Conference 7.286::space

    Apparently, the two satellites were tests of the laser system(?)
    WBGH reported that one of the satellites "successfully destroyed"
    the other. At least this is what I caught by "peripheral hearing"
    (I wasn't listening closely).
    
    --- jerry

    	I wonder when they will launch a new spy satellite to assist
    the only one we have left watching the Soviet Union?
    
    	If the ones launched now are killer satellites, does this mean
    we HAVE an operational LASER SPACE BATTLE SYSTEM????!!!!
    
    	Larry
    

    Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that the
    'destruct' test was a 'mass' test.  One craft was caused to collide
    with the other at high speed to see the effects of the energy released
    with a high speed collision.
    
    jim
    

    As I said in .0 there is a lot of noise about the mission objectives,
    which is why I declined to include any such rumours.
    
    I beleive the SDIO is prohibited from using satellites as target
    for their experiments after they blew away a satellite that exceeded
    its design life but was still returning useful data. I guess that
    is why they carried their target along for whatever the test was.
    
    gary

    	Yes, the Air Force destroyed a perfectly good satellite, P-78,
    which had discovered numerous comets that flew near and into the
    Sun, which were never seen by Earth-bound astronomers.
    
    	See what war does to science.....
    
    	Larry
    

    The Sept 8 AvWeek said nothing about the Delta launch.  Military
    censors had them by the ****s?
    
    In any case, I think that the banned program is the antisatellite
    device which launches from under an F-xx fighter, zooms up, and
    crashes into a sat.  I believe that said ASAT is not under the SDIO,
    whereas this Delta launch is claimed to be.  Thus perhaps it does
    not fall under the congressional ban (in letter, at least).
    
    Burns
    

    My understanding was that any ASAT activity against existing satellites
    was banned. While it was the F-15 launched ASAT that caused the
    fuss the ban was general.
    
    This can be circumvented by carrying your own target and intercepting
    it before it completes one orbit. The Soviets have used this technique
    in the past.
    
    gary

    RE: p78
    
    I thought that the sattilite that was destroyed was also carrried
    up in the same launch...at least that's what the paper here said.

    	No - you are confusing the recent Delta launch with the P-78
    incident, which occured over a year ago with another military
    satellite.
    
    	Larry
    

      According to the new AWST the delta carried two satellites. After
    tracking an Aries launched from White Sands the two satellites
    collided in a kinetic energy experiment. The test was successful
    and both satellites were distroyed.

      George

    Where was it in AWST?  I could not find anything.  Maybe I am going
    blind, or my prejudices force me not to read SDI articles!
    
    Burns
    

      I got a few copies in a few days, read them, and tossed them out.
    I'll try to get down to the library and look it up if I get a chance.

      George

Associated Press Fri 12-SEP-1986 03:37                       Star Wars Launch

New Details of ``Star Wars'' Experiment Released

WASHINGTON (AP) - Pentagon officials say the recent secret test of ``Star
Wars'' satellites in space shows that the proposed anti-missile system is
closer to reality than many people believe. 

The experiment's success ``will lead, just inexorably, to the kinds of
capability that we are all trying to move to in this research program as
quickly as possible,'' Lt. Gen. James A. Abrahamson, Star Wars director,
said Thursday. 

Added Lt. Col. Mike Rendine, the Air Force officer who served as the
project manager, ``I personally believe from the data I've seen that our
job's going to be a lot easier than we thought,'' 

Abrahamson said the main objective of last Friday's experiment had been to
obtain data on what rocket plumes look like in space beyond the earth's
atmosphere. That information is essential, he explained, for the
development of sensors and guidance systems for small rockets that could be
launched from ``garages in space'' to shoot down enemy missiles. 

Without the pressure of the earth's atmosphere to keep a rocket plume
streaming in a straight line from the bottom of a missile, the plume
expands and even envelopes a missile flying through space, the general
said. It thus becomes critical to develop sensors that can guide a rocket
to impact against a missile body without being confused by the ball of hot
exhaust gases, he said. 

The broad outlines of the $150 million experiment, which began with the
successful launch of a NASA Delta rocket from Cape Canaveral, Fla., had
been disclosed previously by officials speaking anonymously. 

For roughly 2 1/2 hours after launch, the second and third stages of the
Delta danced around each other in orbits about 138 miles above the earth's
surface. In the process, they collected data on what solid-fuel as well as
liquid-fuel boosters looked like - silhouetted against the backgrounds of
both space and the Earth. One of them detected and tracked from a distance
of 200 miles another rocket launched from the White Sands Missile Range in
New Mexico. 

Abrahamson offered new details of the work Thursday and also released
pictures of portions of the experiment, including footage of its
spectacular end when the two Delta stages were sent into a deliberate
collision. 

Among Thursday's disclosures, as outlined by Abrahamson and Rendine: 

-From start to finish, the equipment needed for the experiment was designed
and fabricated within 14 months - almost matching Abrahamson's goal of one
year. 

-The second stage of the Delta was carrying ``the world's first space-based
laser radar,'' Rendine said. The device was described as low-powered,
incapable of use as a weapon, but providing extremely accurate range data.
The laser radar was used to point and steer the other sensors on the second
stage. 

-More than 1 million lines of new computer software, or programming
instructions, had to be written for the mission. The computer instructions
worked flawlessly, Abrahamson said, offering a rebuttal to scientific
critics who maintain it is impossible to develop a computerized control
system for a large-scale Star Wars system that would function with
confidence. 

-The experiment was the most complex ever attempted by the United States
from the standpoint of communications and coordination, Rendine said. It
involved 38 radars on the earth's surface, six aircraft flying at high
altitude in various parts of the world to receive information beamed down
by the spacecraft, and 31 different satellite communication links tying the
monitoring system together. 

The Pentagon also said that a modified Patriot missile normally used to
shoot down airplanes successfully intercepted and destroyed a tactical
ballistic missile during an experiment Thursday at the White Sands Missile
Range in New Mexico. 

Thursday's test marked the first time a Patriot missile had actually
intercepted a tactical missile in flight. Earlier tests had successfully
demonstrated a modified Patriot could detect and track an enemy missile. 

The modified Patriot was fired against a Lance missile and intercepted it
at an altitude of 26,000 feet and about eight miles down range, the
Pentagon said. 

    Does anyone remember the good old days when a "successful" launch
    meant achieving orbit WITHOUT hitting anything? :-)
    
    						-Brian
    
    P.S. They claim a million lines of new code and it worked? What
         do they drink for breakfast in the pentagon?
    

    Ex-Lax.
    

    Lessee, it took 10**6 lines to make two widgets launched into the
    same orbit on the same rocket hit each other.  How many lines does
    it take to hit something launched on the other side of the earth
    and actively trying NOT to be hit?
    
    Burns

    I think you have missed the point of their experiment.  What
    they were able to do was to write a large (operating system
    size?) chunk of software which DID manage to work correctly
    when used the first time.  Sure, it is no where as near as
    complex as what a real SDI system would entail, but give
    them credit for achieving one of their major objectives.
    
    You might also be interested to know there WAS some amount
    of manuvering done by each vehicle before the end of the
    "experiment".  I don't know how much, but in a simplistic
    sense doesn't that qualify as trying not to be hit?
    

    Lighten up, software people are cynics. My point was that I am the
    architect for an operating system with about 10^6 lines of code,
    and I barely trust the sucker to walk and chew gum. I don't know
    of anyone in a position like mine who would feel comfortable with
    their million lines of code being the only thing between them and
    an incoming nuke.
    
    						-Brian
    
    P.S. If they really can produce that much code with few errors,
         that may qualify as the single most important spinoff of
         military technologies, assuming they'll tell us how they did
    	 it.

From the stories I've heard about developing military software (which I admit
are relatively few), I think they spend multiple times the money testing the
code as they do writing it.  I suspect we could accomplish similar statistics
if one took say a year or two and a couple hundred test engineers to test 
every version of VMS before releasing it.

Come to think of it, how does the military find someone willing to do that much
testing?

-mark

    	It's called LOTS of money!
    
    	Larry
    

    Maybe a good example is the software for the general-purpose computer
    on board the space shuttle.  As I understand the process, they spend
    several orders of magnitude more time testing than writing.  One
    of the few areas for which NASA was applauded in the Roger's Commission
    report was in the area of computer software.  After all, the computers
    and software in STS-1 *did* work correctly the first time (if we
    overlook the initial problems getting them to synchronize correctly).
    
    If you check out some of the government's "rules" for software you
    will notice an incredible amount of specification required for even
    the most "trivial" subroutine.  How many times have you (or I) made
    a "one line" change or added a "few line" subroutine which broke
    something?
    
    I too wonder where they find people who enjoy (?) testing software.
    It takes all kinds ...
    

    I agree that they put much of their effort into testing.
    
    As for no schedule, I'd point out that their million lines have
    been under construction a lot less time than any million lines of
    DEC's.
    
    They certainly don't entice people via money, because the government
    just isn't all that competitive with the computer industry. How
    do they get people to do testing?
    						-Brian
    

    re .22:  The shuttle software was written by IBM (to govt specs,
    I assume), not directly by the govt.
    
    Burns
    

    I was aware IBM wrote the shuttle computer software, and yes,
    it was done to exacting government specs.  I just wanted to
    illustrate that massive amounts of software could be written
    which would have a very high probability of success the first
    time it was used IF enough of the right type of testing was
    done.
    

    I am one of those wierdos who enjoys testing.  I do a lot of software
    testing for Digital, and it doesn't make me rich here either!
    (It also doesn't win me friends among the developers.)
    
    With enough time and money, it is possible to put together a very
    good testing environment, one that would give you a lot of confidence
    that your software was working.  I would enjoy doing the testing
    for a large software project, if I wasn't constrained by time or
    money.  I would also want one other thing: the authority to hold
    the product if it didn't meet the testing goals.  That is the
    one problem I have found with the testing philosophy within Digital:
    even though test procedures are often put in place, failure to pass
    the tests is generally not a good reason to hold the product!
        John Sauter

    I should have been more clear in .23:  I was responding to .22,
    which said, "They certainly don't entice people via money, because
    the government <doesn't pay as much as private industry>".  I was
    only pointing out that it WAS done in private industry.
    
    Burns
    

Another comment about testing is that if you KNOW you're going to have to do
a lot of it and final shipment DOES depend of successful completion of the tests
people would hopefully put in a lot of hooks to facilitate the testing process,
something we at DEC could learn a lot from.

But I digress from the original topic...

-mark

Associated Press Mon 17-NOV-1986 14:36                    ``Star Wars''Launch

  ``Star Wars'' Launch in September Delayed for Fear of Hitting
                        Soviet Station

   CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) - The launch of a ``Star Wars'' space
mission in September was delayed because of concerns that one of the
two payloads might collide with an unmanned Soviet space station, an
industry magazine reported Monday. 

   Aviation Week & Space Technology said Soviet ground controllers
changed the course of the Salyut 7 station just hours before a Delta
rocket was to lift off from Cape Canaveral on Sept. 5. The Delta
rocket carried two satellites that were to destroy each other to test
missile intercept techniques for the Strategic Defense Initiative. 

   ``Had the Delta launch proceeded on its original schedule - and had
the two payloads missed their intercept - there was a small chance one
of the SDI spacecraft could have collided with the Soviet space
station,'' said the magazine, citing sources. 

   The unexpected Salyut 7 maneuver ``forced the U.S. to undertake an
extensive space collision avoidance analysis,'' said the magazine,
quoting sources. ``The results of the time-consuming computer run did
not become available until the Delta countdown was well under way. The
chance of a collision, while small, violated SDI safety guidelines and
forced a time-critical decision to abandon the original launch window
and use a less desirable launch opportunity only one minute in
duration.'' 

   The rocket lifted off later in the day and the two satellites
destroyed one another in a successful intercept after circling the
globe for four hours. 

   Aviation Week said the Soviets were apparently not trying to
influence the SDI test but were elevating Salyut 7, unmanned at the
time, into a higher storage orbit. 

   ``There is evidence, however, that the Soviets did attempt to
monitor the test and launched one or more aircraft to trail U.S. Air
Force aircraft tracking the test over the Indian Ocean,'' the magazine
said. 

   The report said an Air Force Advanced Range Instrumentation
Aircraft, a converted C-135, ``was flying above its Indian Ocean
station, about 1,000 miles from Australia, when its crew saw another
aircraft enter the extremely remote area, linger for a period and
point a large searchlight at the U.S. tracking aircraft. U.S. Air
Force personnel believe it was a Soviet intercept aircraft.'' 

   The magazine said the next SDI space mission to be launched from
Cape Canaveral, also on a Delta, will involve at least seven different
research tests important to development of a ballistic missile defense
system. 

    re .28:  One of the most intelligent decisions the military has
    made of late. :-(
    
    Burns

    the latest SDI test satellite
    
    this should be visuable over the next few days in north
    eastern USA


1989 026A       SDI TEST
1 19911U 89026  A 89085.08523263 -.00021463          -86020-3 0   043
2 19911 047.6917 035.9824 0015147 330.1753 029.6672 15.24266493   170
    
    
               

VNS TECHNOLOGY WATCH:                           [Mike Taylor, VNS Correspondent]
=====================                           [Nashua, NH, USA               ]

                         Wooden Stake Spacecraft

    The Delta Star Sensor Satellite launched from Cape Canaveral March 
    24 was dubbed "Wooden Stake Spacecraft" to boost morale in the
    industry government team that built the payload.  The group was
    stung by the derisive White House reaction to a SDIO proposal for
    a joint US-Soviet team to retrieve a package from the Delta Star
    and deliver it the Soviet MIR space station.  As reported, a White
    House official kissed it off with the comment that "the concept's
    got a wooden stack driven through its heart now, but you never
    know what's going to come out the SDI during the next full Moon."
    McDonnell Douglas proceeded to erect signs around its Delta Star
    assembly area in California reading "Wooden Stake Space Factory."
    Mission director Col. Michael Rendine ordered "Wooden Stake
    Spacecraft" painted on the launch vehicle.

      (AW&ST Editor's note: The Moon was full three days before the
       latest Delta Star launch.)
      {AW&ST April 3, 1989 pg. 17}

                              Stealth Drone

    The Japanese Air Self-Defense Force plans to begin development of
    a stealth reconnaissance drone.  The air-launched drone, 2.5m wide
    and 4.3m long, would incorporate a delta wing and low observable
    technology.  Equipped with television and infrared cameras and an
    electronic jamming system, the vehicle could be controlled from an
    aircraft or ground station and recovered by helicopter.

      {AW&ST April 3, 1989}

  <><><><><><><>   VNS Edition : 1796    Thursday 13-Apr-1989   <><><><><><><>