrier system capable of providing data and power services to Space 

Shuttle attached sounding rocket class instruments (GSFC); 

measure the effect of gravity on particle dispersion of packing materials in 

HPLC analytical columns (All Tech Associates, Inc.) 

study the solidification of alloys for lead-antimony and an aluminumcopper combination, study the comparative morphology and anatomy of the 

primary root system of radish seeds, study crystal growth of metallic appearing needle crystals in an aqueous solution of potassium tetracyanoplatinate, 

and provide information on the “projectexplorer-payloadelapsed-time” and 

the operational status of experiments during flight to all amateur radio stations and short-wave listeners around the world (Alabama Space and Rocket 

Center); 

0 expose wild and lab research gypsy moth eggs and engorged female 

American dog ticks to weightlessness (GSFC/U.S. Department of Agriculture); 

and 

measure the response of the GAS Bridge to the Space Shuttle environment 

during liftoff, orbit, and landing (GSFC). 

RCA developed the IR-IE infrared camera, and during the mission payload 

specialist Rober Cenker would supervise its operation to acquire radiometric 

357 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

information that appeared within the field of view of the self-contained optical system. RCA hoped it might photograph storms, volcanic activity, or other 

natural occurrences. 

Middeck payloads would include the Comet Halley Active Monitoring 

Program (CHAMP) [see Astronomy, Dec. 17, Initial Blood Storage Experiment (IBSE), Protein Crystal Growth (PC 61, and three student experiments. 

IBSE, funded by Johnson Space Center and led by the Center for Blood 

Research, would study blood storage and sedimentation characteristics in 

m icrogravity. 

Rep. Bill Nelson would assist with an experiment sponsored by the University of Alabama, Marshall Space Flight Center, and the Comprehensive Cancer Center to try to grow crystal proteins in space for cancer research. 

There would be three Shuttle Student Involvement Project (SSIP) experiments on board Columbia. In the Measurement of Auxin Level and Starch 

Grains in Plant Roots experiment, bean plants would be grown and frozen in 

space. Researchers would analyze the plant roots after the flight for auxin 

location and concentration and correlation with statolith in the cells. The Air 

Injection as an Alternative To Honeycombing experiment would investigate 

the feasibility of producing a high stiffness, density ratio, lowweight casting 

with an internal framework. And the Study of Paper Fiber Formation in 

Microgravity experiment would further increase basic papermaking knowledge through a drainage study of paper fiber formation in microgravity and 

later comparison to this same formation on earth. 

NASA scheduled Columbia to land on the sixth day of the flight at KSC, the 

first landing there since mission 51-D on April 19, 1985. (NASA Release 85- 

107; NASA FOR M-989-61-C [prelaunch] Dec 16/85; Spaceport News, Dec 

6/85,4; Goddad News, Dec 85, 1) 

Shuttle Orbiter 

kbruary 4: NASA Administrator James Beggs, during a press briefing, noted 

that the fourth Space Shuttle orbiter, Atlantis, would join the fleet in the 

spring to fly its first mission in 1985 and that, despite being well into the 

Space Shuttle's operational phase, NASA would continue to improve performance, procure space parts, and enhance reliability. 

In support of Presidential efforts to cut government spending, NASA would 

slow space station definition and dwlopment efforts, cancel the advanced 

composite structures program in aeronautics, and not initiate any new projects in the space science and applications program. (NASA release Feb. 41 

85, NASA press briefing, Feb. 4/85) 

kbruary 11: After 16 Space Shuttle flights, NASA believed it had solved the 

spacecraft's commode problems, as reports of the last two missions indicated 

358 
STS 

the improved waste-disposal system performed perfectly, the Washington 

Post reported. 

A $12 million-GE design had transformed the commode from a multipronged, motordrive blender, which had fogged the Space Shuttle's air with 

particles of noxious dust or frozen liquid, to a device using a blast of air from 

a fan to carry waste into the toilet bowl; by pressing a lever, the user closed 

the commode top and opened a valve in the side of the Space Shuttle, where 

the waste was frozen and dried by the cold and vacuum of space. A tube 

collected urine and directed it to a holding tank for later overboard disposal. 

(W Post, Feb 11/85, A5) 

February 22 Members of the U.S. House Science and Technology space 

science and applications subcommittee questioned Jesse Moore, NASA associate administrator, office of space flight, on the agency's decision not to 

request funding for a 5th orbiter in its FY 86 budget, Aerospace Daily reported. Moore restated the agency's position that a four-orbiter fleet was 

adequate to meet traffic demand for the next five years or so, pointing out a 

recent decline in commercial and military traffic. 

NASA had requested $2.1 billion for 14 FY 86 Space Shuttle flights; Moore 

said NASA planned 17 missions in FY 87, 19 in FY 88, and projected 24 per 

year after that. 

Subcommittee chairman Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who had indicated strong 

support for a fifth orbiter, questioned Moore on the likelihood of increased 

launch traffic demand, potential schedule impacts of an accident, and the 

possibility of stretching out orbiter fabrication over a seven-to-eight-year period. 

Moore responded that NASA's program included adequate funding for 

structural spares procurement and maintenance of a viable base for initiating 

orbiter production over the next several years, pointing out that any funds for 

orbiter construction over a seven-toeight-year period would be an add-on to 

NASA's runout budget and could be in competition with other items. He had 

also remarked on increasingly pessimistic market projections, even considering upcoming yearly launches of 18 to 20 communications satellites. 

Earlier, NASA Administrator James Beggs, in response to questions on 

NASA's exploring possibilities of privatesector purchase of a 5th orbiter, had 

said that no Space Shuttle privitization proposals submitted to NASA would 

result in a cost savings to the government. (ND, Feb 22/85, 1) 

March 6: The Space Shuttle orbiter Challenger made a three-mile, six hour 

journey from the launch pad back to a hanger as a result of mission cancellation due to problems with the intended payload, a tracking and data relay 

satellite, the NY Times reported. NASA would replace Challenger on the 

launch pad with the orbiter Discovery on about March 15 and would combine elements of the scrubbed mission with some from Discovery's flight 

359 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

originally scheduled for March 22. Officials had selected Discovery for the 

mission because they decided it could be modified more easily and quickly 

than Challenger. (NU, Mar 6/85, B10) 

April 9: NASA announced that the Space Shuttle Carrier Aircraft’s (SCA) 

functional check flight was successfully flown today following engine repairs 

made in accordance with specificatioas. The SCA would fly the Atlantis 

orbiter to Kennedy Space Center on April 12, with one refueling stop. (NASA 

Daily Activities Report, Apr 11/85) 

April 74 NASAls newest Space Shuttle orbiter, Atlantis, arrived about 5:OO 

p.m. April 14 at KSC after a tmday flight from California, the Marshall Star 

reported. KSC workers rem4 the Atlantis from the 747 Shuttle Carrier 

Aircraft (SCA) and towed it to the processing hangar, where others would 

reconfigure it for its maiden flight, mission 51-1, scheduled for September. 

The SCA made a brief stop at Ellington Air Force Base, Texas, during the 

journey to KSC. (Marshall Star, Apr 17/85, 2) 

April 22 NASA officials said damage sustained by Discovery during mission 

51-D [see Apr. 191 could endanger its next mission and the upcoming week’s 

flight of Challenger, the Washington Times reported. “We may have to do a 

fair amount of tile work on this one:’ Space Shuttle chief Jesse Moore said. 

“Fifty tiles has been our standard up until this last one.” 

Howewr, NASA engineers were more concerned about a hole on a control 

flap, called an elevon, on the ship’s left wing. Such damage had not occurred 

previously. The chief Space Shuttle mechanic said the hole “most likely” 

developed after a heat-shield tile, jarred loose during Discovery’s liftoff, allowed temperatures of more than 1,200° F to penetrate the wing flap during 

reentry. 

Also, NASA said it would not apprm the Challenger mission or Discw 

ery’s next flight, scheduled for June 12, until technicians completed their 

examination of damage and determined why the brakes locked. (W Times, 

Apr 22/85, 2A) 

May 24 In reporting on NASA’s concerns mr the effects of vibrations and 

noise on the Space Shuttle’s passengers and cargo, the Washington Post 

quoted astronaut Air Force Col. Frederick Gregory saying that after his return 

from a Space Shuttle mission that “Nothing prepared me for the sensation of 

those main engines starting and those solids lighting up underneath us. That 

son-of-a-gun really rattles and rolis when it takes off.” 

Although NASA maintained that the Space Shuttle was no rougher a ride 

than the Titan launch vehicle, doubts were creeping into the minds of some 

people planning the Space Shuttle program, the Post said. 

360 
STS 

Troubles arose on Gregory’s flight when astronauts discovered the latch that 

released the airlock holding the Spacelab wide-field camera was badly 

bent-possibly because of the rough ride. In another Spacelab incident, all 

pressure was lost after four days in the laser spectrometer at the heart of an 

experiment to measure molecules of synthetic chemicals that could be attacking the earth’s protective ozone layer. 

Space Shuttle managers were quick to defend the spacecraft, the Post 

reported. Columbia, Challenger, and Discovery had flown 17 times in four 

years without a serious incident. At least two of the three satellites that failed 

in space did SO because of onboard rocket engine difficulties, not because 

the Space Shuttle was too rough. 

Johnson Space Center Director Gerald Griffin said in an interview with the 

Post that “occasional” mistakes had led to mishaps, but he insisted that “we 

are not repeating our mistakes.” He used as an example the Syncom (Leasat3) satellite deployed in April with no power to raise it to a higher orbit. He 

said that NASA would not have deployed the Syncom without any power if 

NASA had insisted that Hughes Communications Corp install a device that 

flashed a warning to the Space Shuttle’s cockpit that the satellite had no 

power. 

“We’ve always insisted our customers adhere to our safety standards to 

protect the crew and the shuttle, but we’ve never insisted they do anything 

else,” Griffin said. “We don’t want to be ‘Big Brother‘ but we’re beginning to 

think that some of the [the customers] design features are not good for us. I’d 

like to see more data for the crew in the cockpit.” (W Post, May 24/85, Al) 

May 30: NASA would probably use the desert runways of Edwards Air Force 

Base for landings of the remaining seven Space shuttle missions in 1985 due 

to brake damage caused by the grooved tarmac at Kennedy Space Center, the 

Washington Post reported. 

“Let’s face it, these brakes are right at the edge in a vehicle that lands as 

heavy and as fast as the shuttle does,” said astronaut Daniel Brandenstein, 

commander of the next Space Shuttle mission. “My guess is we’ll be landing 

for awhile out in the Mojave, where there’s no end to the runways and there’s 

almost nothing on either side of the runways to worry about either.” 

Also, studies suggested that the Space Shuttle nose gear might require 

rebuilding to provide better steering during landing in a crosswind, a situation more likely to occur at KSC than at Edwards. Cost of such rebuilding 

could run as high as $3 million for each orbiter. (W Post, May 30/85, A191 

lune 74 NASA expected the Space Shuttle’s nose wheel steering capability, 

previously used only on an experimental basis, would achieve operational 

status by the fall, the Space News Roundup reported. 

361 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NASA had attributed brake damage to the orbiter Discovery following the 

STS 51-D mission in part to crosswinds at KSC, which required the orbiter's 

commander to use the main gear braking system for differential steering. 

Nose wheel steering would allow Space Shuttle commanders to use the 

brake system for stopping orbiters rather than for braking and steering combined. 

A nose wheel steering capability was in the Space Shuttle design, but used 

only on an experimental basis. NASA had spent the last year upgrading the 

system to operational status. In addition, NASA instrumented the Challenger 

to provide better landing condition data and planned to add instrumentation 

to the landing gear system of the Discovery. 

In the 17 Space Shuttle missions to date, NASA had used 68 individual 

brake systems with 27 receiving no damage, 27 receiving slight damage, and 

14 receiving significant damage in which either one or more stators or rotors 

overheated or suffered other problems. 

Until the nose wheel steering capability became operational, NASA intended to choose on a flight by flight basis between Kennedy Space Center 

and Edwards Air Force Base as the primary end of mission landing site. (ISC 

Space News Roundup, June 14/85, 2) 

luly 79: After spending 18 months at the factory in Palmsdale, California, 

Columbia, the flagship of the Space Shuttle fleet, returned for operational 

duty to Kennedy Space Center (KSC), the JSC Roundup reported. Columbia 

had undergone hundreds of modifications to reconfigure the ship from a 

developmental flight vehicle to a fully operational orbiter. 

Columbia flew the first five Space Shuttle missions, and NASA modified the 

spacecraft at KSC for the October 1983 STS-9 Spacelab 1 flight. Following its 

return to KSC and removal of the Spacelab 1 payload, NASA in late January 

1984 ferried Columbia to California atop the 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. 

Rockwell International performed five major modifications to the orbiter 

during its stay at the orbiter production plant. Structural modifications to the 

wings and midfuselage included strengthening of lower wing surfaces and 

installation of heavier straps across the orbiter's belly. 

Rockwell added a heads-up display to the forward flight deck to allow the 

Space Shuttle commander and pilot to view critical flight information on a 

see-through panel while they looked through the forward cockpit windows. 

Production workers removed the commander and pilot ejection seats, 

which were installed on Columbia for the initial development Space Shuttle 

flights, and replaced them with standard seats. Overhead blowout panels 

were also removed. 

Rockwell modified two orbital maneuvering system pods to make them 

compatible with the other orbiters in the fleet and replaced the thermal 

protection tiles on the pods with the advanced reusable surface insulation 

362 
STS 

blankets. Production personnel also installed supplemental instrumentation 

to gather developmental engineering data. 

In addition, workers removed and replaced approximately 5000 high-temperature tiles from the orbiter's underside, because engineering analysis indicated several areas where greater heat protection was needed. About half of 

the wing leading edge panel assemblies was removed and modified to 

strengthen the supporting structure of the reinforced carbon-carbon panels, 

an infrared imaging device was installed on the vertical stabilizer to provide a 

temperature profile of the upper wing surfaces during reentry, and instrumentation was added to the nose cap to provide improved entry air data. 

During the trip from California to KSC atop the 747 shuttle transport, rain 

damaged more than 1,000 of its head shield tiles, the Washington Post reported. NASA said that between 200 and 300 of the tiles required replacement. Damaged areas were around the windows and on the forward facing 

tiles. According to NASA policy, Space Shuttle transports were forbidden to 

fly through visible rain. However, the shower did not appear on ground radar 

or on the 747's onboard radar system. 

NASA had scheduled Columbia to fly next in December on mission 61-C. 

USC Roundup, July 19/85, 1; WPost, July 19/85, A171 

luly 25 At the third in a series of hearings on assured access to space NASA 

and Defense Department officials said today before the House Science and 

Technology space science and applications and Armed Services research and 

development subcommittees that available data did not support the need for 

a fifth Space Shuttle orbiter in the early 1990s. But the officials acknowledged that there could be a period around 1992 and beyond in which 

unforeseen launch demands would strain capability, Aerospace Daily reported. 

Rep. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) pointed out that earlier testimony had revealed a 

launch demand for 26 to 33 Space Shuttle equivalent flights per year in the 

post-1992 timeframe, and Jesse Moore, NASA associate administrator for 

spaceflight, acknowledged that a flight capability of 30 per year would require a fifth orbiter. He said that NASA projected the annual launch capability of a four-orbiter fleet in the 1990s timeframe to be 24 flights, 20 from 

Kennedy Space Center and four from Vandenberg AFB, with the ability to 

surge temporarily to 28 flights per year. 

When asked to factor in potential extended downtime of one orbiter, 

Moore replied that NASA had not made a projection of lost flights because it 

would be directly related to the length of the downtime and when it occurred. He added that NASA could probably fly 20 to 24 flights with the 

three remaining orbiters if one were out of service for periods up to one year; 

a sustained launch capacity for three orbiters would be in the range of 15 to 

20 flights per year, he said. 

363 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Edward Aldridge, undersecretary of the Air Force, said that, although the 

Department of Defense (DOD) was committed to at least eight Space Shuttle 

missions per year, its current known requirements through the mid-1990s 

averaged 10 launches per year. Including the onetefive Space Shuttle-equivalent launches per year projected through 1995 for the Strategic Defense 

Initiative (SDI) research, he said the total DOD requirement became roughly 

11 to 15 Space Shuttle-equivalent launches per year. Those numbers excluded 

any mission supporting potential deployment of SDI-related systems, he 

added. 

At the same hearing, Gen. Robert Herres, commander of the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD), said he thought the “time had passed” 

during which the U.S. might have built a fifth orbiter. He pointed out that 

resources needed for it might better be devoted to new technology and 

options, “which afford us more flexibility and versatility.” 

Offering an opposing view, Hans Mark, chancellor of the University of 

Texas System and former NASA deputy administrator, said that the argument 

for a fifth orbiter could not be based either on currently projected flight rates 

or on backup requirements. He said only the proposed space station and SDI 

requirements could increase space operations to the point where a fifth 

orbiter was necessary. (ND, July 26/85, 137) 

September 72: NASA announced that Rockwell Internatl. Corp. made significant additions to the Space Shuttle orbiter Columbia to accommodate three 

research experiments that would measure orbite: aerodynamic and thermodynamic characteristics as it reentered earth’s atmosphere. Researchers 

would use the flight data to develop future generation space transportation 

systems. 

The most obvious change was a cylindrical housing that replaced the fintip 

atop the vertical tail. The new experiment pod, containing equipment for the 

shuttle infrared leeside temperature sensing (SILTS) experiment, was approximately 20 in. in diameter and was capped at the leading edge by a spherical 

dome. SILTS would obtain high-resolution infrared images of the upper 

(leeside) surfaces of Columbia’s port wing and fuselage as the orbiter reentered the atmosphere, providing detailed temperature maps at the surface of 

the leeside thermal protection materials and indicating the amount of aerodynamic heating of surfaces in flight. Tape recorders would store experiment 

data. 

Infrared cameras mounted inside the dome would view Columbia’s left 

wing and fuselage through two windows protected during launch from debris by plugs that filled the window cavities and that fell away when the 

experiment began about 400,000 feet above earth at reentry. Injection of 

gaseous nitrogen into the cavities would cool the cameras during that period. 

For the shuttle entry air data system (SEADS) experiment, a new nosecap 

had 14 penetration assemblies distributed about its surface, each containing 

364 
STS 

a small hole through which local surface air pressure was measured from an 

altitude of about 56 miles through landing. This would allow precise postflight determination of the orbiter‘s attitude relative to the oncoming airstream and the density of the atmosphere through which the vehicle was 

flying. 

The shuttle upper atmosphere mass spectrometer (SUMS) would complement the SEADS experiment by providing atmospheric density information at 

altitudes above 50 miles. SUMS would sample air at Columbia’s surface 

through a small hole, located just aft of the nosecap, to measure the number 

of molecules of various gas species in order to determine the atmospheric 

density that, with vehicle motion information, would allow determination of 

orbiter aerodynamic characteristics at altitudes where the atmosphere was 

extremely thin. NASA originally developed the SUMS mass spectrometer for 

the Viking spacecraft that landed in 1976 on Mars and modified it to operate 

in the orbiter’s reentry flight environment. 

NASA‘ Langley Research Center developed the experiments as part of the 

orbiter experiments program managed by NASA’s office of aeronautics and 

space technology. (NASA Release 85-127) 

September 30: NASA announced that, since adverse weather conditions such 

as rain, mist, or ice could damage Space Shuttle tiles, its Ames-Dryden Flight 

Research Facility, using an F-104 aircraft as a testbed, would test Space 

Shuttle thermal protection system tiles for moisture impact damage and to 

verify techniques to record and measure atmospheric moisture. NASA re 

searchers would then correlate this information with existing Space Shuttle 

launch criteria and determine the need for further tests. 

Researchers would install actual Space Shuttle tiles on the leading edge of 

a flight test fixture mounted below the F-104’s fuselage. Some tiles were 

unused; others had flown in space on the orbiter Columbia. 

During initial flights in the 164~18 flight test program, the F-104 would fly 

at subsonic speeds behind a KC-135 tanker aircraft, which would emit a 

water spray to create artificial rain. Tanker personnel could control the flow 

rate, nozzle pressures, and size of the artificial raindrops. 

Pilots would fly additional flights at subsonic speeds near Vandenberg Air 

Force Base, a future Space Shuttle launch site, to observe and measure the 

effects of mist and low stratus clouds. Pilots later would fly at transonic and 

supersonic speeds flights at high altitude through ice particles in clouds. 

A particle-measurement probe located on the F-104’s wing pylon would 

record moisture particle size, while high-frequency load sensors would measure impact forces. A noseboom on the flight test fixture would record velocity, and test fixture pressure orifices would measure pressure distribution. 

Video cameras, one pylon-mounted and one mounted on the F-104’s lower 

fuselage looking back at the flight test fixture, would also record data. (NASA 

Release 85-135) 

365 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

December 13 Langley Research Center announced that the Space Shuttle 

Columbia would carry three experiments on mission 61-C developed at the 

center to measure the spacecraft’s aerodynamic and thermodynamic characteristics. 

Columbia, the first Space Shuttle orbiter to go into space, was making its 

first flight in two years after it was pulled from flight service in December 

1983 for extensive overhaul, including modification to accommodate the 

LaRC experiments, which were the Shuttle Entry Air Data System (SEADS), 

Shuttle Infrared Leeside Temperature Sensing (SILTS) experiment, and Shuttle 

Upper Atmosphere Mass Spectrometer (SUMS). 

SEADS would measure the distribution of air pressure around the orbiter‘s 

nosecap during entry to provide precise determination of the orbiter‘s attitude relative to the oncoming airstream and the density of the atmosphere 

through which it had flown. Lack of this air data had hindered engineers from 

determining aerodynamic flight characteristics of the orbiters. 

The SUMS experiment complemented the SEADS experiment by gathering 

atmospheric density information at altitudes above 90 km (56 statute miles). 

SUMS would sample the gas at Columbia’s surface through a small hole 

located just aft of the nosecap and forward of the nosewheel, with its instrument identifying and measuring the quantities of the various gas species 

present. Data analysis after the mission would allow determination of atme 

spheric density. 

The SILTS experiment would obtain high-spatial-resolution infrared images 

of the upper (leeside) surfaces of the orbiter‘s port wing and fuselage during 

entry through the atmosphere. These infrared images would provide detailed 

“maps” of the surface temperatures of leeside thermal protection materials, 

indicating the amount of aerodynamic heating on the leeside surfaces in 

flight. (LaRC Release 85-99) 

December 22 NASA today rolled the Space Shuttle orbiter Challenger to 

launch complex 398 two miles from where NASA had installed the orbiter 

Columbia for mission 61-C, the first time a pair of orbiters had been on the 

launch pads at the same time, the Washington Times reported. Columbia was 

on Pad 39A until repair of a faulty power unit that aborted a launch attempt 

December 19 [see Space Transportation SystedLaunch Schedules, Dec. 191. 

NASA had scheduled Challenger on mission 51-L for launch on January 22. 

(W Times, Dec 23/85,4A) 

Solid-fuel Rocket Boosters 

January 30: NASA and United Technologies’s United Space Boosters Inc.’s 

Booster Production Co. officials would break ground January 30 for Marshall 

366 
STS 

Space Flight Center‘s (MSFC) solid-fuel rocket booster (SRB) assembly and 

refurbishment facility at KSC, the Marshall Star reported. The company had 

designed and would build the 238,00@sq.-ft. facility, scheduled for completion in 1986, that would employ about 700 people to perform most of the 

Space Shuttle’s SRB refurbishment previously done by the company at various locations at the center and adjacent Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. 

Refurbishment, performed under an MSFC contract, would include replacement of insulation on booster components, addition of electronic and 

guidance systems, and reinstallation of parachutes and ordnance. The refurbished booster components, including forward and aft skirts and frustum, 

would then undergo computerized checkout in the facility before delivery to 

NASA for booster stacking. 

The new facility would process up to 24 flight sets of solid-fuel rocket 

boosters yearly and would offer maximum efficiency with extensive use of 

robotics and computercontrolled production techniques developed in 

MSFC’s Productivity Enhancement Center. (Marshall Star, Jan 30/85, 1 ) 

March 20: NASA had completed a series of tests to validate parachute systems to be used with advanced lightweight, solid-fuel rocket boosters that 

would replace the boosters then in use on the Space Shuttle, Ames Research 

Center (ARC) announced. The new boosters would be first used during a 

Space Shuttle launch from Vandenberg AFB no earlier than January 29,1986. 

For the tests, researchers used a vehicle a third the size of a solid-fuel 

booster with one main parachute and, to simulate a splashdown, drop tested 

it from the Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility’s (DFRC) 8-52 over the 

China Lake Naval Weapons Center at Ridgecrest. Most drops were made at an 

altitude of about 40,000 feet with an airspeed of about 230 knots. ARC and 

DFRC conducted the drop tests in cooperation with Marshall Space Flight 

Center, which was responsible for the parachute system. (ARC Release 85-1) 

May 9: Marshall Space Flight Center’s (MSFC) prime contractor for Space 

Shuttle solid-fuel rocket booster motors, Morton Thiokol’s Wasatch Division, 

successfully static fired today a new lightweight version of that motor at its 

facility in northern Utah, the Marshall Star reported. 

The firing was the second and final test of the development version of that 

motor, which contained major sections made from graphite epoxy materials 

manufactured by Thiokol’s subcontractor, Hercules, Inc. Thiokol would perform a final qualification static test of the flight version of the new filamentwound motor in September. 

NASA had scheduled the first use of the filament-wound motor segments 

for early 1986 during the first Space Shuttle launch from Vandenberg Air 

Force Base, California. 

367 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Lawrence Mullay, manager of MSFC’s solid-fuel rocket booster project, said 

each of the filament-wound boosters would weigh about 28,000 Ib. less than 

the current steel boosters, making possible an increase in Space Shuttle 

payload carrying capacity of about 4,600 Ibs. (Marshall Star, May 15/85, 2) 

lune 3: A fire of unknown cause today destroyed one of the four buildings 

used to mix rocket solid fuels for the Space Shuttle at Morton Thiokol’s rocket 

motor assembly plant outside Brigham City, Utah, the Washington Post reported. No one was injured in the fire that leveled a 400-sq.-ft. building 

operated largely by robots at a remote part of the Thiokol plant. 

Because three of the four fuel mixing plants at Thiokol were needed at all 

times to maintain solid-fuel rocket motor production schedules, NASA said it 

was concerned enough to send an accident review board team from Marshall 

Space flight Center to investigate. (W Post, June 5/85, A5) 

lune 6: NASA was still evaluating data submitted by four companies in response to its request for responses on the possibility of opening a second 

source for Space Shuttle solid-fuel rocket motors (SRM), Aerospace Daily 

reported. Those responding were Hercules, Aerojet Strategic Propulsion, 

United Technologies’ Chemical Systems Division, and Atlantic Research 

Corp. NASA also had a proposal from Morton Thiokol, the current solesource producer, and would not make a final decision until later in the 

month. 

In April Jesse Moore, NASA associate administrator for spaceflight, told the 

House appropriations HUD and independent agencies subcommittee that he 

expected to “haw a review of the assessment sometime in the early part of 

May” and that in the interim NASA would proceed with the next buy of SRMs 

from Morton Thiokol. Agency officials expected it would take about four 

years to qualify a second source and “get them up to speed.” 

NASA Administrator James Beggs would make the final decision on 

whether to open a second source for SRMs. A NASA official said he thought 

there was “a good possibility” that Beggs would haw the needed information 

to make “a decision by the end of this month.” (NO, June 6/85, 1) 

December 26: NASA today released a statement on the proposed action to 

develop a second source for the Space Shuttle’s solid-fuel rocket motor 

(SRM). Since Nowmber 1984, NASA had assessed the desirability of a second source, and four firms-Aerojet Strategic Propulsion Co., Atlantic Research Corp., Hercules, Inc., and Chemical Systems Div. of United 

Technologies Corp.-had expressed interest in becoming the SRM second 

source. As a result, NASA believed the development of an SRM second 

source would serve the national interest. 

The statement read in part: “. . . Because of the continued strong interest 

of the four contractors and our belief that a second source would be in the 

368 
STS 

national interest, it is our intent to provide the contractors the opportunity to 

respond through a formal request for proposal (RFP). 

“Industry must, however, be willing to respond with the full knowledge 

that NASA will provide no firm guarantee of recovery of their qualification 

costs. If industry is so willing, and where competition remains available with 

the incumbent excluded, NASA intends to proceed with establishing a second source. 

“Should the winner of a second source competition for SRMs become 

qualified to produce flightquality motors in time to support our next production buy, NASA would plan to buy contingent on overall cost considerations, 

20 flight sets of motors at the rate of not less than four flight sets a year. In 

addition, NASA would compete the balance of the buy and subsequent buys 

to determine the split in production between the incumbent and the qualified second source. A decision to dual source any quantity beyond the 

planned minimum buy of 20 flight sets would be based on the cost of the 

dual source in comparison to the cost of contracting the balance with the 

incumbent (Morton Thiokol, Inc.) only. 

“Based on the ab-, NASA intends to notify the four interested firms by 

letter in early January 1986 of our willingness to proceed with an RFP and the 

specific conditions that would apply. Their comments and views would be 

requested. A positive response would provide the basis for NASA to issue an 

RFP. Should industry not support the RFP under these conditions, NASA 

vlould cancel any initiative of establishing a dual source for the SRM.” (NASA 

Release 85-178) 

Student Involvement Program 

March 78: Some high school student semifinalists in the Space Shuttle Student Involvement Program, sponsored by NASA and the National Science 

Teachers Association, would meet at Lewis Research Center (LeRC) March 25 

and 26 to present before a panel of LeRC scientists and engineers their 

proposals for candidate experiments to fly aboard future Space Shuttle missions, the center announced. LeRC personnel would evaluate and suggest 

improvements to the experiments. The program was a nationwide competition to stimulate the study of science and technology by engaging students in 

projects to develop actual payload experiments for upcoming Space Shuttle 

flights. 

The 37 students from Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, and 

Wisconsin would hear a presentation by NASA astronaut Robert Springer (Lt. 

Col. USMC), slated to fly aboard Space Shuttle mission 51-H scheduled for 

launch in late 1985, and a discussion by Brian Vlcek, a previous year‘s finalist 

from Parma, Ohio, on his winning experiment entitled “inducing a geotropic-type reaction in radish roots with chemical stimuli.” The meeting 

369 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

would close with a tour of LeRC where the students would see such facilities 

as the 500-foot deep, zero-gravity facility and a propulsion systems laboratory 

where researchers tested full-scale aircraft engines under actual flight conditions. 

Initially students from 10 geographical regions around the country had 

proposed over 2,000 biology, chemistry, and astronomy experiments. Interdisciplinary teams of teachers, scientists, and engineers had evaluated the 

proposals to select each region's semifinalists. As of the Space Shuttle 51-C 

mission in January 1985, NASA had flown 10 student experiments in space. 

(LeRC Release 85-17) 

April 5: NASA announced that through a cooperative effort with Satellite 

Communications for Learning Worldwide (SCOLA), it would televise live via 

satellite to hundreds of high schools, colleges, and universities across the 

U.S. all the science events on the Space Shuttle Discovery following its 

launch no earlier than April 12 from KSC. Two days prior to launch, NASA 

scientists and engineers would conduct a permission videoconference with 

the schools to acquaint students and teachers with the planned mission and 

science experiments. Students from selected schools would ask questions of 

the NASA briefers. NASA's educational affairs office was providing Discovery 

mission and educational materials to the participating schools. 

SCOLA, an association of schools, colleges, and universities based at 

Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, was one of the largest voluntary 

associations of institutional satellite antenna owners in the U.S. (NASA Release 85-51) 

May 7: NASA and the National Science Teachers Association announced 

continuation for the sixth year of the Space Shuttle Student Involvement 

Program, which provided an opportunity for secondary school students 

(grades 9-12) to write proposals for space science experiments that would 

develop their awareness of space and stimulate interest in science and technology. 

During the next year's competition, the association would select up to five 

students from each of eight geographic regions who, along with their teachers, would receive allexpensepaid trips to a Space Shuttle symposium at a 

NASA center. Later, one semifinalist selected from each region would attend a 

national Space Shuttle symposium at Kennedy Space Center, during which 

the association would award scholarships to the three students submitting the 

most outstanding proposals. (NASA Release 85-70) 

May 30: NASA announced that interdisciplinary teams of teachers, scientists, 

and engineers selected seven finalists in the fifth national Space Shuttle 

3 70 
STS 

Student Involvement Program (SSIP), a joint venture of NASA and the National Science Teachers Association. Judges based selection of finalists’ entries upon individual scientific or engineering merit for possible flight aboard 

the Space Shuttle. 

The national winners and their teacher-advisors would attend in August a 

special Space Shuttle conference at Kennedy Space Center and view the 

launch of the Discovery Space Shuttle mission 51-L. NASA would present 

the finalists and their teacher-advisors with orbiter models, and their schools 

would receive orbiter models for trophy case display. 

The sixth year of SSIP competition would open in September 1985. (NASA 

Release 85-79) 

During August: NASA announced that the newest solid-fuel rocket booster 

retrieval ship, the US. Air Force’s Independence, arrived at Kennedy Space 

Center for outfitting with retrieval gear. The Air Force specifically designed 

the ship for retrieval of expended boosters after Space Shuttle launches from 

Vandenberg Air Force Base. 

Independence would be the mother ship for west coast booster retrievals, 

towing one of the boosters and providing room for the majority of the crew 

and the six main parachutes and the bottoms for both boosters. The ship’s 

first booster retrieval would be mission 51-F set for launch no earlier than 

July 15. The Air Force would lease another smaller ship to tow the other 

booster and carry the remainder of the 42-member retrieval crew. 

Independence, at 199 feet long and with a beam of 40 feet, was larger than 

its sister retrieval ships, the Liberty Star and the Freedom Star. Those two ships 

were 176 feet long and had beams of 37 feet. The Independence has both 

fore and aft water jet thrusters, making it highly maneuverable. The other two 

ships had only stern thrusters. Halter Marine in Moss Point, Mississippi, built 

independence. (NASA Activities, Aug 85, 11) 

371 

SPACELAB 

February 25: The European Space Agency (EM) issued a review of some 

material and life sciences experiments aboard the first Spacelab mission 

November 28 to December 8, 1983. 

Of the 33 materials sciences experiments, two were not performed due to 

hardware malfunctioning, and several experiments did not obtain the full set 

of experimental rundoperations. The advantage of the microgravity environment for materials processing and fluid physics was the practical absence of 

thermal (gravitydriven) convention, sedimentation, and hydrostatic pressure. 

In the microgravity environment, secondarydisturbing factors such as surface 

tension, capillary forces, and intermolecular forces became dominant. 

Some materials sciences experiments focused on protein crystallization, 

including growth of insoluble crystals by precipitation reaction, nucleation 

and growth experiments in vapor crystal growth, thermomigration (soret diffusion) of cobalt in liquid tin, floating-zone growth of silicon, investigation of 

free convection and capillary surfaces in low gravity, and eutectic solidification and formation of fault structures in fibrous and lamellar eutectics. 

The Spacelab mission carried nine European life sciences experiments. 

One investigated functioning in zero gravity of the human vestibular system, 

an acceleration-sensing system in the inner ear. Others were a massdiscrimination experiment aimed at comparing perception of mass under microgravity conditions and of weight on earth, an experiment aimed at understanding 

fluid-regulation mechanisms in the low-pressure system of the human body, 

and observations of the proliferation of lymphocytes during weightlessness. 

(ESA release Feb 25/85) 

April 77: NASA announced it had scheduled the Spacelab 3 mission, a 

Europeandeveloped and NASA-operated space laboratory, for launch on STS 

51-8 no earlier than April 29, 1985. Spacelab 3 was a microgravity mission 

with 15 investigations in fiw scientific disciplines: materials science, life 

sciences, fluid mechanics, atmospheric science, and astronomy. Two of the 

investigations-one in materials science, mercury iodide crystal growth 

[France], and one in astronomy, very wide field camera [Francel-had flown 

aboard Spacelab 1. Scientists in the U.S. sponsored 12 of the investigations, 

and an ionization measurements investigation was from India. 

Important new hardware developments in materials science, fluid dynamics, and life sciences would be on the flight, and researchers had designed the experimental hardware for multiple flight use. NASA had selected 

two payload specialists with expertise in crystal growth and fluid mechanics 

for the flight. 

The Spacelab 3 configuration consisted of a long tunnel, a long module, 

and a mission peculiar equipment support structure (MPESS). The module 

373 PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

and tunnel would provide a pressurized shirtsleeve environment within 

which the crew could operate. The MPESS also supported experiments that 

did not require a habitable crew environment. Common payload support 

equipment used on Spacelab 3 was the scientific airlock that could extend 

from the module into space for experiments requiring exposure to the space 

environment and flight crew hands-on activities. 

There were three experiments on materials science: the fluid experiment 

system (FES), the vapor crystal growth system (VCGS), and the French materials science experiment. 

In fluid mechanics, the crew would perform fundamental experiments in 

the drop dynamics module (DDM) to test theoretical predictions of drop 

behavor in a near-zero gravity environment. The geophysical fluid flow cell 

(GFFC) experiment would study fluid motion in a microgravity environment. 

The six investigations in life sciences included four in the Ames Research 

Center‘s (ARC) life sciences payload system to verify a new facility for housing and studying animals in the space environment, observing the animals’ 

reactions to that environment, and evaluating operations and procedures 

relative to in-flight animal care; the urine monitoring investigation to monitor 

crew water intake and to prepare urine samples for postflight analysis; and 

the autogenic feedback training experiment to test a technique to control 

space adaptation syndrome. 

The four investigations in atmospheric science and astronomy were the 

ionization states of solar and galactic cosmic ray heavy nuclei that would use 

a new detector system to determine the composition and intensity of ions 

emitted toward the earth from the sun and other galactic sources; the French 

astronomy investigation to make an ultraviolet survey of the celestial sphere 

in a study of large-scale phenomena such as clouds within our galaxy; the 

auroral observations experiment to observe and record the visual characteristics of pulsating and flickering auroras; and atmospheric trace molecules 

spectroscopy to examine on a global scale the composition and variability of 

the upper atmosphere. 

In addition to the Spacelab 3 experiments, NASA had scheduled two GetAway Specials for the flight-a Northern Utah University satellite (NUSAT) 

and a global low-orbit message relay satellite (GLOMR). NASA would enclose each in a canister mounted in the orbiter payload bay for deployment 

near the end of the mission following completion of Spacelab operations. 

(NASA MOR E-977-51-8-02 [prelaunch] April 17/85) 

April 77: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced its researchers 

completed at KSC a series of three intensive tests that verified the compatibility of Spacelab 2 experiments in space. Known collectively as the “mission 

sequence test,” the tests determined for the first time that actual experiment 

flight hardware for the mission operated in tandem with the Spacelab flight 

systems. MSFC’s Spacelab 2 mission manager Roy Lester said they learned 

374 
Spacelab 

they “could operate this complex system with high efficiency within acceptable Space1 ab resource a I locat ions.’’ 

MSFC had responsibility for managing the first three Spacelab missions in a 

series of Spacelab flights that extended over several years. The first mission 

flew in 1983; the next would fly later in April. “This third and last test was a 

simulated six-hour slice of the actual on-orbit timeline,” Lester said. “It simulated the commanding of experiments as if they were being done both from 

the payload operations control center (at Johnson Space Center) and from the 

flight deck of the orbiter.” 

The period chosen was one that would put maximum stress on the computer, “a worst-case scenario,” Lester explained. “Without a situation like that, 

we wouldn’t have gotten the confidence we have now that we’re ready to go.” 

The 13 Spacelab 2 experiments, covering seven scientific disciplines, 

would rest on three pallets and a special support structure. Unlike the other 

two Spacelab missions managed by MSFC, there was no habitable laboratory. 

Spacelab 2 crew would operate the experiments from the aft deck of the 

orbiter interior. (MSFC Release 85-19) 

During April: NASA announced that Space Shuttle flight 51-B/Spacelab 3, an 

ESAdeveloped Spacelab carrying 15 experiments [see Spacelab, Apr. 17, was 

scheduled for launch April 29 from KSC. The mission’s main objective was to 

provide a high-quality microgravity environment for materials processing and 

flu id experiments. 

For the second time in US. space history, crew members would perform 

scientific investigations continuously. Two scientists who developed Spacelab 3 experiments, payload specialists Dr. Lodewijk van den Berg, a materials 

scientist from EG&G Energy Management Corp., and Dr. Taylor Wang, a fluid 

physicist from JPL, would conduct onboard research during the mission. 

Mission specialist Dr. Don Lind, a high-energy astrophysicist, and Drs. 

Norman Thagard and William Thornton (both medical doctors making their 

second Space Shuttle flight) would also do scientific research. 

The payload operations control center (POCC) at Johnson Space Center 

would manage all Spacelab 3 operations. Members of the Marshall Space 

Flight Center mission management team and the investigator teams that 

developed Spacelab 3 experiments would monitor, direct, and control experiment operations from the ground control center. The mission control center 

in the same building as POCC would control the orbiter and basic Spacelab 

systems. (NASA Release 85-60) 

May 7: A C-5A aircraft carrying the German Spacelab D-1, the first payload 

in the history of U.S. manned spaceflight to be controlled from another 

country, landed May 1 at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Space Shuttle 

runway, Spaceport News reported. The Federal German Aerospace Research 

375 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Establishment‘s (DFVLR) German Space Operations Center in Oberpfaffenhofen near Munich would haw responsibility for the 80 Spacelab D-1 (D 

for Deutschland) experiments. During the welcoming ceremony, (KSC) Director Dick Smith said, “W are looking forward to giving your payload 

‘tender laving care’ and seeing it launched aboard the shuttle and getting it 

safely returned to you after the mission.” 

Germany’s Parliamentary State Secretary Albert Probst responded, “We are 

pleased to take part in this mnt and consider the joint ventures between the 

Federal Republic of Germany, Europe, and the U.S. in manned space flight to 

be a good example of internationai cooperation.” 

Spacelab D-1, scheduled to fly on the sevenday Space Shuttle orbiter 

Columbia mission 61-A no earlier than October 16, consisted of a long 

Spacelab module containing the space sled and a unique support structure. 

Half of the D-1 experiments were from Germany, the remainder from the 

U.S. and European countries. Investigations included the vestibular sled, a 

device driven by an electromotor and traction rope, positioned in the center 

aisle of the Spacelab module, in which astronauts would serve as test sub 

jects to collect information on human reactions to the equilibrium sensing 

system; the Biorack for botanical and medical/physiologicaI experiments; the 

navigation experiment (NAVEX) to test systems performance of clock synchronization and one-way distance measurement; the materials experiment 

assembly (MEA) that would use Marshall Space Flight Center furnaces and 

alloy, fluid physics, and crystal growth investigations. 

The DFVLR, the result of a merger of three organizations and employing 

about 3,500 people in five research centers, would also participate in the 

European Retrieval Carrier (EURECA), a free-flying apparatus of experiments, 

and project “Columbus,” internationally manned space station modules. 

(Spaceport News, May 10/85, 5) 

May 2 7: Marshall Space Flight Center announced that experiment teams for 

the Spacelab 3 mission had begun analysis of the 250 billion bits of data 

obtained during the mission, and preliminary results were excellent. 

In the area of materials science, two of the three experiment teams had 

begun to examine crystals grown during Spacelab 3. In one experiment, a 

mercury iodide crystal the size of a sugar cube grew from a seed crystal in the 

vapor crystal growth system; via the vapor transport technique, the crystal 

grew at a carefully controlled rate over a 104-hour period. Researchers would 

remove the crystal from the glass ampoule within the next few weeks for 

analysis to determine its quality and properties as an X-ray and gamma-ray 

detector for applications in scientific research, medicine, and industry. 

Two fluid mechanics experiments ended successfully; the geophysical fluid 

flow cell experiment completed more than 102 hours of experiments designed to provide information for the first time on convention in spherical 

rotating shells with a radial gravity field. Coinvestigator Dr. Fred Leslie said 

3 76 
Spacelab 

of the experiment, “The films of one of the Jovian (Jupiter) scenarios indicated the formation of a ’Red Spot‘ similar to that present on Jupiter. This data 

should be useful to meteorologists and astrophysicists in modelling the large 

scale circulations of fluids under the influence of rotation, gravity, and convection.” 

Three atmospheric and astronomical observations were completed during 

the Spacelab 3 flight. The atmospheric trace molecules spectroscopy experiment operated for 50 hours providing 19 sequences of more than 150 independent atmospheric spectrally resolved measurements. Researchers would 

use these to analyze the earth‘s atmospheric composition chemically and 

physically for the stratosphere and mesosphere between 10 and 150 km. The 

information also would provide extremely detailed measurements of the 

minor and trace components of the atmosphere, which was crucial to understanding the evolution of earth‘s climate, and would aid in the analysis of 

pollution caiises and effects. The experiment also provided the first highresolution infrared spectrum of the sun, which indicated some surprising 

evidence about its molecular constituents. 

Four of the six life sciences experiments completed successfully were part 

of the Ames Research Center’s life sciences payload. The research animal 

holding facilities proved a suitable animal habitat in which the two squirrel 

monkeys and 24 rats adjusted to spaceflight and demonstrated their suitability for research in orbit. One primate apparently developed symptoms of 

space adaptation syndrome but recovered in a manner analogous to human 

experience. 

“In addition to the successful results from each of these experiments,” said 

Dr. George Fichtl, Spacelab 3 mission scientist at Marshall Space Flight 

Center, “the overall success of the mission has proven the importance of the 

Spacelab concept. During this mission, we have proven that a microgravity 

environment is an important environment for the growth of crystals, the 

study of fluid mechanics, and measurement of the effect man is having on 

this environment. We have also proven the need for man’s presence in performing these tasks.” (MSFC Release 85-28) 

May 24: Spacelab 2 mission manager Roy Lester of Marshall Space Flight 

Center’s (MSFC) Spacelab Payload Project Office said today that the Spacelab 

2 payload was declared “ready for installation” into the orbiter Challenger, 

the Marshall Star reported. Spacelab 2 would be the second of two Spacelab 

missions designed to demonstrate the performance of hardware received 

from the European Space Agency (EM). 

The Spacelab 1 mission verified the majority of Spacelab systems including 

the habitable module, tunnel, scientific airlock, and pallets. For the second 

verification mission, Spacelab would not use a habitable module but only a 

pallet configuration. The crew would operate experiments from Challenger‘s 

aft flight deck. 

377 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Spacelab 2 consisted of a pressurized igloo approximately the size of a fivegallon oil drum and three pallets, two of which joined to form the train 

needed to support several experiments. Also new on the mission was the 

instrument pointing system for pointing four of the onboard solar experiments. Spacelab would carry 13 experiments in 7 scientific disciplines. Primary objective of the mission was to demonstrate the performance of the 

igloo, the two-pallet train, and the instrument pointing system. 

john Thomas, manager of the MSFC Spacelab Program Office, said NASA 

had removed Spacelab 3 hardware from Challenger’s cargo bay and was 

reconfiguring the bay for Spacelab 2. “We expect to begin installation of the 

Spacelab 2 payload on June 3,” he noted. 

The last major test for the hardware before July 12 scheduled launch would 

be an end-twnd test planned for June 10, in which NASA would test all 

systems connecting Challenger, Spacelab 2, and the MSFC-operated payload 

operations control center (POCC) at Johnson Space Center. Thomas said the 

other primary effort was to complete training of the payload team. (Marshall 

Star, May 29/85, 1) 

August6 When the Space Shuttle Challenger on mission 51-F landed today, 

it successfully concluded the third mission of the Europeandeveloped space 

laboratory, Spacelab 2, which NASA used for the first time in its pallet-only 

configuration, NASA reported. All Spacelab subsystems but one provided 

excellent data, and NASA verified for the first time two new Spacelab systems, the ”Igloo” and the instrument pointing system. 

NASA would fly many of the Spacelab 2 instruments on future missions, so 

the 51-F mission provided opportunities not only for scientific data collection but also for engineering checkouts of the new equipment. Since instruments are brought home, engineers could evaluate and refurbish them to 

improve their performance or modify them to meet different scientific objectives in response to results from prior flights. 

Through Spacelab 2‘s four ultraviolet and visible light instruments, researchers observed a sun that, although it was in a fairly quiet phase of its 

activity cycle, displayed sunspots, filaments, granules, spicules, and prominences. These solar features changed over periods as brief as five to ten 

minutes and from orbit to orbit, day to day. 

The solar ultraviolet universal polarimeter (SOUP) started its program late 

in the mission after an unexplained shutdown and startup. Thereafter, the 

instrument performed almost perfectly, observing the strength, structure, and 

evolution of magnetic fields in the solar atmosphere. Scientists were confident that despite abbreviated operations SOUP data would be the best and 

longest run of solar granulation data ever collected. 

Although loss of altitude and propellant during initial Space Shuttle ascent 

jeopardized part of the plasma depletion experiment, planners managed to 

3 78 
Spacelab 

schedule four of the eight anticipated burns, two over Millstone Hill, Massachusetts, and one each over Arecibo, Puerto Rico, and Hobart, Australia. 

Preliminary data indicated that the burns did produce "holes" or troughs of 

depleted plasma that persisted in the ionosphere for more than an hour. The 

crew observed resultant airglow after the nighttime burns, and there were 

reports of visual observations from the ground. The Hobart site reported the 

reception of low-frequency cosmic radio emissions through the window the 

burn temporarily opened. 

In the properties of superfluid helium in zero-gravity experiment, the cryostat performed up to expectation, maintaining a temperature low enough to 

keep the helium in the superfluid state. Temperature was readily controlled, 

and the cryostat recovered well from temperature increases. These findings 

were important to the use of superfluid helium as a cryogen on future missions. 

During the gravity influenced lignification in plants experiment, pine seedlings, oats, and bean sprouts grew in self-contained growth chambers. The 

crew daily monitored chamber temperatures and photographed the chambers early and late in the mission. The oat and bean seeds germinated in 

orbit, and sprouts grew to a height of five to six inches as expected. The pine 

seedlings also showed normal growth. Researchers would analyze the plant 

tissues to determine whether there was any difference in the production rate 

of lignin between plants grown in space and in a control group grown in a 

ground laboratory. (NASA Prelim Spacelab Mission Science Report, Aug 6/ 

85; €SA release Aug 7/85) 

September 30. NASA announced that Spacelab 2, which flew onboard the 

Space Shuttle Challenger that was launched on July 29 from KSC on mission 

51-F, completed the second of two planned Design Verification Flights required by the Spacelab verification Flight Test (VFT) program. Monitoring of 

mission activities and quick-look analysis of data confirmed that the mission 

achieved the 13 specific VFT requirements and performed the planned multidiscipline science. Based on these results, NASA judged the Spacelab-2 mission objectives accomplished. 

NASA researchers were continuing detailed analysis of all data, and Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) would produce additional documents when 

results were finalized for the Spacelab system, payload integration, and the 

Spacelab2 experiments managed by MSFC. Principal investigators would 

produce separate documentation for their experiments. (NASA MOR M977-51 F-03 [postlaunch] Sept 30/85) 

October 30: NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced it 

awarded to McDonnell Douglas Technical Services Co. a 33-month 

$98,105,079 contract extension for continuing Spacelab integration work, 

bringing the total value of the Spacelab contract through June 30, 1988, to 

379 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

$341,496,165. Under the contract, the company would provide system inte 

gration, selected flight hardware, software, ground support equipment, and 

mission integration support for manifested Spacelab missions. 

Spacelab, developed by NASA under an international agreement with the 

European Space Agency, when carried in the cargo bay of the Space Shuttle 

orbiter converted it into an orbiting scientific research center. MSFC was 

responsible for monitoring Spacelab design and development activities a.nd 

for management of U.S. development of selected Spacelab components. 

(MSFC Release 85-53) 

Nowrnber 78 Many of the experiments carried in Spacelab D-1 aboard the 

Space Shuttle Challenger on Mission 61-A [see Space Transportation System/ 

Missions, Oct. 301 achieved more than 100% of mission goals, due in part to 

the continuous cooperation between experiment teams who coped with 

hardware problems and changing conditions on board the space laboratory, 

Aviation Week reported. Peter Sahm, Spacelab D-1 mission scientist, said 

this coordination allowed a rescheduling of experiment activity during the 

final mission days, maximizing the overall scientific return in spite of delays 

caused by hardware problems. 

In one of the repairs, Spacelab D-1 crew members used a saw to cut off a 

plastic cap on a valve that fed liquid into the fluid physics module’s experiment zones. “The valve had an incorrect setting, which perhaps was made 

before launch,” said Berndt Feuerbacher of West Germany‘s Deutsche Forschungs und Versuchsanstalt fur Luft und Raumfahrt’s (DFVLR) Institute for 

Space Simulation. The DFVLR executed and controlled the mission on behaif 

of West Germany’s BMFT ministry of research and technology. ”They tried to 

reset the valve with a wrench, but they couldn’t put the wrench to the nlut 

because there was a plastic cap over it. So they asked for, and received 

authorization, to cut away the plastic cap, then were able to use the wrench.” 

Feuerbacher said other repair/troubleshooting work by the Spacelab D--1 

crew members included West German payload specialist Dr. Ernst Messerschmid using a vacuum cleaner to collect debris from a heating facility in 

the Werkstofflabor material science double rack and writing a software patch 

on the Werkstofflabor to work around a malfunctioning vacuum sensor thlat 

incorrectly indicated a lack of vacuum. NASA mission specialist Dr. Bonnie 

Dunbar also used the vacuum to clean up metallic dust particles from a 

sample that broke in the Spacelab D-1 Medea’s gradient furnace with 

quenching device. 

These corrective actions demonstrated the need for trained crew members 

in complex spaceflight operations and for positive control from the ground, 

Wolfgang Finke, head of space program activities at the West German BMFT 

ministry of research and technology, indicated. “I think it also underscored 

380 
Spacelab 

the good working relationship between the German Space Operations Center here and NASA in the U.S. to overcome problems as they occurred:’ Finke 

said. (AvWk, Nov 18/85, 55 and 65) 

November 20: At the preliminary science review held the previous week at 

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), Dr. Eugene Urban, Spacelab 2 mission 

scientist, called “a complete success” the Spacelab 2 mission flown aboard 

the Space Shuttle Challenger on mission 51-F [see Space Transportation 

System/Missions, July 291, the Marshall Star reported. “We saw that the majority of the experiments collected a large amount of new information that 

should be tremendously beneficial to the world of science and technology:’ 

he commented. 

As the lead center for Spacelab 2, MSFC hosted the two-day conference in 

which numerous science teams shared early data from the mission. The 

teams represented the science disciplines of solar physics, atmospheric physics, plasma physics, life sciences, technology research, infrared astronomy, 

and high-energy astrophysics. Among those attending the conference were 

many of the principal and co-investigators for the 13 experiments, all the 

payload and mission specialists, some invited members from NASA Headquarters who supported mission work, and a number of MSFC science and 

engineering team members. 

Some results thus far, according to Urban, confirmed what scientists had 

earlier predicted but could not measure, while other results yielded some 

surprises. For example, the superfluid helium experiment confirmed theoretical predictions of wave behavior of very thin films of super-cooled helium in 

microgravity. But the infrared telescope surprised researchers when it indicated that the “Shuttle glow” phenomenon observed on past flights was weak 

in the short infrared wavelength region, where the researchers expected it to 

be strong. 

The soiar physics experiment also gathered much data, according to Urban. He cited in particular the experiment called SOUP, the Solar Optical 

Universal Polarimeter, which studied the visible surface of the sun. “We were 

able to obtain long sequences of high-resolution photos of the solar surface:’ 

he said. “We now have the means to study the growth and fading of various 

solar features like sunspots over long periods of time.” 

An example of the special qualities of Spacelab 2 was the Vehicle Charging 

and Potential Experiment, VCAP, in which a beam of charged particles from 

an electron generator passed from the orbiter‘s payload bay through the 

ionosphere. %r the first time:’ Urban pointed out, “we had an interactive 

experiment with the VCAP in which we could observe the experiment remotely-from the Plasma Diagnostics Package, another experiment we allowed to free-fly and sense environmental conditions. Together the 

diagnostics package and VCAP found some highly interesting correlations 

between the man-made electron beam simulations of the ionosphere and 

381 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

naturally occuring auroras. The information will help us understand better 

how such auroras are formed from beams of charged particles from the sun.” 

(Marshall Star, Nov 20/85, 1) 

Decenrber 24: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced preliminary 

scientific results from Spacelab 3 flown on the Space Shuttle Challenger on 

mission 51-B launched April 29, 1985. Researchers and participants in the 

sevenday flight gathered in December at the Center to present their initial 

findings. 

“The mission has made some major contributions in the physical and life 

sciences,” said Dr. George Fichtl of MSFC’s Systems Dynamics Laboratory. 

“We have gained a lot of insight for future Spacelab and space station re 

search. And I think we can now say that space research is becoming routine.” 

Initial results from the three Spacelab 3 crystal growth experiments wlere 

very promising, Ficthl noted. The two triglycine sulfate crystals and the single 

mercuric iodide crystal grown in the space laboratory were at least as good’ as 

the best crystals grown to date on earth. And they might actually be better, 

although additional testing was necessary to confirm this, Fichtl said. “This is 

of major significance, because normally we must grow between one and two 

thousand crystals on earth to get just one crystal that is equal to the quality of 

those grown on Spacelab 3. Mercuric iodide crystals have application in Xray detectors, and triglycine sulfate crystals are used in infrared detectors,” he 

said. 

In addition, the flight proved the reliability of the methods used to grow the 

crystals. Triglycine sulfate crystals were grown from a solution as part of an 

experiment provided by Alabama A&M University. The mercuric iodide crystal grew using a vapor transport process in an experiment provided by EG&G 

Energy Measurements Inc. 

The third crystal growth experiment, provided by France and which also 

used mercuric iodide, performed as expected and added to researchers 

knowledge about the process of crystal nucleation, a process difficult to 

study on earth because of gravity-induced convection. 

The Drop Dynamics Module, a fluid physics experiment developed by the 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, enabled researchers to do some experiments not 

possible on earth. Results confirmed some of the theories on how drops 

behaved when rotated, the first opportunity to test theories posed centuries 

ago including those by Isaac Newton. The experiment also proved that using 

sound waves was a viable technique for manipulating liquids in a microgravity environment, which had direct application to containerless materials 

processing in space. The technique allowed processing of materials without 

incurring the contaminating effects of the container. The experiment showed 

that the “acoustic bottle” or “crucible of sound” containing the droplet had 

much better characteristics than originally theorized. 

382 
Spacelab 

Drop dynamics experiments confirmed theories on how drops behaved 

when rotated slowly; however, experiment data showed violation of some 

basic theories relating to the behavior of drops rotated at higher rates. It was 

found, for example, that drops tended to transition (change) to a new shape at 

rotation rates lower than predicted. ‘fill this tends to indicate that some of our 

theories may need to be modified,” Fichtl said. 

Researchers for the Geophysical Fluid Flow Cell Experiment reported that 

all 102 hours of data looked good, confirming existing theories of convection, and were expected to lead to a better understanding of the dynamics of 

stellar interiors and planetary atmosphere. However, the research team noted 

that at higher heating rates-such as those that might be found on the sunthe data showed some significant departures from that anticipated. After the 

mission, researchers developed computer models of some of this new information. 

The Atmospheric Trace Molecules Spectroscopy (ATMOS) experiment, 

sponsored by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, for the first time simultaneously 

measured the concentrations of chemical compounds associated with carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and other chemical cycles in the atmosphere. This 

would provide better insight into the chemical processes that governed the 

distribution of minor and trace gases in the atmosphere between 10 and 100 

kilometers. The instrument recorded concentrations of gases as low as parts 

per 100 billion, the first time such sensitive measurements were made, and 

detected and measured traces of nitrogen pentoxide, a compound previously 

undetected in the atmosphere. 

Results from the Research Animal Holding Facility showed that the apparent case of space adaptation syndrome in one of the monkeys supported the 

contention that this species would be a good model for future studies of 

vestibular adaptation in microgravity. Results from studies of the largest group 

of rats flown aboard a single spacecraft showed their hind muscles became 11 

to 36% smaller and the bones were less strong after their flight. (MSFC 

Release 85-73) 

383 

UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS 

Missiles 

kbruary 6 Finnish army divers had recovered the main section of a stray 

Soviet rocket that had crashed December 28, 1984, through a frozen lake, 

and military officials said it was not a cruise missile, the Washington Post 

reported. A helicopter recovered the missile’s main frame and engine after 

divers had brought up the nose cone and other debris. Finnish authorities 

said the debris showed it was “an old-type missile dating from 1971 or 72 and 

without mi I itary capacity.” 

U.S. officials, contradicting an earlier statement by Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger that it was an “air cruise missile:’ agreed with the Finnish that 

the missile was an older-generation drone and unarmed. 

The Soviet Embassy in Helsinki, which said the missile had gone off course 

while in use for target practice over the Barents Sea, had requested return of 

the remnants. 

The Finnish later announced they would return the fragments, but asked 

Moscow to pay for the recovery. (W Post, Feb 3/85, A17, Feb 6/85, A151 

April 1: The Department of Defense’s 1985 edition of Soviet Military Powr 

said the USSR was continuing in 1984 deployment of new nuclear and 

conventional military weapons systems, including test firings of fifth-generation ICBMs, launchings of new classes of submarines, and installing new 

strategic bombers, the Washington Times reported. 

The book detailed several significant developments by the Soviet military, 

the article said, including continued test firings of the SS-24 and SS-25 

intercontinental ballistic missiles, launch of two units of new Delta IV-class of 

strategic ballistic missile submarines to be fitted with the SS-NX-23 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) then being flight tested, and completion of sea trials of a third 25,000-ton Typhoonclass strategic ballistic missile 

submarine to join the two Typhoon units already operational and fitted with 

The book also said the Soviets had developed a heavy-lift launch vehicle 

capable of putting 150-ton payloads into orbit as part of an “extremely high 

priority” military-related space program. The Soviet version of the US. Space 

Shuttle and manned Space Station would benefit from this heavy booster. 

Major emphasis in their space program was on longduration manned missions for military research. 

The USSR continued research on ground- and space-based, antisatellite 

high-energy lasers. “The Soviets currently have the world’s only deployed 

antisatellite weapons system that can attack satellites in nearearth orbit,” the 

book said. 

20 SS-N-20 SLBMS. 

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 385 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The Soviets also continued upgrading detection and tracking systems for 

ballistic missile defense and development of new early-warning and air-surveillance radars. Their work on a new, large phased-array radar at Krasnoyarsk 

violated the ABM treaty, the book stated, and “in addition, the Soviets are 

actively engaged in extensive research on advanced defenses against ballistic 

missiles.” (W Times, Apr 1/85, 1A) 

September 3: Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev today told a U.S. Sen.ate 

delegation that the USSR would make “radical proposals” to reduce strate:gic 

and intermediaterange offensive nuclear arms one day after the U.S. agreed 

to prohibit the militarization of space, the Washington Post reported. Gorbachev told the eight visiting senators, headed by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W. Ma.), 

that the Soviet Union opposed research on military space defense programs, 

such as President Reagan‘s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), that went beyond what was done in laboratories. 

Clarifying the Soviets’ position, Gorbachev said that any research outside of 

a laboratory was considered verifiable and subject to limits defined in the 

Antiballistic Missile Treaty ratified in 1972 by both countries. 

During the discussion on SDI research, according to notes taken by Sen. 

john Warner (R-Va.), Gorbachev said, “You can’t verify what‘s going on in the 

brain . . . and that‘s what we refer to as fundamental or basic research. 

”But as soon as you go beyond the laboratory, to mock-ups, models, contracts with defense contractors, here surely verification can be done. 

“We want a ban on that phase of research that approaches design and 

manufacture,” Warner said his notes concluded. (W Post, Sept 4/85, Al) 

Satel I i tes 

kbruary 7: The USSR today boosted the nuclear-reactor core of its Cosmos 

7607 radar ocean-surveillance satellite (RORSAT) to a higher orbit, marking 

the end of its 92day mission, Aerospace Daily reported. 

Some observers linked the maneuver to the failure the week before of 

Cosmos 7625, a solar-powered electronic ocean reconnaissance satellite 

(EORSAT). They belied that EORSATs and RORSATs worked together to 

monitor mowments of potentially hostile ships and that, upon the failure of 

Cosmos 7625, the Soviets decided Cosmos 7607was not worth maintaining. 

Others said the Soviets terminated the Cosmos 7607 mission because it 

had operated successfully for three months, and were therefore uncertain of 

the satellite’s reliability if kept in operation any longer. (The Soviets h,ad 

problems with RORSATs in the past-parts of the Cosmos 954 reactor came 

down in Canada in 1978, and the nuclear power-pack components of Cosmos 1402 reentered over the Indian Ocean and South Atlantic in early 1983. 

386 
USSR 

Cosmos 1266 lasted only about a week in 1981, and in that same year 

Cosmos 1299 only a little longer. In 1982 Cosmos 1412 was operational for 

only 40 days.) 

Cosmos 7607 was the second Soviet RORSAT of 1984; they safely boosted 

the power pack of Cosmos 1579, launched June 28, to a higher orbit on 

September 28. The Soviets boosted the power packs to high orbit so their 

decay would occur after half-life of the nuclear elements. (AD, Feb 11/85, 1) 

February 7: The USSR had launched Meteor-2, a meteorological satellite that 

would obtain global pictures of cloud cover and the surface below in visible 

and infrared frequencies in both the recorded and direct transmission mode 

and would observe penetrating-radiation flow in nearearth space, FBlS Tass 

International Service in Russian reported. 

The satellite also carried an earth-orientation system, equipment to automatically align solar panels to the sun, a radiotelemetry system for satellite 

monitoring, and a radio complex for transmission of data to earth. All equip 

ment was functioning normally, the service reported. (Tass Intl. Service in 

Russian, Feb 7/85) 

lune 27: The USSR today launched a secret rocket from its Tyuratam launch 

site that may have been an antisatellite weapons test or the first launch of a 

new Soviet rocket that used liquid hydrogen fuel instead of kerosene, the 

Washington Post reported. The rocket later broke into three pieces, the largest of which was three feet long, the North American Air Defense Command 

(NORAD) said. One piece fell out of orbit June 24 and burned up in the 

atmosphere; the two other pieces came down June 28. 

The objects were in an orbit 121 miles high at the lowest point and 215 

miles at the highest. The orbit was inclined at 64.4O, a course only slightly off 

the one the Soviets use to test new rockets and satellites, because it passed 

directly over a highly instrumented corridor in the Soviet Union. 

U.S. intelligence sources said they were baffled by the small size of the 

three pieces. One source suggested the launch may have been a test of a new 

Soviet rocket that used liquid hydrogen fuel that resulted in the launch vehicle exploding with most of the debris falling to earth out of radar contact. 

Another source speculated it might have been a test of a new antisatellite 

weapon that failed or was deliberately blown up. 

The June 21 mystery launch followed that same day the launches of Cosmos 1663 and Progress 24. The Soviets launched Cosmos 1664 June 26, 

resuming their numbered Cosmos series after skipping the June 21 ”noname” launch. NORAD gave the secret launch the designation 1985-53-A. 

(The “53” stood for the 53rd object put into space that year; ‘A“ meant 

NORAD classified it as a payload, not a rocket launcher. NORAD gave the 

suffix “B” to launch vehicles that went into orbit.) (W Post, July 5/85, A21 

387 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Space Program 

lanuary 25 FBIS reported that the USSR planned to build before the end of 

the century an orbiting power plant equal in size to a small town to provide 

electricity by solar energy. The craft would also carry panels of solar batteries. 

Soviet cosmonauts had already tested in outer space assembly methods for 

such a plant. (FBIS, Moscow Wcrld Service in English, Jan 25/85) 

March 15: Soviet cosmonaut Aleksey Leonov said in an interview with a lass 

correspondent that continued advances in space would be inconceivalble 

without extravehicular activities, FBIS Tass in English reported. Leonov eiw 

merated the accomplishments of cosmonauts during extravehicular optrations, but pointed out that the benefit of space research was not confined to 

appiied tasks. "Cosmonautics engenders a host of ideas the solution of which 

holds out a promise of immense benefit to mankind:' he said. 

He added that he hoped the space age would contribute to the unification 

of all people and states so they could concentrate on common problems. "It 

seems to me that it would be reasonable that all countries should pool their 

efforts and resources, which are unfortunately now used for military purposes, for the lofty cause of peaceful uses of outer space:' Leonov concluded. 

(FBIS, Tass in English, Mar 15/85) 

April 1: The Department of Defense's 1985 edition of Soviet Military Power 

pointed out that the Soviets were developing a version of the U.S. Space 

Shuttle, a space plane, and directedsnergy weapons and were engaged in 

military-related experiments abroad the Salyut 7 space station, the Washington Times reported. The book concluded that the USSR's grand strategy was 

to attain global supremacy "by means short of war-exploiting the coercive 

leverage inherent in superior forces, particularly nuclear forces." (W Times, 

Apr 1/85, 1A) 

April 9: In remarks at a meeting marking the 25th anniversary of the Gagarin 

Space Training Centre, Gen. Georgiy Beregowy, center commander, said that 

it had become an international space academy where 58 USSR cosmonaiJts 

and participants in international space prcgrams from the socialist countries 

and from France and India trained, FBIS, Tass in English reported. 

Beregovoy also said results of space research were used in virtually every 

sector of the national economy, with more than 800 USSR institutions and 

organizations using the research results. He said that during missions, cosmonauts were concerned with problems of agriculture; radio and electronics 

engineering; metallurgy; welding; studies of sea currents, offshore areas, and 

388 
USSR 

bottom sedimentation in river estuaries; and compiling maps of shoals and 

coastal areas. 

In other remarks at the meeting, Leonid Kizim, a participant in the longest 

space mission, which had lasted 237 days, said that during its 25 years the 

training center had become a major research institution capable of resolving 

most of the USSR’s complex scientific and technical problems. (FBIS, Tass in 

English, Apr 9/85) 

May 27: U.S. Air Force’s imaging reconnaissance spacecraft had observed the 

USSR’s 200-foot tall oxygen/hydrogen-powered rocket hardware, to be used 

in both their space shuttle and new unmanned heavy booster programs, 

being frequently mounted and rem& from its Tyuratam launch pad, suggesting Soviet dissatisfaction with the ground test results and leading U.S. 

space experts to believe the troubles could greatly slow the Soviet‘s ability to 

launch large new space station elements or space weapons such as laser 

battle stations, Aviation Week reported. 

The Soviets had not test flown any of the new heavy space shuttle or new 

unmanned-booster hardware, and serious delays in their flight test schedules 

would undoubtedly arise from the ground test problems. 

However, U.S. reconnaissance had also discovered the Soviet shuttle program recently had added a significant new element-a second large space 

shuttle orbiter whicle--observed sitting partially in a hangar at the Soviet 

Ramenskoye Flight Test Center east of Moscow. The other Soviet heavy orbiter was sitting outside the hangar. The orbiters were almost identical in size 

and design to the U.S. Space Shuttle orbiter, and the discovery of the second 

vehicle showed a forward program direction. (AvWk, May 27/85, 21) 

lune 5: The USSR launched at 10:40 a.m. Moscow time today the Soyuz T-73 

carrying cosmonauts Col. Vladimir Dzhanibekov, mission commander and a 

veteran of four previous space missions, and Viktor Savinykh for a rendezvous 

with the Salyut 7space station in the first Soviet manned launch in nearly a 

year, the Washington Times quoted the official news agency Tass as saying. By 

late evening, Soyuz T-73, fitted with new flight controls, was in an orbit 

ranging from 203 to 182 miles above earth. 

On June 8 the Soyuz spacecraft docked with the space station using the 

new flight controls and an onboard computer in the Soviet program’s first 

known manual docking. The time between launch from the Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan and the rendezvous with Salyut 7was twice as long as 

in previous Soviet space missions, leading obseners to believe the time was 

spent testing the new flight controls. 

In the past, personnel on the ground and automated onboard systems 

controlled Soviet spacecraft docking with Salyut stations, while cosmonauts 

on board simply monitored the operation. But since there had been aborted 

389 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

dockings in recent years, the Soviets might have given more control to 

Dzhanibekov. 

The Salyut space station had been mothballed since the previous October 

when three Russians returned to earth after 237 days in space, a record. (W 

Times, June 7/85, 7A; NYT, June 8/85, 4; W Post, June 9/85, A27) 

Duringlune: Although the Soviet Union in the past had responded to the 

introduction of every new U.S. weapons system by installing a corresponding 

system of its own and many observers assumed the same would be true with 

the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), there were increasing indications that 

the Soviet leadership might decide to restrict itself to taking countermeasures 

against the U.S. system and renounce the development of any Soviet counterpart to SDI, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists reported. 

In 1983 Henry Trofimenko, head of the Foreign Policy Department of the 

Institute for the Study of the USA and Canada, said that in giving effective 

answer to the U.S.’s military program “the USSR is not going to match the 

U.S. in development of every new system of weapons, nor is it going to 

imitate it.” 

More recently, a Soviet analysis by a committee of scientific and strategic 

experts of the implications of SDI stressed that Soviet countermeasures 

against a prospective U.S. system could be very effective, could be taken 

quite easily and quickly, and would cost much less than the system against 

which they were directed. 

Possible countermeasures discussed in the analysis included destruction of 

the space platforms (done by relatively small missiles, by land-based lasers, 

by armed satellites functioning as “space mines,” or by “clouds” of obstacles 

set in their path; encasing missiles with material capable of absorbing laser 

beams or of reflecting them; masking missile launches by means of smokescreens; designing a pattern of missile launches over time that would force 

the lasers constantly to redirect themselves in haphazard fashion, thereby 

reducing the effectiveness of the system; or launching dummy missiles in 

order to use up the destructive power of the system. 

The Soviet scientists agreed with western investigators that an estimated 

total cost of SDI could eventually reach $2 trillion, and even at that expenditure SDI could not guarantee that at least a few missiles in a hypothetical 

Soviet first strike might not get through to their targets. 

The Bulletin also pointed out that Soviet scientists had noted that the 

technologies required for countermeasures were in a much more advanced 

state than those required for SDI itself; in fact, much of the necessary technology already existed. Well before SDI would be in place, “an effective means 

of counteraction” could be set up and would probably cost only 1 or 2% as 

much as the system it was designed to counteract. (Bulletin of the Atomic 

Scientists, JundJuly 85, 38) 

390 
USSR 

July 5: The first month of the flight of cosmonauts Vladimir Dzhanibekov and 

Viktor Savinhkh aboard Salyut 7 was drawing to a close during which time 

the crew had accomplished all planned activities to bring the Soviet space 

station into a manned flight mode, checked the condition of onboard systems, and carried out a variety of scientific research projects and experiments, FBIS Moscow TASS in English reported. 

The cosmonauts had unloaded the Progress-24 transport spacecraft, positioned the delivered equipment, and replaced three sets of storage batteries 

as well as individual instrument units. They had used oxygen delivered in 

containers aboard the transport to pressurize the Salyut's living compartments. The cosmonauts had started preparation of the station's united propulsion unit for refuelling by checking for leaks in the fuelling lines. They would 

then pump compressed nitrogen out of the fuel tanks. 

The schedule for July 5 called for the cosmonauts to perform maintenance 

on a system for the regeneration of water from atmospheric moisture, take 

medical checks including measurements of body mass and evaluations of the 

condition of muscles, and exercise on a bicycle ergometer and running track. 

The cosmonauts would continue geophysical experiments in a research program on earth's natural resources and environment. They also would make 

visual observations and take photos of individual areas of the Atlantic Ocean. 

(FBIS Moscow Tass in English, July 5/85) 

July 70: The USSR today launched Cosmos 7667 intended for the continuation of research on the effects of spaceflight on living organisms, TASS in 

English reported. During the flight, there would be experiments to study 

processes of adaptation to weightlessness and to investigate opportunities for 

rad i at i on shield i ng d u r i ng spacefl i ght. 

The satellite carried two monkeys, Verny and Gordy, for studies on vestibular and hemodynamic responses of living organisms to weightlessness at the 

acute period of adaptation. Experiments carried out at that time would take 

quantitative measures of the excitability of the vestibular apparatus and to 

note increases in its reactivity. The experiments would also yield direct data 

on the outflow and inflow of blood to the head. 

Experiments with 10 male rats aboard the satellite were intended to determine the influence on all parts of a living organism of the acute period of 

adaptation to weightlessness and later readaptation. 

Ten tritons (mollusks) carried on the satellite previously had a portion of 

their front limbs and lenses amputated in order to study possibilities of 

regeneration and division of cells at zero gravity. And a biocalorimeter would 

monitor 1,500 Drosophila flies aboard the satellite to determine processes of 

energy exchanges during the emergence of the flies from nymphs and to 

study the flies' metabolism. Guppy fish, cornseeds, and crocuses were also 

experimental subjects. 

39 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Scientists from the U.S., Bulgaria, Hurigary, the German Democratic Repuhiic, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, and France cooperated with Soviet scientists in developing the experimental equipment for the flight and in 

pre- and postflight examination of the animals and plants abroad the spacecraft. (FBIS, Tass in English, July 10/85, July 13/85) 

July 22 During a “Science and Engineering” radio program, Boris Belits,kiy 

responded to a New Zealander‘s question about the possibility of there sonieday being a larger Soviet space station, FBIS Moscow World Service in English reported. 74 Soviet orbital station of the next generation will be a larger 

and more comfortable complex with better facilities for research work, pilot 

production, cosmonaut exercises, recreation, and everyday life generally,” 

Belitskiy said. 

When asked whether the Soviets were developing a reusable spacecraft 

like the U.S. Space Shuttle, Belitskiy responded, “For the present, freight’ers 

of the Progress type meet the needs of resupplying Salyut orbital stations. 

Nevertheless, Soviet space scientists do see a future for reusable transport 

systems and have been conducting tests in this area. The technological prob 

lems involved have, on the whole, been solved, but this cannot be said of the 

economic problems . . . This being so, Soviet space scientists are interested in quite a few other approaches to the problem as well.” 

In response to a question about a manned mission to Mars, Belitskiy said, 

“Some day, undoubtedly, there will be such a mission but that’s still a long 

way down the road. And a vast project of this kind, bound to be very expensive, would be greatly facilitated by more cooperation between the major 

space powers.” (FBIS, Moscow World Service in English, July 22/85) 

luly 28 Over 700 enterprises and organizations in the Soviet Union used 

pictures taken from Soviet orbital Salyut space stations, helping to save the 

equivalent of $8 million, FBIS Moscow World Service in English reported. 

For example, the photos assisted in selecting routes of tunnels for the BaykalAmur railway in eastern USSR. And cosmonauts Vladimir Dzhanibekov and 

Viktor Savinykh, then aboard Salyut 7, were working on a new program of 

geophysical research. (FBIS Moscow World Service in English, July 28/85) 

September 18 The Soyuz T-14 spaceship, after launch September 17, docked 

today with the Salyut-7/Soyuz T-13 orbital complex manned by Vladimir 

Dzhanibekov and Viktor Savinykh, FBIS TASS in English reported. After 

checking the integrity of the docking compartment, spaceship commander 

Lt. Col. Vladimir Vasyutin, flight engineer Georgiy Grechko, and research Lt. 

Col. Aleksandr Volkov entered the station. 

During the planned eightday joint flight, the cosmonauts would conduct 

geophysical, astrophysical, and medical research as well as technical and 

392 
USSR 

biotechnological experiments. Then Savinykh, Vasyutin, and Volkov would 

continue work on the station, while Dzhanibekov and Grechko returned to 

earth in the Soyuz T-13. (FBIS, Tass in English, Sept 17/85, Sept 18/85) 

September 26: Soviet cosmonauts Vladimir Dzhanibekov and Georgi 

Grechko in the Soyuz T-13 spacecraft returned to earth September 26 from 

the Salyut 7 orbiting complex, making a soft landing 220 km northeast of 

Dzhezkazgan, the Washington Post reported. Vladimir Vasyutin, Viktor 

Savinykh, and Aleksandr Volkov remained onboard Salyut 7. The partial 

replacement of the crew, FBlS Moscow Domestic Service in Russian re 

ported, for the first time provided for continuous use over a prolonged period 

of a manned space complex, thus substantially enhancing its efficiency. 

The present Soviet space effort was the fourth long-term expedition aboard 

the Salyut 7 station since its 1982 launch. The overlapping of crews meant 

that the Salyut 7 would not have to be shut down and restarted. Left empty 

after the previous mission ended in October 1984, the station suffered an 

electrical failure that created severe and dangerous problems for Dzhanibe 

kov and Savinykh when they docked June 8 with the station. 

The Soviet space program emphasized endurance flights in space with the 

ultimate goal of establishing large permanently manned orbiting complexes. 

The previous Soviet space mission set a record for human endurance in space 

when three crew members lived aboard Salyut 7fOr 237 days. (W Post, Sept 

27185, A21; FBlS Moscow Service in Russian, Sept 26/85) 

October 14 At a news conference to discuss the recent flights of cosmonauts 

Vladimir Dzhanibekov and Georgiy Grechko, Soviet space officials said today that they expected to have a permanently manned space station by 1990, 

but that the Salyut 7 orbital laboratory would not be the spacecraft that 

hosted the rotating crews, the NY Times reported. Oleg Gazenko, head of the 

health ministry's Biomedical Problems Institute, which oversaw space medicine, said no unresolved problems remained to block development of the 

permanent station and that the crew rotation on Salyut 7showed that incoming cosmonauts performed their research work better when they were spared 

the start-up operations needed to reactivate the space laboratory. 

At about the same time, Soviet officials told a U.S. Congressional delegation headed by Rep. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) [see U.S. Space Policy/lnternational, 

Oct. 101 that it was building a new space station that would be ready for 

launch in 1986, Defense Daily reported. Because the Soviets did not want to 

have two space stations in orbit at the same time, timing of the launch 

depended on the condition of the orbiting Salyut 7station, which was nearly 

doubled in size in September by the orbiting and deployment of a large new 

module. Nelson said the Soviets gave no details of the new station, which, if 

it is designed to be permanently manned, would beat the planned U.S. space 

station by seven or eight years. (NYT, Oct 15/85, C11; D/D, Oct 21/85, 259) 

393 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

October 3 7: The Soviet Union, which had kept its space program under tight 

military control since it launched in 1957 the first satellite, announced creation of a civilian space agency, the NY Times reported. The agency would be 

responsible for the design, construction, and use of spacecraft for scientific 

research, remote sensing applications such as surveys of resources and crolps, 

and joint space programs with other countries. 

In making the announcement, the government newspaper lzvestia identified the new agency as the Main Administration for the Creation and Use of 

Space Technology for the Economy and for Scientific Research, the Post said. 

It would be known as Glavkosmos, an acronym for the Russian terms “maiin” 

and “space.” 

lzvestia did not specify the position of the agency in the Soviet government‘s table of organization but did identify the head of the agency as A. 1. 

Dunayev. 

The only other publicly disclosed spacerelated agency in the Soviet Union 

was the Space Research Institute, founded in 1965 and a unit of the Soviet 

Academy of Sciences. Western officials generally regarded that institute as 

performing some civilian space coordinating functions. However, in announcing Glavkosmos, lzvestia said, “It goes without saying that the effective 

use of space technology is of interest to many government ministries and 

agencies and to scientific organizations. The space program has reached 

such scope as to require the creation of a special coordinating agency.” 

According to the announcement, the new agency would consider proposals for projects, work out long-term plans, and administer programs. It 

would also be responsible for launching satellites on vehicles expected to be 

supplied by the military and for collection and dissemination of satellite 

information. 

lzvestia said the agency would administer the lntercosmos program and the 

search and rescue satellite program, an international effort of the Soviet 

Union, the U.S., Canada, and France. The announcement did not make clear 

whether the new agency would administer any manned flights; but the emphasis seemed to be on automated space vehicles concerned with remote 

sensing, which until then had been part of the Cosmos series, a mixture of 

nearly 1700 civilian and military satellites launched since 1962. (NY Times, 

Oct 31/85, 813) 

November 27: The Soyuz T-74 spacecraft carrying three Soviet cosmonauts 

made an unscheduled return to earth today because its commander, Vladimir 

Vasyutin, was ill and needed hospital treatment, the Washington Post quoted 

the official news agency Tass as saying. The illness forced the crew to leave 

the Salyut 7 orbiting laboratory, the first time in either the Soviet or U.S. 

programs that a spaceflight was curtailed because a crew member became 

sick in orbit, the Washington Times said. 

394 
USSR 

Vasyutin, who was making his first flight, landed after spending 65 days in 

space. He, Viktor Savinykh, and Alexander Volkov, who were both reported 

feeling well, had been conducting scientific experiments aboard Salyut 7. 

Tass gave no details of Vasyutin’s illness, but western space experts said it was 

unlikely he was suffering from a simple case of space sickness-the inability 

to acclimatize properly to conditions in space. The Tass report quoted doctors who performed a preliminary examination on Vasyutin as saying his 

condition was satisfactory. 

The unscheduled return of the cosmonauts left the Salyut 7, which had 

been in orbit since April 1982, unmanned for the first time since June. 

Almost a week later, the Post reported that officials at Johnson Space Center 

said that cosmonauts who stayed in touch with US. astronauts had said 

Vasyutin caught a cold that grew worse and spread to his sinus cavity and 

lungs. The sources said Vasyutin had a fever that refused to break and may 

have come down with viral pneumonia, which was untreatable with the 

antibiotics the cosmonauts carried. (WPost, Nov 22/85, A26, 27/85, A3; W 

Times, Nov 22/85, 2A) 

December 37: During 1985 the Soviet Union launched 96 spacecraft, the 

US. 17, the Washington Post reported, reflecting what space specialists said 

was the fact that most Soviet spy satellites burned out within weeks while 

U.S. satellites often remained in orbit for years. The Soviets launched 33 

photo reconnaissance satellites, amounting to more than one-third of the 

total Soviet launches from January 1 through December 26. 

In 1985 the Soviets continued to stress the ability to locate with satellites 

U.S. ships at sea, Navy officials commented. One type of Soviet ocean surveillance satellite, which had radar beams that could penetrate clouds, 

sought aircraft carriers and other big ships. The radar provided the location of 

ships below the satellite, forcing the Navy to resort to new methods to foil 

radar detection. 

Nicholas Johnson, advisory scientist to Teledyne Brown Engineering Co., 

kept a widely used log of U.S. and Soviet space launches, and he said that the 

Soviets launched in 1985 five ocean surveillance satellites, two carrying radar 

and three equipped with electronic eavesdropping gear. He added that Soviet 

launches included 19 communication satellites, two of a variety never seen 

before, and seven satellites designed to warn Moscow of a nuclear attack. 

Through espionage the Soviets had learned a great deal about U.S. spy 

satellite capabilities and had taken steps to mask some of their military 

activities, intelligence officials noted. Space specialists largely agreed that 

the US. was well ahead of the Soviets in the art of spying from space, 

although they indicated the Soviet’s reconnaissance satellites were steadily 

improving. (WPost, Dec 31/85, A4) 

395 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Spacecraft 

February 28 The USSR‘s Vega 7 and Vega 2 Venus and Halley’s Comet 

exploratory spacecraft had traveled 18.7 and 17.8 million miles from earth, 

respectively, and were functioning normally, Tass in English reported. The 

Soviets had had 67 radio communications with the stations since launch to 

measure flight-path parameters, monitor onboard systems, and to receive 

scientific and telemetric data. 

Stations located in Evpatoriya and Simeiz in the Crimea, Goldstone (U.S.), 

Jodrell Bank (U.K.), Canberra (Australia), and Onsala (Sweden) received on 

January 21 and February 18 signals from the spacecrafts’ radio transmitters to 

prepare for research on the circulation of the Venusian atmosphere using 

balloon probes. The reception of signals tested correlation of the various 

ground-measuring systems to ensure pinpointing of balloon probe locations 

during their forthcoming drift in the Venusian atmosphere. (FBIS, Tass in 

English, Feb 28/85) 

April 26 The USSR today launched the automatic “Prognoz-10-Intercosmos” 

station to study the structure of interplanetarj and nearearth shock waves 

arising from the interaction of solar wind plasma and the earth’s magnet@ 

sphere, FBIS, Tass in English reported. The station carried scientific equip 

ment designed by USSR and Czechoslovakian scientists under an 

“intercosmos” program of international cooperation. 

The station was in a high elliptic orbit with an apogee of 200,000 km, 

perigee of 400 km, period of 96 hours and 25 minutes, and inclination of 

65O. The report stated all onboard systems and scientific equipment were 

functioning normally and that the USSR’s coordinationcomputer center and 

institutes of the Academy of Sciences were processing incoming data. (FBIS, 

Tass in English, Apr 26/85) 

May29 Finland and Sweden would together build measuring equipment for 

two Mars space probes for launch in three years by the USSR, FBIS, Helsinki 

Domestic Service in Finnish reported. The work was significant, the service 

quoted Risto Pellinen of the Finnish Meteorological Institute as saying, because it was the first time Finns would build equipment to be launched into 

space. 

Altogether 11 countries and the European Space Agency would participate 

in the program. The Mars probes would study solar winds, the planet itself, 

its near surroundings, and its two moons (Phobos and Delmos). Finland with 

Sweden would build equipment to measure the nature and characteristics of 

space particles. 

Participants and funding sources for the Finnish program were the Center 

for the Development of Technology, the Academy of Finland, the Ministry of 

396 
USSR 

Trade and Industry, the Scientific-Technical Cooperation Committee of the 

Foreign Ministry, and the Meteorological Institute. (FBIS, Helsinki Domestic 

Service in Finnish, May 29/85) 

lune 72: Geoffrey Perry of the United Kingdom’s Kettering Group said the 

radio aboard the Soviet Salyut 7 space station came on the air June 12, 

indicating the two cosmonauts who entered it had been successful in repair 

efforts, Aerospace Daily reported. Perry said he had received no radio signals 

from the Salyut for some time, supporting the belief of Western obsemrs that 

the space station experienced some kind of electrical problem since the last 

cosmonauts had left it in October 1984. 

Perry noted the cosmonauts were transmitting on June 12 from 7:09 a.m. to 

7:16 a.m. GMT on the Soyuz frequency, but by 8:46 a.m. GMT, the next time 

they were within his radio range, they had switched to the Salyut frequency. 

(AD, June 13/85, 2) 

August 5: Cosmonauts Vladimir Dzhanibekov and Viktor Savinykh, after 

completing a docking operation, boarded the Salyut 7 orbital station to 

discover cold and darkness, FBIS Moscow World Service in English reported. 

The electricity supply system had broken down, water was frozen, and a crust 

of ice covered the instrument panels. It took a week and a half of intensive 

work by the cosmonauts to eliminate the defects and restore electricity and 

life support systems. Mission planners sent an automatic cargo ferry that 

delivered instruments, fuel, water, and food supplies. After restoring the 

station, the crew continued with planned research. 

In a report on a Pravda article on the same topic, the Washington Post said 

the failure of two batteries had paralyzed the Salyut 7 station after the previous threeman crew mothballed the station in October 1984 following a 

record 238 days in orbit. 

A NY Times article noted Pravda mentioned the risky docking took 50 

hours, during which the cosmonauts had to rely on visual clues instead of the 

automatic electronic radar pulses exchanged between the Salyut and their 

Soyuz T-13 spacecraft. 

“They’ve snatched it back from the brink of death,” the NY Times quoted 

James Oberg, an American expert on the Soviet space program, saying. “It’s a 

major coup.” 

Later the cosmonauts made a five-hour space walk in which they replaced 

two of the ship’s solar panels. The excursion gave them a chance to test new 

semirigid space suits, which were shown on Soviet TV. (FBIS Moscow World 

Service in English, Aug 5/85; W Post, Aug 6/85, A12; NM, Aug 7/85, D19) 

October 77: Soviet cosmonauts Vladimir Vasyutin, Viktor Savinykh, and 

Aleksandr Volkov continued their work aboard the Salyut 7/Soyuz T- 14 or397 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

bital station following the October 2 docking with Cosmos 1686, FBIS Mloscow in English to North America reported. Soviet space officials designed 

Cosmos 7686 to function as a heavy transport vehicle, an inter-orbit tug, or as 

a specialized module for research or production. During docking, the Soviet‘s flight control center and crew on the orbiting complex guided search for 

the satellite, approach, and mooring. 

Cosmos 1686 delivered equipment and various other cargo for continued 

functioning of the complex; the cosmonauts would test satellite equipment 

and elements of its construction and develop methods of controlling orbital 

complexes of large dimensions and masses. 

Soviet science correspondent Boris Belitskiy said of the Cosmos 1686 niission: “The experience gained in recent years in operating such modular 

spacecraft with the Salyut 6 and Salyut 7 stations showed that such satelliites 

can considerably extend the active life of future orbital complexes and make 

their operation more fruitful. Satellites of this new type have an advanced 

computerized control system, a large supply of propellant, and a power 

system incorporating solar batteries. The satellite’s control system makes possible the automatic search for an orbital station, rendezvous, and docking, all 

in an unmanned mode. The onboard computer enabled mission control to 

transmit flight assignments that would over several days, if necessary months, 

assure the autonomous functioning of the satellite’s control system. 

‘Also, the sate!lite’s control system is highly economical,” Belitskiy continued. “The control system itself could select an optimal mode dictated by 

considerations of saving propellant. A previous heavy satellite of this new 

type, Cosmos 1443, was tested in 1983 as a transport craft of large cargo 

capacity. It was fitted with a recoverable capsule which returned a 350-kg 

payload to earth. The present Cosmos 7686 is a modular version. Such a 

modular design of future extraterrestial colonies is particularly promising 

because long-term orbiting stations can most reasonably be assembled directly in orbit from separate modules. 

“Can such automatic craft make space research significantly more efficient?” Belitskiy continued. “That is the question the flight of Cosmos 1686 is 

expected to answer. The total weight of the craft with its payload exceeds 20 

tons, and it‘s almost as long as the Salyut Istation. The diameter of its widest 

part exceeds four meters and it carries over three tons of propellant and five 

tons of cargo. Docked with the Salyut 7 station, Cosmos 1686 has almost 

doubled the working space available aboard the orbital station and made 

conditions for the crew more comfortable. Its flight program provides for 

extensive research for economic needs.” (FBIS Moscow in English to North 

America, Oct 17/85, Oa 2/85) 

December 14: Soviet scientists from the lnterkosmos Institute in Moscow 

together with scientists from the European Space Agency (ESA), the Universities of Utrecht (Netherlands), Birmingham (Great Britain), and Tuebingen and 

398 
USSR 

the Max Planck Institute for Extra-terrestrial Physics in Garching, West Germany were planning to launch in spring 1986 an observatory to investigate Xrays in space, the magazine Geo reported. The observatory would carry four 

instruments intended to investigate the X-ray stars of the Milky Way, the 

remnants of dying stars (supernova), and nuclei of other active galaxies. They 

called the project "Salyut-Hexe," in which Salyut referred to the Soviet space 

station and Hexe to the English abbreviation for high-energy X-ray experiment. 

The magazine noted that Dr. Claus Reppin of the Max Planck Institute said 

it was not clear whether the observatory would be coupled to the existing 

Soviet Salyut 7 space station or to a new space station, Salyut 8. Reppin 

confirmed that the German scientists would not, for reasons of secrecy, be 

present at the installation and assembly of the instruments. Soviet scientists 

had spent two weeks in West Germany to familiarize themselves with the 

instruments so that they would be able to assemble and install them. Reppin 

also said the West European scientists did not know whether they could be 

present at the launch, which would probably be at Baykonur, but he indicated it was probably more important that they be at the ground control 

center in or near Moscow by a few days after launch, when measuring 

instruments would begin operation. 

The experiment, the magazine added, was part of the Soviet effort to set up 

a permanently inhabited large space station. At the beginning of 1986, the 

Soviets planned to launch the new station with several coupling connections 

for attachment of various modules. In this way, a settlement in space would 

grow gradually according to a building block principle; up to 30 cosmonauts 

were in training to serve as crew on the new station. (FBIS, Hamburg DPA in 

German, Dec 14/85) 

399 

UNITED KINGDOM 

Satellites 

February 13 NASA announced that the United Kingdom’s contribution to 

active magnetospheric particle tracer explorers (AMPTE), the UK subsatellite 

(UKS), did not respond to commands when it had passed over Chilton on 

January 16 or since. Efforts to contact UKS by Chilton and the Deep Space 

Network (with 10 kwuplink power) were unsuccessful. 

British officials said they would continue periodic efforts to contact the 

satellite, but were not optimistic. In five months of operation, the UKS had 

supported three chemical releases and had met 70% of the UK-project objectives. (NASA announcement, Feb 13/85) 

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 

401 

UNITED STATES 

Congress 

February 77: Sen. Jake Garn (R-Utah) today joined five astronauts and a 

French pilot for the final two-hour practice aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger, which they would fly in two weeks, the Washington Post reported. 

They had run through launch procedures and checked all spacecraft systems 

to avoid any surprises at liftoff, ending with a simulated liftoff at 4 p.m. 

Garn, who would fly on Challenger as a congressional observer, was chairman of a subcommittee that oversaw NASA funding. The other non-NASA 

spaceman was French Air Force Lt. Col. Patrick Baudry, who would serve as a 

payload specialist. (W Post, Feb 18/85, A14) 

March 20: In response to numerous comments regarding the appropriateness 

of Sen. Jake Garn’s (R-Utah) flight on the Space Shuttle, Sen. Barry Goldwater 

(R-Ariz.) wrote in a letter to the Washington Times that Garn had as good a 

background in aviation as any member of Congress and his was a long, deep, 

and sincere interest. “Of all the members of this body that I know, he is the 

least motivated by any desire for publicity. 

“Why is it wrong for a member of Congress, the body that is responsible for 

authorizing and funding the whole space program, to engage in flight if for 

no other reason than to get a better idea of how the whole operation works?” 

Sen. Goldwater concluded that he would defend the desirability of Sen. 

Garn’s flight, as he would be able “to give the rest of us in Congress who vote 

the money a better idea of how the whole operation is going.” (W Times, 

Mar 20185. 7A) 

/u/y 20: The White House today issued President Reagan’s Proclamation 

5358 for Space Exploration Day, 1985. In the proclamation, the President 

said, ”Sixteen years ago, on July 20, 1969, American astronauts sent a message to Earth: ‘The Eagle has landed.’ In a dramatic and compelling moment 

in history, the first humans had reached solid ground beyond our own 

planet . . . “Space exploration is little more than a quarter century old. In that brief 

period, more has been learned about the cosmos and our relation to it than 

in all the preceding centuries combined. The ever-increasing knowledge 

gained from peaceful space exploration, and the uses to which that knowledge is put, potentially benefit all those on Spaceship Earth . . . /‘In recognition of the achievements and promise of our space exploration 

program, the Congress, by Senate Joint Resolution 154, has designated July 

20, 1985, as “Space Exploration Day . . . 

PRECEDiNG PAGE BLANK NOT FllMED 403 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

“I call on the people of the United States to observe the occasion with 

appropriate ceremonies and activities.” (Admin. of Ronald Reagan, July 22/ 

85, 924) 

U.S. Air Force 

Aircrafi 

February 8 The EC-18B advanced-range instrumentation aircraft (ARIA), the 

first of four former 707 commercial aircraft modified by Aeronautical Systems 

Division’s (ASD) 4950th Test Wing, rolled out on January 4, the Air Force 

Systems Command’s (AFSC) Newsreview reported. To augment ARIA-mission 

capabilities, ASD had purchased the Boeing 707-320 aircraft from American 

Airlines in 1982 as replacements for four of the seven Boeing EC-135s in the 

current ARIA fleet. 

The aircraft would provide worldwide missile- and space-testing support by 

sewing as airborne tracking stations over land where geographical constraints limited ground-tracking stations and over broad ocean areas where no 

tracking stations existed. The EC-18B’s ARIA fleet improvements included 

more room for mission equipment, increased fuel capacity, and more fuelefficient engines. 

Modification of the 707s had offered major cost savings over purchase of 

new aircraft; program costs for the four aircraft were $25 million-$6 million 

for aircraft purchase and $19 million for ARIA conversion. At the time of 

purchase, Boeing officials had estimated new aircraft would cost $25 million 

each, not including ARlA-conversion costs. 

The most obvious external modification was the large bulbous nose-a 9 ft. 

radome housing the world’s largest airbornesteerable antenna, a 7 ft. dish for 

telemetry reception. The nose also housed a smaller weather antenna. Other 

additions included a smaller radome for communications on the aircraft top 

and wingtipprobe antennas for high-frequency radio transmission and recep 

tion. 

ASD also outfitted the aircraft with a navigation station, mission-crirical 

cockpit avionics, a modified electrical system, and an improved environmental-control system. (AFSC Newsreview, Feb 8/85, 6) 

April25 Ted Stens (R-Aka.), chairman of the Senate defense appropriations 

subcommittee, told Air Force officials today that Congress would provide 

funds in FY 86 to buy a number of Northrop F-20 Tigershark fighters, possibly for the Guard or Reserve, despite what the Air Force decided about the 

plane, Defense Dailyreported. “You’re going to get some F-20s if you like it 

or not,” he said, although he added if the Air Force could prove to Congress 

404 
United States 

the F-20 could not do the job, that would be a different matter. He also said 

that no one in Congress was “shilling” for one company or another, but 

simply wanted to have competition, which would ensure the best product at 

the lowest price. 

Air Force Assistant Secretary Thomas Cooper said the Air Force was very 

interested in the F-20, but that the question had not been put to the Defense 

Resources Board and that the Defense Department had made no final decision to buy the F-20 in FY 87. 

When Sen. William Proxmire (D-Wis.) asked about cutting the FY 86 F-16 

buy from 180 to 161 aircraft and using the money freed to buy 32 F-~OS, 

Cooper answered that the Air Force would not simply buy 32 F-20s without 

a follow-on commitment. 

Northrop had proposed to provide 396 F-20s to the Air Force over a fouryear period at a fixed price of $15 million each. However, Cooper said 

General Dynamics had told the Air Force that it would provide a fixed-price 

proposal for the F-16 if the Air Force requested it. 

Sen. Warren Rudman (R-N.H.) pointed out the “supplier of the F-16 has 

not had the best record recently in defense contracting, . . . in fact, is in 

mild disrepute with some sectors” of the Department of Defense and is 

“guilty of some misconduct.” Therefore, he said, the government should not 

“continue to reward them” if there was a viable competitor who gave them a 

better price. (D/D, Apr 26/85, 321) 

May 14 A Northrop F-20 Tigershark crashed today while practicing its routine for the Paris Air Show during a stopover at Goose Bay, Labrador, Aerospace Daily reported. The pilot, whose name was withheld pending 

notification of next of kin, was fatally injured. A Northrup spokesman said an 

investigation was underway to determine the cause of the crash and that the 

company “would expect the cooperation of the Air Force in the investigation 

since they are the executive agency for the F-20.” 

The only other F-20 was at Edwards Air Force Base, California, and would 

remain there to continue the flight demonstration program “because of the 

high interest in the F-20 program in this country,” the spokesman continued. 

The first F-20 had crashed the previous October during a demonstration 

flight at Suwon Air Base near Seoul, South Korea, killing Northrop chief test 

pilot Darrell Cornell. Northrop reported at the time that the crash was “pilot 

induced” and the “the aircraft and all its systems functioned properly.” The 

fourth Tigershark was on the assembly line. 

An attempt earlier in the month to provide funding for the Northrop F-20 

failed, Defense Daily reported, when an amendment by Rep. James Courter 

(R-N.J.) to substitute 30 Northrop F-20s for 24 General Dynamics F-16s in 

FY 86, brought up in a closed door markup by the House Armed Services 

procurement and military nuclear systems subcommittee, failed by a note of 

8-4. An amendment by the panel‘s chairman, Rep. Samuel Stratton (D-NY), 

405 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

calling for competition between the F-20 and the F-16 in the FY 87 budget, 

prevailed. 

The Stratton amendment specified that the Secretary of the Air Force, in the 

development of the tactical aircraft fighter program for the Five-Year Defense 

Plan beginning in FY 87, “shall establish a competition for procuremenit of 

tactical fighter aircraft to meet the requirements of the Air Force above a 

minimum number of F-16 and F-20 aircraft that the Secretary determwnes 

appropriate for meeting the requirements of the active and reserve corniponents. Such competition shall be among all suitable aircraft, including the F16 and F-20 aircraft.” 

A report drafted for the subcommittee stated that the F-16 and F-20 “are 

both roughly comparable aircraft. Both have new and modern radar and 

avionics systems, both haw excellent performance as air-to-air combat 

fighters, and both haw highly accurate air-to-ground bombing systems.” The 

report did note that the F-16 had the advantage in range and payload capabilities, while the F-20 has “a significant advantage“ in reliability and maintainability factors that affect the combat readiness and operating costs.” (ND, 

May 15/85, 1; D/D, May 2/85, 9) 

May 77: The U.S. Air Force awarded Martin Marietta Corp. an $87-million 

contract to begin production of the Low-Altitude Navigation and Targeting 

Infrared System for Night (LANTRIN), the Air Force Systems Command 

Newsreview reported. The award enabled Martin Marietta to buy specialized 

factory equipment to produce the first two of 700 navigation pods for LANTRIN, which consisted of navigation and targeting pods mounted on tactical 

aircraft and a head-up display in the cockpit. The Air Force scheduled production of the targeting pod for spring 1986. 

Production of the entire system, which would give tactical pilots a day/ 

night under weather navigation and weapondelivery capability, would cost 

$3.16 billion for the 700 systems for use on F-15EI F-16, and A-10 aircraft. 

The remaining 698 systems would come under fiscal year options on the 

contract over the next eight years. 

The only system of its kind, LANTRIN had a terrain-following radar that 

scanned the horizon while keeping the pilot at a safe altitude, even in poor 

visibility. The navigation pod turned night into day by distinguishing the 

difference in temperature of the terrain below. The result was a daylight scene 

that appeared on the head-up display mounted in front of the pilot. The 

combination of infrared and radar allowed the pilot to fly safely at a few 

hundred feet above ground. 

The targeting pod also contained a laser designator for delivery of laser 

guided weapons and an automatic handoff capability to allow acquisition 

and delivery of Maverick missiles against tactical targets. (AFSC Newsreview, 

May 17/85, 7) 

406 
United States 

May 31: The U.S. Air Force’s Aeronautical Systems Division’s 4950th Test 

Wing unveiled a generic testbed, the airborne digital avionics test system 

(ADATS), for flight testing newly developed aircraft avionics systems, the Air 

Force System Command’s Newsreview reported. The wing‘s flight test engineering division developed the test pallet in a continuing effort to enhance its 

mission capabilities at reduced costs. 

Air Force personnel could easily load and unload the test pallet from C141 and C-130 aircraft and would use it to flight test aircraft components that 

used a Mil-Std-1553B data bus (a format for transferring digitized information to and from various systems and sensors in an aircraft). 

The avionics test system pallet provided or simulated all electronic signals 

the test item received from the aircraft in which it was designed to fly. To 

accomplish this the pallet had navigation, air data, and timemeasuring systems. A mission computer on the pallet controlled the test item and the 

ADATS’s functions. Flight-test engineers instructed the ADATS through a computer console during each test. 

Before ADATS, test wing electronic technicians typically built a dedicated 

test pallet for each test item. With ADATS, only software needed changing. 

Future planned upgrades for ADATS included a global positioning system for 

better navigation accuracy, a radar altimeter, and Doppler velocity sensor. 

Other planned improvements should permit ADATS to satisfy most digital 

avionics flight-test requirements through the year 2005. (AFSC Newsreview, 

May 312185, 4) 

/u/y 8 In an internal memorandum Assistant Defense Secretary James Wade 

Jr. asked the Air Force why F-15 and F-16 fighter jets were getting morerather than less-expensive to build as time went on, the Washington Times 

reported. The cost of an aircraft normally decreased over the years because 

the high initial costs of design, engineering, and getting an assembly line into 

operation were no longer charged. 

The memo said the price of the F-15-calculated in 1970 dollars-rose 

from $5.5 million to $7.4 million a plane in 1985. In current dollars, an F-15 

cost 26.3 million. The price of an F-16, in 1975 dollars, rose from $3.9 

million in 1980 to $4.8 million in 1984. In current dollars, the plane cost $14 

million. McDonnell Douglas Corp. had been making F-15s since 1970; 

General Dynamics Corp. started building F-16s in 1975. 

A Pentagon spokesman said the Air Force was working on a response. 

However, Pentagon documents provided to Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) 

showed construction hours for both aircraft were well above engineering 

predictions. A single F-15 was supposed to take 22,978 manhours to build; 

during the first quarter of 1984, McDonnell Douglas needed 37,193 

manhours to complete a plane, the documents reported. An F-16 was sup 

posed to take 837,300 manhours to build; in the first quarter of 1984, Gen407 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

era1 Dynamics took 1.4 million manhours to build a plane. (W Times, July 

8/85, 1OC) 

August 1: Under-Secretary of the U.S. Air Force E. C. Aldridge, Jr. announced 

in an internal information memorandum that the policy of the U.S. Air Force 

was to “ensure that the unique capabilities that can be derived from the 

presence of military man in space shall be utilized to the extent feasible and 

practical to enhance existing and future missions in the interest of national 

security objectives.” The memorandum implied that U.S. Air Force would be 

committed to working with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in its most recent manned space undertaking to deploy in orbit a 

manned, permanent orbiting space station in the early 1990s. Memorandum 

for the Vice Chief of Staff, USAF from Under-Secretary E. C. Aldridge, Jr., 

August 1, 1985. 

August 2Or Honeywell’s Military Avionics Division would soon begin for the 

McDonnell Aircraft Co. full-scale development, costing about $500 million, 

of a tactical electronic warfare intermediate support system (TISS) for the F15 Eagle aircraft program, Defense Daily reported. The award to Honeywell 

was part of a larger contract the U.S. Air Force recently awarded to McDonnell to upgrade the F-15 tactical warfare system (TEWS). 

The Honeywell TISS would test the F-15’s electronic warfare system to 

minimize downtime, reduce maintenance costs, and improve overall missile 

effectiveness. 

Stanley Moeschi, Honeywell vice president, noted that, “This contract 

demonstrates the maturity of Honeywell’s automatic test technology a,nd a 

substantial advancement in state-of-the-art digital and radio frequency electronic warfare testing.” (D/D, Aug 20/85, 1) 

September 5 As part of its FY 87 defense budget planning, the Department 

of Defense (DOD) approved a competition between the Northrop F-20 Tigershark and the General Dynamics F-16 Falcon as a fighter interceptor 

aircraft for the air defense fleet, Defense Daily reported. However, DOD had 

not decided how many prototype aircraft it would purchase for the competition. 

Although a FY 86 defense authorization bill specified a competition between the two aircraft, some members of the U.S. House wanted to direct the 

Air Force to set a minimum number of F-16 and F-20 fighters that it would 

procure in FY 86 and then institute the competition. 

The possibility of a competition had set off a price war between Northrup 

and General Dynamics, with General Dynamics proposing a specially configured F-16C to compete in cost and effectiveness with the F-20. (D/D, Sept 

5/86, 12) 

408 
United States 

September 26 A Federal grand jury in St. Louis subpoenaed 11 McDonnell 

Douglas employees and certain company records as part of its investigation 

of alleged overcharges on F-15 contracts with the Air Force, Defense Daily 

reported. The Defense Contract Audit Agency alleged that the company 

furnished inaccurate cost and pricing data to justify $28 million in probable 

inflation in the cost of manufacturing major pieces of the F-15% equipment. 

McDonnell spokesman Gerald Meyer said the subpoenas apparently re 

lated to an investigation of pricing elements in FY 80 and 81 F-15 contracts, 

although McDonnell did not know the full scope of the investigation. 

Meyer said McDonnell had “no reason to believe there was any unlawful 

conduct” on its part and that it would cooperate with the Justice Department 

and other government agencies participating in the investigation. He added 

that McDonnell felt the serving of the subpoenas “was inappropriate and 

unnecessary because it was not preceded by more ordinary channels of 

communications. All they had to do was ask.” (DD, Sept 26/85, 130) 

NASA and U.S. Air Force 

kbruary 27: As a result of White House prodding, the Air Force had signed 

an agreement to use NASA’s Space Shuttle for at least eight flights a year for 10 

years starting in 1988, and the Air Force would get a discount when NASA 

worked out a new pricing policy for the start of FY 89, the Washington Post 

reported. The Air Force would pay a fixed fee at the start of each fiscal year, 

then a per-flight charge less than commercial and other government customers would pay. 

Under the agreement, NASA would drop opposition to an Air Force plan to 

buy 10 single-use unmanned rockets to orbit two satellites a year for five years 

starting in 1988, and NASA and the Department of Defense would work 

together to ensure a fully-operational and cost-effective Space Shuttle. 

NASA hoped the Space Shuttle would begin to break even in 1987, as the 

agency anticipated making from that time on 24 Space Shuttle flights yearly 

for 10 years. The new agreement called for the Air Force to use one third of all 

Space Shuttle flights for the 10 years starting in 1988. 

The agreement also permitted the Air Force to pick the single-use rocket it 

would use to orbit secret satellites too small for economical use of the Space 

Shuttle. (W Post, Feb 27/85, A22) 

April 26 Assured access to space is one of the Defense Department‘s “bottom lines” in fulfilling its mission, said Col. Victor Whitehead, deputy for the 

Air Force Space Command’s (AFSC) Expendable Launch Vehicles (ELV), “and 

we‘re quite proud of our record,” AFSC‘s Newsreview reported. “We’ve gone 

409 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

three years in a row without a launch failure. In that time we have launched 

30 totally successful ELVs. 

“We’ve learned over the years what makes a successful launch; we don’t go 

until everything is ready.” 

The Space Command was examining what might be beyond the Space 

Shuttle and ELVs for space transportation, considering both manned and 

unmanned systems as a follow-on. “But I don’t think you’ll see a future 

scenario in which we will be dependent on a single system,” Whitehead said. 

”There will be alternative ways of flying payloads. Our job is to determine 

what they are.” 

The colonel pointed out that the Space Shuttle was a very good system, but 

that the Air Force recognized that if it stopped using ELVs and was dependent 

on the Space Shuttle alone, “our access to space would be limited if the 

shuttle, for some reason, is not available. We therefore found we needed a 

complementary ELV.” 

Whitehead noted the follow-on Titan 34D7 would fulfill this alternative 

need. “This new booster will giw us into the mid-1990s a totally separate way 

to launch a payload,” he said. “We determine it should have the same capabilities as the shuttle in terms of performance, payload, and volume. This 

way, a payload that could fly on the shuttle can also fly on the Titan 34D7.” 

But it was a true complement to the Space shuttle in that it had “no common 

modes with shuttle. We have a completely separate set of contractors and 

separate launch facilities for the shuttle and Titan. If one system is down, the 

other continues on and flies those payloads,” Whitehead concluded. (AFSC 

Newsreview, Apr 26/85, 3) 

November 20. NASA announced it had scheduled an Air Force AF-16 satellite for launch December 12 aboard a Scout launch vehicle from Wallops 

Flight Center. 

NASA and the Department of Defense entered into agreements in June 

1962 for joint use of the Scout launch vehicle. NASA and the Air Force 

Systems Command continued the agreement under a memorandum of understanding dated April 19, 1977, and amended May 17, 1983. Under the 

agreement, NASA maintained the Scout launch vehicle system, and DOD 

used the system for appropriate missions. 

The Air Force had requested NASA to provide Scout launch vehicles for the 

Instrumented Test Vehicle Program. The Air Force would pay in accordance 

with the existing interagency agreements the costs associated with this 

launch of a Scout vehicle. (NASA MOR M-490-605-85-01 [prelaunch], 

Nov 20185) 

December 72 NASA announced that a Scout vehicle launched the Air Force 

AF-16 satellite [see US. Air Force/NASA and U.S. Air Force, Nov. 201 at 9:35 

p.m. EST today from the Wallops Flight Facility. 

410 
United States 

The Scout launch vehicle, S-207C, performed satisfactorily and placed the 

spacecraft into an orbit with the following parameters: 418 km, apogee; 170 

km, perigee; and 37.05', inclination. 

The U.S. Air Force, in a brief statement released that same day, announced 

that NASA launched aboard a single booster from Wallops Island two instrument test vehicles, or ITVs, into low orbit, the Chicago Tribune reported. 

"The satellites will be checked out and maintained in orbit for an unspecified time as part of the U.S. antisatellite program:' the Air Force said. An Air 

Force official commented later that it was "safe to assume there will be 

another [antisatellite] test during the first quarter of 1986." (NASA MOR M490-605-85-01 [postlaunch], Jan 10/85; Chi Trib, Dec 14/85, A4) 

US. Science and Technology 

January 11: Research at LaRC would improve teleoperation capabilities by 

gradually increasing the automation level of their teleoperation equipment, 

the Langley Researcher reported, as tests focused on the interface between 

the human operator and the remotelycontrolled equipment using a directview station and a station where the operator controlled the action while 

viewing a TV monitor to assess performance loss as a result of the TV link. 

Operators used a Unimation Puma manipulator to pick up a peg, depress 

switches with it, and insert it into a receptacle. In one test, operators individually moved each joint. In another, operators used resolved-rate control (controlling all joints at once, somewhat like the human arm) to move the end 

effector in attitude and translation in its own axis system. 

Use of the smaller of two pegs and resolved-rate control significantly improved performance; however, there was no significant difference between 

viewing directly or through closedcircuit TV. Researchers would use these 

results to assess future incremental improvements to the teleoperator man/ 

machine interface. (LaRC Researcher; Jan 11/85, 2) 

January 16: Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced completion of a 

study done by McDonnell Douglas under a 1983 contract that showed undeniable need for both humans and machines in space. MSFC was continuing 

to refine and validate the data. 

In the human role in space (THURIS) study, engineers identified 37 generic 

tasks requiring human involvement ranging from removing and replacing 

protective coverings around spacecraft to surgically acquiring tissue samples. 

The study then established three criteria for allocation of tasks (performance 

time, relative cost, and technological risk), which became the basis for an 

objective method to allocate tasks and determine how much of each of the 

generic tasks would benefit from human involvement. 

41 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

For each task, researchers rated man’s participation from essential to not 

significant. For example, in a task entitled “compute data,” man’s role rated 

not significant. However, for the task “surgical manipulations”, man’s participation rated essential. 

A second THURIS product was an analytical method to define how man 

should participate in space systems. The method objectively compared humans, machines, and systems requiring both humans and machines and 

consisted of a short, logical sequence of questions and a set of highly condensed supporting data covering performance times, relative costs for each 

madmachine combination, and technology availability data for the 37 generic activities. 

“The study provided a set of fundamental data for planners that can be 

used as a guide for many future activities,” MSFC’s Stephen Hall said. “To 

me . . . machines and automation allow man to proceed to greater challenges and achievements. . . The THURIS study found that there are tasks 

for which man is best, and tasks for which machines are best. For most 

activities, a mixture of both is the best guarantee of success.” (MSFC Release 

85-1 

August 2 NASA announced that NASA, the Department of Energy (DOE), 

and the Department of Defense (DOD) selected the reactor thermoelectric 

power system concept for further design, development, and ground demonstration testing in Phase II cjf the SP-100 space reactor power program. The 

SP-100 program required developing and demonstrating a compact nuclear 

power system that would provide a safe and highly reliable source of hundreds of kilowatts of electric power for a broad range of civilian and military 

space applications including the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in the early 

to mid-1990s and beyond. 

In the past, lower power nuclear sources provided the electric power for 

several NASA and DOD missions including Transit, Pioneer, Apollo, Viking, 

Voyager, and Lincoln Experimental satellites. The Galileo and Ulysses missions would also use nuclear electric power sources. 

The selection of the reactor thermoelectric power system concept followed 

three years of Phase I data collection and technical investigation. The three 

agencies considered four reference reactor system concepts employing different power conversion techniques: incore thermionics and out-ofcore thermoelectrics, which were both static energy conversion processes, and 

Stirling and Brayton cycle engines, which were both dynamic energy conversion machines. 

Selection criteria included safety; reliability; the capability of the system to 

meet mission power requirements; the potential for the technology to cover a 

range of power requirements up to 1000 kw; cost, schedule, and programmatic risks; survivability; and launch operations. The three agencies determined all of the power system technologies were adequate under those 

412 
United States 

criteria; however, they ranked the reactor thermoelectric power system as 

having the greatest potential to fulfill reliably the overall requirements for 

future space power needs with minimum performance and schedule risk. 

The next steps in the SP-100 program required DOE to prepare the request 

for proposals and, pending the availability of funds, to select competitively a 

contractor to design, develop, fabricate, and test during the period FY 1986- 

1991 the major systems of the selected concept. DOE would select shortly a 

site for the reactor system program test. (NASA Release 85-116) 

Policy 

July IZ A Congressional Office of Technology Assessment report on space 

cooperation, commissioned by Sens. Spark Matsunaga (D-Hi.) and Claiborne 

Pel1 (D-R.I.), said the US. and USSR could conduct valuable scientific exchanges, but the US. must handle any renewal of exchanges carefully in 

order to protect national security, the Washington Times reported. The report, 

the release of which coincided with the 10th anniversary of the joint SoyuzApollo docking mission in space, said the US. space program could particularly benefit from Soviet expertise in the life sciences and planetary sciences 

and that cooperation could lead to ”substantive gains” in some areas of U.S. 

space research and applications. 

In 1982 the US. cut off scientific contact between the two countries to 

protest the Soviet’s invasion of Afghanistan, the declaration of martial law in 

Poland, and the exile of Russian human rights activist Andrei Sakharov. However, Congressional attitudes toward joint U.S.-USSR ventures had changed 

since then. 

The report addressed scientific and practical benefits of cooperation, the 

potential for transferring sensitive military technology and know-how, the 

foreign policy aspects of space cooperation such as reducing tensions, and 

perceptions about Soviet motivations and behavior with respect to overall 

US.-Soviet relations. 

Angelo Codevilla, an aide to Sen. Malcolm Wallop (R-Wy0.1 and an expert 

on strategic space programs, said the key to cooperation with the Soviets is 

“to what extent do we give away the whole store” of the US. technology 

advantage. (W Times, July 17/85, 2A) 

July 24 Presidential Science Advisor Dr. George Keyworth said to the US. 

House aviation subcommittee today that the US. was in the forefront of an 

unprecedented revolution in aeronautical technology, Defense Daily re 

ported, and he called for an immediate start by the country on a streamlined, 

focused, and coordinated program by both government and industry to de 

velop the necessary technology to field-before the end of the centuryhypersonic transatmospheric passenger transport and space launch 

41 3 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

vehicledmilitary space planes. The latter could provide a two orders of magnitude reduction in the cost of transporting a pound of payload into orbit. 

Keyworth said he believed it was possible to develop the technology for the 

follow-ons to current commercial jetliners and the Space Shuttle under one 

R&D program. Although he was not certain if one vehicle could fill both 

roles, he predicted that the vehicles would be "very similar." 

Keyworth did not give specifics about funding requirements or a timetable 

but said that the government should in the course of the coming fall's discussions of the FY 87 budget focus on the opportunities available in the hypersonic area. Alluding to the British view that they could build the HOTOL 

(Horizontal Take-Off and Landing) transatmospheric vehicle by 1997, Keyworth said it was possible for the U.S. to exceed that goal. He noted that the 

Reagan Administration over the next few months would work with the aerospace industry to develop a program focusing on welldefined goals and 

added that he hoped NASA and the Defense Advanced Research Projects 

Agency would appropriately budget funds to make the program stand out. 

Keyworth said he was not talking about tomorrow's technology in the hypersonic area but technology that "is here" waiting to be assembled. 

At the same hearing, Rep. Tom Lewis (R-Fla.) said the British claimed that 

the HOTOL would be able to put payloads in orbit at one-half to one-fifth the 

cost of the Space Shuttle, and that they would capture 75% of the commercial launch market by the year 2000. Deputy Assistant Commerce Secretary 

Crawford Brubaker added that Britain had closed to the outside world all 

information about the engines being developed for HOTOL, so "they think 

they have made a breakthrough" on those engines. It was reported that a 

combination of Rolls-Royce conceived, airbreathing engines using atme 

spheric oxygen and liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen rocket engines would 

power HOTOL. (D/D, July 25/85, 129) 

Resources 

February 4 The Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of 

the President, reported that the President's proposed FY 86 budget requested 

$60 billion for research and development (R&D), of which $40 billion would 

support non-DOD projects and nearly $8 billion, basic research. 

Although obligations for non-DOD R&D would decrease slightly from 

1985 to 1986, reflecting determination to reduce the federal deficit, obligations for basic research in the physical sciences and engineering would increase by 7%, and those for all basic research would increase 1%. Actual 

outlays during 1986 would grow by 5'10, permitting some modest real 

growth. 

In testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Science and Technology, 

Dr. G.A. Keyworth, Science Advisor to the President, said he strongly sup 

ported the necessity of slowing the growth of science and technology fund414 
United States 

ing in the short term, but wouldn‘t hide his concern over the vitality of U.S. 

science over the long run. “Our real challenges will come in fiscal years 1987 

and 1988, when we simply will have to find ways to ensure our ability to 

pursue-and pursue vigorously-new avenues of research. . . . We have to 

be prepared to make hard choices to fund new starts for high-priority research facilities under whatever fiscal scenario we face in coming years. 

What will be at stake will be the scientific leadership that we can’t afford to 

compromise.” (Office of Science and Technology Policy release Feb 4/85; 

U.S. House Comm. on Science and Technology testimony, Feb 5/85) 

During February: In its Federal Scientific and Technical Workers: Numbers 

and Characteristics, 1973 and 7983, the National Science Foundation reported that the federal government was the largest single employer of scientific and technical personnel in the U.S. 

Government employment of scientists grew by 20% between 1973 and 

1983, from 74,000 to 89,000, although such employment declined during 

that period at NASA and the Department of Defense. 

The variation by government agency in the proportion of scientists, engineers, and computer (SEC) specialists with at least a bachelor’s degree was 

not great, ranging from 95% at the Department of Transportation (DOT) to 

99% at NASA. The proportion of NASA SEC personnel with advanced degrees increased from 29% to 36% between 1973 and 83, reflecting the 

higher separation rates of bachelor’s degree holders and those without degrees during the long-term cutbacks in SEC employees at NASA. The number 

of SEC staff at NASA declined 8% between 1973 and 83. 

The decline of 1,800 electronics technicians during the period reflected 

primarily a fall in total white-collar employment levels of 10% at DOT and 

NASA; DOT’S electronics technicians went from 8,800 to 7,800, NASA’s from 

900 to 600. (NSF 85-312 [final report], Feb 85) 

lune 27: The National Science Foundation (NSF) in its Science Resources 

Studies Highlights reported that since 1980, annual increases in federal sup 

port of industry-performed research and development, primarily as a result of 

Department of Defense funding, had outpaced growth in company-financed 

R&D expenditures. 

In 1983 federal funding of industrial R&D performance amounted to $20.4 

billion, 11% more than the 1982 level (7% in constant 1972 dollars), whereas 

industry’s own R&D spending increased 8%. Federal and company funds 

together in 1983 were up 9% to a total of $62.9 billion. An NSF projection 

for 1984 placed total industrial R&D expenditures at $70.5 billion, 12% over 

the 1983 level. 

Companies in aircrafdmissiles and electrical equipment industries received 

more than three-fourths of all R&D funds provided by the government. 

415 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Industrial firms spent $42.5 billion of their own funds on R&D in 1983; 

between 1975 and 1980 the average annual constantdollar rate of growth in 

company R&D financing was 6.6%, which slowed to 4.9k over the following 3-year period. 

The number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) R&D scientists and engineers in 

industry rose 3% during 1983 to 538,000. The electrical equipment industry, 

which employed over onefifth of industrial R&D scientists and engineers, 

showed the highest gain-6%. (Science Resources Studies Highlights, June 

21/85, 1) 

July 5 University of Texas scientists recently held a farewell ceremony at the 

McDonald Observatory in the mountains of west Texas for the Korad laser 

that had for the past 16 years measured the distance between the earth and 

the moon to within four inches, the Washington Post reported. 

The laser, one of the last experiments still in use from the days of the Apollo 

moon missions, would have as a replacement the McDonald Laser Ranging 

System, which would compute the constantly changing distance to the moon 

to within two inches. However, the two lasers worked the same way, bouncing a beam of laser light off a reflector left on the moon by astronauts Neil 

Armstrong and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin and measuring its return to the observatory‘s 107 in. telescope. (W Post, July 5/85, A151 

During October: Despite a recent surge of interest among undergraduate 

students, many university aerospace engineering departments were coping 

with faculty shortages, uncertain research support, and inadequate funding 

to operate and maintain their research facilities, the National Research Council’s (NRC) NewsReport reported. A study prepared for NASA by an NRC 

committee chaired by Morris Steinberg, vice president for science at Lockheed Corp., said, “Faculty positions today are not especially attractive to 

ambitious young aerospace engineers.” The number of doctorates awarded 

annually in the field dropped by half in the decade ending with 1983, indicating students were choosing careers in industry rather than academe. The 

committee concluded that NASA, which depended on the nation’s universities for ideas and expertise, should take several steps to help remedy the 

problem. 

NASA should bolster its support of campus research efforts that addressed 

“long-term fundamental problems whose solutions are likely to have lasting 

impact,” the committee said. NASA also should institute a system of peer 

review of research proposals, establish Ph.D. fellowships in aerospace engineering, and coordinate its efforts to support university research and teaching 

in the field. (NRC NewsReport, Oa 85, 17) 

41 6 
United States 

U.S. Space Policy 

During January: The U.S. government released an unclassified version of the 

National Space Strategy based on the National Space Policy President 

Reagan unveiled on July 4, 1982, and on his 1984 State of the Union Address, 

Space World reported. The strategy identified selected high-priority efforts 

and responsibilities and provided for implementation plans for major spacepolicy objectives. 

The document gave new impetus for future manned military-space operations, underscored Administration support for the space station program and 

establishment of future civilian-space goals, encouraged space commercialization, ordered a joint NASNDepartment of Defense (DOD) study of post1995 launch vehicles, and called for full Space Shuttle cost recovery by 

October 1, 1988. 

Gilbert Rye, director of space programs for the National Security Council 

(NSC), said of the strategy: “To our knowledge this is the first document of its 

kind to lay out in any coherent manner a list of priorities that cover the total 

U.S. space program. It should be useful for the Congress, the private sector, 

executive branch agencies, and the American people to fully understand the 

main thrust of the US. space program in the years to come.” 

The strategy authorized DOD to procure a limited number of expendable 

launch vehicles to complement the Space Shuttie, but did not specify particular civilian space program goals. A Presidential National Commission on 

Space during 1985 was to identify goals, opportunities, and policy options 

for the U.S. civil space sector for the next 20 years. (Space World, Jan 85, 8) 

April 76: USA Tiay reported that its debate for that day would explore the 

pros and cons of U.S. manned space missions. In its editorial, USA Tiay 

said, ”Human brains can adapt to change. Machines cannot. Without men 

and women in space, there would be no one to even try to fix the Navy’s 

stranded satellite” [Navy communications satellite carried on the Discovery 

51-D mission]. ’I. . . Space is our last frontier. Without humans aboard to 

ride rockets to the stars and beyond, man will never embrace what he has 

envisioned,” the editorial concluded. 

USA Today guest columnist Geoffrey Keller, a professor of astronomy at 

Ohio State University, wrote that one of the values of the manned space 

program was that it would help to lengthen the useful life of expensive space 

telescopes (for example, the Hubble Space Telescope), by permitting astre 

nauts to replace worn-out telescope parts and to make telescopes more 

powerful as new and more efficient cameras were invented and installed. 

In an opposing view, James Van Allen, a professor of physics at the University of Iowa, wrote that nearly all of what he considered the really important 

and durable products of space technology were “achieved by much-lessexpensive unmanned spacecraft, operating automatically and under com417 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

mand control from ground stations, often for many years in earth orbit or in 

the far reaches of the solar system. 

”. . . The public acclaim for the Apollo program has left a permanent 

imprint on NASA and has, in effect, committed it to an overriding emphasis 

on further development of manned space flight,” Van Allen continued. “This 

emphasis is simultaneously NASA‘s greatest strength and its greatest weakness. Manned space flight, with all its mythological foundations, has assumed the aura of a religion. The space shuttle and the proposed 

permanently manned space station are primarily embodiments of this religion,” he wrote. But, he added, ”the relevant results to date are far too meager 

to justify such hyperbolic expectations and such enormous expenditures. 

Meanwhile, the proven applications of space technology are languishing for 

lack of resources.” (USA Tia~ Apr 16/85, 8A) 

luly 26: A new study issued by the Congressional Office of Technology 

Assessment (OTA) said competition from other nations and several private 

companies in launching spacecraft put the U.S. under pressure to protect its 

economic and technological leadership in space, the NY Times reported. 

This protection could be accomplished by reassessing the Space Shuttle’s 

pricing policy, promoting greater private investment in space-related goods 

and services, and forging a long-term space policy to assure a competitive 

edge, report recommended. 

The European Space Agency, a consortium of 11 western European governments, broke the U.S. monopoly in launch services for the West with its 

Ariane rocket program. Arianespace, a corporation owned by the French 

government and European banks and aerospace companies, was aggressively 

pursuing customers for Ariane’s services and had won several contracts that 

would otherwise have gone to US. conventional rockets or the Space Shuttle. 

France was planning later in the year to use the Ariane to inaugurate the 

world’s first commercial remotesensing satellite service, competing with 

U.S. Landsats that surveyed the world’s geologic, water, and agricultural re 

sources. 

China announced the previous month a new commercial space program 

using its own satellites, launching rockets, and ground stations. The Chinese 

had rockets capable of boosting satellites into the high orbit needed for 

communications satellites. 

Japan, emphasizing the export potential of space technology, was develop 

ing its own rocket launching capability and was planning to launch the next 

year the first of a series of ocean and land remote-sensing satellites. 

India also had joined the nations launching satellites, and Brazil was building a rocket base with the intention of becoming the first South American 

launching power. 

Although the USSR was apparently tempted to enter the commercial market, western space experts questioned whether the Russians would ever be a 

418 
United States 

major force in commercial space operations. They said the USSR might be 

reluctant to allow outside scientists and businessmen access to their facilities 

and other governments would probably not allow advanced communications 

satellites to be exported to the Soviet Union. 

In its report, the OTA said that other nations developed their own space 

launching capabilities out of a desire to be technologically independent, to 

gain any economic benefits that derived from space technology, and to be 

regarded as “space powers.” Consequently, the report concluded that the 

U.S.’s “competitive strategy based on price or superior technology alone will 

not prevent foreign entry into the launch service business.” 

At stake, besides prestige, was a share of what by the end of the century 

could be a $50 billion annual business, according to estimates by some 

economists in the aerospace field. 

The report recommended that the U.S. government investigate new trade 

and regulatory policies to reduce the risks and uncertainties that hindered 

private investment in space technology. The study concluded that NASA by 

itself was “not wellequipped either to promote or to regulate growth in the 

commercial exploitation of space.” The report suggested the regulation of 

“space industries” should be integrated with the regulation of their counterparts on earth. (NYT July 26/85, Al) 

September 6: NASA and the U.S. Air Force announced award of $5 million 

26-month contracts to Boeing Aerospace Co., General Dynamics, Martin 

Marietta, and Rockwell Internatl. to perform studies on space transportation 

architecture-the total transportation system of flight elements, ground and 

orbital support systems, and their operational interactions. NAWs Marshall 

Space Flight Center (MSFC) awarded and would manage the General Dynamics and Martin Marietta contracts; the Air Force Space Division in Los 

Angeles, the Boeing and Rockwell contracts. The two agencies and four 

companies would maintain close coordination throughout the award period. 

Broad objectives of the studies were to determine the nation‘s overall space 

transportation system architectures, including transportation and support systems needed to simultaneously meet mission and operational requirements, 

while substantially reducing total life-cycle cost; to identify the technologies 

required for the architectures; and to refine the resulting transportation and 

support system concept($ for the mid-1990s if firm requirements were identified. 

After the agencies first analyzed and provided projected mission/payload/ 

operational requirements for the mid-1990s to 2010, the companies would 

analyze mission requirements, develop and analyze architecture approaches, 

define future transportation system concepts, and identify technologies applicable to transportation system options. 

Transportation system architectures and concepts would include launch 

and upper-stage flight systems, mission control concepts, ground support 

419 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

systems, logistics support systems, and on-orbit operations for both manned 

and unmanned systems. The resulting transportation architecture and vehicle 

concepts should outline and define the most promising concepts for improved cost-effectiveness and mission need accommodation for the specified 

period. (NASA Release 85-126) 

November 72: NASA announced that its Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) 

issued a request for proposals to LTV, Martin Marietta, and TRW to compete 

for a contract to design, dewlop, and manufacture an orbital maneuvering 

vehicle (OMV). The three companies worked previously on OMV definition 

studies and had until December 20, 1985, to respond. NASA expected to 

award the contract in June 1986 and planned the first OMV flight for early 

1991. 

The contract would include provisions for testing and hardware flight testing before the OMV’s actual operational missions. The company selected 

would build one vehicle, with NASA having an option to request construction of a second. 

Often called a “space tug,” the OMV would transfer satellites and other 

objects between earth orbits and would extend the reach of the Space Shuttle 

by about 1000 miles. It would have the ability to retrieve satellites from high 

orbits, bring them back to the Space Shuttle for maintenance and repair, then 

return them to their operational orbits. The OMV would also be able to 

reboost s2tellites as their orbits gradually decayed. 

The OMV would be an unmanned spacecraft, 15 feet in diameter and 

approximately 4 feet long. Its life would be about 10 years with refurbishment 

and on-orbit maintenance included in the design. NASA expected initially to 

deploy the OMV from the Space Shuttle for short duration missions; later the 

OMV would remain in orbit for extended periods for use in both Space 

Shuttle-based and space station-based modes of operation. (NASA Release 

85-151) 

Civilian Programs 

May 13 The National Space Institute (NSI) announced establishment of 

“Space Outreach ‘85,” a program to acquire original ideas from the public as 

to potential uses of space for social and economic benefit. The program was 

intended to broaden what appeared to be a too narrow debate on a new and 

clarified set of long-term civilian space goals. 

Rules for the program were that ideas could not exceed 750 words; submii 

sions could not include projects already under review by the federal government; and proposals must be creative, innovative, and feasible. 

The NSI would present all ideas received during the program to Congress, 

NASA, and, in particular, the newly created National Commission on Space 

[see Mar. 301. 

420 
United States 

Judges for the program, which had the support of the Sophron Foundation 

of McLean, Virginia, were Walter Boyne, director of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum; Evert Clark, technology editor, Rusk 

ness Wk former astronaut Michael Collins; and Robert Cowen, science 

writer for the The Christian Science Monitor. 

The NSI would present awards for the outstanding entries, with the writer 

of the most innovative suggestion receiving an alluxpensepaid trip to see a 

Space Shuttle launch. (NSI Release, May 13/85) 

August 9 World amateur radio operators participated in the shuttle amateur 

radio experiment (SAREX) on Space Shuttle mission 51-F, the lewis News 

reported. SAREX allowd people connected with amateur radio to talk with 

Challenger‘s crew and watch TV transmissions from the flight deck. 

The SAREX test, conducted during offduty hours in cooperation with onboard mission specialistsham operators Tony England and John-David Bartoe 

and mission commander Gordon Fullerton, allowed world amateur radio 

operators access to the Space Shuttle’s voice and video transmissions to earth 

on amateur 2-m band. A video buffer circuit designed, built, and tested by 

Lewis Research Center (LeRC) ham operators was key to SAREX’s success. 

The SAREX system worked in two primary modes, one mode at a time. The 

first allowed voice communications back and forth between radio operators 

on the ground and spacecraft crew. 

The second primary mode was amateur TV. Using a set-up similar to the 

ham radio system, amateur TV operators and the Space Shuttle crew sent 

images to one another-the first such use of two-way video in space. Users 

transmitted color TV pictures in a slow-scan-mode-one picture every 8 to 36 

seconds. 

SAREX, closely connected to the Young Astronaut Program, was a joint 

effort of the American Relay League and NASA. A ham radio experiment with 

mission specialist Owen Garriot conducted in 1983 on STS-9 was generally 

credited as the genesis for the current SAREX. (Lewis News, Aug 9/85, 1) 

October 22 In its recently published “1986 Long-Range Program Plan:’ 

NASA outlined plans for an evolutionary, permanently manned space station 

in low-earth orbit; operation by the year 2000 of man-tended platforms in 

equatorial, polar, and geosynchronous orbit; and routine manned missions 

on the moon and later Mars by the early 21st century, Defense Daily re 

ported. The annually updated plan, summarizing the status of NASA planning as of the end of February 1985, also detailed some 120 ongoing and 

planned NASA space projects and missions for approximately the next ten 

years, with some out to the year 2000. 

The plan did not discuss budget figures, but for the near-term assumed 

budgets with the 1% growth promised annually by President Reagan (which 

had since disappeared in the deficit battle in Congress). 

42 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

The report did not project a need for more than four Space Shuttle orbiters 

but did not rule out such a need, while calling for development by 1990 of an 

orbital maneuvering vehicle (OMW. 

Beyond 1990, objectives of the NASA spaceflight program included developing an orbital transfer vehicle complementary to the Space Shuttle for 

transportation of payloads, to, between, and beyond earth orbits; defining, 

designing, and providing a second-generation space transportation system 

including unmanned cargo vehicles and second-generation orbiters; developing and operating on a routine basis, beginning in the mid-l990s, geosynchronous orbit space platforms that were unmanned, permanent, and multifunctional; developing and putting into routine operation by the year 2000 

geosynchronous orbit facilities that were permanent, multifunction, and able 

to be periodically manned; developing technology and techniques to construct, deploy, or assemble such facilities in space and to test and service 

them in orbit; and encouraging and supporting NASA and industry develop 

ment of technology to improve concepts for space boosters that significantly 

reduced launch costs. 

The NASA report noted that “achievements in the early 21st century in 

science, exploration, earth applications, and commercial uses would depend 

on two trends: first, the increasing capabilities of space systems with regard to 

accessibility, payloads, stay times, and variety and sophistication of operations; and second, the increasing capability of instruments with regard to 

detection, resolution, pointing accuracy, and data collection and manage 

ment made possible by improvement of their power supplies and cooling 

mechanisms.” 

In the 21 st century, the NASA report said, “automated or human-tended 

instruments located on the lunar surface will begin complementary observations” with instruments in lowearth orbit and geosynchronous orbit. For 

manned transportation from the space station, “a cyrogenic version of the 

orbital transfer vehicle evolutionary family, currently in early stages of preliminary design, is expected to provide by the year 2000 reusability for manned 

and sortie flights to at least geosynchronous orbit . . . It also should be 

able to provide the basis for transportation for longer flights to establish a 

lunar base and for planetary missions such as a Mars sample return . . . Routine access to the lunar surface will make possible the first intensive, 

systematic study of another major celestial body,” the report noted. “Extensive sample collection and scientific traverses conducted by humans and 

long-term instrument networks installed and managed by humans will help 

determine the details of the moon’s structure, composition, and history. They 

also will make accessible the record of solar and cosmic ray particle fluxes 

preserved in the lunar soil . . . Similar scientific activities can be carried 

out on Mars, either by large automated spacecraft or by a manned mission 

. . .I, (DID, oct 221as, 268) 

422 
United States 

November 29 NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory UPL) pioneered the concept 

of a satellite system for mobile users and, because a U.S. mobile satellite 

industry was emerging, was turning its attention to developing technologies 

critical for future systems, the JPL Universe reported. 

Similar to cellular phones popular in urban areas, the mobile satellite 

system (MSS) would provide voice and data communications for the entire 

North American continent, employing one or two satellites in geosynchronous orbit to relay communications instead of depending on ground-based, 

line-of-sight relay towers that celluar phones used. 

There were four categories of MSS users: people who needed uninterrupted communications while they traveled over wide geographical areas, for 

example interstate truckers; those responding to unpredictable events such as 

medical emergencies or natural disasters; people working at planned but 

temporary installations such as oil or gas drilling facilities, mining camps, or 

archeological excavations; and those in very remote areas. 

The new technologies JPL was developing included mechanically steerable 

low-profile and electronically steerable medium-gain vehicle antennas, digital speech compression, digital modems, and multiple-access techniques for 

integrated voice and data. 

NASA was working with industry and, through a joint endeavor agreement, 

would exchange a Space Shuttle deployment for 15% of the channel capacity 

for two years to test the system. “But first:’ said Dr. Firouz Naderi, JPL‘s mobile 

satellite experiment project manager, “we must further develop the technology and try to squeeze as many channels as we can from a very narrow 

frequency allocation. That is the biggest obstacle we face.” 

Also, JPL must design sophisticated multi-beam antennas that service “spot 

areas” and create techniques so frequencies could be reused to provide the 

most efficient use of the limited spectrum. 

Recently JPL sponsored a two-day briefing on the state of the industry. 

Attending were more than 250 representatives of 120 organizations including 

the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which would regulate the 

MSS; 11 of 12 candidate companies that petitioned the FCC for the right to 

operate the system; communications equipment manufacturers such as General Electric, Harris, and Motorola; Canadian government and industry repre 

sentatives; banking officials; and potential users of the system. At the briefing, 

the FCC said it hoped by the middle of 1986 to assign a frequency to the 

mobile satellite industry as well as license an operator to be in charge of the 

system. 

NASA scheduled for launch in 1990 the first generation satellite with a 5 to 

7 m antenna. During the program’s second phase, NASA would launch from 

the Space Shuttle a 20m (65 ft.) antenna. NASA then planned for the program’s final phase to construct on the proposed space station a 50m (180 ft.) 

antenna for deployment into geosynchronous orbit. UPL Universe, Nov 29/ 

85, 1) 

423 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

During Nowmber: Quoting from the Congressional Record, NASA reported 

remarks of Rep. Don Fuqua, (D-Fla.) chairman of the House Science and 

Technology Committee, who introduced the Federal Science and Technology 

Revitalization Act of 1985. 

The act “. . . would establish an alternative personnel management system for scientific and technical people in the federal government,” Fuqua 

said. “This is something I have been interested in for a long time, and I am 

hopeful that the proposal I am introducing will be able to help improve the 

quality of government-operated federai laboratories by encouraging the recruiting and retention of highly qualified scientific and technical individuals.” 

Major provisions of the bill would permit agencies to include scientific and 

technical personnel in the new personnel management systems; simplify job 

evaluation and remove covered positions from the classification requirements 

of 5 U.S.C., Chapter 51; provide flexibility to develop a salary structure that 

ensured a competitive position in the labor market and that reflected the 

hiring and pay policies needed to attract, retain, and motivate a highly qualified scientific and technical work force; increase base pay on performance, 

not longevity; allow waiver of the pay cap for up to 5% of specially qualified 

scientific and technical personnel; provide for performance and special 

awards and remove the pay cap for lumpsum awards; and create a senior 

scientific and technical personnel service. 

In May 1983 the Federal Laboratory Review Panel of the White House 

Science Council chaired by David Packard reported that federal laboratories 

had several serious deficiencies and, consequently, a number of them did not 

meet the quality and productivity standards that might be expected, Fuqua 

explained. The panel reported that salaries at federal laboratories were noncompetitive with the private sector at entry and senior levels and that federal 

laboratories had to deal with a personnel management system that was cumbersome and had little flexibility. 

As a result, there existed what the panel referred to as an alarming “inability of many federal laboratories-especially those under civil service constraints-to attract, retain, and motivate qualified scientists and engineers.” 

The panel concluded that administrative and legislative actions should be 

initiated to create, at government-operated laboratories, a scientific-technical 

personnel system that was independent of current civil service personnel 

systems, Fuqua continued. 

This “bill is the legislative attempt to deal with these very real problems,” 

Fuqua said. ”My own experience . . . is that the requirements for NASA 

and Department of Agriculture labs may be very different, but attracting and 

retaining quality personnel is absolutely essential for the space program and 

for emerging fields in agriculture.” (NAU Activities, Nov 85, 9) 

424 
United States 

Commercialization 

lanuary 9 NASA Administrator James Beggs, in a January 9 speech in Washington at the Conference on International Business in Space, predicted that 

early in the 21 st century there would be a permanently manned base on the 

moon to serve a lunar mining industry and as a way-station to other points in 

the solar system. 

He called space the endless frontier and outlined the unique attributes it 

offers: first, a vantage point for communications and earth observations and, 

from telescopes beyond the atmosphere, an improved view of the universe; 

second, a zero gravity environment, which offers unusual manufacturing 

opportunities; and third, a near-perfect vacuum, which also offers new op 

tions for industrial processes. 

He noted that the communications-satellite business was one of the fastest 

growing industries in the world, with an estimated market of more than $3 

billion a year in sales potential through the year 2000, but that the other two 

unique attributes of space were under-used. To remedy this, he reported 

three major NASA initiatives: new high-technology ventures, new commercial applications of existing technology, and unsubsidized initiatives that 

would transfer existing space assets on earth to private hands if they could be 

operated for profit. 

Beggs concluded that expanding commerce in space would be difficult, 

but not impossible, in order ‘I. . . to transform the promise of space into a 

brighter tomorrow for all mankind.” (NASA Release 85-1) 

/anuary 77: John Townsend, corporate vice president and president of Fairchild Space Co., said in a January 16 speech to the American Institute of 

Aeronautics and Astronautics’ (AIAA) National Capital Section that those 

planning commercial space ventures must monitor the uncertainty of NASA‘s 

Space Shuttle manifest and orbiter fleet‘s long-term availability, Aerospace 

Daily reported. “The manifest is at risk,” he said and cited difficulties NASA 

had in “remanifesting” resulting from the orbiter Challenger‘s thermal-protection tileadhesion problems. NASA had cut back its planned 13 missions to 

12 in 1985, and Townsend expressed concern over the potential problems of 

a 4-orbiter fleet that could be exacerbated by an accident. 

Townsend also expressed concern over the Space Shuttle pricing policy, 

noting NASA’s recommendation of a 22% price increase in Space Shuttle 

flights from $71 million (1982 dollars) per flight to $87 million, and concluding that NASA‘s “expendable launch vehicle people haw Ariane to face.” (A/ 

0, Jan 17/85, 90) 

lanuary 25 The Celestis Group, an organization of Florida undertakers, 

signed a contract with Space Services, Inc., headed by Donald Slayton, one 

of the original seven U.S. astronauts and based in Houston, to orbit a payload 

425 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

of cremated human remains at 1,900 miles high, the NY Times reported. The 

mission, scheduled for late 1986 or early 1987, would cost about $15 million. 

The Department of Transportation (DOT), which must approve the contract, 

indicated it had no immediate objections. 

In 1982 Space Services had become the first private company to launch its 

own rocket, the 36-foot Conestoga, into suborbital flight. The company’s 

original liquid-fuel rocket had exploded on the launching pad a year before. 

The space-burial mission would use a second-generation Conestoga capable 

of putting 1,500 Ib. into orbit. 

John Cherry, who had formed the Celestis Group, said that a Conestoga 

nose cone could contain as many as 13,000 capsules, each 318 inches by 1/4 

inches, holding ashes reduced in volume by a Celestisdeveloped technique. 

Burial price would be $3,900 a customer. A reflective material would cover 

the nose cone in the first launch, enabling viewing of the satellite mause 

leum as it passed overhead. Later missions would be deepspace burials, in 

which the nose cone would eject the capsules for dispersion into the cosmos. 

The Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984 empowered the DOT to license 

all commercial space launchings. DOT examined proposals for their effect on 

public safety, national security, and international treaty obligations. (Nq Jan 

25/85, A13) 

February 73: The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) approved plans of 

a Florida-based undertakers and engineers’ consortium to orbit in 1986 or 

early 1987 a mausoleum [see US. Space Policy/Commercialization, Jan. 251 

with the announcement that the plan represented “a creative response to the 

president‘s initiative to encourage the commercial use of space,” the Washington Post reported. The approval was the first granted by the DOT’S new 

licensing authority for commercial space activities and followed checks with 

the Department of Defense, the State Department, and NASA. The mausoleum’s 1,900 mile-high orbit would place the spacecraft in the Van Allen radiation belts, a region of space rarely used by other spacecraft. 

The mausoleum would be in the nose cone of a rocket, Conestoga 2, 

designed and built by Space Service Inc. (SSI), a Houston firm headed by 

Donald Slayton, one of the original Project Mercury astronauts. Conestoga 1, 

a one-stage rocket, had made a successful test flight in 1982. The Celestis 

Group, Melbourne, Florida, would pay SSI $14 million to put the 300 Ib. 

cargo into orbit and charge $3,900 per cremated body. 

A Celestis spokesman said that since announcement of its plans, the group 

had received hundreds of calls from people wanting to sign up. Slayton said 

seven or eight other companies had approached him about setting up similar 

businesses. ( W Post, Feb 13/85, A2) 

April 9: Hans Mark, former NASA deputy administrator, Ames Research Center director, and Secretary of the Air Force, on April 9, during part of an MIT 

426 
United States 

dinner lecture series, disparaged government attempts to commercialize 

space, the Space Commerce Bulletin reported. “Now that I’m out of government, I can say that I found nothing funnier than bureaucrats wringing their 

hands in town around here about how to commercialize something where 

most of them, myself included, don’t have the slightest idea on how to make 

investments, how to judge markets, how to do all those things that are 

important for commercialization,” Mark said. 

He characterized commercial space efforts as being politically popular but 

backed with little substance, with much of his criticism directed at private 

sector remote sensing and expendable launch vehicle operations. He said he 

didn’t believe either technology would be a commercial success in the US., 

and he predicted private Space Shuttle operation would never work. 

Mark considered true commercial space activity to be technology transfer 

programs and government-industry relations as set up in the 1950s to build 

hardware for government programs. He added, however, that government 

couldn‘t take credit for technology transfer as being space commercialization 

because that was not what “intellectuals think commercialization means and 

we need to do other things. So we need to hire 50 people in NASA headquarters to do commercialization.” 

Regarding the impact of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) on commercial space, Mark said, ”There’s no doubt in my mind that important commercial ventures will follow from SDI simply because of the nature of the 

contractor systems that we use. We will build high-intensity lasers and the 

first commercial application of those lasers will surely be in welding or in 

something like that . . . That’s what I like to call the commercialization of 

space,” Mark concluded. (Space Commerce Bulletin, Apr 26185, 1) 

lune 28: NASA Administrator James Beggs announced that 21 teams submitted proposals to establish centers for the commercial development of space, 

the objective of which would be to stimulate high-technology research in the 

microgravity environment of space. NASA expected this research to lead 

eventually to development of new products that either had commercial potential or would contribute to possible commercial ventures. 

The research areas proposed by the teams included semiconductor crystal 

growth, remote sensing, communications technology, and biotechnology. 

A panel of technical, managerial, and financial experts would review over 

the next 45 to 60 days the proposals to identify winning proposals. NASA 

would fund, beginning around mid-September 1985, between three and six 

of the centers for up to $1 million per year each for a period not to exceed 

five years. (NASA Release 85-98) 

july 17: NASA and the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) announced the 

first sales of a product manufactured in space-tiny polystyrene spheres to 

427 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

serve as NBS standard reference material. The spheres could improve microscopic measurements made throughout the economy in electror?ics, medicine, and other high-technology areas. 

A chemical process developed for NASA by Lehigh University produced 

billions of the 10 micrometers (1/2500th of an inch) in diameter spheres 

during several space Shuttle flights. Earthbound processes could not yield 

sufficiently uniform materia!s in usable quantities; when produced in a lowgravity environment, the spheres grew uniformly in size and shape. 

NBS had packaged the spheres into approximately 600 Standard Reference 

Material (SRM) units priced at $384 per unit. Each unit was a 5-milliliter vial 

that contained about 30 million spheres in a 0.4% concentration by weight; 

the remainder was water. NASA and NBS shared sales proceeds equally. 

(NASA Release 85-106) 

August 20: NASA announced it had signed an agreement with Space Industries, Inc. (SII) for the company to construct and operate an industrial space 

facility (ISF), the first habitable privately owned commercial platform in 

space, which NASA would deploy from the Space Shuttle. SI1 also signed a 

separate agreement with NASA’s space station office that would provide for 

exchange of information during the definition and preliminary design phase 

of the space station. The agreement laid the groundwork for subsequent 

discussions and negotiations during the space station development period to 

begin in mid-1987. SI1 was the first private company to sign an agreement with 

NASA’s space station office to share information that could result in a commercial facility capable of compatible operations with the space station. 

The modular ISF would initially measure 35 by 14.5 feet. Although not 

intended to be permanently manned, it would be habitable and provide a 

shirt sleeve work environment for astronauts when docked with either the 

Space Shuttle or space station. 

NASA Administrator James Beggs said, “We hope the ISF will be the first of 

many such platforms to be funded and built by private industry that will 

complement the permanently manned space station and lead eventually to 

an industrial park in space.” 

Max Faget, president of SII, said, “The facility is scheduled to be deployed 

in 1989 and will respond to a variety of private research and manufacturing 

needs. Industry could take advantage of the unique gravity-free environment 

of space to conduct experiments that cannot be effectively duplicated here 

on earth.” 

SI1 considered the cost of building the ISF to be proprietary. Under the 

novel agreement, a provision stipulated that SI1 would reimburse NASA for all 

costs incurred by the government associated with the deployment of the ISF 

when it became operational and was revenue generating. (NASA Release 85- 

119) 

428 
United States 

August 22: NASA announced selection of teams to establish Centers for the 

Commercial Development of Space. The Centers were intended to stimulate 

high-technology research that took advantage of the characteristics of space 

to develop new products with commercial potential. The five centers were 

joint undertakings of government, industry, and academic teams and would 

work closely with NASA field centers. 

NASA initially would fund the centers for a period not to exceed five years, 

at which time they should be self-sustaining. Funding would range from 

$750,000 to $1.1 million on a year to year basis. 

The centers selected were Batelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, 

Ohio, research area: multiphase materials processing; University of Alabama, 

Birmingham, Alabama, macromolecular cyrstallography in space; University 

of Alabama, Huntsville, Alabama, materials processing; Institute for Technology Development, National Space Technology Laboratories, Hancock 

County, Mississippi, space remote sensing; and Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, metallurgical processing in space. (NASA Release 85-120) 

September 5: NASA announced that Lewis Research Center (LeRC) opened 

the Microgravity Materials Science Laboratory (MMSL) to aid scientists on 

earth in determining what was and was not feasible for science experiments 

in space [see NASA Installationdlewis Research Center, Aug. 261. 

"The MMLS will permit US. government, university, and industry researchers to conduct scientific experiments using equipment that functionally duplicates equipment aboard the Space Shuttle," explained Salvatore Grisaffe, 

chief of the LeRC materials division. "Access to such a laboratory will give 

U.S. companies a competitive advantage in developing better materials 

through microgravity research." 

Other microgravity research facilities at LeRC included two drop towers in 

which experiment packages could free-fall up to 500 feet, achieving a 

weightless condition for up to five seconds, and the Lewis Lear jet, which 

could fly parabolic trajectories to achieve a microgravity environment inside 

the plane for up to 22 seconds. 

The MMSL was one part of NASA's microgravity science and applications 

program, which fostered research in the science and technology of processing materials in low gravity. The aims of the program were to obtain a clearer 

understanding of the factors controlling earth-based processes to guide their 

improvement and development of new materials that could not be made on 

earth and procedures to support long-term space operations. 

The Space Shuttle then offered up to seven days for microgravity experimentation; the proposed space station eventually would provide a wry longterm microgravity research and materials processing capability. However, the 

most efficient use of such space resources demanded that experimental procedures be based on a firm scientific understanding with extensive prior 

ground-based examination. (NASA Release 85-123) 

429 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

September 30: The U.S. Commerce Department announced it signed a contract with Earth Observation Satellite Co. (Eosat) to pay $250 million over the 

next five years for Eosat to construct two new Landsat satellites (Landsat 6 and 

I); provide a ground system to operate and process data from the new spacecraft; and operate, process, and market data from Landsats 4, 5, 6, and 7 the 

Washington Post reported. Eosat, a joint venture of RCA Corp., which would 

build the new spacecraft, and Hughes Aircraft Co., which would provide 

satellite instrumentation including the thematic mappers, would operate the 

orbiting Landsat 4 and 5 for their anticipated lifetime at a cost to the government similar to the government‘s projected cost. The Commerce Department 

said the new satellites, Landsat 6 scheduled for launch in 1988 and Landsat 7 

scheduled for launch when Landsar 6 neared the end of its approximately 

fiveyear lifetime, should provide sharper images and enhance the value of 

the system for agricultural uses. 

The U.S. government would launch the new satellites from the Space 

Shuttle at an estimated cost of $44.9 million and also pay for any Space 

Shuttle system modifications necessary for the launches. 

Although the contract called for Eosat to market and operate the four 

Landsats, it allowed the company to terminate date marketing for Landsat 4 

and 5 if cumulative revenue was below 65% of the mutually agreed upon 

projected revenues for data sales for the two satellites and to terminate operations and data marketing for Landsat 6 and 7 if total cumulative revenue fell 

below 60% of projected revenue after launch of Landsat 6, Defense Daily 

reported. 

Landsats used cameras and other scanners to produce pictures in various 

wavelengths for many uses, including agriculture, mineral explorations, fishing, forestry, snow cover and surface water surveys, and land use and city 

planning. NASA developed the Landsat system and in 1983 transferred it to 

the Commerce Department. (WPost, Oct 1/85, 83; D/D, Oct 1/85, 153) 

October 29: Society Expeditions, which specialized in offering exotic vacations, announced at an October 29 press conference that on November 15 it 

would begin taking reservations for regularly scheduled spaceflights, the 

Washington Times reported. 

Society Expeditions scheduled its first flight for October 12, 1992, the 

500th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’s discovery of the new world. A 

flight would cost $50,000, and there would be a $2000 charge for a threeday 

orientation. T.C. Swartz, president of Society Expeditions, said more than 

3,500 people had already expressed interest in traveling in space and 350 

had signed letters of intent and deposited $5,000 to confirm space on the 

rocket. 

He explained that his company signed a five-year $280 million contract to 

charter the first two commercial reusable spaceships built by Pacific American Launch Systems. Pacific American’s president Gary Hudson said it would 

430 
United States 

cost more than $200 million to develop and build a 57-foot long rocket and 

that each launch should cost about $1 million. 

A flight on Pacific American’s PHOENIX E, a rocket powered launch and 

landing vehicle, would begin somewhere in northern California, circle the 

earth five to eight times, and return to the launch area. 

Before certification for commercial use, PHOENIX E would undergo at 

least 50 test flights and face vigorous examination by the Department of 

Transportation, Hudson said. Asked if he would be on one of the test flights, 

Hudson said, “We think it’s the ethical responsibility of the designers to go 

up before the public. But we won’t be on the first flight. That’s why there’s test 

pilots.” (W Times, Oct 30/85, 1 B) 

November 18: The 3M Corp. and McDonnell Douglas joined as a team to 

produce and market a proprietary drug that McDonnell Douglas produced 

on board the Space Shuttle to treat patients who had lost their ability to 

produce red blood cells, Aviation Week reported. The ability of the drug 

erythropoietin to stimulate the body to produce red blood cells could benefit 

persons who were anemic or had a variety of other disorders in which red 

blood cell levels were a factor. And it had the potential in a number of 

medical situations to reduce the need for blood transfusions that carried the 

risk of complications. Erythropoietin was not widely used because current 

production techniques could not filter out by-products harmful to the body. 

A batch of the material to be produced in an electrophoresis machine on 

the next flight of Space Shuttle, mission 61-B, would be given to the first 

human test patients soon. It was expected the drug could be available for sale 

in 1988 pending Food and Drug Administration approval. 

McDonnell Douglas was completing arrangements to bring 3M’s Riker 

Laboratories Div. into the program as the drug company that would market 

the product in place of Johnson & Johnson‘s Ortho Pharmaceuticals Div., 

which recently dropped out of the program in favor of producing the sub 

stance through earth-based bioengineering. Ortho believed it would be able 

to bring the drug to market a year sooner, while McDonnell Douglas believed 

space processing would be far more efficient and less costly. 

McDonnell Douglas was also completing arrangements with a French drug 

company, Roussel Pharmaceuticals of Paris, to begin processing starting the 

next summer of a French drug on the Space Shuttle as a second commercial 

space product. The French product would be purified in the same middeck 

unit that brought erythropoietin to the animal and human test phase. NASA 

and McDonnell Douglas were completing arrangements to keep the middeck system operational for research and to help generate new products 

under their joint endeavor agreement. (AvWk, Nov 18/85, 16) 

December 17: NASA announced it had signed with the International Space 

Corp. (ISC) an agreement for development of the Normal Freezing Furnace, a 

43 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

high-temperature furnace for producing several types of infrared semiconductor crystals in the microgravity environment of spaceflight. The furnace 

would produce materials through a directional solidification crystal growth 

process. 

The agreement call for NASA to fly the furnace aboard six to eight Space 

Shuttle missions to perfect the proposed crystal production process, and ISC 

would make the experimental equipment available to NASA for the agency’s 

exploratory space processing operations. 

NASA anticipated that the experiments would lead to new space manufacturing techniques for producing crystal materials, thus enhancing the U.S. 

electronic industry’s position in the highly competitiw worldwide semiconductor market. (NASA Release 85-173) 

International 

February 8: A dispute over application of U.S. laws to foreign companies 

apparently killed a joint U.S.-W. German project to commercialize remote 

sensingequipment data and could affect negotiations over European participation in the planned U.S. space station, Science magazine reported. The 

joint project, known as SPARX, was to finance regular flights on the Space 

Shuttle of the modular opto-electronic multispectral scanner, an instrument 

developed by Messerschmitt-BolkowBlohm (MBB) under contract with the 

German Aerospace Research Establishment. NASA said proposals received 

from SPARX were unacceptable, because data would be available solely on a 

proprietary basis to SPARX’s commercial customers, conflicting with NASA‘s 

“open skies” policy mandating nondiscriminatory access to all data obtained 

from U.S.-launched civilian missions. NASA and MBB were continuing discussions on the possibility of a separate mnture using the German equip 

ment that would respect licensing conditions applied to U.S. companies 

under the Land Remote Sensing Commercialization Act. 

Some members of the European space science community-particularly 

those with reservations about tying Europe’s fortunes too closely to those of 

NMs proposed space station-were using the apparent conflict as evidence 

of their concerns, the Science article said. The scientists noted the extent to 

which the regulations and other provisions contained in the legislation’s 

licensing requirements-such as those requiring licensees to deposit any data 

obtained in a single central archive-would apply to foreign companies becoming NAWs commercial customers. The dilemma hinged on the conflict 

between companies based outside the U.S. resenting being subject to legislation over which they had no formal control and Congress and U.S.-based 

companies that would complain if they saw foreign companies getting an 

advantage by not having to meet domestic-licensing requirements. 

Udo Pollvogt of MBB’s Washington office said the issues raised by SPARX 

“definitely need to be resolved over the next two years” as Europeans consid432 
United States 

ered whether participation in the space station would make them unaccep 

tably liable to U.S.domestic laws. (Science, Feb 8/85, 617) 

/une I2 NASA Administrator James Beggs stirred up a controversy when he 

reportedly told a Washington gathering of the American Stock Exchange that 

the Soviets had "turned us down, flat, with no explanation" on the proposal 

of a joint space mission, the Washington Times reported. Later NASA spokesman Miles Waggoner said the Soviets had not rejected the idea, but a joint 

manned space mission was not likely to happen within the next few years. 

President Reagan had offered the Soviets a chance to participate in a coop 

erative space venture about a year previously. The Soviets responded that 

they believed it was not the time to fly that kind of mission. "To us, that 

means the item is still open," Waggoner said. "This time, though, Mr. Beggs 

decided to look at it from the other perspective." 

Other NASA officials, indicating the agency hadn't received any new word 

from the Soviets about the proposal, speculated Beggs might have said what 

he did to provoke a reaction from them. 

Originally, NASA planners envisioned a joint practice rescue mission in 

which a US. astronaut would use a jet backpack called a manned maneuvering unit (MMU) to fly from a Space Shuttle to a Soviet Salyut space station. 

The astronaut might also use the MMU to push a cosmonaut back to the 

Space Shuttle for a brief time. (W Times, June 12/85,4A) 

/one 20: The House Science and Technology Committee today completed 

mark-up of legislation authorizing funding to transfer the land remote-sensing system operations to Eosat, a joint venture of Hughes and RCA, Aero 

space Daily reported. The legislation, H.R. 2800, was identical to a measure 

reported out by the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee the previous week. Both bills amended the Land Remote-Sensing Commercialization Act of 1984 that authorized $75 million in FY 85 for such 

activities. The House bill authorized $295 million for transfer activities in the 

FY 85-89 period, of which not more than $125 million would be available 

for FY 85-86. 

The Commerce Department and Eosat, which was selected the previous 

fall to operate the system, had not yet finalized the contract, but a National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) official told Congress the 

contract would be signed within two weeks. Eosat was proposing to provide 

two satellites and a new ground station for a fixed price of $250 million, 

satellite hardware continuing present capabilities with improvements, greater 

data processing capabilities at the new ground station, and a program covering 10 years. Government funding would occur in the first fiw years. (AD, 

June 21/85, 1) 

433 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

july 6 Taylor Wang, the first space traveller of Chinese origin who performed 

materials science and fluids studies in weightlessness during the April 1985 

Challenger Space Shuttle flight 51-8, arrived in Beijing, China, for a twoweek visit at the invitation of the Astronautics Industry Ministry. Wang, a 

scientist at the jet Propulsion Laboratory, was born in China's jiangxi Province 

and had not been in China for over 30 years. 

Wang said the purpose of his trip was to exchange views with Chinese 

scholars and to conduct academic exchanges with Chinese specialists in 

Beijing, Xian, and Shanghai. 

During a welcoming ceremony July 8 at the Ministry, Vice-Minister Bao 

Keming said that China's open policy in recent years had given great impetus 

to the development of its space technology. He concluded by saying that 

Wang's visit would further promote the friendship and cooperation between 

scientists of the two countries and that Sino-American space science and 

technology collaboration and exchanges were promising. (FBIS, Beijing 

XINHUA in English, July 6/85, July 7/85, july 8/85) 

/uly 8 Vice President George Bush, after meeting with French President 

Francois Mitterrand and other French leaders in Paris, said the U.S. Strategic 

Defense Initiative (SDI) program and the European French-sponsored Eureka 

technology program were not incompatible, Defense Daily reported. Seeking to calm concerns that the Eureka program was in competition with SDI 

for scientific and technology talent, Bush said that after his talks with the 

French that "I more firmly believe . . . there is no incompatibility between 

Eureka. . .and SDI. . . "They understand our research program, which is strictly related to strategic defense, and I think we understand much more clearly their concept of 

collective research on broad technology as far as Europe is concerned," Bush 

commented. 

Technology ministers from 16 European countries had scheduled a meeting 

for july 17 in Paris to discuss projects and areas of cooperation in the Eureka 

program. Five areas of high technology were identified for joint programs: 

information technology, robotics, communications, bio-technology, and new 

materials. (D/D, July 8/85, 1) 

july 16: On the 10th anniversary of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, former 

astronauts Thomas Stafford, Donald Slayton, and Vance Brand and cosmonauts Alexei Leonov and Valery Kubasov met on July 16 in Washington D.C. 

at a celebration sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and 

Astronautics and the Planetary Society, and called on their countries to undertake a joint manned mission to Mars, the Washington Post reported. 

"People in both countries are already dealing with the technological questions about how to accomplish such a mission," said Leonov, who commanded the Soyuz spacecraft that docked on July 17, 1975 with an Apollo 

434 
United States 

spacecraft. “I know that all big things start with small steps but we can 

accomplish big tasks, not only in space but on the ground as well. I know we 

want to work together,” he continued. 

The conference heard repeated calls for the U.S. and USSR to begin planning a joint manned mission to Mars. Speakers included Carl Sagan of Cornell University; Bruce Murray, former director of the Jet Propulsion 

Laboratory; former New Mexico Senator Harrison Schmitt, a former astronaut; and Sen. Spark Matsunaga (D-Hawaii), who has sponsored Senate 

resolutions promoting more cooperation in space between the two countries. 

Other conference participants reminded the audience of the difficulties 

inherent in sending men to Mars. “Our two uppermost concerns are still a 

large solar flare and the everyday cosmic radiation the Mars pioneers would 

receive on their two-year round trip,” Dr. John Billingham of Ames Research 

Center said. 

“Massive solar flares represent the worst hazard,” he explained. “In 1972 a 

large flare produced a cloud of radiation equal to a dose of 1500 rads and in 

1956 an even bigger flare sent out a dose of 2500 rads. Both would have been 

lethal to men on a trip to Mars. 

“We have to find a way to create a kind of bomb shelter inside a ship bound 

for Mars and for the crew to have their own solar observatory on board to 

warn them of things like flares,” Billingham said. 

During the celebration, the Soviet Union released details of its next unmanned mission to Mars-the 1988 launch of a spacecraft and its 1989 

landing on Phobos, the larger of Mars’s two moons. (W Post, July 17/85, A181 

October 70: Members of the House of Representatives, former astronauts, 

and assorted other government people would depart on October 10 for a five 

day stay in Moscow to interest Soviet officials and scientists in a joint manned 

mission to Mars, the NY Times reported. The Soviets invited the group, and 

the White House cleared the visit. 

Heading the 40-member delegation was Rep. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who 

was chairman of the House space science subcommittee and scheduled to 

fly aboard the Space Shuttle in December. Former astronauts Thomas Stafford 

and Donald Slayton, also in the group, would join in a celebration in Moscow of the 10th anniversary of the Apollo-Soyuz space mission. 

Nelson noted that the formal space cooperation agreement between the 

two countries expired in 1982 and said that he hoped the Congressional 

mission would open the way to a “new spirit of scientific cooperation.” 

Under the sponsorship of the Soviet Academy of Sciences, the group would 

visit the space research institute, the cosmonaut training center, and the 

mission control center in Kaliningrad. A U.S. request to visit the Baikonur 

Astrodrome, the launching facility in Tyuratam outside the city of Leninsk, 

was pending. (NYT, Oct 9/85, 814) 

435 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Military Programs 

february 7: In taking actions that would likely aggramte the already eroding 

launch service‘s market psition of the Space Shuttle, Aerospace Daily reported that the Department of Defense (DOD) announced plans to fly at least 

two complementary expendablelaunch vehicles per year beginning in 1998, 

and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced in its FY 86 budget submission that “three of their satellites haw 

been committed to the Titan 11.” (MD, Feb 7/85, 1) 

March 3: In his “National Security Launch Strategy” directive, President 

Reagan told NASA and the U.S. Air Force to begin a study leading to joint 

development of a bigger and more powerful space shuttle that could begin 

flying missions just before the par 2000, the Washington Post reported. In a 

major policy change, the Reagan Administration indicated that the Air Force 

should share with NASA the cost of designing and acquiring the secondgeneration space shuttle; NASA had borne the $10 billion cost of developing 

the current Space Shuttle, although the Air Force used it one third of the time. 

The directive also covered an agreement by the Air Force to use NASA‘s 

Space Shuttle at least eight times a year for the 10 years after 1988 and 

approved an Air Force decision to buy an improved version of its Titan rocket 

to supplement the Space Shuttle for military launches starting in 1988 and 

ending in 1993 [see Feb. 271. 

Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger said in the directive that the Air 

Force had decided to buy 10 Titan 34D7 singleuse rockets for $2.09 billion 

between then and September 1993 from Martin Marietta Corp. The directive 

did not resolve the dispute between NASA and the Air Force over Air Force 

plans to sell at bargain rates obsolete Titan II intercontinental ballistic missiles to launch three weather satellites for NOAA [see Feb 251. 

NASA was disappointed in the Air Force decision to buy the Titans, as it 

had tried to persuade the Air Force to buy an upgraded version of the solidfuel rocket booster that helped put the Space Shuttle into orbit. Present 

rocket power limited Space Shuttle cargo weight, flying height, and its crossrange (limiting landings to Kennedy Space Center, Edwards AFB, and the 

White Sands Missile Range). 

The permanently manned space station planned for 1993 would require 

loads up to 75,000 Ib. carried into polar orbit and at least 100,000-lb. loads 

into nearequatorial orbit at altitudes of at least 500 miles. (Whsf, Mar 3/85, 

A12) 

March 25: Brig. Gen. Donald Kutyna, director of Air Force space systems and 

C3, told the Senate Armed Services Committee the previous week that twothirds of the FY 86 space budget was earmarked for the military, Defense 

Daily reported. The Air Force would receive about 48% of the national space 

436 
United States 

budget, NASA 33%, and other Defense Department activities (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency [DARPA], Navy, and Army) the remaining 

18%. Kutyna added that Air Force space activities represented about three 

quarters of the total Defense Department space program, with the Defense 

agencies, mainly DARPA, coming in second. He noted the Air Force budget 

for FY 86 was $10.95 billion, with “no change percentagewise” from FY 85 

and “very little change among the elements.” 

Maj. Gen. Carl Beer, deputy chief of staff for plans for the Air Force Space 

Command, reported to the same committee approval of the Air Force space 

plan, which was divided into support and operational missions, including 

the launch, orbit transfer, and on-orbit control of spacecraft and payloads, 

and the operations necessary “to secure free passage in space and deny the 

enemy the use of space” when necessary. 

Beer confirmed that the requirement for a space-based radar system was 

established for the Air Force and Navy and the two would meet in the near 

future to get an R&D program underway. (D/D, Mar 25/85, 129) 

April 10: The U.S. Navy implemented a plan announced earlier by Navy 

Secretary John Lehman to abolish the Naval Material Command and to restructure the Naval Electronics Systems Command to integrate space systems, 

force ships, and aircraft systems into a Space and Warfare Systems Command, 

Defense Daily reported. The actions were part of a two-year-old plan to 

decentralize acquisition management in the Navy and streamline the decision making process. Defense Daily reported the Navy as saying a major 

impact of the reorganization of Navy acquisition management would be 

improved accountability by eliminating a reporting layer. 

Adm. James Watkins, chief of Naval Operations, said the space aspea of 

the reorganization was part of a total package intended to bring the Navy “up 

to speed” in addressing space needs. “We are trying now to put our act 

together. We have established the Navy Space Command. . .putting in my 

office the Space and C’ Directorate, rather than just C3,” Watkins said. “The 

Space and Warfare Systems Command will be our technical depository, 

working with the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) and other laboratories to 

work our projects in space, of which there are many. . .This is a nice step 

ping stone on the route to a unified space command,” Watkins added. 

He also pointed out that the Navy and the Air Force, and perhaps the Army, 

would rotate into the unified space command that President Reagan would 

establish on October 1, 1985. Therefore, Watkins said, he saw the reorganization as important not only within the Navy, but also within the unified 

command system to achieve a higher level of command decision. (D/D, Apr 

10/85, 225) 

August 27: Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger today cancelled the Army’s 

new battlefield anti-aircraft gun, called the Division Air Defense (Divad) gun, 

437 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

saying that tests showed it would give soldiers no significant improvement 

mr existing weapons, the Washington Times reported. Weinberger told a 

Pentagon press conference that operational tests held from March through 

June demonstrated the Divad mobile gun system "does not effectively meet 

the military threat" or justify adding $3 billion to the $1.8 billion already 

spent for development and production of the first Divads. The cancellation 

was one of the largest ever made of a weapon in production. 

Weinberger said the gun showed poor flexibility and a lack of range against 

the threat posed by Soviet missilefiring Hind helicopters. The Army declined 

comment, other than to say it would follow Weinberger's direction. Sources 

had said, however that the Army fought hard in meetings over the previous 

sMral weeks to keep the Divad in production. The Army had planned to buy 

615 Divads for a total cost of $4.5 billion and had accepted delivery of 65 

units. 

Ford Aerospace and Communications Corp. developed and built the 

weapon, employing 1900 people in its Divad division at Newport Beach, 

California. Ford Aerospace President Donald Rassier said the company understood the basis for the defense secretary's decision and that the firm had 

already begun work on new solutions to the growing Soviet threat. 

The Divad was based on the 40-millimeter double-barrel Swedish Bofers 

gun system, designed to be mounted on old M-48 tank chassis that the Army 

had in stock. Ford Aerospace equipped it with radar from the F-16 fighter for 

all-weather and nighttime operation. 

The Army considered the weapon essential for the defense of quick-moving 

armored tank divisions, especially in Europe, against both helicopters firing 

missiles and fixed-wing aircraft. (W Times, Aug 28/85, 1A) 

September23: During a ceremony today at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorad0 Springs, the Department of Defense (DOD) activated its first unified 

space command, SPACECOM, to mrsee all military programs in space, the 

NY Times reported. SPACECOM would oversee and control all Air Force, 

Army, Navy, and Marine Corps defensiw space activities, which consisted of 

systems demted to intelligence-gathering, watching for an attack, and facilitating communications and navigation, and would operate separately from 

the civilian programs run by NASA. Homr, it was the potential role that the 

new command might play as headquarters for any space-based defense 

against enemy missiles that drew most attention, despite official assertions 

that any such assignment would lie far in the future. 

Although the U.S. was committed to the early stage of research for a missile 

defense system known as the Strategic Defense initiative, Gen. John Vessey 

Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said after the ceremony that the 

command's purpose was an extension of the armed services' current strategy 

of deterrence, and he sought to allay concern that it would be a first step 

toward war in space. 

438 
United States 

“There are several things the command will not become:’ he said. “It is not 

a force built to escalate the arms race. it is not a force built to achieve 

dominance for the United States. The command will make its contribution to 

that fundamental element of United States strategy, the prevention of war.” 

Rep. Ken Kramer (R-Colo.), who strongly favored development of a missile 

defense system, said that the Space Command opened a new period in the 

lives of nations. Noting that he could “speak a little more freely” than the 

military officials, Kramer said, “I call it the post-nuclear era, in which the 

people of this nation and potentially all nations will no longer live in this 

shadow of potential nuclear destruction and nuclear holocaust.” Kramer had 

fought hard to have the military’s space functions united and based in his 

district and said Colorado had become the “military space capital of the free 

world.” 

DOD named Gen. Robert Herres, who headed the North American Aerospace Defense Command and the United States Air Force Space Command, 

to command the new organization. Herres attempted to dampen speculation 

about SPACECOM’s role in strategic defense development. “There is a lot of 

uncertainty about how that research is going to turn out. That’s why we call it 

research:’ he said. “I could speculate about what our role might be, but those 

decisions will depend on how the research turns out. (NM, Sept 24/85, A281 

Nowmber 1: The U.S. Air Force’s Electronic Systems Div. awarded Grumman 

Corp. a $657 million contract to build the Joint Surveillance Target Attack 

Radar System (JSTARS), an airborne radar system for spotting tanks, personnel 

carriers, or any other enemy vehicle moving or standing still, the Air Force 

Systems Command (AFSC) Newsreview reported. A C-18, a militarized version of Boeing’s 707, would serve as the radar‘s airborne development platform. The JSTAR would include radar equipment and operations and control 

displays as well as communications links to ground terminals and weapons 

systems. 

Under the fixed-price incentive contract, a Grumman team including Boe 

ing Military Airplane Co. and United Technologies Corp.3 Norden Systems 

Div. would design, build, and test two full-scaledevelopment airborne radar 

systems. 

The Air Force and Army would test the JSTARS ability to detect, locate, and 

track enemy ground vehicles and to help ground commanders plan attacks to 

destroy them. The Air Force expected field testing to begin in March 1990. 

Col. Harry Gillogly, JSTARS program manager, said the airborne systems 

would provide “an electronic high ground to observe maneuvering enemy 

forces:’ telling Air Force and Army commanders what forces to apply where 

and when in order to inflict the most damage at the least cost. 

“Both services will be able to attack key targets,” Gillogly said, “the Air 

Force with direct-attack aircraft and missiles, and the Army with artillery, 

439 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

maneuver forces, and ground-launched missiles.” (AFSC Newsreview, Nw 1/ 

85, 1) 

National Space Commission 

March 29: In a speech today before the National Space Club, President 

Reagan urged a greater U.S. effort in the commercial development of space 

and announced establishment of a 14-member National Space Commission, 

which he said would “devise an aggressive space agenda to carry America 

into the 21 st century,” the NY Times reported. He said Thomas Paine, head of 

a consulting company on high-technology enterprises and former NASA administrator and president and chief operating office of the Northrup Corp., 

would lead the commission. 

Other commission members were Laurel Wilkening, NASA scientist who 

would be vice chairman; Jeanne Kirkpatrick, former U.S. ambassador to the 

U.N.; Brig. Gen. Charles Yeager, retired; Neil Armstrong, former astronaut 

who headed Computer Technology Aviation; Kathryn Sullivan, first American 

woman to walk in space; Luis Alvarez, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory physicist; Paul Coleman, Space Research Association president and professor of 

geophysics and space at the University of California, Los Angeles; George 

Field, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory senior physicist; Lt. Gen. William Fitch, retired, former Marine Corp. deputy chief of staff for aviation; 

Charles Herzfeld, vice president and director of research and technology at 

In, 1. L. Kerrebrock, head of the department of aeronautics and astronautics 

at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Gerard ONeill, president of 

Geostar Corp.; and David Wbb, a consultant for space development. 

President Reagan said the commission would develop long-term goals for 

civilian space enterprises, but he did not elaborate on the type of commercial 

space ventures he had in mind. He said only that, “Before the end of the 

century, many billions of dollars of commercial activity will be taking place 

in and because of space” and that the U.S. must use the incentives of individual freedom and the profit motive to encourage these commercial uses. (NV 

Mar 30/85, 1A) 

June 5: Although a mission to put a human colony on Mars seemed unlikely 

anytime soon, members of the National Commission on Space [see U.S. 

Space Policy/National Commission on Space, Mar. 291 said it appeared to be 

only a matter of time until such an undertaking took place, the Washington 

Post reported. The commission was due in May 1986 to present a report 

outlining what it thought the U.S. space program should look like mr the 

next 20 years. 

The U.S. last visited Mars in 1976, when unmanned Viking 7 and 2 missions landed and began collecting data. The Mars Observer was scheduled 

for a 1991 launch to study the planet from orbit. NASA officials said that 

440 
United States 

beyond that there was nothing concrete on the drawing boards, although they 

were considering sending an unmanned craft to land on Mars, collect samples, and return in a manner similar to early moon explorations. (W Post, 

June 5/85, AS) 

December 18: Cen. Lawrence Skantze, commander of the Air Force Systems 

Command, declared that the U.S. military space program was about to begin 

a new era in which military space systems competed against terrestrial systems to determine which could better handle military situations, Defense 

Daily reported. 

Three dewlopments had created the military space program, reaching 

what Skantze called a “critical mass.” These were the establishments of the 

Unified Space Command that provided for the first time an advocate for U.S. 

space activities; the Project Forecast II technology study, which would propose among other things “quantum leaps in space capabilities;” and the 

growing momentum of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). 

“This ’critical mass,’ merging with the prmn combat enhancement roles of 

space systems and a tight defense budget, would thrust the military into a 

new era of force structure decision,” Skantze said. ‘A limited budget and its 

allocation process will place space systems in direct competition with terrestrial systems for resources and solutions to military problems,” he commented. 

Space systems would have to demonstrate that the benefits they provided 

were worth more than the terrestrial force addition that would haw to be 

foregone for the space system, Skantze pointed out. In the past, “space 

systems have often competed for R&D dollars with terrestrial systems that 

haw traditionally done the same or similar jobs,” he explained. ’At times we 

have the luxury of being able to afford both. These times are gone. Given the 

more sophisticated treat, and the corresponding increased complexity and 

cost of all aerospace systems, tradeoffs among different mission areas are 

now essential. 

“In an era when fielding a single military satellite can cost up to $.5 billion, 

we need to carefully consider what we are willing to give up to get a space 

system,” he asserted. 

Regarding the outlook for a shift to space systems, Skantze said that “future 

tradeoffs of space systems will be tough for several reasons. One is that right 

now, space systems are fewer in number, more costly, and subject to different 

logistics concepts than terrestrial systems. While multiyear contracting can 

reduce cost, we haven’t been able to take advantage of economic order 

quantities the way we have for missiles, bombs, or even planes. Development 

and production costs for spacecraft will continue to exceed the flyaway cost 

of a B-16 or F-15-even with on-orbit satellite repair on the horizon. 

”While the Shuttle offers that possibility,” he added, “we still have to build 

space systems reliable, redundant and survivable. For two to ten years at a 

44 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

time, military spacecraft must survive in-space radiation or combat, regulating their own systems or responding to remote controls. Ultra-high reliability 

is costly, but we can’t yet afford squadron-level maintenance of military satellites on-orbit. For now, w’re working on new maintenance concepts and 

better materials, propellants, and hardening to reduce some of the cost of 

space systems. However, they will remain expensive military alternatives 

until w find a new way of doing business.” 

A second reason making tradeoffs between space and terrestrial systems 

difficult was that “the payoffs are different, and hard to compare,” since space 

systems were “force multipliers:’ that is, they made weapon systems more 

capable, Skantze said. 

And a final reason that made tradeoffs difficult, he said, was “that a decision for a space system can be all or nothing,” meaning the number of fighter 

wings could be pared and still provide an effective force to some extent, 

”while the Unified Space Command cannot cut back on satellite numbers 

and still operate an effectiw system. The investment question can boil down 

to doing it all or just not doing it:’ he commented. (DID, Dec 18/85, 241) 

442 
MISCELLANEOUS 

May 9: The Coca-Cola Co. had developed the first container capable of 

dispensing carbonated beverages in weightlessness, and NASA officials said 

Coca-Cola could be aboard Space Shuttle flights as early as July, the Washington Post reported. Coca-Cola President Donald Keough said that including 

carbonated soft drinks on a Space Shuttle flight reflected NAWs interest in 

providing home-like comforts for the astronauts. 

Because liquids did not pour in weightlessness, astronauts had to sip drinks 

from straws inserted into plastic containers that collapsed as they were emp 

tied. However, gas in carbonated drinks expanded in weightlessness and low 

atmospheric pressure and therefore could escape from plastic containers. 

A company spokesman said Coca-Cola had solved the problem with a steel 

supercan equipped with a drinking spout, a screw to adjust beverage flow, 

and a safety lock to prevent leaks. (W Post, May 9/85, A8) 

lune 20: NASA announced it would test on Space Shuttle mission 51-F, 

scheduled for mid-July 1985, a Coca Cola Co. technology, dewloped at its 

own initiative and expense, to dispense its carbonated beverage in space [see 

NASMechnology Transfer, May 91. Previously it was impossible for astronauts to consume carbonated soft drinks in microgravity because there was 

no way to dispense the beverages. The test was part of an agreement between 

NASA and Coca-Cola under which the company would grant NASA a license 

to use the company’s patented technology, a specially designed can, for 

unrestricted use in dispensing carbonated bewrages in space. NASA would 

also receive the technical information necessary to fabricate its own cans. 

NASA added that other companies in the carbonated beverage industry 

were welcome to propose different technology for the same purpose. (NASA 

Release 85-96) 

lune 25: NASA announced that a Pepsi-Cola dispensing technology would fly 

aboard Space Shuttle mission 51-F, scheduled for launch on July 12, provided time permitted completion of NASA qualification procedures at the 

Johnson Space Center. The container, developed by Pepsi-Cola USA and 

Enviro-Spray Systems (a subsidiary of Grow Group) at their own initiative and 

expense, was capable of dispensing carbonated beverages, as well as other 

liquids in space, because pressure within the can was automatically renewed, 

whenever necessary, to maintain a steady flow of liquid. 

Pepsi-Cola had granted NASA a license for unrestricted use of the dispensing technology for testing carbonated beverages in space, and NASA would 

receive the technical information necessary to fabricate its own cans. (NASA 

Release 85-97) 

443 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

July 72: NASA scheduled the Space Shuttle Challenger to take today four 

high-tech cans each of Pepsi-Cola and Coca-Cola, the world’s two largestselling soft drinks, into orbit for the first time, the Washington Post reported. 

Stocking Challenger with both Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola resulted from a 

compromise reached after weeks of highly sensitive negotiations. NASA had 

not previously flown carbonated drinks in space because no containers were 

available to control and dispense carbonated liquids in zero gravity. 

It took the companies more than two years to develop and test the cans. 

Pepsi-Cola said its can cost its supplier, Enviro-Spray, $14 million to develop. 

Pepsi-Cola filled its can with eight ounces of cola and a plastic pouch that 

expanded when chemicals were mixed inside it to create carbon dioxide gas, 

which then inflated the pouch and forced the beverage out. Coca-Cola’s can 

was lined with a laminated plastic bag filled with cola that averlaid a second 

plastic bag containing carbon dioxide under 50 Ib. of pressure. The carbon 

dioxide forced the cola out of the can. A drawback to both cans was that they 

must be drunk unchilled. 

NASA retained the legal right to use whichever container worked best, the 

Washington Times reported, and to fill it with the drink of its choice. (W Post, 

July 12/85, A3; W Times, July 8/85, 3A) 

August 6: Sometime in 1986 or shortly thereafter a Conestoga rocket might 

launch a capsule carrying the cremated remains of 15,000 human beings into 

an orbit 1,900 miles above the earth, Malcom Brown wrote in the NY Times, 

and a few critics had deplored the idea that the U.S.’s first private venture into 

space should haul so seemingly useless a payload. However, Browne pointed 

out, the day might come when the space undertakers would orbit human 

relics of genuine value to future historians, archeologists, scientists, and 

doctors. 

As the living world became more crowded, he wrote, cremation seemed 

increasingly attractive as a spacesaving alternative. However, if the trend 

continued, scientists in the distant future might encounter a troublesome 

shortage of human remains representing today’s society. Space burial of at 

least a few representatives of our society would serve future science admirably, he wrote. Safe from grave robbers, souvenir hunters, land developers, 

and other terrestrial menaces, an orbiting body would remain in the most 

pristine frozen storage imaginable. 

Short of orbiting whole bodies, he added, even the storing of samples of 

human tissue in space would give future scientists useful time capsules. A 

system patented by a U.S. inventor, Philip Backman, reduced a human body 

to 5% of its natural weight by freezing, pulverizing, and vacuum drying it. ‘A 

few grams of the resulting powder, taking up no more space in an orbiting 

mausoleum than cremated remains, would bequeath to future scientists important clues about the deceased person’s identity, genetic makeup, pathology, and even style of life,” he wrote. 

444 
Miscellaneous 

“Space may be the arena of our future wars. It seems fitting that space 

should also sew as a graveyard, from which our distant descendants could 

mine the treasure of knowledge:’ Browne concluded. (NYT Aug 6/85, C3) 

August 14: During a news conference today at Johnson Space Center, Space 

Shuttle mission 51-F commander Gordon Fullerton said the Challenger‘s 

crew members could not endorse either the Coca-Cola or Pepsi-Cola they 

carried into space for the first time, the Washington Post reported. Both 

drinks were warm, fizzy, and full of froth whenever the crew tried to drink 

them. 

“They both failed miserably, mainly because we had no refrigerator. Warm 

cola is not on anybody’s favorite list of things . . . They just weren’t at the 

right temperature and we had no desire to drain the cans the two drinks came 

in:’ Fullerton said. 

He added that, although the crew suffered no gastric distress from drinking 

the two colas, “I just can’t extrapolate to any great desire to want them.” 

When reporters asked the seven crew members if they would forsake the 

fruit juices they usually drank for the colas if the colas were refrigerated, they 

all shook their heads. “The drinks we have on board now are quite attractive,” 

said astronaut Anthony England. (W Times, Aug 15/85, A8) 

DecemberZO: NASA announced that a cubic crystal art work, the first nonscientific payload to fly aboard a Space Shuttle, would go into space in the 

spring of 1986. “The Boundless Aperture:’ created by artist Lowry Burgess, 

was one in a series of sewn works in a project entitled “Quiet Axis:’ intended 

to express through art the scientific observation of order and harmony in the 

u n iwrse. 

The De Cordwa Museum, the New Works Program of the Massachusetts 

Council on the Arts and Humanities, and the Massachusetts Artists Foundation funded and would pay for launch of “The Boundless Aperture:‘ which 

was a six-lb. fiveinch sq. cube of bronze-tinted transparent glass. The cube 

contained such materials as water from 18 of the world’s rivers and minute 

amounts, or an appropriate substitute, of each of the elements in the periodic 

table. 

After flying in a middeck locker of the Space Shuttle orbiter, the work 

would be placed inside a petrified sycamore tree obtained from the Grand 

Canyon; and both would hwr in a permanent magnetic field inside a rock 

formation on the grounds of the De Cordwa Museum. 

Burgess was a professor at the Massachusetts College of Art in Boston and 

was director of its graduate program in fine arts and design. He was also a 

fellow and senior consultant at the Center for Advanced Visual Studies of the 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. NASA would determine the final cost 

of flying the work when it arrived at Kennedy Space Center. (NASA Release 

85-175) 

445 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

December 27: NASA announced that its Kennedy Space Center (KSC) 

awarded a research grant to Tuskegee University to research possibilities of 

growing food in outer space. In the project, the researchers would select 

several sweet potato varieties that looked promising and research nutrient 

delivery and hydroponic systems that appeared best suited to development of 

the crop. 

The sweet potato project was part of NASA’s Controlled Ecological Life 

Support Systems (CELSS) program to search for methods to supply a continuous food source and to regenerate waste during longduration spaceflights or 

for proposed lunar colonies. Dr. William Knott, manager of KSC’s Life Science Support Facility and technical monitor for the project, said that, if the 

sweet potato could deliver enough energy conversion efficiency and productivity, NASA would incorporate it into a nearly full-scale “breadboard” of a 

working CELSS that it was developing. Other plants previously chosen for the 

CELSS breadboard project included sugar beets, lettuce, snap beans, wheat, 

soy beans, and white potatoes. 

The sweet potato research would focus on three systems: plant growth, 

food processing, and waste management. The program would begin by 

studying the plants in a sealed 24 by 12-foot growth chamber with controlled 

light, food, water, and temperature. Plants would receive food in the chamber 

by recycling the atmosphere and water that passed through the nutrient 

system. NASA expected the chamber, once used to test the Mercury spacecraft for flight, might produce enough food for two to three people. A waste 

management system would treat leftovers from the recycling process, converting the waste products into a nutrient source for the plants. 

Knott said a major challenge of the project was to harvest the highest yields 

possible while using a minimum of space and water to deliver nutrients to 

the plants. “We will take the edible seeds and fruit out of the chamber for 

processing and storage. The leaws, stems, and parts of the plant normally not 

consumed also would be converted into a food material.” 

Calling the CELSS program “a beyond the year 2000 endeavor,” Knott said 

NASA would test some of the concepts of the program on the proposed space 

station “just to see if they work.” However, he pointed out, “resupply on a 

longduration spaceflight, a lunar base, or on a Mars mission . . . would 

make the ‘space farm’ . . . much more attractive.” (NASA Release 85-180) 

446 
APPENDIX A 

SATELLITES, SPACE PROBES, AND 

MANNED SPACE FLIGHTS, 1985 

There were 121 space launches in 1985, of which the USSR conducted 98 

or 81%; the U.S. conducted 17 launches. The European Space Agency (ESA) 

was responsible for three launches; Japan, two; and the Peoples Republic of 

China, one. 

NASA carried out 14 of the U.S. launches. Nine of these were with the 

Space Transportation System; three used Atlas Centaur vehicles; and two 

used Scout vehicles. The US. Department of Defense sponsored the remaining three launches-one with a Titan IIIB-Agena D and two using Atlas E 

launch vehicles; all DOD launches were from the Western Space and Missile 

Center (Vandenberg AFB). During the year NASA used all four of the continental U.S. launch sites: Kennedy Space Center for all Space Shuttle and 

Atlas Centaur launches; Vandenberg AFB for one Scout launch; Wallops 

Flight Facility for a Scout launch; and the White Sands Missile Range (New 

Mexico) for the final launch of an Aerobee sounding rocket. 

Soviet space activities in 1985 indicated their program was on the verge of 

major advances in exploring and exploiting outer space. The USSR tested 

three new space systems in 1985, established a new network of Molniya 3 

satellites, conducted three flights in the inscrutable Cosmos 1603 series, and 

reactivated the dormant Salyut 7station. Also of interest among USSR space 

advances were two missions, of the type normally supported by the D-l-e 

vehicle, that demonstrated completely new launch profiles, suggesting either 

the first variant in 15 years of the basic Proton booster or an entirely new 

launch vehicle. And for the first time in 20 years the USSR did not acknowledge a space mission (on June 21 from Tyuratam), leading observers to 

speculate it used either a new launch vehicle or a new class of satellite. The 

overall USSR launch rate, equalling their rates for the previous five years, 

resulted from a surge in October that was three times the launch rate of 

October 1984. In addition, they conducted three launches within eight hours 

on June 21 and three in less than 11 hours on August 8. The USSR used the 

Plesetsk facility for 62 launches, Baikonur Cosmodrome at Tyuratam for 35, 

and the Kapustin Yar complex for one. USSR launch vehicles deployed 119 

satellites, of which 71 remained operational by the end of the year. Of the 

Soviet's 95 identifiable missions, 64 or two-thirds were dedicated government/military missions. And also in 1985 the USSR created Glavkosmos SSR 

to coordinate civilian space activities in that country. 

Two of ESA's three launches deployed communications satellites-during 

the first launch one satellite for the Arab Satellite Communications Organization and one for Brazil. The purpose of the second mission was to deploy 

447 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

GSTAR 1 (U.S.) and Telecorn 18 (France). Their final mission launched Giotto 

for a Halley’s comet flyby. Both Japanese launches were associated with data 

gathering on Halley’s Comet; and the Peoples Republic of China launched 

Sources for these data include Spaceflight: Satellite Digest; The Soviet Year 

in Space, 1985; press releases of NASA, Department of Defense, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and other government agencies, 

as well as the Communications Satellite Corporation. Soviet data also derie 

from statements in the Soviet press, translations from the Tass news agency, 

international news service reports, and announcements and briefings by Se 

viet officials. Data on satellites of other nations also come from announce 

ments of their respective governments or national organizations. 

PRC- 1Z 

448 
Appendix A 

c) 

P 

0 

v 

E 

.- 

c) L 

.- 8 - 

? 

449 
Astre~mtks and Asranautics$ 1485 
Appendix A 

h 

N 

\o 

'9 c9 N 

W 

'9 

N 

co 

m 

c9 

", 

.- 

v) 

m 

W 8 

d 

4 

\o 

7 7 

f 

d 

OI 

m 

m N 

0 N 

ss N s: 

s 

c - m 

45 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

v) 

9 

x 

01 

8 

v) 

OD 

h 

OD 

0 

OD 

L 

0 td 
Appendix A 

m 

x 

Q3 

h 

9 

h' 

m 

0 

c! 

N 

m 

m 

0 

m 

9 

3 9 

m 

N 

c - m 

2 

N 

0 

QI 

E' 

8 

-Y 

m 

74 

c - m 

t 

N 

m 

c - 

453 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

u0 

d 

N 

03 

v! 

VI 

s 

P 

n 

9 

454 
Appendix A 

-! 

0 

F 

0 

m 

m 

7 

c 7 

m 

m 

m 

m 

d 

co 

In 

m 

F 

0 

m 

F: 

m 

w 

Qo 

d 

9 

d 

9 

U 

C 

m 

455 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

h 

f? 7 

m 

c'! 

x 

d 

I.- 

ltl 

h 

h 

ltl 

m 

0 

a3 

In 

m 

m 

ltl 

h 

r 

m 

m 

h 

N 

h 

c9 

\o 

m 

CQ 

N 

m 

R 

h 

9 

N 

F 

N 

n 

9 

h 

N 

n 

I2 

h 

N 

n 

1p! 

7 

L: 

s 

456 
Appendix A 

d 

co 

x 

h 

rg 

h' 

m 

h 

rg 

m 

co 

v) 

\o 

V 

v) 

L: 

s 

9 .c 

.- 

ed 

s 

2 

s 

h 

v) 

h 

d 

co 

7 

6 

Y 

ab 

- 8 

Y 

v) 

m 

\o 

d \o 

9 2 co x 

N 

a3 

B 

x 

d 

3 m 7 

c 2 

0 v) 

7 7 

m 

4 

L. 

s 

0 

N 

L: 

s 

457 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

-E 

m 

u) 

9 

x 

VI 

h 

P 

? 

VI 

m 

P 

F 

458 
7 

m 

0 

9 

x 

e 

; 

c 

m 

d 

r 

F 

0 

CQ 

d 

c 

7 

m 7 m 

Appendix A 

00 

Oh 

dd 

c00 

h0 

dh 

459 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

81- .plj 

2- 

c 

x x 

h 

h 

h 

ln 

m 

N 

N 

L: 

3 

e 

h 

a2 

h 

ln 

m 

rD 

h 

h 

ln 

m 

N 

N 

L* 

3 

460 
Appendix A 

h 

d 

bo 

h. 

VI 

c? 

1? 2 

N 

m 

N 

N 

2 

N 

VI 

N 

m 

d 

m 

m 

& 

< 

m 

N 

7 

& 

< 

461 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

7 

m 
Appendix A 

x 

m 

W 

N 

d 

t 

t 

t 

m 

2 

W 

m 

s 

m 

x 

W 

m 

N 

N 

m h N N 

m m 

s 

& 

< 

7 c 

ui 

W 

h 

v) 

c 

N 

d 

0 

N 

m 

0 

0 

N 

\D 

N 

& 

< 

463 
Idronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

0 

K 

v) 

'9 

7 

m 

VI 

d 

m 

a3 

v) 

W 

464 
Appendix A 

0 

r\: 

K 

h 

N 

0 

\o 

W 

U 

h 

6 

z 

m 

: 

\o 

6 

N 

N 

2 h 2 

x 0, 

m 

h. 

In 

h 

\o 

m 

W 

h Y 7 

6 

z 

6 

z 

465 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

U 

C 

m 

0 d a? 

-4. 

Lo 

x co 

fn 

In 

N 

0 

N 

7 

z 

In m d h 7 N 

c 

U 

C 

m 

N 

N 

466 
Appendix A 

0 

CO 

h 

bo 

2 

CO 

ro CO 

0 

v! 

F : 

s F 

bo 

50 

CO 

m 

m 

3 

m 

- 

bo E CO 7 

467 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

468 
2 

h 

h 

N 

m 

c'! 

In 

d 

c 

m 

'9 

m 

h 

v! 

03 

N 

N 

03 

d 

c 

rD 

N In - 

U 

Appendix A 

;n 

m 

ln 

c 

m 

m 

469 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

2 

m 

470 
Appendix A 

50 

7 

In In 

m 

R 

471 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

472 

m 

N 

a3 

? 

m 

c9 

m 

a3 

m 

v) 

N 

m 

r\ 

N 

e 

N 

W 

C - 3 

\o 

a3 

2 

v) 

m e 

0 

d 

m 

c 

N 

W 

C - a 
Appendix A 

7 

0 

In 

v! '9 8 8 

d 

6 d 

N 

N d 

d 

m 

Q, 

h 

m x 

h 

In 

m 

bo 

3 

m 

N 

bo 

bo 

0 

N 

0 

N 

d 

In 

m 

d 

2 

h 

h 

z 

co 

d 

N 

N 

N 

Q, 

N 

bo 

N 

W 

C - 3 

N m 

473 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

474 
Appendix A 

0 

m 

5 

475 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

c 

ab 

2 

€0 

N 

h 

c4 

9 

co 

2 

m 

h: 

N 

co 

In 

N 

N 

ab 

2 

m In 

N 

7 

d 

m 

ab 

2 

476 
Appendix A 

N 

2 

co 

0 

8 

.- 

0 

9 

N 

? 

d 

x co 

N 

2 

co 

m 

h 

N 

0 

co 

2 

co 

E 

m 

h 

r4 

m 

x 

co 

N 

m 

9 

3 

9 

m 

hc 

.- 

0 

v) 

m 

x 

7 

M 

ln 

m 

7 

m 

h 

w 

2 

477 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

In 

N 

9 

c9 

In 

M 

K 

h 

7 

N 

0 

9 

N 

M 

h 

m 

M 

N 

c 

w 

2 

F 

xs co 

N 

co c 

w 

2 

478 
Appendix A 

N 

N 

M 

2 

7 

In 

N 

m 

Q 

N 

m 

N 

v) 

co 

N 

s 

h 

N 

d 

2 

479 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

m 0 

c 

m 

c 

0 

c 

4 

m 

w 

N 

v) 

c 

2 

m 

z 

h 

v) 

m 

480 
Appendix A 

h! 

0 

In 

m 

In 

0 

co 

In 

m 

m 

c 

N 

co 

s 

N 

N 

h 

N 

h 

2 

co 

3 

x 

m 

h 

7 

d 

co 

I\ 

m 

3 

m 

N m 

N 

m 

N 

48 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

N 

'9 

7 

v) 

d 

m 

f 7 

p\ 

m 

m 

m 

m 

m 

482 
Appendix A 

9 

N 

h 

c9 

9 

m 

x 

9 

2 

h 

h 

N 

m 

hc 

m 9 

VI 9 In (0 

m m m 

d 

d 

c ry 

w 

- c? 

In 

m 

m 

c? r 

VI 

m 

m 

r 

In 

m m 

m 

9 

N h 

N 

483 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

h 

2 \o 

3 

F; 

h 

7 

2 

h 

QI 

m 

C 

m 

4 i hl 

e 

0 

484 
Appendix A 

N 

\o 

K 

h 

7 

N 

h 

tn 

h 

tn 

9 

u0 t& 

m 

m 

0 

9 

Eo 

h 

m 

m m 

485 
-utronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

I h 

c 

4 

n 

1 

B 

7 

m 

m 

8 

486 
Appendix A 

2 

co 

m 

co 

m 

7 

h 

d 

c 

c 

c 

2 

co 

m 

m 

m - 

E 

d 

c 

T 

m 

N 

2 

co 

c 

2 a3 

In 

0 

d 

h 

d 

7 

c 

T 

m 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

9 

cc, 

9 

F 

0 

m 

N 

9 

2 

F 

m 

K 

h 

F 

Ln 

0 

\o 

9 

N 

h 

m 

m 

c 

N N 

N 

8 

N 

N 

488 
Appendix A 

h 

2 \c 

In 

x 

a0 

W 

- t 

N 

OI 

K 

h 

e 

h 

c*! 

E 

\o 

co 

2 h 

- 

In 

In 

h 

In 

m 

h 

rD 

F 

m 

W 

m 

co 

5: h 

N 

N 

0 

m 

c 

W 

h 

-4- 

co 

In 

F 

m 

h 

Q) 

In 

e 

In 

N 

m e W m 

W 

W 

N In 

N In 

N co 

N 

489 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

0 

K 

ul 

7 

m 

c 

N 

m 

m 

m 

m 

U 

K 

m 

0 

h’ 

In 

9 

c 

m 

3 

m 

m 

m 

m 

m 

2 

\o 

In 

d 

h 

5 

m 

h 

m 

c 

m 

490 
Appendix A 

h 

: 

h 

rD 

N 

m 

c'! 

bo 

m 

m 

d 

d 

7 

h 

7 

1 

N 

rD 

m 

d 

v! 

7 

7 

e 

m 

m 

co 

m 

h 

In 

m 

c 

v! 9 N 03 co N 

m 

h 

K 

m 

v) 

rD 

m 0 

m 

m 

i? 

m 

N 

N rD 

N 

8 

Z 

8 

z 8 

Z 

49 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Ln 

m 

0 

m 

h 

Ln 

m 

U 

C 

m 

492 
Appendix A 

v! 

03 

N 

0 

m 

ii 

Z 

m h 

: 

h 2 co 

v) e e v) 

m m 

m co 

r4 

n 

ii 

Z 

493 
lstronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

- I 

B 

m 

cn 

d 

v! 

w 

W 

w 

h 

494 
Appendix A 

7 

h' 

m 

x 

m 

d 

m 

F 

N 

h 

h 

0 

co 

2 

h 

u) 

N 

m 

h 

N 

ln 

2 co 

m 

rD 

m 

E 

0 

7 

u 

VI 

ln 

h 

h. 

m 

N 

co 

d 

m 

h 

h 

\o 

d 

h 

rf? 

d 

N 

495 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

a3 

h 

LD 

2 

0 

? 

E 

LD 

496 
d 

co 

x 

h 

cv 

d 

n 

9 c 

h 

co 

w 

m 

r\ 

m 

bo 

F 

m 

In 

co 

Appendix A 

497 

APPENDIX B 

NASA LAUNCHES, 1985 

The following table of NASA launches in 1985 includes payloads carried 

by the Space Shuttle and rocket launches larger than sounding rockets. 

NASA conducted 14 launches with 24 payloads, all of which were successful or partially successful (the booster on Syncom 3 failed to ignite and was 

repaired during STS-511, Syncom 4 ceased functioning after deployment, 

and Glomr was deployed during a second mission after it failed to leave the 

cannister on STS-51 B). NASA flew for the Department of Defense two dedicated Space Shuttle missions, during which three satellites were deployed, 

and conducted two Scout launches, each with two payloads. In addition the 

Space Shuttle flew the first of what likely would be a series of experiments for 

the Strategic Defense initiative program. The Space Transportation System's 

Space Shuttles, along with the Payload Assist Module (PAM) D and D-2 and 

Hughes's inertial upper stage, deployed 11 communications satellites into 

synchronous orbit for eight organizations and five countries. 

NASA in 1985 introduced Discovery, the last and lightest-weight Space 

Shuttle orbiter; and McDonnell Douglas inaugurated its more powerful up 

per stage booster, the PAM 0-2. 

Space Shuttles also carried 11 Get Away Special (GAS) cannisters in 1985; 

15 middeck (secondary) payloads for such organizations as 3M Corp. and the 

IMAX film company; two Shuttle Student Involvement Project experiments; 

two deployable GAS can satellites (wry small satellites in a GAS can); Spacelab 3 with the first largescale animal colony; Spacelab 2 with the ESA 

developed Instrument Pointing System; and Spacelab D1, a dedicated 

scientific flight purchased by the West German government. 

Crew members on Space Shuttle missions in 1985 totalled 52 (four crew 

members flew twice). Of this total, 19 were scientists performing observations, experiments, or investigations; 27 were US. military officers (16 Air 

Force, five Navy, four Marine Corps, and two Army); and six were payload 

specialists from foreign countries. A US. Senator, EJ. "Jake" Garn, flew on 

STS-5 1 D. 

The following table categorizes vehicle and payload performance as S for 

successful, P for partially successful, or U for unsuccessful. These categories, 

which are unofficial, do not take into account that U missions might produce 

valuable information or that payloads with a long-life design might fail to 

meet the design requirements, thus becoming officially unsuccessful. Further 

information on these launches appears in Appendix A and in the text. 

C -I499 

mlul 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

In 

co 

$ 

3 

c 

u 

C 

9 

Z 

c 

m c 

9 

m - 

v) 

v) 

LL 

0 '6 

500 
Appendix B 

L 

u 

m 

N 

& 

< 

501 
astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

502 
Appendix B 

L 

9 

e, 

c, 

9 

L 

v) 

v) 

v) v) L 

v, v) v) 

m 

0 

m 

h 

N 

Pb 

i 

h h 

N N 

Pb Pb 

i i 

0, 

N 

< 

503 
4stronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

In 

v) 

tn 

w 

.- 

C 

- m 

F 

vi 

c 

0 

m 

u 

c 

1- 

Y 

.- 

2 

E 

t. 

S 

E 

8 

- .- .- 

E 

.- E 

r-0 

mm 2 

88 8 

0 

m 

504 
Appendix B 

v) 

v) 

.g 0 

SY =- 

4 

\o 

hl 

<< 

uu 

ug 

v) v) v) v) 

v, v) v) v) 

c 

0 

34 

L 

,o 

m N 

h h N hl 

8 

Z 

8 

Z 

8 

Z 

505 

APPENDIX C 

MANNED SPACE FLIGHTS, 1985 

There were a total of 11 manned spacecraft flights worldwide in 1985: nine 

Space Shuttle missions conducted by the U.S. and two Soyuz T missions by 

the USSR to carry crew to and from the Salyut 7 station. 

The U.S. total of manned spacecraft hours in flight in 1985 was 1395 hours 

53 minutes; total cumulative man-hours in space in 1985 were 9280 hours 

43 minutes. The 1985 USSR total of manned spacecraft hours was 4249 

hours 44 minutes; their total cumulative man-hours in space in 1985 ,were 

10,056 hours. 

In total, 52 individuals flew aboard Space Shuttles in 1985. Four individuals-three NASA astronauts and one payload specialist-flew twice. The 

U.S. Air Force flew payload specialists on each dedicated DOD mission; 

McDonnell Douglas flew the same payload specialist on two missions; U.S. 

Senator E.J. "Jake" Garn, one of NASA's subcommittee chairman, flew as an 

observer; a scientist from EG&G Corp. and another from the Jet Propulsion 

Laboratory flew as part of the Spacelab 3 mission; scientists from Lockheed 

Palo Alto Research Laboratory and the Naval Research Laboratory flew as part 

of the Spacelab 2 mission; two scientists from West Germany and one from 

the Netherlands flew as part of the Spacelab D-1 mission; payload specialists 

from Saudi Arabia and France flew on a mission together; and a scientist from 

Mexico flew to perform experiments. 

Crew aboard three Space Shuttle missions went on space walks. On the 

first, astronauts attached an impromptu "flyswatter" to the robot arm in prep 

aration for an attempt to activate Syncom IV-3. Later, in a two-part space 

walk, two astronauts activated that satellite. Finally, in another twepart exercise, two astronauts carried out largestructures assembly techniques in 

space. 

The year of manned space flights for the USSR was marked by the rescue 

mission of Salyut the first partial space station crew rotation; and the 

emergency return to earth to get an ailing cosmonaut to the hospital. The 

USSR in 1985 conducted five missions to the manned Salyut 7 station: two 

manned Soyuz T's, one Progress resupply ship, one modified Progress flown 

under a Cosmos designation, and the fourth in a series of enhanced unmanned resupply and support spacecraft. 

The year 1985 was the 20th anniversary of the world's first space walk by 

Alexei Leonov on board Voskhod 2. Two cosmonauts aboard Salyut 7conducted one space walk in 1985 to install a third and final main solar panel 

attachment on the space station and test an improved extravehicular activity 

suit. 

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

m 

co 

m 

v; 

M 

c 

E 

8 

3 

- .- 

LL 

v) 

c 

C 

2 

508 

h 

N 

C - m 
Appendix C 

h iD 7 

iD m 

07 

N 

h 

N 

509 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

h 

r; 

0 

m 

r; 

0 

510 
Appendix C 

Z 

51 1 

Appendix D 

ABBREVIATION§ OF REFERENCES 

Listed here are the abbreviations used for citing sources in the text. Not all 

the sources are listed, only those that are abbreviated. 

AAAS Bull 

A&A 

A&A 1985 

ABC 

AEC Release 

Aero Daily 

Aero Med 

AF Mag 

A FHF Newsletter 

AFI 

AFSC Newsreview 

AFSC Release 

AIA Release 

AlAA Facts 

AlAA Release 

AI P Newsletter 

AP 

ARC Astrograrn 

Astro lourn 

Atlanta IC 

AvWk 

B News 

B Sun 

American Association for the Advancement of SciAmerican Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics‘ 

NASPls Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985: A Chre 

American Broadcasting Company 

Atomic Energy Commissior? news release 

Aerospace Daily newsletter 

Aerospace Medicine magazine 

Air Fcrce Association’s Air brce Magazine 

Air Force Historical Foundation Newsletter 

Armed Forces Journal magazine 

Air Force Systems Command’s Newsreview 

Air Force Systems Command news release 

Aerospace Industries Association of America news 

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics’ 

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 

American institute of Physics Newsletter 

Associated Press news service 

NASA Ames Research Center‘s AStrogrdm 

American Astronomical Society’s AstrophysicallourAtlanta journal Constitution newspaper 

Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine 

Birmingham News newspaper 

Baltimore Sun newspaper 

ence‘s AAAS Bulletin 

magazi ne, Astronautics gi Aeronautics 

no/ogy (this publication) 

release 

Facts 

news release 

nal 

PRECEDENG PAGE BLANK MOT FlLMED 

513 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Bull Atom Sci 

Bus Wk 

C Daily News 

C Fib 

Can Press 

CBS 

C&E News 

CI PD 

CI Press 

Columbia J Rev 

ComSatCorp Release 

CQ 

CR 

CSM 

CTNS 

D News 

D Post 

DASA Release 

DFRC 

DJ 

DOC PI0 

DOD Release 

DOT Release 

EOP Release 

ESA Release 

FAA Release 

FBIS-SW 

FonF 

FRC Release 

FRC X-PESS 

GE Forum 

Goddard News 

GSFC Release 

GSFC SSR 

GT&E Release 

H Chron 

H Post 

INTELSAT Release 

Education Foundation for Nuclear Science's Bulletin 

of the Atomic Scientists 

Business Week magazine 

Chicago Daily News newspaper 

Chicago Tribune newspaper 

Canadian Press news service 

Columbia Broadcasting System 

Chemical & Engineering News magazine 

Cleveland Plain Dealer newspaper 

Clewland Press newspaper 

Columbia Journalism Review magazine 

Communications Satellite Corporation news release 

Congressional Quarterly 

Congressional Record 

Christian Science Monitor newspaper 

Chicago Tribune News Service 

Detroit News newspaper 

Denwr Post newspaper 

Defense Atomic Support Agency news release 

See FRC. 

Dow Jones news service 

Department of Commerce Public Information Office 

Department of Defense news release 

Department of Transportation news release 

Executive Office of the President news release 

European Space Agency news release, use dated (not 

Federal Aviation Administration news release 

Foreign Broadcast Information Service, Soviet numFacts on File 

Flight Research Center news release, after 8 Jan. 

1976, became Dryden Flight Research Center 

(DFRC) news release 

numbered) 

ber 

NASA Flight Research Center's X-Press 

General Electric Forum magazine 

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center's Goddard News 

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center news release 

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center's Satellite SituaGeneral Telephone & Electronics news release 

Houston Chronicle newspaper 

Houston Post newspaper 

Intl. Telecommunications Satellite Org. news release 

tion Report 

514 
Appendix D 

/A 

JPL Laboratory 

JPL Release 

JPRS 

JSC Release 

JSC Roundup 

ISR 

KC Star 

KC Times 

KSC Release 

LA Her-Exam 

LA Times 

Langley Researcher 

LaRC Release 

LATN S 

LeRC Release 

Lewis News 

M HER 

M News 

M Fib 

Marshall Star 

MJ 

MSFC Release 

N Hav Reg 

N News 

N Va Sun 

NAA News 

NAA Record Book 

NAC Release 

NAE Release 

NANA 

NAS Release 

NAS-NRC Release 

N AS- N RC- N A E 

News Rpt 

Journal of Aircraft magazine 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s Laboratory 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory news release 

Department of Commerce Joint Publications Re 

search Service 

NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (Manned 

Spacecraft Center until 17 Feb. 1973) news release 

NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center‘s Space 

News Roundup 

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics’ 

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets magazine 

Kansas City Star newspaper 

Kansas City Times newspaper 

NASA John F. Kenn’edy Space Center news release 

Los Angeles Herald-Examiner newspaper 

Los Angeles Times newspaper 

NASA Langley Research Center‘s Langley Researcher 

NASA !Langley Research Center news release 

Los Angeles Times News Service 

NASA Lewis Research Center news release 

NASA Lewis Research Center’s Lewis News 

Miami Herald newspaper 

Miami News newspaper 

Minneapolis Tribune newspaper 

NASA George C. Marshall Space Flight Center’s MarMilwaukee lournal newspaper 

NASA George C. Marshall Space Flight Center news 

New Hawn Register newspaper 

Newark News newspaper 

Northern .Virginia Sun newspaper 

National Aeronautic Association News 

National Aeronautic Association’s World and U.S.A. 

National Aviation Club news release 

National Academy of Engineering news release 

North American Newspaper Alliance 

National Academy of Sciences news release 

National Academy of Sciences-National Research 

Council news release 

National Academy of Sciences-National Research 

Council-National Academy of Engineering News 

Report 

shall Star 

release 

National World Aviation-Space Records 

515 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

NAS4 Actv 

NASA anno 

NASA GMR 

NASA HER-39 

NASA Hist oft' 

NASA tiq WB 

NASA In! Aff 

NASA LAR, XllIi8 

NASA Leg Ofi 

NASA MOR 

NASA prog off 

NASA proj off 

NASA Release 

NASA Rpt SRL 

Natl Ohs 

Nature 

NBC 

NGS Release 

NMI 

NN 

NOAA Release 

NASA SP-4019 

NRL Release 

NSC Release 

NSC News 

NSC Letter 

NSF Highlights 

NSF Release 

NSTL Release 

N Y News 

NM 

NYTNS 

0 Sen Star 

Oakland Trib 

Omaha W-N 

ONR Rev 

NASA Activities 

NASA announcement 

NASA Headquarters "General Management Review 

NASA Historical Report No. 39 

NASA History Office 

NASA Headquarters Weekly Bulletin 

NASA Office of International Affairs 

NASA Legislative Activities Report, Vol. XIII, No. 8 

NASA Office of Legislative Affairs 

NASA Headquarters Mission Operations Report, preliminary prelaunch and postlaunch report series 

(information may be revised and refined before 

publication) 

Report" 

NASA program office (for the program reported) 

NASA project office (for the project reported 

NASA Headquarters news release 

NASA report of sounding rocket launching 

NASA Special Publication No. 4019 

National Obsemr magazine 

Nature Physical Science magazine 

National Broadcasting Company 

National Geographic Society news release 

NASA Management Instruction 

NASA Notice 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

Naval Research Laboratory news release 

National Space Club news release 

National Space Club News 

National Space Club Letter 

National Science Foundation's Science Resources 

National Science Foundation news release 

NASA National Space Technology Laboratories news 

New York Daily News newspaper 

New York Times newspaper 

New York Times News Service 

Orlando Sentinel Star newspaper 

Oakland Tribune newspaper 

Omsha World-Herald newspaper 

Navy's Office of Naval Research Reviews 

news release 

Studies Highlights 

release 

516 
Appendix D 

P Bull 

P Iny 

PA0 

PO 

PI0 

PMK Missile 

PMR Release 

Pres Rpt 74 

SA0 Release 

SBD 

Sci Amer 

Sci & Govt Rpt 

SciServ 

SD 

SD Union 

SET Manpower 

Comments 

SF 

SF Chron 

SF Exam 

Sov Aero 

Sov Rpt 

SP 

Spaceport News 

Spacewarn 

SR list 

SSN 

St Louis G-D 

%Picayune 

Tech Rev 

St Louis P-D 

Today 

testi mony 

text 

Philadelphia Ewning and Sunday Bulletin newspaPhiladelphia Inquirer newspaper 

Public Affairs Office 

National Archives and Records Service’s Weekly 

Public Information Office 

USN Pacific Missile Range’s Missile 

USN Pacific Missile Range news release 

Aeronautics and Space Report of the President: 1974 

Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory news release 

DefensdSpace Business Daily newspaper 

Scientific American magazine 

Science & Gowrnment Report, independent bulletin 

Science Service News service 

Space Digest magazine 

San Diego Union newspaper 

Scientific Manpower Commission‘s Scientific, EngiBritish Interplanetary Society’s Spaceflight magazi ne 

San Francisco Chronicle newspaper 

San Francisco Examiner newspaper 

Soviet Aerospace newsletter 

Center for Foreign Technology’s Soviet Report (transSpace Propulsion newsletter 

NASA John F Kennedy Space Center’s Spaceport 

IUWDS World Data Center A for Rockets and SatelNASA compendium of sounding rocket launches 

Soviet Sciences in the News, publication of ElectroSt. Louis GlobeDemocrat newspaper 

St. Louis Post-Dispatchmewspaper 

New Orleans Times-Picayune newspaper 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Technology 

Today newspaper 

Congressional testimony, prepared statement 

Prepared report or speech text 

per 

Compilation of Presidential Documents 

Activities 

of science policy 

neering, Technical Manpower Comments 

lations) 

News 

lites’ Spacewarn Bulletin 

Optical Systems, Inc. 

Review 

517 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

transcript 

UN Reg 

UP1 

USGS Release 

USPS Release 

w Post 

WFC Release 

WH Release 

WJT 

WSJ 

Official transcript of news conference or congressioUnited Nations Public Registry of Space Flight 

United Press International news service 

U.S. Geological Survey news release 

U.S. Postal Service news release 

Washington Post newspaper 

NASA Wallops Flight Center news release 

White House news release 

Wrld Journal Tribune newspaper 

Wall Street Journal newspaper 

nal hearing 

518 
INDEX 

A-10 aircraft, 406 

Abel, Brig. Gen. Richard, 316 

ABM. See Antiballistic Missile. 

Abrahamson, Lt. Gen. James, 109, 

Abrams M-1 tanks, 24 

Abruzzo, Ben, 16-1 7 

NC. See AtlasKentaur. 

Academy of Finland, 396 

Academy of Sciences, USSR. See Soviet 

Academy of Sciences. 

ACCESS. See assembly concept for 

construction of erectable space 

structures. 

ACFS. See advanced concept flight 

simulator. 

ACLU. See American Civil Liberties 

Union. 

active magnetospheric particle tracer 

explorers (AMPTE), 77-79, 401 

Acton effect, 47 

Acton, Loren, 47, 330 

ACTS. See Advanced Communications 

Acuna, Dr. Mario, 79 

Adams, Robert McCormick, 237-239 

ADATS. See airborne digital avionics test 

Adelman, Kenneth, 1 13 

ADSF. See automated directional 

Advanced Communications Technology 

advanced concept flight simulator 

advanced fighter technology integration 

advanced medium range air-to-air 

missile (AMRAAM), 119 

advanced range instrumentation aircraft 

(ARIA), 340, 404 

Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF), 10-1 1, 

117 

Advanced Technology Bombers (ATBsStealth), 1 16 

Advanced Turboprop Project (ATP), 

126- 127 

Technology Satellite. 

system. 

solidification furnace. 

Satellite (ACTS), 169 

(ACFS), 27 

(AFTI), 11, 13-14 

14-15 

Advanced X-ray Astrophysics Facility 

AEDC. See Arnold Engineering 

Development Center. 

Aerobee, 167 

(AXAF), 39-40 

-payload, 244 

-sounding rocket, 243-244 

aerodynamics, 16, 26, 187 

Aerojet Electro Systems Co., 73, 132 

Aerojet Engineering Corp., 243 

Aerojet Strategic Propulsion Co., 368 

Aerojet Technologies, 22 

Aeronautical Policy Review Committee, 

Aeronautical Systems Division. See Air 

7 

Force, U.S., Aeronautical Systems 

Division. 

Aeropropulsion Systems Test Facility 

(ASTF), 19 

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, 223 

aerospace sales, 1 

Aerospatiale, France, 145-1 46, 

159-160, 330 

-Space and Ballistic Systems Division, 

219 

AFE. See American Flight 

Echocardiograph. 

Afghanistan, 41 3 

AFGL. See Air Force, U.S., Geophysics 

Laboratory. 

AFSC. See Air Force, U.S., Systems 

Command. 

AF-16 satellite, 410 

AFTI. See advanced fighter technology 

jntegration. 

Agency for International Development 

(AID), U.S., 212, 224 

Agriculture, U.S. Department of, 179, 

424 

aggregation of red blood cells, 348 

Af. See artificial intelligence. 

AIAA. See American Institute for 

Aeronautics and Astronautics. 

AID. See Agency for International 

Development. 

aileron-rudder interconnect (ARI) 

program, 10 

519 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

AIM-7 rddar missile, 11 9 

Air Force, U.S., 2, 6-7, 11, 16, 20, 

22-24, 27-29, 33, 81-82, 94, 

11 1-1 17, 11 9-120, 122-1 23, 

129-131, 169, 185, 191, 286-287, 

321, 330, 335, 344, 364, 371, 389, 

404-411, 419, 426, 436-439 

292, 294-296, 305-306, 315-318, 

-Academy, 357 

-AF-16 satellite, 410 

-Aeronautical Systems Division 

(ASD), 10-12, 25, 81-82, 117, 

407 

-budget, 1 16-1 17, 437 

-Defense Meteorological Satellite 

-Deputy for Airlift and Trainer 

-Electronics Systems Division, 439 

-Flight Dynamics Laboratory, 14 

-4950th Test Wing, 404, 407 

-Geophysics Laboratory (AFGL), 

-Reserves, 404 

-Science Advisory Board Task Force 

on Manned Strategic System 

Vulnerability, 179 

Program, 21 7 

Systems, 82 

27-28, 356-357 

-shuttle assembly task force, 286 

-Space Command, 407-410, 437, 

-Space Division, Los Angeles, 419 

-space systems, 436 

-space test program satellite P80-1, 

-Space Technology Center, 132 

-Systems Command (AFSC), 12-1 3, 

19, 24-25, 27, 81, 114, 117, 

221, 286, 404, 406, 439, 441 

-3246 Test Wing, 119 

-Weapons Laboratory, 176, 179, 182 

439 

31 7 

119-120, 122, 124, 132, 201, 

Air Force One, 81-82 

Air India jetliner, 87 

Air Injection as an Alternative to 

Honeycombing experiment, 358 

Air Line Pilots Association, U.S., 91 

air traffic communications, 141, 339 

air traffic control, 86-87, 141-143, 197 

Air Transport Association, 85, 141 

airborne digital avionics test system 

Airbus Industrie, 84, 145 

(ADATS), 407 

Aircraft Accident Investigation 

Committee. See Japan. 

Air-India, 87, 92-93, 96 

airline 

-deregulation, 95-96 

-insurance premiums, 69-90 

-passenger costs, 85 

-passenger trips, 85 

aidskin friction, 4 

AKM. See apogee kick motor. 

Alabama, 198, 357-358, 382, 429 

Alabama A&M University, Normal, AL, 

Alzbama Space and Rocket Center, 357 

Alabama, University of, 358 

382 

-Birmingham, 429 

-Huntsvil!e, 429 

Alaska, 75, 220 

AI-Bassam, Abdulmohsen Hamad, 280 

Albuquerque, NM, 16, 100 

Aldrich, Arnold, 304, 3 12 

Aidridge, Edward, Jr., 120, 305, 322, 

Aldrin, Edwin, 416 

Alexander, Joseph, 179-1 80 

Alexandria, VA, 272 

Alfven, Dr. Hannd, 60 

All Tech Associates, Inc., 357 

Allen, Dr. Joseph, 33-34 

Allen, Dr. Lew, 214 

Alpha Jet, 145 

AI-Saud, Sultan Salman Abdelazize, 280, 

328 

AI-Saud, Sultan bin Salman bin Abdul 

Aziz, 282 

Alvarez, Luis, 440 

American Airlines, 404 

American Association for the 

American Astronautical Society, 87, 185, 

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), 

American Flight Echocardiograph (AFE), 

American Geophysical Union, 180, 353 

American Institute for Aeronautics and 

Astronautics (AIAA), 101, 179, 31 1, 

434 

364, 408 

Advancement of Science, 101, 1 79 

31 1 

320-321 

350-35 1 

-Narional Capital Section, 425 

American Institute of Industrial 

Engineers, 201 

520 
Index 

American Newspaper Publishers 

Association, 276 

American Red Cross, 232 

American Relay League, 421 

American Rocket Society (ARS), 101 

American Samoa, 220 

American Satellite Co. (AmSat), 1-2, 

American Society of Newspaper Editors, 

American Stock Exchange, 433 

American Telephone and Telegraph 

American University, Washington, DC, 

Ames-DFRC. See Ames-Dryden Flight 

Arnes-Dryden Flight Research Center 

303, 333-334 

2 76 

(AT&T), 300, 330 

124 

Research Center. 

(Ames-DFRC), 8, 10-1 1, 13-1 4, 16, 

98, 294, 365, 367 

25-27, 37-38, 42, 61, 66, 82-63, 

210, 235, 259, 268, 327, 354, 367, 

374, 377, 426, 435 

Ames Research Center (ARC), 5, 12, 

86, 151, 167, 175, 186-109, 194, 

-Extraterrestrial Research Division, 

-Space Human Factors Office, 

-Space Sciences Division, 37 

-Water on Mars Workshop, 66 

AMPTE. See active magnetospheric 

particle tracer explorers. 

AMRAAM. See advanced medium range 

air-to-air m issi le. 

AmSat. See American Satellite Co. 

Amsterdam, Holland, 62 

Anders, Edward, 147 

Anderson, Jack, 31 

Anderson, Jim, 209 

Anderson, Maxie, 17 

Andrews AFB, MD, 81 

Anik-C (Telesat-1) communications 

satellite, 296, 298-299, 3C1, 323 

Annapolis, MD, 241 

Annunzio, Congressman Frank, (D-IL), 

Antartica, 100, 2 18 

antennae, 63, 159, 172-173, 231, 423 

Antiballistic Missile (ABM) treaty, 130, 

antimatter, 55 

235 

267-268 

32 

386 

antisatellite (ASAT) 

-miniature homing vehicle 

-pathfinder sensor, 19 

-system, 111-116 

-weapon, 112-1 14 

Anzic, Godfrey, 103 

APL. See Applied Physics Laboratory. 

apogee boost motor (ABM), 226 

apogee kick motor (AKM), 159, 221 

Apollo, 31, 34, 102, 138-139, 185, 

(MHV-ASAT), 24 

307, 310, 412, 416, 418, 434-435 

-1, 34 

-4, 220 

-15, 33 

-17, 338 

Apollo Soyuz test project, 172, 290, 

Applications Technology Satellite (ATS), 

Applied Physics Laboratory (APL), 243 

Apt, Dr. jerome, 33 

Arab League, 21 9 

Arab Satellite Communications 

Organization, 220, 280, 330 

Arabsat, 136, 219-220, 280, 330 

Arabsat Consortium, 300 

ARC. See Ames Research Center. 

archaeology, 246, 252 

Arecibo Observatory, Puerto Rico, 44, 

54, 236, 379 

Argus satellite, 315 

ARI. See aileron-rudder interconnect. 

ARIA. See advanced range 

Ariane rockets, 46, 135-1 36, 138-140, 

294, 434-435 

220-221 

instrumentation aircraft. 

145, 213-214, 219, 255, 343-344, 

346-347, 418 

Aianespace, 139, 344-347, 418 

Arizona, 37-38, 43, 244, 403 

Arizona, University of, Tucson, AZ, 37, 

-Lunar and Planetary Laboi.atory, 

-Planetary Sciences Department, 244 

43, 52, 58 

37-38 

Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 

244 

Arkansas, 81 

Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 

113 

Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research 

Laboratory, 13 

521 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Armstrong, Neil, 102, 416, 440 

Army, U.S., 11, 132, 180, 437-439 

-Audit Agency, 201 

-Division Air Defense (Divad), 180, 

Arnold Engineering Development Center 

ARS. See American Rocket Society. 

artificial intelligence (AI), 186 

ASAT. See antisatellite. 

ASC- 1 Satel I ite, 3 33-3 34. 

ASD. See Air Force, U.S., Aeronautical 

Systems Division. 

ASEA Robotics, Inc., 193 

Aspin, Rep. Les (D-WI), 115 

ASRS. See NASA, Aviation Safety 

assembly concept for construction of 

184, 437-438 

(AEDC), 18-20, 221 

Reporting System. 

erectable space structures (ACCESS), 

341, 355 

Association for Education in Journalism 

and Mass Communication, 276 

Association of Government Accountants, 

201 

Association of Schools of Journalism and 

Mass Communication, 276 

asteroid, 54-55, 61, 142, 148 

-amphitrite, 62 

-Freia, 50 

-Hedwig, 50 

-impact, 148 

-theory, 147 

-flyby, 50-51, 61-62 

ASTF. See Aeropropulsion Systems Test 

Faci I ity. 

ASTRO, 60, 244 

Astro-1, 56, 278, 283 

astrometry, 43 

Astro-Electronics, 281 

astronauts, 31-35. (See also firsts.) 

-candidates, 32-34, 163 

-naval, 33 

-pilot candidates, 33 

-training, 34-35 

Astronomy Survey Committee. See 

National Academy of Sciences. 

AT&T. See American Telephone and 

Telegraph. 

ATAC. See Congress, U.S., Advanced 

Technology Advisory Committee. 

ATB. See Advanced Technology 

Born bers. 

Atchison, Kenneth, 203 

ATF. See Advanced Tactical Fighter. 

Atlanta, GA, 142 

Atlantic City, Nj, 86, 144 

Atlantic Ocean, 16-17, 92, 142, 157, 

160, 221, 223, 391 

Atlantic Research Corp., 368 

Atlantis. See Space Shuttle. 

Atlas, 72 

Atladcentaur (NC) launch vehicle, 18, 

ATMOS. See Atmospheric Trace 

Molecules Spectroscopy. 

atmospheric research, 71-80, 148-1 49, 

192 

Atmospheric Trace Molecules 

Spectroscopy (ATMOS), 383 

Atomic Energy Commission, Division of 

International Affairs, 177 

ATP. See Advanced Turboprop Project. 

ATS. See Applications Technology 

Satel I ite. 

AuCoin, Rep. Les (D-OR), 11 5 

auroras, 328, 354 

Austin, David, 201 

Austin Co., 310 

Australia, 44, 69, 71, 129, 131, 171, 

20, 62-64, 157, 160, 167, 204, 345 

AUSSAT, 333-334, 339 

185, 220, 235, 255, 300, 303, 

333-334, 339, 349, 379 

Australian National Satellite System, 339 

Austria, 135, 139, 251 

automated directional solidification 

furnace (ADSF), 328, 355-356 

Automation and Robotics Panel, 262 

autopilot, 11 7-1 19 

Avco Systems, 112 

avionics, 11 7 

awards, 99-104 

-Allan D. Ernil Memorial, 31 1 

-Arthur S. Fleming, 31 1 

-Federal Design Achievement, 99 

-Lawrence Sperry, 31 1 

-Louis W. Hill Space Transportation, 

-Meritorious Civilian Service, 100 

-NASA Distinguished Service Medal, 

-NASA Exceptional Scientific 

-NASA Exceptional Service Medal, 

31 1 

176, 311 

Achievement Medal, 33 

33, 173, 176, 185 

522 
Index 

-NASA Group Achievement, 31 1 

-NASA Outstanding Leadership 

Medal, 185-186, 31 1 

-National Air and Space Museum 

Trophy, 102 

-National Civil Service League Career 

Service Medal, 176 

-Order of Magellan, 102 

-Presidential Design, 99 

-Presidential Medal of Freedom, 101 

-Presidential Rank of Distinguished 

Executive, 104, 176 

-Public Service Medal, 101 

-Research & Development magazine’s 

-Senate Productivity, 285 

-Soviet Geophysical Committee, 100 

-Space Act, 99 

-Superior Performance, 33 

-United States Senate Productivity, 

-W. Randolph Lovelace II, 31 1 

IR-100, 103 

285 

AXAF. See Advanced X-ray Astrophysics 

Facility. 

6-1 6, 11 6, 441, 444 

6-52, 122-123 

Babylonia, 43 

Bacillus subtilis, 337 

Backman, Philip, 444 

Bagian, James, 282 

Baggett, Blaine, 151 

Baikonur Astrodome, USSR, 435 

Bain, J.C.D., 97 

Baker, Lt. Comdr. Michael, 33 

balloons, 16-17, 63, 65, 71-74, 79, 80, 

112, 115, 171, 173, 200, 292 

Balloon-borne Laser In-situ Sensor 

(BLISS), 79 

Baltimore, MD, 241, 272 

BattimorelWashington International 

Airport (BWI), 202 

Bame, Dr. Samuel, 59 

Bangladesh, 224 

Bangor, ME, 16 

Bankruptcy Court, U.S., 92 

bankruptcy laws, 92 

Banks, Peter, 248 

Barents Sea, 385 

barium clouds, 76, 78 

Barnes, Richard, 177 

Barren, James, 324, 347 

Barsukov, Dr. V. L., 244 

Bartoe, Dr. John-David, 330, 421 

Batelle Columbus Laboratories, 

Battista, Anthony, 127 

Baucom, Lt. Comdr. Chuck, 10 

Baudry, Lt. Col. Patrick, 278-280, 296, 

Bay of Bengal, 224 

Bay St. Louis, MO, 207 

Baykal-Amur railway, USSR, 392 

Baykonur, USSR, 399 

Beach, Tom, 246 

Beard, Ron, 233 

Beaver Creek, AK, 75 

Beazley, Mr., 129 

Beer, Maj. Gen. Carl, 437 

Beggs, James, 34-35, 47, 52, 61, 155, 

Columbus, OH, 429 

403 

168-170, 174, 180-182, 184, 260, 

263-266, 272, 297, 299, 31 7, 

343-344, 346, 358-359, 368, 425, 

427-428, 433 

Beijing, People’s Republic of China, 434 

Belgium, 135, 285, 336 

Belitsky, Boris, 392, 396 

Bell, Donald Lyndon, 45 

Bell Laboratories, 55 

Bellows, Randy, 184 

Bement, Laurence, 94-95 

Bendix Field Engineering Corp., 190, 

Beregovoy, Georgiy, 388 

Beres, Kathleen, 272 

Bergemaschi, Silvio, 248 

Bering Sea, 220 

Bermuda, 172 

Beta Pictoris, 39, 41-42 

Bethlehem, PA, 100 

Bhatt, N.C., 284 

big bang theory, 42 

Bignier, Michel, 137, 263 

Bigot, Charles, 345 

Billingham, Dr. john, 235-236, 435 

Binzel, Richard, 64, 67 

biomedical imaging, 103 

Biomedical Problems Institute, USSR, 

Biorack, 338, 376 

Birmingham, England, 398 

Black Brant Rockets, 71, 73 

Black, Dr. David, 37, 42, 259 

314 

393 

523 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

black hole, 44, 46, 55-56 

Black, Robert, 82 

Blaeu, Willem janszoon, 238 

Blaha, John, 278 

BLISS. See Balloon-borne Laser In-situ 

Block 5D-2 DMSP spacecraft, 21 7 

Bluford, Col. Guion, jr., 335, 338 

Bobko, Col. Karol, 278-279, 296, 

Boeing 

Sensor. 

318-319, 321-322, 324-325, 335 

-707, 404, 439 

-727, 27, 143 

-737, 89, 93, 111, 143 

-747, 81, 87-89, 90-93, 240-241, 

363 

(SCA), 360, 362. (See also Space 

Shuttle Carrier Aircraft.) 

-747 Space Shuttle Carrier Aircraft 

-757-200, 93 

-767, 142 

-EC-188, 404 

-jT8D engines, 143 

Boeing Aerospace Co., 19, 88, 90, 

Boeing Aerospace Operations, 192, 314 

Boeing Military Airplane Co., 10, 

Boeing Service International, Inc., 31 3 

Bogota, Colombia, 105 

Boise High School, Boise, ID, 272 

Boland, Rep. Edward (D-MA), 300 

Bolden, Charles, jr., 282, 356 

Bolivia, 91 

Bolivian Red Cross, 91 

bone stiffness analyzer, 21 0-2 1 1 

Bonn, Federal Republic of Germany, 

Bonnet, Roger, 136 

Booker T. Washington Senior High 

School, Houston, TX, 357 

Boston, MA, 16, 445 

Boulder, CO, 133 

Boundless Aperture, the, 445 

Bourland, Charles, 274 

Boye, jack, 228 

Boyne, Walter, 421 

Bradbury, Ray, 109 

Brahe, Tycho, 238 

Brand, Vance, 278, 282, 434 

Brandenstrin, Daniel, 279-281, 361 

Brandt, Dr. John, 49 

120-121, 190, 258-260, 270, 419 

14-16, 439 

255, 265 

Brasilsat, 136, 138 

Braunstein, David, 174, 178 

Brazil, 73, 136, 418 

Bridges, Col. Roy, Jr., 330 

Briggs, Dr. Geoffrey, 244 

Brigham City, UT, 368 

Brinkman, Dr. Albert, 40, 

Briscoe, Lee, 331 

British Aerospace Corp., 228 

British Aerospace Dynamics Group, 

Space and Communications 

Division, 263 

British Airtours, 89 

British Airways, 86, 96 

British Civil Aviation Authority, 143 

British Museum, the, 43 

British Science Research Council, 45 

Broome, Dr. Taft, 18 

Brown, Dwayne, 203 

Brown, Rep. George, jr. (D-CA), 24, 114 

Brown, June Gibbs, 200 

Brown, Malcolm, 444-445 

Brubaker, Crawford, 414 

Bruhweiler, Dr. F.C., 39, 41-42 

Bryne, john, 176 

Buchli, L!. Col. James, 282, 295 

Bulgaria, 392 

Bunch, Dr. Ted, 188 

Burch, Michaei, 126, 31 5-31 6 

Burgess, Lowry, 445 

Burns, George, 174 

Bush, Vice President George, 155, 

Byron, Rep. Beverly (R-MD), 116 

272-273, 434 

C-5 aircraft, 12, 24-26, 11 6, 375 

C-17 aircraft, 19, 24, 11 6 

C-18 aircraft, 439 

C-130 aircraft, 407 

C-141 aircraft, 407 

C. ltoh and Co. Ltd., 346 

Caban, Maj. Robert, 33 

California, 17, 24, 44, 47, 63-64, 182, 

207, 237, 240, 258, 271, 291, 360, 

362-363, 367, 405, 431, 438 

California Institute of Technology, 133, 

California Space Institute, 262 

California, University of 

179 

-Berkeley, 42, 44, 55-57, 186 

- Kearney Agricultural Center, 249 

524 
Index 

-Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, 248 

-Los Angeles, 195, 443 

-Medical Center, San Francisco, 279 

-Santa Barbara, 67 

-Santa Cruz, 42 

Ca!io, Anthony, 176, 344, 346 

Callahan, Dr. Paul, 327 

Cambridge University, England, 18, 40, 

Canada, 87, 92, 135, 228, 255, 259, 

45 

261, 263, 265, 269, 296-297, 300, 

357, 394, 423 

Canary, Krista, 246 

Canaveral Council of Technical Societies 

symposium, 109 

Canberra, Australia, 44, 69, 396 

Canizares, Dr. Claude, 40 

Canoga Park, CA, 258 

Cape Canaveral AFB, FL, 21, 49, 291, 

298, 306, 310, 325 

-Air Force Station, 124, 157, 

-Range Control Center, 292 

-Forecast Facility (CCFF), 292 

160-161, 367 

Cape Henry, VA, 228 

capillary pumped loop (CPL) 

experiment, 330 

Carnegie Institution of Washington, 244 

Caroline Islands, 220 

Carr, Dr. Michael, 66-67 

Carter, President James E., 31 5 

Carter, Manley Sonny, 282 

Case Institute of Technology, 31, 195 

CAT. See clear-air turbulence. 

Catholic University of America, 

Washington, DC, 39, 41, 178 

Caussols, France, 55 

CCE. See charge composition explorer. 

CCFF. See Cape Canaveral Forecast 

Facility. 

CCRES. See Combined Release and 

Radiation Effects Satellite. 

CCSSO. See Council of Chief State 

School Officers. 

CDP. See Goddard Space Flight Center, 

Crustal Dynamics Project. 

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los 

Angeles, CA, 206-207 

Celestis Group, the, 425-426 

Cellarius, Andreas, 238 

CELSS. See Controlled Ecological Life 

Support Systems. 

Cenker, Robert, 281, 357 

Centaur upper stage rocket. See Space 

Shuttle Centaur. 

Center for Blood Research, 358 

Center for the Development of 

Centers for the Commercial 

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), 124 

Centre National dEtudes Spatiales 

Technology, Finland, 396 

Development of Space, 429 

(CNES). See French National Center 

for Space Studies. 

Priori ties. 

CEP. See Council on Economic 

Cerro Central, Peru, 252 

Cessna Aircraft Co., 9 

Cessna 421 aircraft, 16 

CFES. See continuous flow 

electrophoresis system. 

Chaffee, Martha, 33 

Chaffee, Roger B., 33-34 

Challenger. See Space Shuttle 

Challenger. 

CHAMP. See Comet Halley Active 

Monitoring Program. 

Chang, Dr. Sherwood, 188 

Chang-Diaz, Franklin, 356 

Chappell, Dr. Charles, 284-285 

charge composition explorer (CCE), 77, 

Charleston County, SC, 56 

Charleston, WV, 16 

Charon, 63-64 

Chattanooga, TN, 16 

Chernenko, Chairman Konstantin, 31 

Cherry, John, 426 

Chevalier, Dr. Roger, 42 

Chicago, IL, 16, 85, 142-143 

Chicago, University of, Chicago, IL, 56, 

Chile, 147, 289-290 

China. See People’s Republic of China. 

China Lake Naval Weapons Center, 367 

Chincoteague Naval Air Station, 200 

Chinese People’s Insurance Co., 21 5 

Chretien, Jean-Loup, 41 

CIA. See Central Intelligence Agency. 

Circumnavigators Club, New York, NY, 

CISS. See Space Shuttle Centaur, 

Civil aviation, 82-96 

79 

147 

102 

Centaur integrated support structure. 

525 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Clark, Evert, 421 

clay originaf-life theory, 188 

clear-air turbulence (CAT), 83 

Clearwater, FL, 197 

Clearwater, Yvonne, 267-268 

Cleave, Dr. Mary, 338, 342 

Cleveland, OH, 16 

clouds. See meteorology. 

CLS. See contingency landing sights. 

CNES. See French National Space 

Coats, Michael, 278 

Coca-Cola Co., 443-445 

Cocoa Beach, FL, 109 

Codevilla, Angelo, 41 3 

Coleman, Paul, 440 

Colladay, Dr. Raymond, 3-4, 175 

College of William and Maty, 

Williamsburg, VA, 180 

Collins, Michael, 421 

Colombia, 76, 105 

Colorado, 1 14, 133, 439 

Colorado Springs, CO, 438 

Colorado State University, Boulder, CO, 

Colorado, University of, 42, 167, 426 

-Boulder, 245, 252 

-Center for Space Law and Policy, 

-Department of Astro-Geophysics, 

-Laboratory for Atmospheric and 

Columbia. See Space Shuttle Columbia. 

Columbus, Christopher, discovery of 

Columbus, OH, 429 

Columbus Space Station (Italo-German 

project), 135, 137, 236, 376 

Combined Release and Radiation Effects 

Satellite (CCRES), 76 

comet 

Agency. 

2 79 

175-1 76 

180 

Space Physics, 58 

America, 255, 430 

-artificial, 77-79 

- burned-out, 54 

-dynamics, 43 

-gas cloud ejection, 76 

-intercept, 51, 60 

-nucleus, 59 

-penetrator concept systems, 37 

-plasma tail, 50, 60 

-satellite encounter, 43-44 

-surface, 37 

Comet Giacobini-Zinner, 43-45, 48-51, 

59, 167 

Comet Halley, 37, 41, 43, 46, 48-52, 

56-58, 61, 63, 65, 109, 135, 137, 

163, 173, 178, 225, 283, 396 

Comet Halley Active Monitoring 

Program (CHAMP), 60, 358 

Comet Kopff, 37 

comet rendezvous/asteroid flyby 

mission, 51, 55 

Comet Tempel 2, 50, 52 

Comet Wild-2, 37, 47, 50, 52 

Commerce, U.S. Department of, 222, 

Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, 

Committee on the Present Danger, 179 

Committee on Solar and Space Physics, 

communications satellite systems, 

communications traffic processor, 104 

Comprehensive Cancer Center, 358 

Compton, Dr. Dale, 186 

Computer Sciences Corp., 283 

Computer Technology Aviation, 440 

Comsat Corp., 107, 141 

Coilcord High School, Concord, NH, 

Concorde Supersonic Airliner, 97, 145, 

Conestoga rockets, 426, 444 

Conference on International Business in 

Congress of the International 

430, 433 

426 

51 

103-1 04, 296 

2 72 

237, 239 

Space, 425 

Astronautical Federation, the 36th, 

149 

Congress, U.S., 1, 37, 111-115, 

124-125, 182, 239, 260-262, 269, 

272, 285, 405, 41 3, 424, 433. 435 

-Advanced Technology Advisory 

Committee (ATAC), 262 

-H.R. 2800, 433 

-H.R. 3403, 239 

-House Appropriations Committee, 

-House Appropriations subcommittee, 

-House Armed Services Committee, 

-House Armed Services R&D 

11 7, 347, 368 

118 

1 1 5-1 16 

subcommittee. 127 

526 
Index 

-House aviation subcommittee, 41 3 

-House foreign affairs Subcommittee, 

-House Housing and Urban 

113 

Development and independent 

agencies appropriations 

Subcommittee, 275, 299, 368 

-House procurement and military 

systems subcommittee, 405 

-House Public Works and 

Transportation Committee, 95 

-House Public Works and 

Transportation subcommittee on 

investigations and oversight, 90 

-House of Representatives, 5 1, 1 71, 

435 

-House Republican research report 

on ASAT, 111 

-House Science and Technology 

Committee, 169-1 70, 270, 273, 

414-415, 424, 433 

-House Science and Technology 

transportation aviation and 

materials subcommittee, 169 

-House space subcommittee, 261, 

435 

-House space science subcommittee, 

435 

-House Subcommittee on space 

science and applications, 170, 

257, 273, 356, 359, 363 

-Library of, 122 

-Senate, 112, 171, 176, 181, 285 

-Senate Appropriations Committee, 

-Senate armed service strategic and 

11 7, 260 

theater nuclear forces 

subcommittee, 126 

436 

Transportation Committee, 433 

Administration, 238 

-5enate Armed Services, 11 6, 126, 

-Senate Commerce, Science and 

-Senate Committee on Rules and 

-Senate Joint Resolution 154, 403 

-Senate science, technology, and 

space subcommittee, 169, 270 

Congressional Office of Technology 

Assessment (OTA), 257-258, 261, 

41 3, 41 8 

-report, 4 1 3 

Connecticut, 350 

Connolly, Denis, 103 

Conran, Col. Philip, 18 

Continental Airlines, 91-92 

Continental Telecom Inc., 1 

contingency landing sites (CLS), 289 

continuous flow electrophoresis system 

(CFES), 352 

Controlled Ecological Life Support 

Systems (CELSS), 446 

controller, 82, 83, 86 

Convair C-580 aircraft, 192 

Cook Islands, 220 

Cooper, Robert, 28-29, 127, 3 17 

Cooper, Thomas, 23, 405 

Cooperative Observations of Polar 

Electrodynamics (COPE), 71 

COPE. See Cooperative Observations of 

Polar Electrodynamics. 

Copenhagen, Denmark, 71 

Corfu, Greece, 89 

Cornell, Darrell, 405 

Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 67, 320 

Coronado Airport, NM, 16 

cosmonauts, 31, 388, 391-399 

Cosmos Satellites, 394, 

-954, 386 

-1266, 387 

-1299, 387 

-1402, 386 

- 1412, 387 

-1443, 398 

- 1579, 387 

- 1607, 386-387 

-1616, 449 

-1625, 386 

- 1648, 449 

- 1663, 387 

- 1664, 387 

-1667, 391 

- 1686, 398 

COSPAS/SARSAT program, 228 

Costa Rica, 246, 356 

Council of Chief State School Officers 

Council on Economic Priorities (CEP), 

Council on Foreign Relations, 179 

counter-rotating pusher propellers 

propulsion system, 15 

Courter, Rep. James (R-NJ), 405 

Covey, Col. Richard, 332 

Cowen, Robert, 421 

(CCSSO), 271-272 

125 

527 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Cox, John, 320 

Coyne, Dr. Lelia, 187 

CPL. See capillary pumped loop. 

Crab Nebula, 39 

Cray-2 supercomputer, 187-1 89 

Creighton, John, 279-280 

Creighton University, Omaha, NE, 370 

Cremen, Joseph, 327 

Crimea, 396 

Crippen, Capt. Robert, 34, 278, 322 

Cronkite, Walter, 238 

Crossfield, Scott, 151 

CRRES. See Combined Release and 

Radiation Effects Satellite. 

Culbertson, Philip, 181, 183, 257, 259, 

263 

Cumberland Elementary School, West 

Lafayette, IN, 272 

Current, Maxwell, 192 

Czechoslovakia, 392, 396 

DalladFt. Worth International Airport, 

dAllest, Frederic, 136, 146 

Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), 

DARPA. See Defense Advanced 

Darmstadt, Federal Republic of 

Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, 177 

Dassault-Breguet Aviation Co., 145-146 

David Sarnoff Research Center, 281 

Davis, Leon, 194 

Daytona Beach, FL, 292 

DC-9 aircraft, 143 

DC-10 aircraft, 81 

DDM. See drop dynamics module. 

de Bondone, Giotto, 46 

De Cordova Museum, 445 

de Pater, Imke, 57 

DeCair, Thomas, 183, 203 

Deep Space Network (DSN), 63, 168, 

173, 401. (See also NASA.) 

Defense, U.S. Department of (DOD), 

3-4, 7, 12, 15, 22, 29, 83, 

TX, 88, 96 

71 

Research Projects Agency. 

Germany, 46 

111-133, 141, 174, 178, 180, 182, 

192, 217, 228, 271, 278-279, 

294-295, 300, 302, 311, 315-323, 

334, 347-349, 364, 388, 405, 

408-410, 412, 414-415, 417, 426, 

436-439. (See also Air Force, U.S.; 

Army, US.; Marine Corps, U.S.; 

Navy, U.S.) 

-Affairs Division, 320 

-budget, 1, 116-117 

-early-warning satellite, 31 5 

-Joint Chiefs of Staff, 438 

-National Guard, 404 

-Office of the Secretary, 177, 179 

-Pentagon, 111-115, 126, 131, 182, 

217, 302, 315, 318, 326 

Defense Advanced Research Projects 

Agency (DARPA), 5-6, 28-29, 122, 

127, 317, 414, 437 

Defense Contract Audit Agency, 409 

Defense Intelligence Agency, 126, 320 

Defense Meteorological Satellite 

Defense Nuclear Agency, Scientific 

Defense Preparedness Association, 1 79 

Defense Resources Board, 405 

Defense Satellite Communications 

System (DSCSIII), 319, 334 

Defense Science Board System 

Vulnerability Task Force and 

Associated Task Forces, 179 

Program, 27 

Advisory Group on Effects, 177, 179 

Defense Systems, Inc., 219 

del Valle, Foreign Minister Jaime, 

290-291 

Delmos, 396 

Delory, Greg, 249 

Delta Air Lines, 88, 93, 96, 345 

Delta rockets, 226, 300, 345 

DeMarque, Dr. Pierre, 42 

Denmark, 71, 135, 148, 151 

Denson, W. John, 288 

Denver, CO, 16, 142, 258 

Design Verification Flights (Spacelab), 

Dessler, Alexander, 100 

Detroit, MI, 16 

DFRC. See Dryden Flight Research 

Center. 

DFVLR. See West German Aerospace 

Research Establishment. 

Dickenson, David, 288 

Dicks, Rep. Norman (D-WA), 11 5 

Dicus, Carroll, Jr., 177 

digital image processing, 102-103 

Dihrab, Saudi Arabia, 219 

Diller, George, 305 

3 79 

528 
Index 

Dintenfass, Dr. Leopold, 349 

Discovery. See Space Shuttle Discovery. 

District of Columbia. See Washington, 

Divad. See U.S. Army, Division Air 

DMI. See Danish Meteorological 

Dobbins AFB, CA, 12, 25 

Dobrowolny, Marino, 248 

DOD. See Defense, U.S. Department of. 

DOE. See Energy, US. Department of. 

Doi, Takao, 163 

Dole, Secretary of Transportation 

Elizabeth Hanford, 86 

Donahey, Lt. Col. Dayl, 25 

Doppler radar system, 88 

Doppler velocity sensor, 407 

Dorfman, Steven, 230, 234 

DOT. See Transportation, U.S. 

Department of. 

Double Eagle II, 17 

Douglas Aircraft Co., 4, 48 

Downey, CA, 258 

drop dynamics module (DDM), 374, 

382 

Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC), 

6-7, 10, 300-301, 338 

DSCS. See Defense Satellite 

Communications System. 

DSN. See National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration, Deep Space 

Network. 

Du Pont Co., 151 

Dubin, Maury, 243 

Duffy, Capt. Brian, 33 

Duigot, Michel, 219 

Dulles International Airport, VA, 237, 

Dunayev, A.I. 394 

Dunbar, Dr. Bonnie, 282, 380 

Durer, Albrecht, 238 

Durrance, Dr. Samuel, 283 

Dzhanibekov, Vladimir, 389-393, 397 

DC. 

Defense gun. 

Institute. 

239-241 

E-2C Hawkey airborne control aircraft, 

EAA. See Experimental Aircraft 

Eagle, moon landing, 403 

111 

Association. 

earth, 33, 47, 51, 53, 61, 65, 71, 

74-75, 100-1 01, 140, 148-1 49, 

226-227, 231, 296, 317, 322, 334, 

-as center of the universe (Ptolemy), 

-atmosphere, 57, 75, 148-149, 

-horizon, 61 

-magnetism, 275 

-magnetoscope, 79 

-magnetotail, 78 

-metallic core, 245 

-observation and microgravity 

program, 135, 137 

-orbit, 49, 54, 125, 146, 152, 236, 

-ozone layer, 75 

-primitive, 187 

-solar system, 48 

-troposphere, 74 

-vegetation, 249 

350-351 

238 

243-244 

252-253 

Earth Observation Mission (EOM), 

Earth Observation Satellite Co. (Eosat), 

Earth Resources Laboratory, 245 

earth station sites, 160 

EASE. See experimental assembly of 

structures in extravehicular activity. 

EASVACCESS. See experimental 

assembly of structures in 

extravehicular activity/assembly 

concept for construction of erectable 

space structures. 

East Germany. See German Democratic 

Republic. 

Easter Island. See lsla de Pascua. 

Eastern Airlines, 91 

Eastern Island University, Indonesia, 21 1 

Eastern Space and Missile Center, 72, 

EC-18B aircraft, 404 

ECC. See electrochemical concentration 

echocardiography, 301, 328-329, 351 

ECS satellites, 139-140 

Edelson, Dr. Burton, 148-149, 283, 332 

Edwards AFB, CA, 114, 240, 293, 300, 

284-285 

430, 433 

123 

cell. 

319, 327, 334, 337, 342, 361-362, 

404, 436 

-Mojave Desert lakebed runway, 332 

529 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Edwards, Rep. Mickey (R-OK), 88 

EEC. See European Economic 

EC&G Energy Management Corp., 375 

EC&C Energy Measurements, Inc., 382 

Eglin AFB, FL, 119 

Egypt, 38, 11 1, 250 

--Great Pyramid of Cheops, 38 

EIDI. See Electro-Impulse Deicing 

El-Asser, Mohammed, 100 

El Cichon (volcano), Mexico, 76 

electrochemical concentration cell (ECC), 

Electro-Impulse Deicing System (EIDI), 

Electromagnetic Levitator (EML), 355 

Ellington AFB, TX, 360 

Elliot, Steve, 246 

ELV. See Expendable Launch Vehicle. 

emergency evacuation systems, 90, 

Emerson, Terry, 239 

EML. See Electromagnetic Levitator. 

Energetic Proton Experiment, 59 

Energy, U.S. Dept. of (DOE), 133, 201, 

Engen, Donald, 142-143 

England, Dr. Anthony, 330, 421, 445 

England. See United Kingdom. 

Engle, Col. Joe, 240, 332-333 

Engstrom, Dr. Fredrik, 137 

Enterprise. See Space Shuttle Enterprise. 

Enviro-Spray Systems, 443-444 

EOM. See Earth Observation Mission. 

Eosat. See Earth Observation Satellite 

Equatorial Communication Co., 2 

Erlangen-Nurnberg, University of, 

ERS-1 programs, 139 

ESA. See European Space Agency. 

ESOC. See European Space Operations 

Estes, Robert, 248 

Ethics and Public Policy Center, the, 

EURECA. See European Retrievable 

Eureka technology program, 128, 138, 

European Communications Satellites 

Community. 

System. 

73 

9-10 

94-95 

208-209, 212, 412-413 

co. 

Federal Republic of Germany, 109 

Centre. 

179 

Carrier. 

145, 250-251, 434 

(ECS), 139-140 

European Economic Community (EEC), 

European Retrievable Carrier (EURECA), 

European Space Agency (ESA), 28, 

251 

137-138, 376 

45-46, 48, 51-52, 62, 99, 129, 

135-141, 177, 213, 222-223, 252, 

255, 259, 261, 263, 265-266, 269, 

282-285, 300, 335-336, 338, 343, 

373, 377, 380, 396, 398, 418 

European Space Operations Centre 

(ESOC), 45-46, 52 

European Space Research Technology 

European X-ray Observatory Satellite 

EUTELSAT 1, 138 

EUVE. See extreme ultraviolet explorer. 

EVA. See extravehicular activity. 

Evpatoriya, Crimea, USSR, 396 

EXOSAT. See European X-ray 

Observatory Satellite. 

Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV), 

Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), 

experimental assembly of structures in 

Center, 62 

(EXOSAT), 45, 46 

409-4 1 0 

85-86 

extravehicular activity (EASE), 17, 

341, 355 

-assembly concept for construction of 

erectable space structures 

(EASHACCESS), 341 

Extraterrestrial Research Division. See 

Ames Research Center. 

extraterrestrial signals, 235-236 

extravehicular activity (EVA), 17, 333 

extreme ultraviolet explorer (EUVE), 189 

F-8 fly-by-wire research aircraft, 98 

F-14 aircraft, 11, 111, 119 

F-15 Eagle aircraft, 11, 23, 111-114, 

F-16 Falcon aircraft, 23, 25, 119, 

F-18 aircraft, 1 19 

F-20 Tigershark aircraft, 23, 404-406, 

F-100 aircraft, 23, 81 

F-110 aircraft, 23 

F-111 aircraft, 11, 13-14, 16 

FAA. See Federal Aviation 

11 9, 406-409, 41 1, 441 

405-408, 438 

408 

Administration. 

530 
Index 

Fabian, Dr. Andrew, 40 

Fabian, John, 34-35, 279-282 

Faget, Max, 428 

Fahd, King of Saudi Arabia, 280 

Fairchild industries, 1-2 

Fairchild Space Co., 424 

Fairchild Weston Systems, 291 

Farquhar, Dr. Robert, 49 

FBIS. See Foreign Broadcast Information 

FCC. See Federal Communications 

FDA. See Food and Drug 

FEA. See fluidssxperiment apparatus. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 

Services. 

Commission. 

Administration. 

9, 15, 27, 82-90, 141-144, 191, 

197, 219, 220, 239 

-Aeronautical Center, 87 

-air route traffic control centers, 

-NASA runway surface traction 

-regulations, 81, 142, 144 

-Technical Center, 86-87, 144 

Federal Communications Commission 

Federal Investigators, Association of, 20 

Federal Republic of Germany, 46, 50, 

86-87 

program, 196 

(FCC), 141, 158, 423 

59, 65, 77-79, 119, 135, 145, 152, 

159-160, 167, 192, 214, 250-251, 

255-256,263,2a4-285, 300, 

335-338, 375-376, 380, 399 

-BMFT ministry of research and 

technology, 380 

Federation of American Scientists, 112, 

125 

Federation of Japanese Economic 

Organizations, 266 

FEE. See French echocardiograph 

experiment. 

Fees, Martin, 45 

FEPC. See Flight Equipment Processing 

Contract. 

Ferguson, Graeme, 238 

Fernandez, Judge Ferdinand, 184 

FES. See fluid experiment system. 

Feuerbacher, Berndt, 380 

Fichtl, Dr. George, 327, 377, 382-383 

Field, George, 440 

Finke, Wolfgang, 380-381 

Finland, 71, 251, 396-397 

first 

-Arab in space, 280, 282 

-black astronaut to take shuttle's 

-manned landing on the moon, 310 

-private citizen passenger, 272-277 

-Space Shuttle. See Space Shuttle. 

-to travel twice the speed of sound, 

controls, 328 

151 

first American 

-in space, 151 

-to orbit the globe, 151 

-to pilot the X-15, 151 

-woman as prime payload specialist, 

-woman in space, 102, 151, 281 

-woman to walk in space, 32, 440 

280 

Fischell, Robert, 99 

Fisher, Anna, 278 

Fisher, Dr. William, 227, 230, 281, 

Fitch, Lt. Gen. William, 440 

Five-Year Defense Plan, 406 

fixed service structures (FSS), 287-288 

Flight Equipment Processing Contract 

Florensky Memorial Symposium on 

Florida, 21, 197, 207-208, 232, 270, 

332-333 

(FEPC), 190-191, 314 

Venus, 244 

273, 275, 304, 334, 338, 356, 393, 

414, 424-426, 435 

fluid experiment system, 243, 374 

Fluid Physics Module, 338 

fluids-experiment apparatus (FEA), 243, 

Foerster, Robert, 272 

Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 

Ford Aerospace and Communications 

3 74 

43 1 

Corp., 19, 159-161, 438 

-Western Development Laboratories, 

224 

Ford, President Gerald R., 203 

Foreign Broadcast information Services 

(FBIS), 105, 137, 163, 213, 215, 

387-388, 391-392, 394-396, 398 

Forrester, James, 207 

Fort A.P. Hill, VA, 195 

Fort Davis, TX, 44 

Fort Smith, AR, 81 

Fowler, Rep. Wyche, Jr. (D-GA), 51 

FPE. See French posture experiment. 

531 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

France, 41, 55, 59, 97, 128, 135-138, 

144, 146, 159, 161, 167, 191, 214, 

382, 388, 392, 394, 403, 418 

228, 251, 255-256, 285, 327-329, 

Franco/Soviet space cooperation, 41 

Ftanke, John, Jr., 179 

Frankel, Edward, 177 

Franklin, I.V., 263-264 

Freedom Star, the, 371 

French Center for Nuclear Studies, 191 

French echocardiograph experiment 

French Guiana, 46, 129, 139, 219 

French materials science experiment, 

3 74 

French National Center for Space 

Studies, 136, 146 

French National Space Agency (CNES), 

138, 173, 279 

French Polynesia, 139 

French posture experiment (FPE), 

Friedman, Dr. Herbert, 39, 41 

Friendswood, TX, 272 

Frimout, Dr. Dirk, 284-285 

Fthenakis, Emanuel, 2 

FSS. See fixed service structures. 

fuel efficiency, 1, 84 

Fullerton, Col. C. Gordon, 240, 330, 

421, 445 

Funk, Scott, 293 

Fuqua, Rep. Don (D-FL), 270, 424 

Furrer, Reinhard, 284, 335, 338 

Future Air Navigation System 

(FEE), 328-329 

328-329 

Committee, 142 

G-Star satellites, 136, 138 

Gabon, Republic of, 208-209 

-Ministry of Energy and Hydraulic 

Resources, 208 

Gaffney, Dr. F. Drew, 279 

Gagarin Space Training Centre, USSR, 

Galapagos Islands, Ecuador, 329 

galaxies, 57-58. (See also Milky Way.) 

388 

-development, 42 

-infrared, 57-58 

-Seyfert, 57 

-starburst. 57 

Galileo mission, 20-21, 28, 61-62, 

64-66, 169, 178, 197, 214, 252, 

261, 280-281, 290, 300, 412 

Galung-gung (volcano), Indonesia, 76 

Gamma-Ray Observatory, 40, 42 

gamma rays, 41, 55 

Gander, NF, Canada, 96 

Gandhi, Prime Minister Rajiv, 155 

CAO. See General Accounting Office. 

Garching, Federal Republic of Germany, 

Garcia, Judith, 272 

Cardner, Comdr. Dale, 31-32, 278, 322 

Gardcer, Lt. Col. Guy, 278, 322 

Garmire, Dr. Gordon, 40 

Garn, Sen. E. J. (R-UT), 273, 275, 

-propulsion system, 65 

59, 399 

277-279, 296, 322-323, 325, 351, 

403 

Garriot, Owen, 282, 421 

GAS. See Get Away Special. 

gas turbine engine (convertible), 5-6 

Gazenko, Oleg, 393 

GD. See General Dynamics Corp. 

GD/C. See General Dynamics Corp., 

GE. See General Electric Co. 

GEC-Marconi, 159-1 60 

Gemar, Capt. Charles, 33 

Gemini, 31, 34, 102, 185, 310 

General Accounting Office (GAO), 

General Advisory Committee on Arms 

Convair Division. 

95-96 

Control and Disarmament, 177, 179, 

185 

General Dynamics Corp. (GD), 12, 120, 

170, 180, 182, 184, 197, 204, 

345-346, 4 19 

-Convair Division (GD/C), 18, 20-21 

General Electric Co. (GE), 5, 1 1, 15, 

23-24, 103, 118-119, 121, 141, 

190, 192-193, 260, 319, 359, 423 

-Penn State University, 357 

-Space Systems Division, 258 

-Valley Forge Space Center, 

Philadelphia, PA, 77 

Geneva, Switzerland, 71-72, 112, 229 

Geological Society of America, 100 

geophysical fluid flow cell (GFFC), 374, 

geophysics, 147-1 49 

383 

532 
index 

Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 

Geostar Corp., 440 

Geostationary Operational 

GA, 167 

Environmental Satellites (GOES), 

geostationary orbit, 105, 136, 140, 220, 

geosynchronous orbit, 18-22, 157, 

222-224, 226-227, 229-230, 253 

222-224, 226, 229-230 

159-160, 168, 171, 214, 220-221, 

227, 231-232, 423 

geosynchronous space stations. See 

space stations, geosynchronous. 

Gerard, Patty, 246 

German Democratic Republic, 392 

German ion-release module (IRM), 

German Space Operations Center, 

77-78 

Oberpfaffenhofen, Federal Republic 

of Germany, 78, 375-376, 380-381 

Germany, East. See German Democratic 

Republic. 

Germany, West. See Federal Republic of 

Germany. 

Gernigan, Tamara, 33 

Get Away Special (GAS), 218-219 

-bridge, 357 

-canisters, 301, 329-330, 357 

-experiments, 56, 247, 356 

-satellites, 326 

GFFC. See geophysical fluid flow cell. 

Giacconi, Dr. Riccardo, 40 

Giacobini-Zinner. See Comet GiacobiniGibson, Comdr. Robert, 34, 86 

Gilbert, Gene, 252-253 

Gilbert Islands, 220 

Gillogly, Col. Harry, 439 

Gilruth, Robert, 102 

Giotto interplanetary space probe, 46, 

52, 135, 137 

Glenn, Sen. John (D-OH), 151 

Glickman, Rep. Dan (D-KS), 170 

Global Change, 149 

Global Low Orbiting Message Relay 

Satellite (GLOMR), 204-205, 

Global Positioning System (GPS), 

Zinner. 

218-219, 374 

122-124, 141, 233-234. (See also 

Navstar.) 

Message Relay Satellite. 

GLOMR. See Global Low Orbiting 

Goddard, Robert, 152 

Goddard Laser Tracking Network, 250 

Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), 

37, 39-41, 43, 45, 49, 58-59, 67, 

71, 73-79, 86, 112, 152-153, 171, 

177-1 78, 180, 185-186, 189, 199, 

204, 208, 218-220, 225-226, 228, 

243-244, 247, 250, 258, 330, 334, 

356-357 

-Crustal Dynamics Project (CDP), 250 

-Laboratory for Astronomy and Solar 

-Laboratory for Oceans, 252 

-Microwave Sensors and Data 

-Wallops Flight Facility, VA, 71, 

-Wallops Range Control Center, 77 

Godwin, Dr. Linda, 33 

GOES. See Geostationary Operational 

Goetz, Robert, 191 

Gohagan, Dr. John, 209-210 

Goldenberg, Tsvi, 207-208 

Goldschmidt, Rudolf, 9 

Goldsmith, Philip, 137 

Goldstone, CA, 44 

Goldwater, Sen. Barry (R-AZ), 102, 239, 

Goose Bay, LB, Canada, 405 

Gorbachev, General Secretary Mikhail, 

Gordon Bennett Race, 17 

Gorton, Sen. Slade (R-WA), 270 

Gossamer Condor, 237 

Could 32-87 computer system, 247 

GPS. See global positioning system. 

Grabe, Lt. Col. Ronald, 278, 287 

Graham, Lt. Gen. Daniel, 126, 320 

Graham, William, 176-177, 181-183, 

Gran Patajen, 246, 252 

Grand Canyon, AZ, 66, 445 

Grassley, Sen. Charles (R-IA), 407 

Great Britain. See United Kingdom. 

Great Pyramid of Cheops, Egypt, 38 

Grechko, Georgiy, 393 

Greece, 89, 250 

Greely, Dr. Ronald, 244 

Green, Jacklyn, 67 

Green, Shirley, 183-184 

Green Bank, WV, 44 

Physics, 49 

Acquisition Systems Branch, 253 

73-77, 172, 199-200, 244, 41 1 

Environmental Satellites. 

403 

386 

191 

533 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Greenbelt, MD, 218 

Greenland, 142 

Gregory, Col. Frederick, 195, 325, 328, 

Gregory, William, 320 

Griffin, Gerald, 191, 361 

Griggs, S. David, 278-279, 282, 296, 

Grindeland, Richard, 354 

Grissom, Virgil, 34 

Grow Group, 443 

Grumman Aerospace Corp., 6, 10-1 1, 

11 1, 165, 190, 192, 270, 439 

-Sondre Stromfjord facility, 71 

360-361 

322, 324 

-Data System Corp., 198 

Grundfest, Dr. Warren, 207 

GSFC. See Goddard Space Flight Center. 

GTE Spacenet Corp., 136 

Guam, 233 

Guarachi, Bernardo, 91 

Gulf of Mexico, 253, 333 

Gulf Stream eddies, 353 

Gulfstream II aircraft, 15 

Gullahorn, Gordon, 248 

Gymnastics Federation, U.S., 246 

H-ll booster rocket, 163 

Haise, Fred, Jr., 240 

Hall, Donald, 58 

Hall, Stephen, 412 

Halley's Comet. See Comet Halley. 

Halperin, Morton, 320-321 

Halter Marine, 371 

Hamilton Standard Management 

Services, Inc., 190, 314 

Hammack, Jerome, 222 

Hancock County, MS, 429 

Hansen, James, 180 

Harford, James, 101 

Harris, Hugh, 302 

Harris Corp., 172, 270, 423 

Hart, Terry, 34 

Hartigan, James, 93-94 

Hartsfield, Henry, Jr., 293, 335, 338 

Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 

Hat Creek, CA, 44 

Hauck, Frederick, 280 

Hawaii, 58, 63-64, 129-132, 221, 318, 

350 

330 

Hawaii, University of, Honolulu, HI, 58, 

Hawes, Ralph, 180 

Hawley, Steven, 282, 300, 356 

Hazen Union School, Hardwick, VT, 

Heath, Dr. Donald, 75 

Heise, Ing., 137 

Helin, Eleanor, 55 

Helsinki, Finland, 385, 396-397 

Henderson, Maj. Cen. Donald, 124 

Henize, Dr. Karl, 330-331 

Hercules, Inc., 367-368 

Hemes, 135, 145-146, 255 

Herpes Samirii, 350 

Herres, Gen. Robert, 364, 439 

Herschel, John, 38 

Herschel, William, 68 

Herzfeld, Charles, 440 

Heseltine, Michael, 132-1 33 

hexanitrostilbene (HNS), 95 

Hexe. See high-energy X-ray experiment. 

Heyerdahl, Thor, 102 

HHG-1. See Hitchhiker payload. 

Hi Lat Spacecraft, 71 

Hieb, Richard, 33 

High Frontier system, 126 

high precision tracking experiment, 

high-energy X-ray experiment (Hexe), 

hijackings, 85, 11 1 

Hilmers, Maj. David, 279, 281, 319, 

Hind helicopters, 438 

Hipparcos, 139-140 

Hitchhiker (HHC-1) payload, 356-357 

HNS. See hexanitrostilbene. 

Hodge, John, 185-1 86 

Hoffman, Jeffrey, 278, 296, 322-324 

Hogrefe, Arthur, 99 

Hokkaido University, Japan, 163 

Holland. See The Netherlands. 

Holmes, Todd, 81 

Honeywell, Inc., Military Avionics 

Hong Kong, 146, 2 15 

Hoover, President Herbert, 102 

Hopkins Ultraviolet Telescope, 283 

Horizontal Take-Off and Landing 

63 

2 72 

129-130 

399 

335 

Division, 197, 408 

(HOTOL) transatmospheric vehicle, 

414 

534 
Index 

Hosenball, S. Neil, 175-1 76 

HOTOL. See Horizontal Takeoff and 

Houston, TX, 91, 282, 310, 331, 

-Chamber of Commerce, 191 

Houston Mission Control, 315, 337 

Hovestadt, Dr. Dieter, 59 

Howard University School of 

Landing. 

334-335, 357, 425-426 

Engineering, Large Space Structure 

Institute (LSSI), Washington, DC, 

17-18 

HS-393 Ku-band satellite, 346 

Hubble Space Telescope, 40, 42, 48, 

53-54, 58, 178, 199, 252, 282, 

300, 417 

Hudson, Gary, 430-431 

Hughes Aircraft Co., 119, 176, 192, 

212, 223, 228, 234, 260, 279, 

Hughes Communications, Inc. 222-226, 

323-325, 334, 339, 430 

230-233, 275, 299-300, 334, 346, 

360 

Hughes-Fulford, Dr. Millie, 279-280 

human performance research, 13 

human powered aircraft, 96 

Human Role in Space, The (THURIS), 

Hungary, 392 

Hunt and Co., 187 

Huntsville, AL, 198 

Hutchinson, Neil, 257 

Hyang, Yi Zluo, 214 

hydrogen bomb test detonation, 133 

hydrogen-fueled scramjets, 4 

Hymer, Wesley, 354-355 

Hynds, Dr. Robert, 59 

Hyperion, 67 

hypersonic speed, 4, 7, 29, 97, 199 

41 1-412 

IBM. See International Business 

IBSE. See Initial Blood Storage 

ICAO. See International Civil Aviation 

ICBM. See intercontinental ballistic 

ICE. See International Cometary 

Machines. 

Experiment. 

Organization. 

missile. 

Explorer. 

Iceland, 142 

IHW. See International Halley Watch. 

Ikle, Fred, 128 

ILC, 190 

Illinois, University of, Urbana, IL, 57, 

image processing laboratory (IPL), 103 

impact theory, 148 

Imperial College, London, England, 59 

Independence, the, 371 

India, 71, 87, 155, 238, 284, 373, 388 

Indian Department of Space, 284 

Indian Ocean satellite, 160-161, 213, 

Indian Space Research Organization, 

Indonesia, 76, 21 1-212 

industrial space facility (ISF), 428 

inertial navigation system (INS), 

inertial upper stage (IUS), 19, 299, 316 

Informatics General Corp., 188 

Information Agency, U.S., 222 

Infrared Astronomy Satellite (IRAS), 39, 

Initial Blood Storage Experiment (IBSE), 

358 

INMARSAT. See International Maritime 

Satellite Organization. 

Innovative Optics, Inc., 186 

Inorganic Coatings, Inc., 208 

INS. See inertial navigation system. 

Institute of Aeronautical Sciences, 101 

Institute for the Study of the USA and 

73-74 

386 

284 

122-1 23 

41-42, 53, 57-58, 186 

Canada, Foreign Policy Department, 

3 90 

National Space Technology 

Laboratories, Hancock County, MS, 

429 

Institute for Technology Development, 

lnstituto Fisica Spazio, 248 

instrument pointing system (IPS), 47, 

Instrument Technology Associates (ITA), 

Instrumented Test Vehicle (In/) program, 

Integrated Systems Analysts, 190 

Intelsat. See International 

Telecommunications Satellites. 

intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), 

132, 217, 344, 347, 436 

331 

353 

410 

535 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Intercosmos Program, 394, 396 

Interior, U.S. Department of, 200-201 

lnterkosmos Institute, Moscow, USSR, 

International Aeronautical Federation, 31 

International Air Transport Association, 

International Association of 

International Association of Quality 

International Astronomical Union, 180 

International Business Machines (iBM), 

International Civil Aviation Organization 

International Cometary Explorer (ICE), 

-Prognoz-1 O-lntercosmos, 396 

398 

85 

Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 100 

Circles, 174 

86-87 

(ICAO), 141, 219 

43-46, 46-51, 59-60, 167. (See 

also International Sun-Earth 

Explorer.) 

-magnetometer experiment, 60 

International Geophysical Year, 243 

International Halley Watch (IHW), 109. 

(See also Hallefs Comet.) 

International Mariti me Satel I ite 

Organization (INMARSAT), 136, 227 

International Solar Polar Mission, 62, 

300. (See also Ulysses.) 

international solar terrestrial physics 

program, 51-52 

International Space Corp. (ISC), 431 -432 

International Sun-Earth Explorer (ISEE-3), 

43, 46, 49. (See also International 

Cometary Explorer.) 

324, 347 

Satellites (Intelsat), 134, 156-161, 

204, 229 

International Technology Underwriters, 

International Telecommunications 

1 nternational Ultraviolet Explorer (I U E), 

Interplanetary Monitoring Probes, 180 

Investigators Working Group (IWG), 285 

Ion Composition Experiment, 59 

Iowa, 369 

Iowa, University of, 41 7 

IPL. See image processing laboratory. 

IPS. See instrument pointing system. 

IR-IE. See RCA Infrared-Imaging 

Equipment. 

IRAS. See Infrared Astronomy Satellite. 

Ireland, 92, 96, 135 

38, 41-42, 45 

IRM. See German ion-release module. 

ISC. See International Space Corp. 

ISEE-3. See International Sun-Earth 

ISF. See industrial space facility. 

Ishmael, Stephen, 6 

lsla de Pascua, 289, 291-292 

Israel, 250 

ITA. See Instrument Technology 

Italian National Research Council, 247 

Explorer. 

Associates. 

-National Space Plan Office 

(PSNKNR), 247-248 

Italy, 135, 137, 159-161, 250-251, 

255, 336 

IT, 440 

ITV. See instrument test vehicle 

IUE. See International Ultraviolet 

IUS. See inertial upper stage. 

IWG. See Investigators Working Group. 

Izvestia, 394 

program. 

Explorer. 

Jaguar jet, 145 

JAL. See Japan Air Lines. 

Japan, 85, 87-88, 93, 96, 109, 

159-160, 163-164, 168, 255, 259, 

263-266, 269, 283, 285, 418 

-Aircraft Accident Investigation 

-National Space Development 

-Space Activities Commission, 163 

Committee, 88 

Agency, 163 

Japan Air Lines UAL), 88-89, 93, 96 

Japan Communications Satellite Co. 

UCSat), 346 

Jarvis, Gregory, 275, 279 

Jastrow, Robert, 125 

JCSat. See Japan Communications 

Satellite Co. 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory ((PL), 43, 48, 

109, 173, 206-208, 214, 375, 

-Geobotanical Remote Sensing 

-JPUCedars/Sinai procedure, 206 

-Managed ThreeAxis Acoustic 

Levitator (3AAL), 355-356 

-wide-field/planetary camera (WFPC), 

48 

54, 60, 62-65, 77, 79, 102-103, 

382-383, 422, 434-435 

Group, 249 

536 
Index 

JetStar, 4, 8-9, 16 

JFK. See Kennedy International Airport. 

Jiangxi Province, People’s Republic of 

China, 434 

Jirberg, Russel, 104 

Jiuquan launching center, 215 

John Cabot, the, 87, 92 

Johns Hopkins University 

-Applied Physics Laboratory, 78-79, 

-Department of Physics and 

99, 147 

Astronomy, 283 

Johnson, Frank Jr., 183 

Johnson, Kathy, 246 

Johnson, Scott, 246 

Johnson & Johnson, Ortho 

Pharmaceuticals Divisions, 431 

Johnson Space Center USC), 22, 31-32, 

35, 86, 135, 163, 167, 186, 

190-191, 225, 227, 244, 246, 

256-259, 265, 268, 271-274, 

276-278, 280, 304, 307, 309-310, 

312-314, 317-318, 323, 328, 

350-351, 358, 361, 370, 395, 443, 

445 

Johnson Wax Co., 237 

Johnston, J. Bennett (D-LA), 286 

Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar 

System (JSTARS), 439 

JPL. See Jet Propulsion Laboratory. 

JSC. See Johnson Space Center. 

JSTARS. See Joint Surveillance Target 

JT8D engines, 143 

Jupiter, 21, 53-54, 61-62, 64-65, 68, 

178, 245, 252, 280, 300, 377 

Justice, U.S. Department of, 181, 203, 

409 

Attack Radar System. 

Kagoshima Space Center, Japan, 48 

Kaiser, Dr. Michael, 67-68 

Kalamazoo, MI, 16 

Kaliningrad, USSR, 435 

Kanematsu Institute, Department of 

Medical Research, Sydney, Australia, 

349 

167 

Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 

Kascak, Thomas, 103 

Kazakhstan, USSR, 389 

KC-1 35 tanker aircraft, 365 

Keegan, Sarah, 203 

Keio University Medical School, Tokyo, 

Japan, 163 

Keller, Geoffrey, 41 7 

Keller, Samuel, 104, 178 

Kelly, Judith, 91 

Kelly, William, 91 

Kerning, Vice-Minister Bao, People’s 

Kennedy (John F.) International Airport 

Kennedy Space Center (KSC), 18, 63, 

Republic of China, 434 

(JFK), New York, NY, 85 

65-66, 120, 157, 159-160, 171, 

176, 191-195, 199, 205, 208-209, 

220, 226, 240-241, 269, 273, 278, 

281, 286-294, 296-297, 299-302, 

304-307, 309-310, 312, 316-317, 

322, 324-325, 328, 334-335, 

338-339, 358, 360-363, 370-371, 

374-376, 379, 436, 445-446 

-thermal protection system facility, 

171 

Kentucky Fried Chicken, 248 

Kenwood High School, Baltimore, MD, 

2 72 

Kenya, 246 

Keough, Donald, 443 

Kerrebrock, J.L., 440 

Kerry, Sen. John (D-MA), 111 

Kettering Group, United Kingdom, 397 

Keyhole satellites, 124-1 25 

Keyworth, Dr. George, II, 7, 29, 

kinetic-kill vehicle, 126 

Kirkpatrick, Ambassador Jeanne, 440 

Kirkpatrick, Commodore John, 179 

Kitt Peak, AZ, 78 

Kizim, Leonid, 389 

Knollenberg probe, 9 

Knott, Dr. William, 446 

Kohrs, Richard, 3 12 

Kondo, Dr. Yoji, 39, 41-42 

Konrad, John, 279 

Korad laser, 416 

Kornfeld, Dale, 100 

Korou Space Center, 46, 138-1 39 

Kraft, George, 244 

Kramer, Rep. Ken (RCO), 439 

Kramer, Saunders, 87-88 

Krasnoyarsk, USSR, 386 

Krueger, Dr. Arlin, 76 

KSC. See Kennedy Space Center. 

41 3-41 4 

537 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Kubasov, Valery, 434 

Kupperman, Dr. Charles, 185 

Kutyna, Brig. Gen. Donald, 29, 436-437 

Kyushu, Japan, 48 

La Paz International Airport, Bolivia, 91 

Lageos, 250 

Lahav, Dr. Noam, 188 

Lahore, India, 238 

Lake Maracaibo, Venezuela, 76 

Lally, Richard, 85 

Lamberth, Horace, 3 12 

laminar-flow control, 4-5, 8-9, 16 

Lampton, Dr. Michael, 282, 285 

Land Management, Bureau of, 200 

Land Remote Sensing Commercialization 

landing gear, 195-1 96 

Landsat earth resources satellite, 246, 

249, 418, 430 

Langford, John, 96 

Langley Memorial Aeronautical 

Langley Research Center (LaRC), 3, 5, 8, 

Act, 432-433 

Laboratory, 102 

17, 86, 94, 96, 167-168, 175, 184, 

194-1 95, 365-366, 41 1 

-Aircraft Landing Dynamics Facility, 

LANTRIN. See Low-Altitude Navigation 

195 

and Targeting Infrared System for 

Night. 

LAP. See Large-Scale Advanced Propfan. 

LaRC. See Langley Research Center. 

Large Space Structure Institute (LSSI), 

Large-Scale Advanced Propfan (LAP), 

Larson, Rear Adm. Charles, 33 

laser technology, 206-208 

-fiber-optic imaging system, 206 

-JPL excimer laser, 206 

-medical laser, 206 

17-18 

14-15 

Lathlaen, Peggy, 272 

Laudenslager, Dr. James, 207 

launch environment instrumentation 

system (LEIS), 291 

Lawless, Dr. James, 188 

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, 440 

Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory, Department of Energy, 

133 

LDEF. See Long-Duration Exposure 

Le Fevre, Marius, 137 

Le Bourget, France, 260 

Leakey, Richard, 246 

Leakey Foundation, 246 

Leasat, 221-223, 225, 230-232, 301, 

Lee, Mark, 281 

Lee, Thomas, 100 

Lees, Frederick, 177 

Leestma, David, 32, 102 

Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA, 100, 

Lehman, Navy Secretary John, 1 1 1, 437 

LEIS. See launch environment 

instrumentation system. 

Leninsk, USSR, 435 

Lennon, Thomas, 246, 252 

Lenoir, William, 34 

Leonov, Aleksey, 388, 434 

LeRC. See Lewis Research Center. 

Leslie, Dr. Fred, 376 

Lester, Roy, 374-375, 377 

Levy, Dr. Eugene, 37, 244 

Lewis, Roy, 147 

Lewis, Rep. Tom (R-FL), 414 

Lewis Lear jet, 429 

Lewis Research Center (LeRC), 5, 9-10, 

Facility. 

303-304, 323, 325, 333-334 

428 

14-15, 18, 20, 26, 31, 85, 96, 

103-104, 157, 160, 175, 194, 

196-198, 208-209, 211-212, 235, 

256-259, 270, 310, 369-370, 421, 

429 

Li, Wu Ke, 213 

Liberty Star, the, 371 

Lichtenberg, Dr. Byron, 282, 285 

lightning, 74, 191-192 

-location and protection (LLP), 

292-293 

Lincoln satellite, 412 

Lind, Dr. Don, 325-326, 375 

Lindstrom, Robert, 302 

Linsky, Dr. Jeffrey, 40 

lithium, 78-79 

Litvack, Dr. Frank, 207 

Lloyds of London, 223 

LLP. See lightning location and 

LLWAS. See low-level, wind-shear alert 

Lockheed Corp., 12, 15, 287-288, 298, 

protection. 

system. 

310. 416 

538 
Index 

-Georgia Corp., 4-5, 8, 11-12, 

-L-1011-1, 88-89 

-Logistics Directorate, 310 

-maintenance problems, 25 

-Missiles and Space Co., 48, 258 

-Palo Alto Laboratory, 330 

-Space Flight Co., 190 

-Space Operations Co. (LSOC), 205, 

25-27 

288, 294 

Loewenthal, Stuart, 103 

Long, Sen. Russell (D-LA), 286 

Long-Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF), 

Long March rockets, 2 1 3-2 15 

Lopez, Don, 237 

Los Alamos National Laboratory, 59 

Los Angeles, CA, 206-207, 419 

Louisiana, 253, 285-286 

Lounge, John M., 231, 281, 332-333 

Lousma, Jack, 34 

Low-Altitude Navigation and Targeting 

297-298, 300-301 

Infrared System for Night 

(LANTRIN), 406 

248 

Lowell High School, San Francisco, CA, 

Lowenthal, Stuart, 103 

low-level, wind-shear alert system 

(LLWAS), 88 

LOXhydrogen cryogenic and 

hydrocarbon engines, 22 

LSOC. See Lockheed Corp., Space 

Operations Co. 

LSSI. See Howard University School of 

Engineering, Large Space Structure 

Institute. 

LTV, 420 

Lucid, Shannon, 279-282 

lunar research, 167. (See also moon.) 

Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 

Lunney, Dr. Glynn, 310-312 

Lust, Cen. Reimer, 263 

Luxembourg, 138 

16th, 244 

MacArthur, Gen. Douglas, 102 

MacCready, Paul, 237 

MacQueen, Robert, 114 

Madrid, Spain, 44 

Magnetometer Experiment, 60 

magnetosphere, 64, 77-79 

magnetotail probe, 78-79 

Malinckrodt Institute of Radiology, St. 

Louis, MO, 209 

Manchester International Airport, 

Manchester, England, 89 

Manned Flight Awareness Panel, the, 

174 

manned maneuvering unit (MMU), 433 

Manned Spacecraft Center, 310 

Manno, George, 232 

Man-Vehicle Systems Research Facility 

MARECS, 136 

Mark, Hans Michael, 176, 364 

Mariana, Franco, 248 

Mariana Islands, 220 

Marine Corps, U.S., 438, 440 

Mariner, 180 

Marquart, David, 272 

Mars, 51, 54-55, 66-67, 149, 235, 244, 

(MVSRF), 26-27 

365, 392, 396, 421-422, 434-435, 

440, 446 

Mars Observer, 440 

MARSAR II, 12 

Marsden, Megan, 246 

Marshall Islands, 220 

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), 

17, 22, 40, 86, 99-100, 167, 171, 

175, 198-1 99, 248-249, 258-259, 

267, 284-285, 307-309, 324, 331, 

349-353, 358, 366-368, 374-383, 

41 1, 420 

-Materials Science Laboratory, 355 

-Productivity Enhancement Center, 

-Research Animal Holding Facility, 

-Solar Terrestrial Division, Space 

-Space Camp, US., 249 

-Systems Dynamic Laboratory, 382 

367 

383 

Science Laboratory, 285 

Marsik, Stanley, 308 

Martin, Dick, 26 

Martin Marietta Corp., 2, 258, 260, 267, 

Maryland, University of, College Park, 

maser clocks, 233-234 

Masar II Computer, 12 

Mason, Senator, Australia, 129 

Massachusetts, 18, 40, 44, 131, 272, 

285, 349, 406, 419-420, 436 

MD, 40 

379,445 

539 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Massachusetts Artists Foundation, 445 

Massachusetts College of Art, Boston, 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 

MA, 445 

(MIT), Cambridge, MA, 18, 40, 96, 

167, 186, 426 

-Center for Advanced Visual Studies, 

-MIT Monarch, 96 

445 

Mataveri Airfield, Easter Island, 289-291 

Materials Science 1-aboratory-2 (MSL-2), 

Matese, John, 38 

Matsunaga, Sen. Spark (D-HI), 41 3, 435 

Mattingly, Capt. Thomas, 34, 295, 349 

Maui, HI, 129-132, 318 

Mauna Kea Observatory, Hawaii, 64 

Maverick missiles, 406 

MAW. See mission adaptive wing. 

Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial 

355-356 

Physics, Garching, Federal Republic 

of Germany, 59, 399 

MBB. See Messerschmidt-Bolkow-Blohm. 

McAuliffe, Sharon Christa, 272-277 

McBride, ion, 278 

McCall, ID, 272-273 

McCall-Donnelly Elementary School, 

McCall, IO, 272-273 

McCandless, Bruce, 178, 282, 300 

McCarthy, Dr. John, 197 

McCray, Dr. Richard, 42 

McDermid, Dr. Stuart, 207 

McDonald, Rebecca, 207 

McDonald Laser Ranging System, 416 

McDonald Observatory, TX, 416 

McDonnell, Sanford, 120-1 21 

McDonnell Douglas Astronzutics Co., 9, 

258, 264, 279, 299, 322, 339, 342, 

11, 116, 120-121, 143, 167, 226, 

345, 407-409, 411-412, 430 

-continuous flow electrophoresis 

-investigation of alleged overcharges, 

system, 299 

409 

McDonnell Douglas Technical Services 

McDougall, Walter, 151 

McMurdo Sound, Antarctica, 218 

McNair, Ronald, 274, 278 

McPherson, David, 180 

McPherson, M. Peter, 224 

Meade, Capt. Carl, 33 

Co., 193, 379 

Medea’s gradient furnace, 380 

medical advances, 206-21 1 

Medina, Ernest0 Rodriguez, 105 

Mediterranean Sea eddies, 353 

Melanesia, 220 

Melbourne, Australia, 129 

-Overseas Service, 129 

-Regional Airport, 292 

Melbourne, FL, 273, 426 

Melton, Robert, 258 

Merbold, Ulf, 284 

Mercury, 244 

Mercury Program, 102, 176, 184-1 85, 

200. {See also P:oject Mercury.) 

Merino, Admiral Jose Toribio, 289-290 

MERIT (interactive data management and 

enhancement program), 197 

Merritt Island, FL, 172 

Messerschmid, Dr. Ernst, 284, 335, 

Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm (MBB), 

337-338, 380 

432 

-Erno, Space Systems Group of, 137, 

159-160, 192 

Metcalf, Michael, 272 

Meteor-2, 387 

meteorites, 148 

Meteorological Institute, Finland, 

meteorological interactive data display 

meteorological satellites (Metsats), 344, 

meteorology, 38-42, 71, 76-78, 133, 

396-397 

system (MIDDS), 292-293 

346 

218, 221, 223-224, 226-227, 238, 

333-334 

Meteosat, 140, 222-223 

Methia, Richard, 272 

Metsats. See meteorological satellites. 

Meudon Observatory France, 59 

Mexico, 75, 167, 220, 300, 329-330, 

Mexico City, Mexico, 232 

Meyer, Gerald, 409 

Meyer, Lt. Col. Thomas, 318 

MHV-ASAT. See antisatellite miniature 

homing vehicle. 

Miami, FL, 228 

Micale, Fortunato, 100 

Michigan, 16, 369 

Michigan, University of, Ann Arbor, MI, 

167, 186 

333, 339 

540 
index 

microburst, 88 

micro-earth stations, 2 

rnicrogravity, environment, 275 

Microgravity Materials Science 

Laboratory (MMSL), 198, 428 

microspheres, 100-101 

microwave window frequency range, 

MIDDS. See meteorological interactive 

mid-infrared chemical laser (MIRACL), 

Military Airlift Command, 12 

Milky Way galaxy, 44--46, 55, 329, 399 

Millstone Hill, MA, 379 

Mil-Std-15538 data bus, 407 

Milwaukee, WI, 201, 357 

Mineta, Rep. Norman !D-CA), 239-240 

Ministry of Astronautics. See People’s 

Ministry of Trade and Industry, Finland, 

Minnesota, 369 

Minuteman Mark-1 2 reentry vehicle, 

MIRACL. See mid-infrared chemical 

Mirage Jet, 145 

mishap investigation board, 205 

missiles, 11 7-120. (See a!so individual 

mission adautive wing (MAW), 13-14, 

mission peculiar equipment support 

mission sequence test, 374 

Mission Watch, 277 

Missouri, 369 

MIT. See Massachusetts Institute of 

Mitsubishi Electric Corp., 159-1 60 

Mitsui and Co. Ltd., 346 

Mitterrand, President Francois, 128-1 29, 

Mixon, Marvin, 323 

MLP. See mobile launch platform. 

MMS. See multimission modular 

MMSL. See Microgravity Materials 

MMU. See manned maneuvering unit. 

Mobile Laser Ranging System 

235 

data display system. 

131 

Republic of China. 

397 

118 

laser. 

names.) 

16 

structure (MPESS), 355, 373-374 

Technology. 

139, 145, 251 

spacecraft. 

Science Laboratory. 

(MOBLAS), 7, 250 

mobile launch Dlatform (MLP), 287-288 

mobile (multiple) satellite system (MSS), 

mobile subscriber equipment (MSE), 132 

MOBLAS. See Mobile Laser Ranging 

Mode S transponder, 144 

Modular Transportation Laser Ranging 

Moeschi, Stanley, 408 

Mojave Desert, CA, 361 

monkeys in space, 391 

monodisperse latex reactor processor, 

moon, 49, 244, 396. (See also lunar 

122, 423 

System. 

System, 250 

100 

research.) 

-rocks, 245 

Moore, Jesse, 174, 312-313, 331-332, 

334, 337, 343, 359-360, 363 

MOP-1, 140 

Morelos satellites, 329-330, 339 

Morgan, Barbara, 272-274, 277 

Mori, Mamoru, 163 

Morison, Samuel, 124-125 

Morton Thiokol Inc., 221, 367-369 

Moscow, USSR, 39, 115, 385, 389, 395, 

Mosquito Lagoon, FL, 191-1 92 

Moss Point, MS, 371 

motion sickness research, 152, 278, 323 

Motorola Corp., 104, 423 

Mount Illimani, Bolivia, 91 

Mount St. Helens, WA, 76 

MPESS. See mission peculiar equipment 

support structure. 

MSE. See mobile subscriber equipment. 

MSFC. See Marshall Space Flight Center. 

MSL-2. See Materials Science 

MSS. See mobile satellite system. 

Mullane, Lt. Coi. Michael, 278, 322 

Mulloy, Lawrence, 368 

multimission modular spacecraft (MMS), 

Munich, Federal Republic of Germany, 

Muroc, 101 

Murray, Bruce, 435 

Murray, Dr. Steven, 40 

Musgrave, Dr. F. Story, 330 

Mushotzky, Dr. Richard, 40 

-Wasatch Division, 20, 367 

399,435 

Laboratory-2. 

77 

3 36-33 7 

541 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Mutual Broadcasting System, 21 7-218 

-MultiComm, 21 7 

-Mutual Satellite Services division, 

21 7 

Mutual Radio Network, 21 7-218 

MV Kreuztrum, 92 

MVSRF. See Man-Vehicle Systems 

MX missiles, 118 

Research Facility. 

N-ll rocket, 163 

Naderi, Dr. Firouz, 423 

Nagashima, Japan, 17 

Nagel, Lt. Col. Steven, 279-282, 335 

Naito, Chiaki, 163 

NAS. See National Airspace System. 

NASA. See National Aeronautics and 

NASCAP. See NASA, Charging Analyzer 

NASCOM. See NASA, Communications. 

Nashville, TN, 429 

Natal, Brazil, 73 

Nathan, Dr. Robert, 102-103 

National Academy of Engineering, 84 

National Academy of Sciences, U.S., 39, 

-Astronomy Survey committee, 51 

Space Administration. 

Program. 

61, 75, 100, 149, 179, 259 

National Advisory Committee for 

Aeronautics, 31, 310 

national aeronautics research and 

development goals, 3 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA) 

-Air Force, 408-41 1 

-Air Force Space Transportation 

Architecture Studies (STAS), 22 

-Authorization Bill, 171 

-Aviation Safety Reporting System, 

-Board of Contract Appeals, 177 

-budget, 168-171, 299 

-Charging Analyzer Program 

-Communications (NASCOM), 247 

-Deep Space Network (DSN), 63-64, 

-Flight Review Board, 204 

-Hardware Contractors Productivity 

82-83 

(NASCAP), 28 

168, 173, 401 

Conference, 175 

-National Space Technologies 

Laboratory (NSTL), 207, 209, 

245-246, 252, 306, 309 

-Navy program, 97-98 

- 1986 Long-Range Program Plan, 

-Office of Aeronautics and Space 

-Office of Commercial Programs, 

-Office of Inspector General (OIG), 

-Office of Interim Space Station 

-Office of Management Operations, 

-Office of Space Flight, 183 

-Office of Space Science and 

42 1-422 

Technology, 183 

173-175, 183, 202 

200-201 

Program, 185 

174 

Applications (OSSA), 183, 246, 

-Office of Space Station, 183, 185 

-Office of Space Tracking and Data 

Systems, 183-1 84 

-Seasat program, 21 7 

-Scientific and Technical Information 

-Solar System Exploration Division, 

-Sounding Rocket Division, 243 

-Space Flight Participant Committee, 

-Space Station Task Force, 185 

-Teacher in Space Project, 271-273 

National Agrarian University, Lima, 

National Air and Space Museum 

251-252 

Facility (STIF), 201-202 

244 

272, 275-276 

Peru, 246 

(Smithsonian), 237-241, 251-252, 

42 1 

-Trophy, 102 

National Airspace System (NAS), 197 

National Association of Broadcasters, 

National Bureau of Standards (NBS), 40, 

National Cancer Institute, 209 

-Breast Imaging Project, 209 

National Center for Atmospheric 

Research, 114, 197 

National Committee of the International 

Union of Radio Science, U.S., 180 

National Council for Marine Resources 

and Engineering Development, 100 

2 76 

42 7-428 

542 
Index 

National Earthquake Information Center, 

National Geographic Society, 56 

National Institutes of Health (NIH), 350 

National Museum of American History, 

National Newspaper Association, 276 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

133 

237 

Administration (NOAA), 72-73, 149, 

176, 197, 217, 221-228, 230, 253, 

292, 344, 346-347, 433, 436 

-satellites, 72-73, 21 7, 224-225 

National Oceanic Satellite System 

National Research Council (NRC), 84, 

-Committee on Undersea Warfare, 

National Research Council of Canada, 

(NOSS), 217 

41 6 

179 

357 

-space sciences budget, 73 

National Science Foundation, 44, 149, 

National Science Teachers Association, 

National Scout Jamboree, 1985, Fort 

National Security Council (NSC), 151, 

National Security Industrial Association, 

National Security Launch Strategy 

National Society of Professional 

National Space Centre. See French 

National Space Club, 440 

National Space Commission, 440 

National Space Institute (NSI), 420-421 

-Space Outreach ‘85 program, 420 

National Space Transportation System 

National Telecommunications and 

Information Agency, 142 

National Tire Modeling Program, 196 

National Transportation Safety Board 

National Weather Satellite Week, 221 

Naval Academy, U.S., 33-34 

Naval Aviation Logistics Center, 179 

Naval Electronics Systems Command, 

41 5 

369-370 

A.P. Hill, VA, 195 

41 7 

31 7 

directive, 436 

Engineers, 99 

National Center for Space Studies. 

(NSTS), 310-312 

(NTSB), 83, 91 

437 

Naval Intelligence Support Center, 124 

Naval Material Command, 437 

Naval Observatory, 38 

Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), U.S., 

Naval Space Command, 32-34 

Naval Underwater Systems Center, 350 

Navstar (Rockwell), 122-1 24, 141, 

114, 191, 233-234, 330, 437 

233-234 

-Global Positioning System (GPS), 

Navy, US., 10, 23, 111, 119, 124-125, 

228, 230, 234, 243, 297, 303, 323, 

233 

131-132, 170, 177-180, 183, 217, 

326, 333, 395, 437-438 

-Bureau of Ordinance, 177 

-espionage trial, 124 

-Finance Center, 200 

-Fleet Numerical Oceanography 

-Office of General Counsel, 178 

-Office of Naval Research, 100 

-Remote Ocean Sensing System 

(NROSS), 180-181, 217 

-Space Program Office, 349 

Center, 21 7 

NBS. See National Bureau of Standards. 

Nelson, Rep. Bill (D-FL), 273, 275, 356, 

Nelson, George, 230, 356 

Neptune, 38, 51, 68 

Netherlands, The, 53, 62, 135, 167, 

Nevada, 133 

Nevado del Ruiz (volcano), Colombia, 

76 

New Bedford High School, New 

Bedford, MA, 272 

New Hampshire, 272 

New Jersey, 86, 258 

New London, CT, 350 

New Mexico, 44, 100, 131, 182 

New Orleans, LA, 16 

New Works Program of the 

Massachusetts Council on the Arts 

and Humanities, 445 

New York, NY, 16, 85, 93, 102, 223, 

228 

New Zealand, 148, 220, 392 

Newfoundland, Canada, 96 

Newman, Larry, 17 

Newport Beach, CA, 438 

Newton, Isaac, 275, 382 

358-359, 363, 393, 435 

251, 335-336, 398 

543 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Nicogossian, Dr. Arnauld, 350 

Nicollier, Claude, 282 

NIH. See National Institutes of Health. 

NikeOrion, 73-74 

Nike-Tomahawk, 71 

Nimbus satellites, 77, 253 

Nixon, President Richard M., 203 

NOAA. See National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration. 

Nomura, Dr. Tamiya, 163 

NORAD. See North American Air 

Defense Command. 

Nordsieck, Dr. Kenneth, 283 

Normal Freezing Furnace, 431-432 

North, Warren, 31 

North American Aerospace Defense 

Command, 439 

North American Air Defense Command 

(NORAD), 87, 100, 364, 387 

North American Aircraft Operations, 97. 

(See also Rockwell International 

Corp.) 

North Carolina, 77 

North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 

Northern Lights (radio waves), 68 

Northern Utah Satellite (NUSAT), 205, 

Northrop Services, Inc., 11, 23, 190, 

404-405, 440 

Northwest Airlines, 93 

Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, 

Norway, 135, 139, 251 

NOSS. See National Oceanic Satellite 

System. 

NOVA, 228 

NRC. See National Research Council. 

NRL. See Naval Research Laboratory. 

NROSS. See Navy Remote Ocean 

NROSS satellites, 180-181, 217 

NSC. See National Security Council. 

NSI. See National Space Institute. 

NSTL. See National Space Technologies 

NSTS. See National Space Transportation 

NTSB. See National Transportation 

nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), 209 

nucleonics, 163 

NC, 185 

218-219, 374 

42 

Sensing System. 

Laboratory. 

System. 

Safety Board. 

numerical aerodynamic simulation, 187 

Nunamaker, Robert, 194-1 95 

Nusantara, P.T. Elektrindo, 21 3 

NUSAT. See Northern Utah Satellite. 

Oberg, James, 397 

Oberstar, Rep. James (D-MN), 90 

Oberth, Herman, 152-1 53 

O'Brien, John, 176-1 77 

Ockels, Dr. Wubbo, 284, 335, 338 

(YConnor, Bryan, 281, 338 

Ocampo, August0 Ramirez, 105 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), 206 

oceanography, 147. (See also National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration.) 

Office of Management and Budget, 

White House, 217, 269 

Office for Official Publications of the 

European Communities, 138 

Office of Science and Technology 

Policy, White House, 414-415 

Ogilvie, Dr. Keith, 59 

O'Gorman, George, 287 

O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, 

IL, 85, 143 

Ohio, 15, 369 

Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 

OIG. See NASA Office of Inspector 

Oklahoma City, OK, 16 

Omniplan Corp., 190, 314 

OMS. See orbital maneuvering system. 

OMV. See orbital maneuvering vehicle. 

onehundredth American to reach space, 

O'Neill, Gerard, 440 

Onizuka, Mal. Ellison, 274, 278, 295 

Onsala, Sweden, 396 

Opal, Chet, 67 

optic electronics, 251 

opto-electronic multispectral scanner, 

orbit 

41 7 

General. 

281-282 

432 

-geostationary, 105, 136, 140, 220, 

- geosynchronous, 18-22, 157, 

222-224 

159-160, 168, 171, 214, 

220-221, 227, 231-232, 423 

544 
Index 

-north-south, 295 

-sun-synchronous, 72 

orbital maneuvering system (OMS), 299 

orbital maneuvering vehicle (OMV), 

Orbiter Processing Facility, 288 

orbiting astrometric telescope, 37 

origin of life theory, 187-188 

Orion rocket, 74-75 

Orlando International Airport, Orlando, 

FL, 293 

Osaka, Japan, 96 

OSHA. See Occupational Safety and 

267, 420, 422 

Health Administration. 

Oshkosh, WI, 85-86 

OSSA. See NASA Office of Space 

Science and Applications. 

Ostriker, Dr. Jeremiah, 42 

Ostro, Steve, 54 

Oswald, Stephen, 33 

OTA. See Congressional Office of 

Ousley, Gilbert, 78 

Overmeyer, Col. Robert, 86, 325-328 

Owen, David, 288 

Owens Valley, CA, 44 

ozone, 73, 75, 76, 149 

-depletion of, 75 

-layer, 75-76 

-stratospheric, 75 

Ozonesonde, 73 

Technology Assessment. 

Pacala, Dr. Thomas, 207 

Pacific American Launch Systems, 

430-43 1 

-PHOENIX E, 431 

Pacific Missile Range Facility, 131-1 32 

Pacific Ocean, 16, 53, 77-78, 1 14, 129, 

136, 161, 220-221, 234, 291 

Padova University, lnstituto Meccanica, 

248 

Pailes, Maj. William, 319, 335 

Paine, Thomas, 440 

Palapa 8-2, 19, 33, 223 

Palestine, TX, 79 

Palestinians, 11 1 

Palmer, Patrick, 57 

Palmdale, CA, 240, 362 

Palomar Observatory, 64 

PAM. See Payload Assist Module. 

Pan Am World Services, 292 

Pan American World Airways, 87 

Pan American World Health 

Organization, 232 

Pan Pacific education and 

communications experiments by 

satellite (PEACESAT), 220 

Panama, 34-35 

Papadopoulos, Konstantinos, 248 

Paris, France, 17, 157, 173, 434 

Paris Air Show, 31, 145, 213, 260, 266, 

Parise, Dr. Ronald, 283 

Parkersburg, WV, 272 

Parliament, British, 133 

Parma, Ohio, 369 

Pasadena, CA, 133 

Patrick AFB, FL, 292 

Pattie, Geoffrey, 255-256 

Payload Assist Module (PAM), 19-20, 

payload ground operations contract 

(PGOC), 193 

Payload Operations Control Center 

(POCC), 285, 375, 378 

Payton, Maj. Gary, 295 

PCG. See protein crystal growth 

Peace Corps, US., 91 

PEACESAT. See pan Pacific education 

405 

167, 228, 299, 303, 339-340, 356 

experi ment. 

and communications experiments by 

satellite. 

Peale, Stanton, 67 

Pedersen, Kenneth, 177 

Peebles, OH, 15 

Peenemunde, Federal Republic of 

Pei, I.M., 99 

Pell, Sen. Claiborne (D-RI), 413 

Pellinen, Risto, 396 

Penaranda, Frank, 173-1 74 

Pennsylvania State University, State 

College, PA, 40, 258, 354 

Pentagon. See Defense, U.S. 

People’s Republic of China, 21 3-21 5, 

Germany, 152 

Department of. 

434 

-Ministry of Astronautics, 21 3 

-State Bureau of Meteorology, 215 

-State Council, 213 

Pepsi-Cola USA, 443-445 

perihelion, 109 

Perini Co., 187 

545 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Perkin-Elmer Corp., 53-54, 357 

Perry, Geoffrey, 397 

Perry, Leon, 203 

Perseus Cluster, 329 

Peru, 77-79, 246, 252 

Petersen, Ronald, 288 

Peterson, Donald, 34 

Peterson AFB, Colorado Springs, CO, 

PFRR. See Poker Flat Research Range. 

PGME. See propylene glycol methyl 

PGOC. See payload ground operations 

Phase Partitioning Experiment (PPE), 

Philadelphia, PA, 258 

Philadelphia University City Science 

Center, Bioprocessing and 

Pharmaceutical Center, 353 

438 

ether. 

contract. 

35 1-352 

Philadelphia World Affairs Council, 132 

Phillips, Dr. Robert, 279 

Phobos, 137, 396, 435 

PHOENIX E, 431 

Photovoltaic power system, 208-209, 

212, 270 

physical vapor transport of organic solids 

(PVTOS), 303 

Pierce, Dr. William, 271 

Pike, John, 112, 125 

PIMS. See programmable implantable 

Pioneer, 61-62, 65, 180, 412 

pivoting wing, for supersonic aircraft, 

Planet A, 48 

Planet X theory, 38 

Planetary 

medication system. 

97-98 

-detection and study, 38 

-exploration, 52, 61-69, 170 

-flyby spacecraft, 51, 61, 180 

-formation, 37, 39, 41, 43 

-image processing, 102 

-science, 149 

-systems, 39, 197 

Planetary Society, the, 434 

Planning Research Corp. (PRC), 192 

plant experiments, 358, 446 

Plasma Diagnostics Package, 28, 354, 

Plasma Wave Experiment, 59 

PLSS. See precisionilocation strike 

381 

system. 

Pluto, 51, 63-64, 68 

POCC. See Payload Operations Control 

Point Brown, U.S. Coast Guard Cutter, 

Poker Flat Research Range (PFRR), AK, 

Poland, 392, 413 

POLAR. See Potential of a Large Object 

in the Auroral Region. 

polar cap studies, 71 

Pollack, Dr. James, 66-67 

Pollock, Dr. Glenn, 188 

Pollvogt, Udo, 432 

Portugal, 251 

Potential of a Large Object in the 

Auroral Region (POLAR), 27-28 

PPE. See Phase Partitioning Experiment. 

Pratt & Whitney, 11, 22, 81, 143, 204 

Pravda, 397 

PRC. See Planning Research Corp. 

precision location/strike system (PLSS), 

25 

President's Committee on Science and 

Technology, 183 

Presidents Council on International 

Economic Policy, 33 

President's General Advisory committee 

on Arms Control and Disarmament, 

177, 179, 185 

Presidential National Commission on 

Space, 41 7 

Presidential Proclamation 5358, 403 

Presler, Alden, 196 

Princeton, NJ, 258 

Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, 42 

Probst, Albert, 376 

Prognoz-1 0-lntercosmos, 396 

programmable implantable medication 

system (PIMS), 99 

Progress-24, 387, 397-392 

Project Mercury, 3 1. (See also Mercury 

Program.) 

Propeller propulsion systems, 14, 97 

propfan, 15, 84 

Propylene glycol methyl ether (PGME), 

protein crystal growth experiment (PCG), 

Prouty, Clarke, 219 

Proxmire, Sen. William (D-WI), 405 

Pshak, Mary, 13 1 

Center. 

74 

75 

8-9 

352-353, 358 

546 
Index 

PSNICNR. See Italian National Research 

Council, National Space Plan Office. 

P.T. Elektrindo Nusantara, Indonesia, 

212 

Pterosaur, 237 

Public Broadcasting System, 151 

Public Health Service, 220 

Puerto Rico, 54, 236, 271, 330, 379 

Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 

PVTOS. See physical vapor transport of 

Pyle, Thomas, 85 

185, 248 

organic solids. 

Quality Circles (NASA), 174 

quasars, 283 

R&D. See Research and Development. 

R&D Associates, 185 

radar, 438-439 

-beacon system, 144 

-spacebased radar system, 437, 439 

radar ocean-surveillance satellite 

Radford, Wade, 99 

Radhakrishmam, P., 284 

Radio Astronomy Explorer satellite 

radio astronomy technique, 63 

Radio Technical Commission for 

Radio Television News Directors 

Radio Wave Experiment, 59 

radiosonde instruments, 71 

RADL. See Robotic Applications 

Development Laboratow. 

Rahn, Debra, 203 

Ramenskoye Flight Test Center, USSR, 

ramjet, 28, 96 

Ramsey, Rear Adm. William, 34 

Rand Corp., 176, 179, 181 

Rand, Maj. Ronald, 321-322 

Ranger spacecraft, 103 

Rankine, Brig. Cen. Robert, Jr., 130 

Rao, U.R., 155, 284 

Rassier, Donald, 438 

Ratajczak, Tony, 209 

(RORSAT), 386-387 

program, 180 

Aeronautics, 141 

Association, 276 

389 

RCA American Communications (RCA 

RCA Astro-Electronics, 258, 281 

RCA Corp., 225, 430, 433 

RCA G-STAR satellite, 221 

RCA Infrared-Imaging Equipment (IR-IE), 

RCA SAT-COM satellite, 20, 276 

-C-band, 281, 340 

-F-2R, Transponder 13, 276 

Americom), 340 

356-357 

-KU-1, 281, 356 

-KU-2, 278, 339-340, 356 

Reagan, President Ronald W., 1, 29, 31, 

85, 99, 101, 111-113, 126-129, 

168-170, 176, 179, 181, 200, 221, 

256, 264, 272, 282, 403, 414, 417, 

421, 433, 436-437, 440 

-Administration, 7, 97, 1 12-1 13, 

118, 121, 126-128, 132, 158, 

178, 183, 229, 251, 255, 311, 

315, 409, 414, 417 

-National Commission on Space, 52, 

41 7 

-National Security Launch Strategy 

directive, 436 

-National Space Strategy, 41 7 

- 1980 Presidential Campaign, 185 

real-time multiprocessor simulator, 26 

recorders, flight data, 83, 87, 91 

Red Spot, 377 

Redondo Beach, CA, 258 

Redmond, Lt. Col. Thomas, 312 

Redstone rocket, 152 

Reeves, Bill, 333 

remote manipulator system (RMS) arm, 

remote sensing technology, 246 

Renaissance, 238 

rendezvous and docking, 152 

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, 

Renz, David, 104 

Reppin, Dr. Claus, 399 

Request for Proposal (RFP), 189, 369 

Research Animal Holding Facility, 383 

research and development (R&D), 174, 

257 

NY, 18 

414-416, 437 

-budget, 41 4, 440 

-facilities, 85 

-spacerelated computer science, 

-weapons systems, 23 

186-189, 198 

547 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Resnick, Judith, 274, 278 

Reynolds, William, 175 

RFP. See Request for Proposal. 

Rhyolite reconnaissance satellite, 315 

Richards, Richard, 278 

Richelson, Jeffrey, 124-1 25 

Rickman, Doug, 209 

Ride, Sally, 102, 151, 281 

Rider, Dr. David, 207 

Riesenhuber, Heinz, 255 

Rinker, Lewis, 200-201 

Rio Abiseo National Park, Peru, 

245-246, 252 

-Research Project, 246 

RMS. See remote manipulator system 

RMS Associates, 200, 202 

RMS Technologies, Inc., 190, 31 4 

Robotic Applications Development 

arm. 

Laboratory (RADL), 193-1 94 

-adaptive control, 194 

-artificial intelligence, 194 

-closed-loop control commands, 194 

-control center for robotics, 193 

-real-time tracking system, 194 

-servo-controlled robot, 194 

--smart systems, 193 

-3-D graphics and simulated work 

-touch and mobility systems, 194 

cells, 194 

Robotic Control Systems, 194 

robotic development, 193 

rockets. See names of individual rockets. 

ROCket OZonesonde (ROCOZ-A), 73 

Rockwell International Corp., 1 1, 97, 

103, 141, 191, 240, 243, 258, 298, 

-North American Aircraft Operations, 

- Rocketdyne Division, 258, 303, 309 

-Space Station Systems Division, 258, 

-Space Transportation Systems 

362-364, 419 

97 

264 

Division, 199 

Rockwell Shuttle Operations Co., 190, 

Rodgers, Dave, 48 

Rogers, Tom; 261-262 

Roland, Alex, 151 

Rolls Royce, 84, 414 

Romania, 392 

Rome, Italy, 135 

31 3 

Rome, University of, Italy, 248 

Rome Air Development Center, 122 

RORSAT. See radar ocean-surveillance 

Ross, Maj. Jerry, 278, 322, 338-342, 

rotary power-transfer device, 104 

rotary-wing flight, 5-7 

Rothmeier, Steven, 93 

rotorcraft, 5-7 

Roussel Pharmaceuticals of Paris, 431 

Royal Greenwich Observatory, England, 

Rudman, Sen. Warren (R-NH), 405 

Rye, Gilbert, 41 7 

sate1 lite. 

355 

45 

S-207C launch vehicle, 41 1 

Sadilek, Albert, 99 

Safer, John, 102 

Sagan, Dr. Carl, 39, 320, 435 

SAGE II, 73 

Sagittarius, constellation, 45 

Sahm, Peter, 380 

St. Louis, MO, 16, 209, 409 

St. Mary's Hospital, Laser Laboratory, 

Milwaukee, WI, 357 

Sakharov, Andrei, 41 3 

Salvator, Giorgio, 137 

Salyut mission, 329, 392, 397 

Salyut space stations, 388-395, 

Salyut-Hexe project, 399 

San Jose State University, San Jose, CA, 

Sanchini, Dominick, 303 

SAREX. See shuttle amateur radio 

Sargent, E. Douglas, 288, 294 

SARSAT. See satellite carried search and 

Satcol satellite, 105 

satellite, 121-124, 159-161, 217-234, 

(See also individual names; Appendix 

397-399, 433 

187 

experiment. 

rescue. 

411-412, 417, 430, 441-442. 

A.) 

-debris, reentry, 87 

-early warning, 315 

-earth-orbiting, 171 

-electronic car map, 123 

-failures, 233 

-keyhole, 124-125 

548 
Index 

-meteorological, 155 

-Navy, 326 

-on-orbit repair, 440 

-radar-ocean surveillance, 386-387 

-reconnaissance, 123, 314-315 

-science, 163 

-Soviet, 386-399, 41 7, 419 

-weather, 163, 214, 221, 224, 

satellite carried search and rescue 

satellite, communications, 33, 103-104, 

-based communications network, 2 

-commercial communications, 19, 

159, 419 

-international communications, 160, 

213 , 

-Navy, 417 

-planetary communications, 197 

-telecommunications, 140, 157-161 

Satellite Communications for Learning 

Worldwide (SCOLA), 370 

Satellite Television Corp., 107 

Satellite Transfer Vehicle, 22 

Saturn, 45, 51, 65, 67, 68, 214, 307 

Saturn V/Apollo launch, 294 

Saudi Arabia, 167, 219, 280, 282-283 

Savinykh, Viktor, 389, 391-393, 395, 

SCA. See Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. 

Scandinavia, 71 

SCAPE. See self-contained atmospheric 

protective ensemble. 

Scarab 2 underwater search and 

recovery vehicle, 92 

Scarburgh, Col. Edmund, 200 

Scarf, Dr. Frederick, 59 

SCAS. See stability control augmentation 

Schmitt, Sen. Harrison (R-NM), 435 

Schneider, Ed, 10 

Schoenewolf, 1st Lt. John, 123 

Scholossberg, Stephen, 178 

Science Applications, Inc., 248 

Scientific-Technical Cooperation 

-SPY, 315-316, 395 

229-230, 436 

(SARSAT), 225 

155, 211, 232, 419 

397 

system. 

Committee of the Foreign Ministry, 

Finland, 397 

specialists, 41 5 

scientists, engineers, and computer (SEC) 

SCO-X-2. See Scorpius X-2. 

Scobee, Francis, 274, 278 

Scorpius X-2 (SCO-X-2), 329 

Scott AFB, IL 

Scout Science and Technology, Inc. 

Scout launch vehicle, 167, 410-411 

scramjet. See supersonic combustion 

Scranton, University of, PA, 31 1 

Scully-Power, Dr. Paul, 350, 353 

SDC-Burroughs, 144 

SDI. See Strategic Defense Initiative. 

SEADS. Shuttle Entry Air Data System. 

Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence 

Seasat Imaging Radar (SIR-B), 147, 217 

Seattle, WA, 90 

Seattle-Tacoma Airport, 143 

SEC. See scientists, engineers, and 

computer specialists. 

Secret Service, 82 

Seddon, Dr. M. Rhea, 278-279, 296, 

Selby, Barbara, 203 

Selective Service System, 178 

Selenia, Italy, 159-161 

self-contained atmospheric protective 

semiconductor crystals, 165 

-directional solidification, 165 

Senior Executive Service designation, 

Seoul, South Korea, 93, 405 

servomechanism, 103 

SETI. See Search for Extraterrestrial 

Intelligence. 

Sever, Tom, 252 

SFMD. See storable fluid management 

demonstration. 

Shamsin, V.A., 158 

Shanghai, People’s Republic of China, 

Shanghai Institute of Satellite 

Shanghai Institute of Technical Physics, 

Shaw, Lt. Col. Brewster, Jr., 293-294, 

Shepard, Alan B., Jr., 151 

Shergotty, Consortium, 244 

-Rescue and Command Center, 228 

(SST), 21 

-S-207C, 41 1 

ramjet. 

(SETI), 235-236 

322-324, 351 

ensemble (SCAPE), 66 

31 1 

93, 434 

Engineering, 214 

214 

339-341 

549 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Shklovsky, losif S., 39 

short takeoff and landing (STOL) 

capabilities, 11 7 

Shrewsberry, Dave, 247 

Shriver, Loren, 281, 295 

Shroter, A.R., 288 

shuttle amateur radio experiment 

Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA), 360, 362. 

Shuttle Entry Air Data System (SEADS), 

shuttle infrared leeside temperature 

Shuttle Inventory Management System 

Shuttle Operations Strategic Planning 

Shuttle Processing Contract (SPC), 310 

Shuttle Student Involvement Project 

(SSIP), 358 

shuttle upper atmospheric mass 

spectrometer (SUMS), 365-366 

Sicily, Italy 11 1 

Siddon, The Honorable Tom (Canadian 

(SAREX), 421 

(See also Boeing 747.) 

364-366 

sensing (SILTS), 364, 366 

(SIMS), 310 

Group, 311 

Minister of Science and 

Technology), 261, 265 

Sieck, Robert, 306, 312 

sigint (signals intelligence), 295 

Sigonella Air Base, Sicily, Italy, 11 1 

SILTS. See shuttle infrared leeside 

temperature sensing. 

Silveira, Milton, 210 

Simeiz, Crimea, USSR, 396 

SIMS. See Shuttle Inventory Management 

single rotation tractor propulsion 

SIR-6. See Seasat Imaging Radar. 

Skantze, Cen. Lawrence, 441 -442 

sky marshal force, 85 

Skylab, 31, 172, 257, 340, 354 

Slayton, Donald, 425-426, 434-435 

SLBM. See submarine-launched ballistic 

SLS. See Spacelab Life Sciences. 

Small Business Innovation 

-Development Act of 1982, 202 

-high technology, 202 

-research program, 202-203 

System. 

technology, 15 

missile. 

SME. See Solar Mesospheric Explorer 

Satel lite. 

Smith, Arthur, 81 

Smith, Dick, 294, 376 

Smith, Dr. Edward, 60 

Smith, Dr. L.G., 74 

Smith, Michael, 274, 278, 282 

Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 

Smithsonian Institution, 102, 237-241, 

40, 248, 440 

251-252, 421. (See also National 

Air and Space Museum.) 

-Associates lecture, 55 

-Board of regents, 239 

Snead, Leon, 201 

Society Expeditions, 430 

Society of Experimental Test Pilots, 10 

Society of Professional JournalistdSigma 

solar 

delta chi, 276 

-activity, 114 

-chronosphere, 47 

-dynamic system, 270 

-flares, 435 

-optical universal polarimeter, 47 

-panels, 397 

-power satellite, 18 

-system, 68, 140, 149, 235, 245 

-system, life beyond, 235 

-telescope, 47 

-terrestrial relations, 100 

-ultraviolet rays, 75 

-wind, 59-60 

Solar Max, 230, 238 

Solar Maximum Mission satellite, 223 

Solar Mesospheric Explorer (SME) 

Solar Optical Telescope, 42 

Solar System Exploration Committee, 61 

Solar Ultraviolet Universal Polarimeter 

(SOUP), 378, 381 

solid fuel rocket booster (SRB), 367-369 

solid rocket fuel, 323 

Solwind satellite, 114 

Sondre Stromfjord. See Greenland, 

Sondre Stromfjord facility. 

SOOS-1 spacecraft, 228-229 

Sophron Foundation, McLean, VA, 421 

sound barrier, 151 

sounding rockets, 73-74, 76, 132, 200 

SOUP. See Solar Ultraviolet Universal 

Polarimeter. 

South America, 231 

South Atlantic, 386 

satellite, 73 

550 
Index 

South Bend, IN, 75, 77 

South Carolina, 56 

South Korea, 405 

South Pole, 2 18 

Southern California, University of 

-School of International Relations, 

Southwestern Louisiana, University of, 

Southwestern Medical School, Dallas, 

Soviet 

185 

Lafayette, LA, 38 

TX, 279 

-Academy of Sciences, 39, 100, 136, 

-cosmonauts, 388, 391-399 

-Geophysical Committee, 100 

-laser weapons, 316, 390 

-missile system, 126-127 

-rocket, 385 

-secret launch, 387 

-socialist system, 151 

-space agency, 394 

Soviet Military Power, 385 

Soviet Union. See Union of Soviet 

Socialist Republics (USSR). 

394,435 

SOYUZ T-6, 41, 434 

-T-13, 389, 397 

-T-14, 394, 397 

-frequency, 397 

Soyuz-Apollo mission, 41 3 

space 

-activity, history of, 151-153 

-astronomy, 140 

-camp, 249 

-colonies, 39 

-commercialization, 141, 417, 419 

-probe, 46-47 

space, daily life in 

-habitability, 267 

-motion sickness, 152, 323, 395 

-movement, 274 

-personal hygiene, 274 

-preparation of food, 274 

-sleep, 274 

-use of leisure time, 274 

Space Activities Commission, 163 

Space Command (SPACECOM), 410, 

Space Communications Co. (Spacecom), 

Space Congress, 109 

Space Exploration Day, 403 

438-439 

1-2, 20 

Space Flight Participant Committee. See 

NASA Space Flight Participant 

Committee. 

space goals, United States, 261 

Space Human Factors team, 267 

Space Infrared Telescope Facility, 40 

Space Industries, Inc., 33, 428 

Space Outreach '85, 420 

space plans, future, 151-152, 167, 195, 

space platform, 189 

space program, manned, 151, 200 

space radio astronomy, 180 

space reactor power program, SP-100, 

-long-range civilian space goals, 261 

440 

41 2-4 1 3 

-Phase I, 412 

-Phase 11, 412 

Space-related computer-science 

technology research, 186 

Space Research Association, 440 

Space Research Chair, 34 

Space Research Institute. See Soviet 

Academy of Sciences. 

space sciences 

-food processing research, 446 

-future directions for research, 259 

-plant growth research, 446 

-waste management research, 446 

Space Services, Inc., 425-426 

Space Shuttle, 17-18, 20, 31-32, 34, 

50, 52, 73, 76, 100, 120, 126, 137, 

146, 151-153, 155, 214, 221-222, 

227, 234, 241, 248, 257-258, 263, 

279, 296-297, 299-301, 303-306, 

308, 310, 312, 315-319, 321-326, 

330-350, 353-355, 357-365, 

368-371, 385, 388, 392, 403, 

409-410, 414, 417-418, 421, 425, 

428-433, 435, 441, 443, 445. (See 

also shuttle; Space Shuttle missions.) 

-abort, 302, 307-308 

-based photos, 56 

-communications, 2 

-crew, 48, 223, 274 

-deployed satellites, 22, 24, 27, 28, 

29, 33 

-docking, 152 

-emergency landing, 290 

-first private citizen passenger, 

-flight assignment, 243 

272-277 

55 1 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

-flight crew equipment, 190 

-foreign Competition for launches, 

-launch, 267, 421 

-launch countdown, 312 

-maintenance and launch 

preparation, 31 2 

-manifest, 295, 301, 425 

-military missions, 315 

-National Selection Committee, 276 

-operations, 311, 314, 427 

-robot arm, 59 

-Student Involvement Project 

-thermal protection tiles, 296, 298, 

-weather officer, 293 

31 3 

-payload, 302, 310, 312 

experiments, 275 

300, 425 

-Workload, 13 

Space Shuttle Atlantis, 167, 278-279, 

318-319, 321. (See also Space 

Shuttle orbiters.) 

Space Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA), 360, 

362 

Space Shuttle Centaur, 170, 192, 197, 

204,300 

-Centaur integrated support structure 

-development costs, 169 

-rolling beam, 294 

-upper stage rocket, 62, 159, 

(CISS), 21 

-C, 169 

169-170, 281, 290, 294 

Space Shuttle Challenger, 31-32, 47, 

60, 131, 147, 152, 218, 252, 

276-277, 287, 293-298, 301-303, 

321, 326-338, 353, 359-362, 

366-367, 377-382, 403, 421, 425, 

434, 444-445. (See also Space 

Shuttle orbiters.) 

Space Shuttle Columbia, 56, 151, 163, 

168, 238, 278, 281, 302, 305, 356, 

361-362, 364-366, 376, 444 

-U.S.’s first space shuttle, 238 

-maiden flight, 278 

Space Shuttle Discovery, 33, 121, 129, 

131, 205-206, 225, 227, 230-231, 

233, 250, 281, 287, 295, 298, 300, 

302-304, 315-317, 321-325, 

328-329, 332-334, 339, 359-362, 

370-371, 415. (See also Space 

Shuttle orbiten.) 

Space Shuttle Enterprise, 240. (See also 

Space Shuttle main engine (SSME), 22, 

Space Shuttle orbiters.) 

301 

-1, 330-331 

-2, 301 

Space Shuttle missions, 17, 32-34, 42, 

102, 204, 219, 223-227, 230-231, 

247, 250, 275-284, 293-309, 319, 

321-325, 330-343, 349, 354-358, 

363, 370-371, 376, 378-381, 417, 

421, 431, 434, 443 

Space Shuttle orbiters, 422, 425 

-Atlantis, 167, 278-279, 284, 

293-294, 300, 309, 319, 

334-335, 338-343, 360 

-cabin, 99 

-Challenger, 296-297, 299, 425 

-Colunibia, 278 

-Discovery, 33, 298-299, 314, 359 

-Enterprise, 240, 286 

-Marshall Star, 155 

space stations, 1-7, 17-18, 26, 109, 

432-433. (See also Salyut.) 

-automation, 186-187, 262 

-center of gravity, 268 

-Columbus, 263 

-efficiency, 260 

-geosynchronous, 167 

-manned, 135, 168-169, 255, 

-Phase B, 261, 265-266 

-program, international, 164 

-settlements, 17 

-Soviet, 388-394, 433 

135, 199, 259, 262, 264-266, 

264-268, 327, 385, 417-418 

-SPARX, 432 

Space Systems Research Chair, 33, 34 

Space Task Group, 310 

space technology transfers, 206-2 12 

space telescope data capture facility (ST 

Space Telescope Science institute, 40, 

Space Transportation Architecture 

Space Transportation Main Engine 

Space Transportation System (STS), 183, 

DCR, 247 

247 

studies, 22 

(STME) study, 22, 301 

190-191, 193, 313-314, 343, 348, 

355-356 

552 
Index 

-missions, 32-34, 60, 218, 243, 279, 

297-300, 305-306, 334, 

351-352, 362, 373 

space walk, 397, 440 

Space and Warfare Systems Command, 

SPACECOM. See space command. 

Spacecom. See Space Communications 

SPACEFLIGHT (Public Broadcasting 

Spacelab, 99, 135, 138-1 39, 167, 193, 

437 

co. 

System), 151 

219, 300, 326-327, 335-337, 350, 

361, 373-383 

-animal flights, 327 

-development, 99 

-European design, 99 

-module, 285 

-Dallet. 285 

Spacelab Life Sciences (SLS) missions 

-1, 279, 285, 362, 373 

.-2, 280, 330-331, 374, 377-379, 

381 

-3, 285, 325, 328, 373-374, 378 

-4, 278 

-12, 328 

-D-1, 284, 335-338, 375-376, 380 

-D-2, 284 

Spacelab Payload Project Office, 377 

Spacelab Verification Flight Test (VFT), 

3 79 

Spacenet Corp. See GTE. 

spacesuits, 167, 190 

Spacetrack, 12 1 

Spain, 44, 135, 148, 251, 336 

Spartan 1, 247, 328-329 

Spartan-Halley, 58, 59, 60 

SPARX, 432 

SPC. See Shuttle Processing Contract. 

Speakes, Larry, 11 3, 181 

Sperry Corp., 86 

Sperry Flight Systems, 104 

Spitznagel, Or. Ed, 209 

Spring, Lt. Col. Sherwood, 339-342, 

Springer, Lt. Col. Robert, 278 

Sputnik 1, 151 

SRB. See solid fuel rocket booster. 

SRI International, 186, 260 

SRM. See Standard Reference Material. 

SSIP. See Shuttle Student Involvement 

355 

Project. 

SSME. See Space Shuttle Main Engine. 

SS-N-20 missile, 385 

SS-NX-23 missile, 385 

SST. See Scott Science and Technology, 

55-24, SS-25 missiles, 385 

ST DCF. See space telescope data 

stability control augmentation system 

Stafford, Thomas, 434-435 

Stallings, William, 247 

Standard Reference Material (SRM), 428 

Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 177, 

-Invitational Rugby Tournament, 21 1 

Inc. 

capture facility. 

(SCAS), 11-12 

179, 186, 210, 248 

star formation, 42-43 

Star 30C, 221 

Star Wars. See Strategic Defense 

Initiative. 

STAS. See NASNAir Force Space 

Transportation Architecture Studies. 

State, U.S. Department of, 426 

Stearns Catalytic Corp., 306 

Steele, Dr. Charles, 210-21 1 

Steers, Louis, 11 

Steimle, Hans-Ulrich, 284 

Steinberg, Morris, 41 6 

Steinetz, Bruce, 103 

Stevens, Rep. Ted (R-AR), 404 

Stewart, Col. Robert, 279, 319, 335 

STIF. See NASA Scientific and Technical 

Stirling cycle engine, 412 

STME. See Space Transportation Main 

Stockholm, Sweden, 149 

Stofan, Andrew, 104 

STOL. See short takeoff and landing 

capabilities. 

Stone, Nobie, 248 

Stone, Randy, 296 

storable fluid management 

Stover, Col. Thomas, 12 

Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), 28-29, 

Information Facility. 

Engine. 

demonstration (SFMD), 349 

109, 125-133, 145, 151, 251, 318, 

390, 412, 434, 441 

-budget, 126-1 28 

-commercialization, 427 

-organization, 329 

-research, 364, 386, 434, 438 

-Space Shuttle activity, 31 1 

553 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Strategic Defense Office, 109 

Stratton, Rep. Samuel (D-NY), 116, 405 

Stratton Amendment, 405-406 

STS. See Space Transportation System. 

STSOC. See Space Transportation System 

Operations Contract. 

Study of Paper Fiber Formation in 

Microgravity, 358 

submarinelaunched ballistic missile 

(SLBM), 385. (See also missiles.) 

-SS-N-20, 385 

-SS-NX-23, 385 

submarines, 385 

-Delta IV class, 385 

-Typhoon class, 385 

subsonics, 3, 7 

Suitland, MD, 124, 223, 253 

Sullivan, Dr. Kathryn, 31-32, 102, 282, 

Sullivan, Thomas, 184 

SUMS. See shuttle upper atmosphere 

mass spectrometer. 

sun, 21, 47-48, 55, 65, 68-69, 72, 75, 

109, 244, 252 

Sundstrand Corp., 270 

Sunnyvale, CA, 258 

sun-synchronous orbit, 72 

super-loki datasonde dart, 73 

supercomputer, 187-189, 256 

supernovas, 39, 45-46, 399 

supersonic combustion ramjet (scramjet), 

supersonics, 3-4, 28-29, 96-98, 199 

Suwon Air Base, Seoul, South Korea, 

Sverdrup Technology, Inc., 221 

Swam, T.C., 430 

Sweden, 74, 135, 251, 396 

Swedish Bofers, 438 

Switzerland, 63, 72, 135, 251, 336 

Sydney, University of, Sydney, Australia, 

Symbolics Inc., 186 

synchrotron radiation, 39 

Syncom satellite, 227, 297, 361. (See 

300, 440 

4, 28, 96-97 

405 

322 

also satellite.) 

-I, 232 

-11, 232 

-111, 232, 234 

-IV, 231, 233, 299 

-IV-3, 221, 323 

-1V-4, 334 

-IV-5, 275 

System Development Corp., 190, 200, 

System Management American Corp., 

314 

190, 314 

T-38 aircraft, 34 

Taam, Dr. Ronald, 42 

tactical electronic warfare intermediate 

support system (TISS), 408 

tactical warfare system (TEWS), 408 

Taft, William Howard, IV, 23, 124 

Takeuchi, Reiichi, 264, 266 

TAL. See trans-Atlantic landing sites. 

Tasmania, Australia, 131 

Tasmania, University of, Australia, 172 

Tass News Agency, 137, 387-388, 

Taurus-NikeTomahawk rocket, 76 

Taurus-Orion rocket, 71, 74 

Taurus-Tomahawk rocket, 71 

Taylor, Edward, 3 

TDRS. See Tracking and Data Relay 

Satellite. 

TDRSS. See Tracking and Data Relay 

Satellite System. 

Teal Ruby experimental space-based 

aircraft detection system, 129, 31 7 

Technology Development of California, 

188 

Tedesco, Dr. Edward, 64 

Teledyne Brown Engineering Co., 395 

Teledyne Industries, Inc., 20 

Telesat Canada, 296, 299 

telescope, orbiting astrometric, 37 

Telestar 3-D, 330 

Tempel 2, 50-52 

Tennessee, University of, Space Institute, 

Terrier-Malemute rocket, 71, 131 -1 32 

tethered satellite system (TSS), 247-248 

TEWS. See tactical warfare system. 

Texas, 44, 64, 79, 207, 272, 416 

Texas, University of, 63, 67, 167, 184, 

391-392,394-396 

Nashville, TN, 19 

186, 41 6 

-Health Science Center, Southwestern 

Medical School, Dallas, TX, 279 

Texas A&M, College Station, TX, 167 

TF-34 engine, 5 

TF-39 engine, 12, 24 

Thagard, Dr. Norman, 278, 282, 375 

554 
Index 

Thatcher, Prime Minister Margaret, 

thermal dust emission, 58 

Thomas Jefferson School for Science and 

Technology, Alexandria, VA, 272 

Thomas, Gene, 338 

Thomas, John, 378 

Thomas, Peter, 67 

Thompson, Dr. Roger, 58 

Thomson-CSF, 159, 161 

Thorne, Lt. Comdr. Stephen, 33 

Thornton, William, 375 

3AAL. See Managed ThreeAxis Acoustic 

3M Corp., 303, 431 

132-1 33 

Levitator. 

-Material Sciences Laboratory, 3, 278 

-Riker Laboratories Division, 431 

Thuot, Lt. Pierre, 33 

THURIS. See human role in space study, 

Tiamet rocket, 199 

Tigershark. See F-20 Tigershark. 

tilt-rotor aircraft, 11-12, 15. (See also 

V-22 and XV-15 aircraft.) 

Tiros weather satellites, 214 

TISS. See tactical electronic warfare 

intermediate support system. 

Titan, 51, 67, 123, 131, 217, 344, 347, 

410, 436 

Titan-probelSaturn orbiter, 51 

Titan4 intercontinental ballistic missile 

Titan-ll rocket, 131 

Titan-34D7, 123, 410, 436 

Tokyo, Japan, 87, 93, 96, 163, 264 

TOMS. See Total Ozone Mapping 

Spectrometer. 

Torr, Dr. Marsha, 285 

Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer 

Toulouse, France, 146 

Townes, Charles, 55-56 

Townsend, John, 425 

TPL. See trans-Pacific landing site. 

TR-1 aircraft, 25 

tracking network, international, 173 

Tracking and Data Relay Satellite 

the. 

-fighters, 23, 404-406 

(ICBM), 217, 344, 347, 436 

(TOMS), 76 

(TDRS), 168, 247, 277-278, 

296-300 

Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System 

(TDRSS), 171 

trans-Atlantic landing (TAL) sites, 289 

transpacific landing (TPL) sites, 289, 

transatmospheric vehicles, 3-4, 7, 

Transit satellite, 228-229, 41 2 

Transpace Carriers, Inc., 345 

transport-aircraft flight efficiency, 4 

Transportation, U.S. Department of 

291 

28-29 

(DOT), 95, 185, 199, 345-346, 41 5, 

426 

Mission. 

TRMM. See Tropical Rainfall Measuring 

Trofimenko, Henry, 390 

Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission 

Truly, Commodore Richard, 33-34, 240 

TRW, Federal Systems Division, 258, 

Tsiolkovsky, Konstantin, 152 

TSS. See tethered satellite system. 

Tucson, AZ, 37, 58 

Tuebingen, University of, Federal 

Republic of Germany, 398 

turbofan, 10, 14 

turboprop, 10, 84 

turbulence, 71, 74, 83 

Turkey, 250-251 

Tuskegee University, AL, 446 

Typhoon missiles, 385 

Tyuratam, USSR, 387, 389, 435 

(TRMM), 252-253 

260, 420 

UARS. See Upper Atmosphere Research 

Uchinoura, Japan, 163 

UCS. See Union of Concerned 

UDF. See Unducted Fan demonstrator 

UKS. See UK Subsatellite. 

UK Subsatellite (UKS), 401 

Ultimate Field Trip, the, 274 

ultraviolet radiation detection, 48, 

Ulysses mission, 20-21, 62, 169, 197, 

252, 280-281, 290, 300, 412 

UN. See United Nations. 

Unducted Fan (UDF) demonstrator 

Unesco, 222 

Satel I i te. 

Scientists. 

engine. 

75-76, 244 

engine, 15 

555 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

Unified Space Command, 440, 442 

Unimation Puma manipulator, 41 1 

Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), 

Union of Soviet Socialist Repuhlics 

125-126 

(USSR), 23, 41, 100, 109, 112-115, 

120-121, 125, 127, 130, 137, 151, 

155, 158, 220, 222, 228, 255, 268, 

283, 295, 315-316, 319, 329, 

385-399, 413, 419 

-Academy of Sciences, 100 

-Biomedical Problems Institute, 393 

-embassy in Helsinki, Finland, 385 

-Glavkosmos, 394 

-military power, 385 

-space plane, 388 

-Space Research Institute, 65 

-Venera-Halley space probe, 63 

United Aircraft, 81 

IJnited Airlines, 93-94 

United Kingdom, 48, 53, 59, 72, 75, 

78, 84, 89, 97, 119, 135, 137, 143, 

398, 401, 414 

159, 214, 251, 255-256, 263-264, 

-Department of Trade and Industry, 

-Bureau of Ordinance, 177 

-Information Technology, 255 

-Kettering Group, 397 

-Meteorological Office, 72, 159-160 

133 

United Nations (UN), 105, 122, 296, 

-Legal Subcommittee for Outer 

United States-United Kingdom joint 

Working Group on Atomic 

Weapons, 179 

United Technologies Corp., 81 

440 

Space, 105 

-Chemical Systems Division, 368 

-Hamilton Standard Division, 15 

- Norden Systems Division, 439 

-United Space Boosters, Inc.’s Booster 

Production Co., 366 

upper air wind information, 197 

Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite 

Uranus, 38, 51, 65, 67-68, 168, 178, 

Urban, Dr. Eugene, 332, 381 

uresco ultrasonic immersion testing 

system, 3 

Usada, japan, 44 

WARS), 77-78 

252 

USS Detroit, 228 

USS Saratoga, 111 

USSR. See Union of Soviet Socialist 

Republics. 

Utah, 275, 277, 296, 367-368 

Utrecht, University of (the Netherlands), 

Utsman, Thomas, 301, 312 

40 

V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, 12, 15 

Valentine, Ed, 17, 355 

Van Allen, Dr. James, 243, 41 7-418 

van Allen Belts, 77 

van den Berg, Dr. Lodewijk, 325-326, 

van Hoften, James, 227, 230-231, 

Vandenberg AFB, CA, 27, 114, 120, 

375 

332-333 

123, 192, 199, 228, 240, 278, 

321, 335, 363, 365, 367, 371 

-Space Launch Complex-6, 286 

-Western Space and Missile Center, 

287-289, 291, 294-295, 300, 305, 

72, 128 

Vandenkerckhove, Jean, 2 13 

Vanderhoff, john, 100 

Vannier, Dr. Michael, 209-210 

vapor crystal growth system (VCGS), 374 

VAS. See VISSR Atmospheric Sounder. 

Vasyutin, Lt. Col. Vladimir, 392-395, 

vay Speybroek, Dr. Leon, 40 

VCAP. See Vehicle Charging and 

Potential Experiment. 

VCCS. See vapor crystal growth system. 

Vega, 53 

Vega spacecraft, 65, 137, 173, 396 

Vehicle Charging and Potential 

Experiment (VCAP), 381 

Vela, Rudolfo Neri, 339 

Vellinger, John, 249 

Vendervender junior High School, 

Venus, 21, 41, 61, 63, 65, 137, 149, 

Vernadsky Institute of Sciences, 244 

Very Large Array telescope, 57 

very-large scale integration (VLSI), 103 

very long baseline (VLB), 51 

Very Long Baseline Interferometry 

397 

Parkersburg, WV, 272 

173, 244-245 

(VLBI), 63 

556 
Index 

Vessey, Gen. John, Jr., 438 

Veterans Administration Medical Center, 

VFT. See Spacelab Verification Flight 

Vickers-Armstrong, Ltd. 185 

Viking spacecraft, 66, 99, 235, 412, 440 

Vikmanis, Maris, 13 

Vikram Sarabhai Space Center, 

Trivandrum, India, 284 ' 

Virgin Islands, 271 

Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 

Blacksburg, VA, 167 

Virginia, University of, Charlottesville, 

VA, 42 

VISSR Atmospheric Sounder (VAS), 

226-227 

VLB. See very long baseline. 

VLBI. See Very Long Baseline 

Vlcek, Brian, 369 

VLSI. See very-large scale integration. 

volcanic eruptions, 76. (See also 

individual volcanoes.) 

Volkov, Aleksandr, 395, 397 

von Braun, Werner, !51 

Voyager spacecraft, 62, 65, 168, 178, 

180, 252, 412 

2 79 

Test. 

Interferometry. 

Wade, James, Jr., 407 

Waggoner, Miles, 433 

Wales, Robert, 220 

Walker, C.B.F., 43 

Walker, Charles, 279, 322 

Walker, David, 280 

Walker, Richard, 38 

Wallop, Sen. Malcolm (R-WY), 41 3 

Wallops, John, 200 

Wallops Flight Facility. See Goddard 

Space Flight Center. 

Wallops Island, VA, 200, 41 1 

Wallops P-3 search aircraft, 74, 147 

Wallops Range Control Center. See 

Goddard Space Flight Center. 

Wallops Skyvan aircraft, 75 

Wallops Station, VA, 223 

Wang, Dr. Taylor, 214, 327, 375, 434 

Warner, Sen. John (R-VA), 11 1, 386 

Washington, DC, 16-1 7, 29, 39, 41, 

102, 113, 125, 191, 233, 240-241, 

255, 271-272, 432-433 

Washington Space Business Roundtable, 

Washington, University of, Seattle, WA, 

Washington University Medical Cpnter, 

wastewater treatment technology, 

Waterville, ME, 75, 77 

Watkins, Adm. James, 349-350, 437 

Watterson, Maj. John Brett, 120, 322 

Wawatobi, Indonesia, 2 12 

Webb, David, 440 

Weber State College, Ogden, UT, 219 

Webster, Christopher, 80 

weightlessness, 152, 248, 350-352 

Weinberger, Secretary of Defense 

2 70 

167, 220 

St. Louis, MO, 209 

207-208 

Caspar, 1 13, 115-1 16, 120, 126, 

132-133, 295, 316, 385, 437-438 

Weitz, Paul, 33 

Wenger, Niki, 272 

West German Aerospace Research 

Establishment (DFVLR), 335, 

375-376, 380, 432 

West Germany. See Federal Republic of 

West Lafayette, IN, 272 

West Virginia, 16, 44, 272 

Westar satellites, 19, 33, 223, 276, 278 

Western Samoa, 220 

Western Space and Missile Center. See 

Vandenberg AFB. 

Western Union, 278 

Westinghouse Electric Corp., 144 

Westwood Elementary School, 

Friendswood, TX, 272 

Wetherill, Dr. George, 244-245 

WFPC. See wide-field/planetary camera. 

Wheelon, Albert, 232-233 

White, Dr. David, 188 

White, Edward, 34 

White, Dr. Simon, 43 

White, Terry, 337 

White House 

Germany. 

-Advisory Committee on Arms 

-Office of Science and Technology 

-Press Office, 203 

-Science Council, Federal Laboratory 

Control and Disarmament, 181 

Policy, 3, 180 

Review Panel, 424 

White Mountains, AK, 75 

557 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985 

White Sands Missile Range, NM, 1 19, 

131, 172, 243, 247, 318, 436 

Whitehead, Victor, 409-410 

Whitmire, Daniel, 38 

Wichita State University (WSU), Wichita, 

Wick, Charles, 222 

widefield/planetary camera (WFPC), 48 

Widick, Fritz, 321 

Widick, H.W., 294 

Wilkening, Dr. Laurel, 52, 440 

Williams, Clifton C., 33-34 

Williams, Comdr. Donald, 282, 296, 

Whams, Jane, 33 

Wilson, Dr. Andrew, 40 

wind shear, 83, 88 

Winkler, Martin, 21 

Wisconsin, 85, 369 

Wisconsin, University of, Madison, WI, 

KS, 9 

322 

167 

-Washburn Observatory, 283 

Wisconsin Ultraviolet Photopolarimetry 

Experiment, 284 

Wisdom, Jack, 67 

Wisniewski, R., 343 

WMO. See World Meteorological 

Organization. 

Wolbach, Wendy, 147 

Wolverton, Dr. Billy, 207 

woman astronaut, first American 

-as prime payload specialist, 280 

-in space, 102, 151, 281 

-to walk in space, 32, 440 

Wood, H. William, 184-185 

Woodgate, Dr. Bruce, 58 

World Administrative Radio Conference, 

141, 229 

World Meteorological Organization 

World Radio Conference, 141 

Wornick Corp., 190, 314 

Wright Aeronautical Laboratory, 191 

Wright Patterson AFB, OH, 14 

(WMO), 71-72 

X-29 aircraft, 6-8, 11, 168 

XBQM-106 unmanned vehicle, 

Xian, People’s Republic of China, 434 

Xiannian, President Li, People’s Republic 

of China, 214 

Xichang launching center, People’s 

Republic of China, 21 5 

X-ray timing explorer (XTE), 189 

XTE. See X-ray timing explorer. 

Xue, Li, 213, 215 

XV-15 tilt-rotor research aircraft, 11-12, 

X-wing rotorcraft, 6 

1 1 7-1 18 

15-16 

Yager, Col. Walter, 286 

Yale University, New Haven, CT, 42 

Yeager, Brig. Gen. Charles, 101, 151, 

Yeager, Clennis, 101 

Yeomans, Dr. Don, 43 

Young Astronauts Program, 31-32, 421 

Young Cosmonauts, 31 

Young, Dr. Donald, 210-21 1 

Young, John, 91, 278, 282, 322 

Yugoslavia, 158 

440 

zero gravity, 100, 189, 243, 256, 425 

558 
The NASA History Series 

HISTORIES 

Anderson, Frank W., Jr., Orders of Magnitude: A History of NACA and NASA, 

Benson, Charles D., and William Barnaby Faherty, Moonpart: A History of Apollo 

Bilstein, Roger E., Stages to Saturn: A Technological History of the ApollolSaturn Launch 

Boone, W. Fred, NASA Office of Defense Affairs: The First Five Years (NASA HHR-32, 

Brooks, Courtney G., James M. Grimwood, and Loyd S. Swenson, Jr., Chariots for 

Byers, Bruce K., Destination Moon: A History of the Lunar Orbiter Program (NASA 

Compton, W. David, and Charles D. Benson, Living and Working in Space: A History 

Corliss, William R., NASA Sounding Rockets, 1958-1 968: A Historical Summary 

Ezell, Edward Clinton, and Linda Neuman Ezell, On Mars: Exploration dthe Red Planet, 

Ezell, Edward Clinton, and Linda Neuman Ezell, The Partnership: A History of the 

Green, Constance McL., and Milton Lomask, Vanguard: A History (NASA SP-4202, 

Hacker, Barton C., and James W. Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans: A History 

Hall, R. Cargill, Lunar Impact: A History of Project Ranger (NASA SP-4210, 1977). 

Hallion, Richard P., On the Frontier: FLight Research at Dryden, 1946-1981 (NASA 

Hansen, James R., Engineer in Charge: A History of the Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, 

Hartman, Edwin P., Adventures in Research: A History of Ames Research Center, 

Levine, Arnold, Managing NASA in the Apollo Era (NASA SP-4102, 1982). 

Muenger, Elizabeth A., Searching the Horizon: A History of Ames Research Center, 

Newell, Homer E., Beyond the Atmosphere: Early Years of Space Science (NASA 

Pitt, John A., The Human Factor: Biomedicine in the Manned Space Program to 1980 

1915-1980 (NASA SP-4403, 2d ed., 1981). 

Launch Facilities and Operations (NASA SP-4204, 1978). 

Vehicles (NASA SP-4206, 1980). 

1970, multilith). 

Apollo: A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft (NASA SP-4205, 1979). 

TM X-3487, 1977, multilith). 

of Skylab (NASA SP-4208, 1983). 

(NASA SP-4401, 1971). 

1958-1978 (NASA SP-4212, 1984). 

ApolleSoyuz Test Project (NASA SP-4209, 1978). 

1970; also Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1971). 

of Project Gemini (NASA SP-4203, 1977). 

SP-4303, 1984). 

19 17- 1958 (NASA SP-4305). 

1940- 1965 (NASA SP-4302, 1970). 

1940-1 976 [NASA SP-4304, 1985). 

SP-4211, 1980). 

(NASA SP-4213, 1985). 

559 
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1935 

Roland, Alex, Model Research: The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 

Rosenthal, Alfred, Venture into Space: Early Years of Goddard Space Flight Center 

Rosholt, Robert L., An Administrative History of NASA, 1958-1 963 (NASA SP-4101, 

Sloop, John L., Liquid Hydrogen as a Propulsion Fuel, 1945- 1959 (NASA SP-4404, 

Swenson, Loyd S., Jr., James M. Grimwd, and Charles C. Alexander, This New Ocean: 

1915-7958 (NASA SP-4103, 1985). 

(NASA SP-4301, 1968). 

1966). 

1978). 

A History of Project Mercury (NASA SP-4201, 1966). 

REFERENCE WORKS 

Aeronautics and Space Report of the President, annual volumes for 1975-1982. 

The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology (NASA SP-4009, vol. 1, 1969; vol. 2, 1973; 

VOI. 3, 1976; VO~. 4, 1978). 

Astronautics and Aeronautics: A Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy, 

annual volumes 1961-1 978, with an earlier summary volume, Aeronautics and 

Astronautics, 195 1- 1960. 

Dickson, Katherine M., ed., History of Aeronautics and Astronautics: A Preliminary 

Bibliography (NASA HHR-29, 1968, multilith). 

Hall, R. Cargill, ed., Essays on the History of Rocketry and Astronautics: Proceedings 

of the Third through the Sixth History Symposia of the International Academy of 

Astronautics (NASA CP-2014, 2 vols., 1977). 

Hall, R. Cargill, Project Ranger: A Chronology (JPUHR-2, 1971, multilith). 

Looney, John J., ed., Bibliography of Space Books and Articles from Non-Aerospace 

Roland, Alex F., A Guide to Research in NASA History (NASA HHR-50,6th ed., 1982, 

Skylab: A Chronology (NASA SP-4011, 1977). 

Van Nimmen, Jane, and Leonard C. Bruno, with Robert L. Rosholt, NASA Historical 

Wells, Helen T., Susan H. Whiteley, and Carie E. Karegeannes, Origins of NASA Names 

journals, 1957-1977 (NASA HHR-51, 1979, multilith). 

available from NASA History Office). 

Data Book 1958-1968, vol. 1, NASA Resources (NASA SP-4012, 1976). 

(NASA SP-4402, 1976). 

Recent volumes are available from Superintendent of Documents, Government 

Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402; early volumes from National Technical 

Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161. 

560