Conference 7.286::space

    re: .0's trivia question
    
    I haven't any idea, but here's my guess: Hughes.
        John Sauter

    re:0
    I dont know either but only because they seem to be very active
    in publishing a satellite log I would say TRW but they may only
    be a sub contractor
    
    I can add a trivia question however
    what is the oldest satellite still in orbit
    
    

    	Vanguard II.
    
    	Now, what is the oldest satellite anywhere in space that is
    still functioning?  (I'm not sure about the answer, but I have a
    good idea.)
    
    	Larry
    

Ford Aerospace?

I worked for them on a satellite in the mid '60s.  It was then
known as Philco WDL, AKA Philco-Ford.  Think some of those birds
are still up there.

    Good guesses, but no cigar.
    
    The answer is linked to the topic of the note. As of early 1986,
    51% of all US satellites had been built by Lockheed, who also build
    the Agena. They quietly build most of the USAF/CIA satellites. TRW
    are tied in on a lot of them, but more in the operational side.
    This is probably an extension of the 'watchman/byeman' security
    concept where the person who knows the capabilities of the satellite
    does not know the targets and vice versa.
    
    If you eliminate military sats, my guess would also be Hughes.
    
    gary

    The oldest functioning satellite anywhere?  Might that be Pioneer
    n orbiting the sun?
    
    And just a comment on the Agenas:  They did not have a very good
    record in the Gemini program as I recall.  They (Atlas-Agena variant)
    were used as rendezvous and docking targets for the Gemini spacecraft
    (which were launched on Titans).  As I recall, a number of tries
    failed in various ways.  Some failed to make orbit; some made orbit
    but did not open up their docking port correctly (the famous
    "clamshell"... this is of course not the fault of the Agena).
    
    More trivia:  When was the only time that the US has had two crewed,
    separately-launched spacecraft in orbit at the same time, and how
    does it relate to this topic?
    
    Burns
    

    	GEMINI 6 and 7 in 1965.  GEMINI 6 was supposed to dock with
    an AGENA target, but the AGENA was destroyed at launch.  NASA decided
    to go with a manned rondezvous instead.
    
        Larry
    

    The oldest satellite in Earth orbit is Luna.  It's been there a
    *very* long time.
        John Sauter

    ok some interesting ans to the oldest earth satellite
    from Satellite Situation Report Nasa vol 27 no 1 march 31,1987
       
    .3 with Vangauard 2 was close but
    
    Vanguard 1 is still in orbit launch 17 Mar 1958
    Vanguard 2 was not launch until     17 Feb 1959 about a year later
      and it is still in orbit
    
    as for the HELIOCENTRIC ORBITS
    LUNA 1 launch on 2 JAN 1959 (USSR) is the oldest with
    PIONEER 4 launch on 3 MAR 1959 (US) being next oldest and
     the oldest US Heliocentric object
    
    and one last point there are
    1677 payload objects still in orbit
    4999 debris  object  still in orbit
    
    and 11187 object have decayed from orbit
    
    and 24 countries/organization have at one time had payloads in space
    
    anyone for a space junk yard 
    john
    
    

    	I just remembered reading somewhere (I can't remember right
    now) that the very first objects into interplanetary space was NOT
    LUNA 1, but fragments of metal shot into space by a single stage
    rocket from the US in April of 1957.  I wish I could remember more
    about it; can anyone?
    
    	Larry
    

    RE: .6 and .7
    
    While it was Gemini 6 & 7, Gemini 7 was launched first.  This is
    the only time, to my knowlege, that manned missions were launched
    out of sequence.
    
    jim
    

    re .11:  You are right about 7 being launched first.  It was intended
    to be a "long duration" (about 2 weeks) mission.  G6 was launched
    2nd to rendezvous with 7.  This was also the time we had our plastic
    bag problem...G6 shut down a few seconds after ignition (but before
    liftoff, thank heaven).  They discovered that there was a plastic
    bag that had been left somewhere in the engine, although I am not
    sure that was the immediate cause of the shutdown.  There was a
    plug that fell out early.
    
    However, I don't think you are correct about out-of-sequence flights.
    For example, the Challenger flight was 51L (forget the letter).
    However, Bill Nelson's flight a couple weeks before was 61A or some
    such.  In other words, the Challenger flight was scheduled for fiscal
    year 85, but got delayed to 86, while Nelson's flight got off in
    the fy that was planned.
    
    Burns
    

    Flight 51L was launched in January, 1986.  I am not sure what NASA
    uses for its fyscal year but January, 1986 would be FY:85 at DEC. 
    FY:86 begins the first week of July, 1986
    
    jim
    

    Its FY:87 that starts 1 July 1986, isn't it??
    

    I think the flight numbering has nothing to do with reality. Rather
    it is a function of what year's flight budget it came out of, or
    something like that. I have something at home that explains how
    the numbering scheme works and if I can remember what it is, I'll
    look it up.
    
    gary

    re: .14
    
    Ya got me there... :-(  (and I thought I was being sooooo smart...)
    
    jim
    ;-)

    
    The federal govt's fy begins in October.  I think that FY86 begins
    in October 85.
    
    The numbering scheme is as follows:
    
    		5 1  L
    		^ ^  ^
    		| |  |
    		| |  -----The "Lth" (i.e. 12th) mission of the fy
    		| --------Launch from KSC (Vandenberg is 2)
    		----------Planned launch in FY 85
    
    So one can order missions in their planned launch order by sorting
    first by FY and then within each year, sorting by letter.
    
    The mission that was launched just before 51L was 61A.  Thus 51L
    was out of order.  (There was also one or 2 '85 missions that were
    out of order within 85, and there was at least one that was dropped.
    I think either J or K was not flown.)
    
    Now, that we have gotten sufficiently off the track of Agenas, I
    might as well also add that they are dropping this BS numbering
    scheme.  The next mission is called STS-26.
    
    Burns

        NASA (and I think the entire federal bureaucracy) starts its
        fiscal year October 1st. The first 9 shuttle missions were
        numbered STS-n, since then they are coded xy-a where: 
        
        	x is the last digit of the scheduled fiscal year
        	y is the launch site (1=KSC, 2=Vandenburg)
        	a is a sequence letter
        
        Canceled mission codes are not reused, thus there have been both
        out of sequence missions, as well as never flown missions.