Conference 7.286::space

    	Other notes on the CLEMENTINE probe may be found in SPACE Topics
    344 and 359.
    
    	I felt it was about time this fascinating mission received its
    own Topic.
    

From:	US1RMC::"baalke@kelvin.Jpl.Nasa.Gov" "Ron Baalke"  8-SEP-1993 
To:	sci-space-news@uunet.uu.net
CC:	
Subj:	DSPSE (Clementine) Update - 09/08/93

                         DSPSE (CLEMENTINE) STATUS REPORT
                                September 8, 1993

     A DSPSE MRT (Mission Readiness Test) was performed yesterday at
the DSN (Deep Space Network) sites in Canberra and Madrid.  All test
objectives for telemetry and tracking were met.  Telemetry was flowed
to NOCC (Network Operations Control Center) using the TSA (Telemetry
Simulation Assembly) as the data source.  Tracking data (doppler and
ranging) was also verified.  The command portion of the test was not
performed due to the CPA (Command Processing Assembly) project files
for DSPSE not being available yet. 

    The DSPSE (Deep Space Program Science Experiment) spacecraft, also
known as Clementine, will be launched next January.  It will orbit the
Moon for a couple of months and then flyby the near-Earth asteroid
Geographos.  The DSPSE mission is jointly sponsored by both BMDO
(Ballist Missile Defense Organization) and NASA. 

     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab | 
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Nobody notices when things
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | go right.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 

Call me whatever.

I believe Clemintine is a very much 'on the cheap' mission, we're talking 10's
of millions here, not hundreds.

Dollars to doughnuts, the folks at BMDO (which I think is now the can-do
organization NASA was) are figuring out how to send a mission to Mars, maybe
with 2 spacecraft, to get some geoscience and act as relay's for the Russian
mission for under $50M.

Tony

Article: 73728
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: malin@esther.la.asu.edu (Mike Malin)
Subject: MOC PI Comment Re: Use of Clementine II at Mars
Sender: news@ennews.eas.asu.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: Mars Observer TES Project, ASU, Tempe AZ
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1993 04:01:50 GMT
 
Lou Wheatcraft (lsw@bonnie.jsc.nasa.gov) commented:
 
   Studies show that with modifications, Clementine II can meet >70% of the
   Science Objectives with a smaller spacecraft at reduced cost. These studies
   and design changes are already complete - parts could be on order within
   weeks of turn on. By using Clementine II the launch costs are much smaller
   - the baseline is a Titan IIG, the same as for Clementine I. (Clementine II
   will also use BMDO light weight technology resulting in a appoximate dry
   weight of only 630 pounds). The advantages are great - all launch base
   documentation and procedures are already in place, the DSN
   interface is also in place, the engineering team is in place,
   spacecraft design  complete, contracts for parts are in place,
   flight software is already developed, launch vehicle available, etc.
 
Hyperbole not withstanding, the above "facts" (?) are significantly
overstated.  Clementine II CANNOT meet >70% of the science objectives
of Mars Observer.  Take them one-by-one:
 
1.  Global definition of topography - elliptical orbit allows LIDAR to
work only over a small portion of orbit (if then, since it has 10-15 db
less signal strength and a single, broad acceptance filter that will
work, at best, only on essentially flat surfaces; i.e., no topography
on canyon walls, etc).  Topography also relies on good tracking, which
is not available since Clementine II cannot take data and be tracked
at the same time.
 
2.  Global definition of gravity field - elliptical orbit does not
permit high resolution gravity determination except around periapsis.
Tracking at periapsis precludes data acquisition requiring surface
orientation (e.g., images with Clementine II's instruments).  So, you
either take data or track, not both.  To acquire data over most of the
surface requires tracking at periapsis for a full martian year (i.e.,
the entire mission).  So you either get a good gravity field and
nothing else, or nadir observations and essentially no gravity.
 
3.  Global determination of elemental composition - Clementine II does
not have any elemental analysis instrumentation (neither X-ray
fluorescence nor gamma ray spectrometers).  Clementine II studies just
blow this one off.
 
4.  Global determination of mineralogical composition - Clementine II
proposes to modify the IR sensors to use wedge-filters to collect
moderately broadband spectral data.  No one has yet demonstrated the
ability to use wedge filters for scientific remote sensing--they have
many problems such as interband cross-talk.  The mid-IR spectral bandpass
does not cover a sufficient range to characterize even the silicate Si-O
vibrations, let alone important non-silicates such as carbonates,
sulfates, etc.  The Near-IR bands arise primarily from OH and H2O
vibrations in altered minerals (hence of only inferrential help in
addressing "bedrock" mineralogy), and secondarily from cation
coordination (at best a subsidiary phenomena with which to classify
geologic materials).  The visible bands are dominated by Fe
charge-related phenomena, useful but not too characteristic of
geologic materials in general.  A BIG concern re: Clementine II is the
complete lack of in-flight calibration capability.  Compositional
studies without ground truth are incredibly difficult, and without
calibration essentially impossible.  Bottom line-very little mineralogical
information would be obtained.
 
5.  Determine nature of magnetic field - Clementine II does not have a
magnetometer.  A proposed magnetometer is vaporware.  NRL comments
"Potentially Major Spacecraft Impact Due to Magnetic Cleanliness
Requirements."  Doesn't sound likely to me.  Also, magnetometer has
two goals: 1) global field studies and 2) local/regional crustal
studies.  Elliptical orbit perimits #1 and greatly limits #2.
 
6.  Determine space/time distribution, abundances, sources, and sinks
of volatile materials and dust over a seasonal cycle - Clementine II
does not carry any amospheric sounding instrument.  Its cameras are
incapable of acquiring global imaging at any resolution to track or
monitor clouds or other atmospheric phenomena.  Clementine studies also
blow this objective off.
 
7.  Delineate atmospheric structure and dynamics - Same as #6.
 
What Clementine II could do is take pictures--at several different
resolutions and in several different colors--from various locations in
orbit.  The images would be small (~288 X 384) and the highest
resolution (about 1/3 as good as MOC from a much lower periapsis)
would either be very dim or smeared (not enough light for their
relatively small aperture and high ground speed).
 
On other issues raised by Mr Wheatcraft, the Titan IIG does not have
the lift capability to get a Clementine II capable of achieving
Mars orbit to Mars.  It falls about 50 kg short.  Clementine II's own
tanks cannot be enlarged (thanks to that great BMDO technology, e.g.,
owing to structural limitations).  The only credible launch vehicle on
a quick-decision mission is the Delta.  Deltas are available.
 
Clementine II contracts are in place but no parts have been ordered.
Even long-lead items have not been ordered.  There is no evidence that
the flight software design accommodates an 11 month cruise and 2 year
mapping mission.  In comparison, MO parts exist--in fact, whole
subsystems exist.  One of the few advantages of big companies is that
they can bring together experienced teams in short times--the key MO
people are ready, willing, and able to put together the MO spare,
MMC/ASD willing.  On a separate issue, note that the amount of time
from now to launch is roughly the same amount of time in which MO was
put together the first time around, since final spacecraft boxes and
payload trickled in over a 3-4 month period between October 1991 and
February 1992.  It has thus been demonstrated that MO can meet the
October 1993 to October 1994 type schedule.
 
Nothing on Clementine has flown for extended periods in deep
space--that's at least part of the objective of Clementine I.  The
likelihood of it achiving any science return from Mars has been rated
by the BMDO at around 85%, and of surviving a Mars year at perhaps
70%.  MO has design numbers significantly better (and look what
happened to it).  In my opinion, based on knowledge of open-litereature
information on BMDO technology, and present commercial technology
(upon which much of the BMDO effort is based), Clementine II wouldn't
make it to Mars.  With proper attention to the RXO, CDU, and
propulsion systems (the leading failure candidates according to "the
net"), I have no doubt MO II would meet its mission objectives.  It
did, after all, operate succesfully in space for 11 months, and it has
had a substantial effort put into it to make it deep space reliable.
 
Finally, lets talk cost and cost effectiveness: Clementine II will
cost between $40M and $60M (depending on the magnitude of spacecraft
and instrument modifications needed just to achieve the above minimal
science capabilites), plus launch and operations costs.  The MO
II refly would cost roughly $110M plus launch plus operations costs.
By NASA edict (don't argue with me about this, please!), the Delta
launch cost for Clementine and the Shuttle launch cost for MO II would
be a wash.  Operations may be, too (I'm not sure who to give the edge
to, here--JPL's costs for MO might start out higher, but they have
good experience commanding their spacecraft; NRL's abilities re: deep
space probes are unknown; they might encounter problems that need far
more support than is presently planned).  So the bottom line is the
spacecraft and payload.  For roughly $50M you get essentially none of
the science objectives, and roughly $100M gets you all of the them.
 
Thus, on the basis of science, cost, ability to actually meet the
launch date, reliability of primary spacecraft systems, redundancy,
operability, and overall probability of successfully achieving the
objectives of the mission, it seems, in my opinion, that Mars Observer
is clearly the winning spacecraft and mission. 
 
Mike Malin
Mars Observer Camera PI
 

Article: 46045
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: stooke@sscl.uwo.ca
Subject: Clementine II mission?
Organization: Social Science Computing Laboratory
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1993 20:40:29 GMT
Sender: news@julian.uwo.ca (USENET News System)
 
Two accounts of proposed Clementine II missions have appeared in recent
months.  They are (very briefly):
 
a)  one spacecraft for launch in 1995, flyby of asteroid 433 Eros later
that year, then a second flyby of 4179 Toutatis in 1996, at which it will
fire a projectile to impact on Toutatis.  Imaging of the impact site a
short time later would give information on surface properties. (ref: 
abstract at ACM '93 conference, by Pleasance et al.)
 
b)  four spacecraft to be launched into lunar orbit to await suitable NEA
targets.  Each one carries a projectile to perform some version of the
Toutatis encounter described above. (ref: Flight International, Oct.
20-26, 1993, pp. 49-50)
 
Can anybody more 'in the know' comment on current thinking on this subject?
 
Phil Stooke
 

Article: 81225
From: jerrys3971@aol.com
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Upcoming Clemintine Launch
Date: 13 Jan 94 02:53:26 GMT
Sender: news+@cs.cmu.edu
Organization: [via International Space University]
 
As of today, 1/12/94 the USAF & BMDO are still planning to launch the
Clemintine Lunar Orbiter/ Asteroid flyby spacecraft on Tuesday, 
January 25, 1994 from SLC 4W at Vandenberg AFB.   The launch window
will open at around 8:30 AM PST.  The launch may be delayed a day or
so, depending on the final set of spacecraft functional tests now
being completed.  Propellant loading of the spacecraft was completed
last night (1/11/94), and the spacecraft will be transfered to the
launch pad for mating with the Titan IIG LV at around 1AM on 1/14. 
The launch window will extend till February 2. 
 
 Jerry W. Smith            |   " Why don't you guy's solve your little 
 JerryS3971@AOL.COM        |      problems and light this candle!"
                           |      Alan B. Shepard  5/5/61

Article 550 of sci.space.policy:

In article <2i3lrh$ohg@jac.zko.dec.com>, fisher@skylab.enet.dec.com () writes...
> 
>Any word on the Clementine launch?  Does anyone know when it was nominally 
>scheduled for?
> 

Clementine was successfully launched at 8:30 AM PST this morning.  Contact
with the Titan was made 90 minutes later.  Contact with the spacecraft
is not due until four hours after launch.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab | 
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   Galileo S-Band     | Failure is success if we
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | learn from it.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |             Malcom Forbes

Last I heard, they had made contact with the spacecraft as expected.  Not much
information on the net...this came from the newspaper (The Nashua Telegraph, of
all things!)

Burns

From: lsw@bonnie.jsc.nasa.gov (Lou Wheatcraft)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine Status?
Followup-To: sci.space
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 1994 15:46:19 -0600
Organization: Barrios Technology, Inc.
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <lsw-010294154619@nrl2.jsc.nasa.gov>
References: <2ijger$s4a@grover.jpl.nasa.gov> <wilson.760070723@moonshine>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nrl2.jsc.nasa.gov

DSPSE (Clementine status).

DSPSE is doing fine. All of the spacecraft is one big experiment and with
the short development time, not all bugs where worked out of the software. 
However with a R3081 and a 1750A on-board, the system is very robust and
forgiving and software fixes are easy.  DSPSE uses a "lost in space" system
for attitude knowledge.  This involves obtaining star tracker images,
processing them on the R3081, generating a valid quaternion and sending
this to the attitude control software on the 1750A.  The 1750A then
compares IMU position knowledge to the star tracker quaternion and
generates an error and corrects it.  The software also computes a drift
rate.  Initially, there was a problem getting a valid quaternion and also
the drift rate was initialized to too large a value.  To avoid using to
much ACS fuel, the trusters were disabled until the software folks could
correct their problems.  This placed the spacecraft into a slow tumble
rather than maintaining a solar pointing attitude to maximize the solar
panels ability to keep the battery charged so operations were kept to a
minimum while the software problems were fixed. (remember the solar panels
are not deployed until after the SRM burn.)  This wasn't bad in that we had
planned on 7.5 days in LEO and only had 24 to 36 hours of activities
planned anyway.  Also the slow tumble was great to keep thermal gradients
from forming in the SRM.

The current status as of 1600 CST, is that the spacecraft is healthy, all 3
axis attitude control software problems have been solved, the battery is
charged, we have demonstrated uplink/downlink capability with all ground
resources, and have spun up the spacecraft to test out the special software
needed for the spin stabilized attitude control used for the SRM burn. 
Engineers are now analyzing the results of this test to make sure we are
ready to do the SRM burn at approximately 20 minutes after midnight CST.

Being this is primarily a technology demonstration mission we will be doing
rehearsals through out the mission to bring out any bugs and fix them
on-orbit before the actual capability is required.
-- 
==========================================================================
Lou Wheatcraft            Barrios Technology, Inc.        Ph:(713)280-1892
lsw@bonnie.jsc.nasa.gov                                  Fax:(713)283-7903
========================================================================== 
  

Article: 82187
From: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine Launched
Date: 29 Jan 94 06:55:37 GMT
Organization: Robotic Midwives, Ltd.
 
In article <2i41lh$ae1@pravda.sdsc.edu> u1452@sluggo.sdsc.edu (Jeff
Bytof - SIO) writes: 

>Just heard on the CBS radio news (1:00 pm PST) that Clementine has
>been successfully launched from Vandenberg AFB.
 
Confirmed!  I was there covering the launch for the hobby magazine
_Sport Rocketry_. The VAFB PR folks are very accomodating, but I was
surprized at the general lack of press. Two local TV stations and
eight reporters/photogs from the local print media ("local" in this
case stretches to LA) and me. 
 
The post launch press conference was somewhat better attended with
about 30 of us there. During the conference, Col. Rustan mentioned
that the Jan 25 launch date had been set at the beginning of the
program over two years ago, and that this was the first time in his
experience that a project had kept to its *original* schedule. 
 
I think that Col. Rustan and all the Clementine personnel deserve a
big round of applause for just getting this thing off the ground in
such an efficient manner, especially the guys that lit the fire under
that old Titan! 
 
- Jack
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Jack Hagerty [jack@rml.com] |  "Sometimes I think that my writing sounds  |
| Robotic Midwives, Ltd.      |   like I walked out of the room and left    |
| Livermore, CA		      |   the typewriter running."                  |
| (510) 455-1143	      |              - Gene Fowler                  |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Article: 51801
From: elarse1@mason1.gmu.edu (Erik A Larsen)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: The real scoop on Clementine
Date: 2 Feb 1994 13:32:14 GMT
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
 
Problem With Moon Craft Solved
 
   LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Batteries in the orbiting Clementine 1 ran low
after the spacecraft lost communications with Earth, but the problem
was solved and Clementine will soon head to the Moon, a  spokesman
said Monday. 

   Clementine automatically went into a "safe mode" that shut down all
systems except its main computer until the problems were solved, said
Air Force Lt. Col. Michael Stepp of the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization in Virginia. 

   The craft was launched Jan. 25 from Vandenberg Air Force Base,
Calif., on a $75 million mission to test new defense space technology
and gather scientific data about the Moon and an asteroid named
Geographos. 

   Communications problems between ground stations and the spacecraft
during the first day of the mission left Clementine wid stations
around the world, not all of which are in position on any one orbit.
The spacecraft must be almost directly over a station to communicate,
and there is only a four- to five-minute window. 

   During Clementine's first pass over a station, the station lost its
lock on the craft, Stepp said. 

   Problems persisted in the next two passes over the station, and
another station that could have sent commands had hardware problems,
Stepp said. 

   Eventually, the problems were solved and commands were sent that
recharged Clementine's battery through its solar panels. 

   Controllers now expect Clementine to leave Earth's orbit and head
for the Moon on Feb. 2, Stepp said.  It would go into lunar orbit early
Feb. 20. 

   The mission is testing advanced sensors that detect and track
missiles. The Earth, Moon and Geographos will be used as targets to
test the instruments. 

   Clementine's sensors will also be used to map the entire surface of
the Moon during its two months in orbit.  It will then proceed on a
four-month journey to the asteroid Geographos, passing within 75 miles
on Aug. 31. 

Article: 51942
From: extpasc@sbusol.rz.uni-sb.de (Patrick Schmeer)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Visual Observation of Clementine
Date: 4 Feb 1994 14:31:57 GMT
Organization: Universitaet des Saarlandes,Rechenzentrum
 
Visual satellite observations by Patrick Schmeer

Observing site: Saarbruecken-Bischmisheim 
Longitude:  7 deg 04' E
Latitude:  49 deg 13' N
Altitude: 293 m
 
1994-  4A   CLEMENTINE
1994 Jan. 29,  6h06m UT
Max. elevation:  63 deg NE
Min. distance:   300 km
Altitude:        270 km
Max. brightness: mag +5 (in clouds)
Instrument:      7x50 binoculars
 
1994-  4B   CLEMENTINE (Rocket)
1994 Jan. 31,  5h48m UT
Max. elevation:  64 deg SW
Min. distance:   280 km  
Altitude:        250 km
Max. brightness: about mag +2.5 or brighter (in clouds)
Instrument:      naked eye
 
Kind regards,

Patrick
 
Two-Line Elements:

Clementine
1 22973U 94004A   94033.23458104  .00055318  70271-5  10484-3 0   216
2 22973  66.9968  65.1659 0032384 159.1197 201.1309 15.99921100  1200
Clementine (Rocket)     
1 22974U 94004B   94033.89723396  .00451940  10491-3  50741-3 0   214
2 22974  66.9955  62.7424 0033982 159.4890 200.7659 16.07821602  1319

Article: 82704
From: jtk@s1.gov (Jordin Kare)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine Computers.
Date: 7 Feb 1994 21:06:05 GMT
Organization: LLNL
 
In article <2iu2jm$alf@access2.digex.net> prb@access2.digex.net (Pat) writes:

>Lou tells us the Clementine uses a 1750A  and a R3081.  I don't know the
>R3081,  but Gack a 1750A.  that's as old as the hills.  please don't
>tell me it's programmed is CMS-2  or Jovial....
>couldn't the in 1992-3  get something a little better hten the 1750A?
>
>pat
 
The 1750RH (rad hard) processor was the best fully Mil-Std
space-qualified processor available for Clementine, as well as being a
processor that NRL (the spacecraft integrator) had used before and was
comfortable with. It runs "mission critical" software (housekeeping,
command&control functions) for which it is quite adequate, and for
which the demonstrated reliability was considered extremely important.
I'm not sure what the bulk of the actual code was written in, but
there is a C compiler available for the 1750 that was used for at
least some ofthe development. 
 
The R3081 is a rad hard variant of the R3000 RISC processor, and much
closer to the current state of the art.  It is used as the Sensor
Interface Processor, doing image processing (including processing Star
Tracker images for attitude control) and is programmed in C; it runs
VxWorks, a commercial operating system. 
 
The Clementine bus structure was designed such that either processor
could run the satellite if the other failed.  This did involve some
interesting development, notably porting the Star Tracker algorithms
to the 1750. 
 
A feature of the Clementine software development was the use of SCL,
the Spacecraft Command Language, which is a high-level language
developed expressly for operating spacecraft, with appropriate ability
to schedule and prioritize events that may be driven by spacecraft
resources (power, instrument availability) or external events both
predictable (sunrise) and unpredictable (component failure)... 
 
LLNL has flown sounding-rocket missions using only R3000-series
processors, and I believe the local preference would be to fly future
satellites without having to worry about the limitations of 1750s and
the like ... but there's also much to be said for using familiar,
well-tested hardware when it will do the job... 
 
	Jordin Kare
 
    "The believer is happy; the doubter is wise." - Hungarian Proverb
 

Article: 156
From: jfoust@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeffrey A Foust)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Comet SL9 and Clementine
Date: 4 Feb 1994 19:39:16 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
 
In article <CKM8Fp.Anu@athena.ulaval.ca> dutil@leo.ulaval.ca writes:

>Is it possible to program Clementine to image the impact of the comet 
>Shoemaker-Levy 9, on Jupiter in July?
 
Gene Shoemaker discussed this briefly at a workshop about the impacts
last month.  Clementine will be in cruise mode on the way to
Geographos at the time of the impacts.  It's possible to turn on
Clementine's hi-res camera and observe the impacts, however, Jupiter
will be only a few resolution elements across.  You could still do
some photometry, but the question would be whether the data would be
of high enough quality to collect and return to Earth.  I don't know
when they'll make a decision on this; they may wait until after the
lunar mapping phase of the mission. 
 
-- 
Jeff Foust
EAPS Dept., MIT	      |  "We'll really know the world is coming to an end
jeff@astron.mit.edu   |   when the Cubs and the Red Sox meet in the Series."
jfoust@mit.edu	      |  	-- Ken Brady, in rec.sport.baseball

Article: 157
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Comet SL9 and Clementine
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 1994 22:57:43 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <CKM8Fp.Anu@athena.ulaval.ca> dutil@leo.ulaval.ca writes:

>Is it possible to program Clementine to image the impact of the comet
>Shoemaker-Levy 9, on Jupiter in July?
 
It doesn't seem like a very useful thing to do.  Clementine's entire
working life will be spent in the immediate vicinity of Earth.  It
will have essentially the same view we do (i.e., a poor one).
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 162
From: wsears@lpl.arizona.edu (William D. Sears 1-8369)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Comet SL9 and Clementine
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 1994 16:26:11 +0000 (GMT)
Organization: Lunar and Planetary Lab.  U. of Az.
 
While this is true, Clementine does have a few advantages. For one
thing, it's not doing anything else, so why not? It has an
uninterrupted view of Jupiter, something that even Hubble does not
have.  Since it will not be orbiting around the Earth, nor riding on
the spinning Earth, it will not have those periods of not seeing
Jupiter, and so might just see something we would otherwise miss.  And
that low resolution might not be a problem in observing the dust
effects on the Jovian magnetosphere, which at least some people at the
Pre-Comet Crash Bash last fall felt was something to look for, and
which would be many times the size of Jupiter. 
 
So Clementine does not see things from a different point of view,
it might still see things differently.
--
William D. Sears                | 'I reserve the right to ask irrelevant  
Lunar and Planetary Lab         |  questions, even impudent ones.          
wsears@lpl.arizona.edu          |  You, of course, don't have to answer.'"    

Article: 163
From: jfoust@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeffrey A Foust)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Comet SL9 and Clementine
Date: 7 Feb 1994 05:05:23 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
 
In article <2j123c$p12@aludra.usc.edu> parkinso@chaph.usc.edu (Steve
Parkinson) writes: 

>Question from complete space science idiot: 
>
>   "What about the Hubble - would that be able to see it?"
 
Yes, the HST can and will observe Jupiter during the impact sequence. 
A considerable amount of HST time has been set aside for this; I know
the atmospheric dynamics team alone has on the order of 30 orbits for
observing Jupiter before, during, and after the impacts. 
 
But if you're asking if HST can view the impacts directly, sorry; HST
will have the same geometry as the ground-based telescopes. 
 
-- 
Jeff Foust
EAPS Dept., MIT	      |  "We'll really know the world is coming to an end
jeff@astron.mit.edu   |   when the Cubs and the Red Sox meet in the Series."
jfoust@mit.edu	      |  	-- Ken Brady, in rec.sport.baseball

Article: 52230
From: jtk@s1.gov (Jordin Kare)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.space.science
Subject: Re: pronounciation of "Clementine"
Date: 9 Feb 1994 03:30:55 GMT
Organization: LLNL
 
In article <9402090028.AA24758@cs.utexas.edu> obyrne@cp.dias.ie (Chris
O'Byrne) writes: 

>I had assumed the probe's name was pronounced "clem en TINE" (as in
>fork tine and indeed the song "oh my darling Clementine") but on
>Patrick Moore's Sky at Night TV programme he pronounced it "clem en
>teen ah" or "clem en teen eh".
>
>What's the correct pronounciation?
 
Clem en TINE.  Ghu knows where Patrick Moore's alternative came from.
Possibly the same place all the politicians get "nuc-u-lar". :-)

>How did the probe come to get this name in the first place?
 
Stu Nozette, who initially promoted the mission concept at SDIO, was
thinking about asteroid mining (miner '49er's) and about asteroid
flybys (after which the spacecraft is "lost and gone forever") and
decided to call the (at that time embryonic idea for a) mission
"Clementine".  For a while, NRL made a determined effort to use a more
"official" name, DSPSE, the Deep Space Program Science Experiment, but
that got pronounced "Dipsy", and everyone else kept calling it
Clementine, so they eventually gave up... (No doubt the DSPSE
satellite should have used a computer with a SCSI bus :-)).
 
Incidentally, the official Clementine logo shows a blond-haired woman
(Clementine) holding a shield (part of SDIO's logo), with a portion of
the moon in the lower foreground and an American flag sticking out of
the moon.  In the background is a brown rock (Geographos, presumably),
with a large "#9" stamped on it:  "And her shoes were Number Nine".
>
>-David Moore BSc FRAS, Editor, ASTRONOMY & SPACE magazine published by:
> Astronomy Ireland, P.O.Box 2888, Dublin 1, Ireland. VISA/MC accepted.
 
"In a lab up near the Beltway
Where the weather's seldom fine,
Lived a feller, an NRL'er
And his satellite, Clementine
 
	Oh, my darling, Oh my darling, 
	Oh, my satellite, Clementine!
	You are launched and gone forever
	Send some data, Clementine!"
 
		Jordin (Bard of the Spaceways) Kare
 
Article: 52233
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.space.science
Subject: Naming lunar orbiters (was pronounciation of "Clementine")
Date: 8 Feb 94 23:36:29 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
In article <9402090028.AA24758@cs.utexas.edu>, obyrne@cp.dias.ie
(Chris O'Byrne) writes: 

> I had assumed the probe's name was pronounced "clem en TINE" (as in
> fork tine and indeed the song "oh my darling Clementine") but on
> Patrick Moore's Sky at Night TV programme he pronounced it "clem en
> teen ah" or "clem en teen eh".
> 
> What's the correct pronounciation?
 
You're right, Moore's wrong.
 
> How did the probe come to get this name in the first place?
 
She was the daughter of a "miner, forty-niner." (cf. 1849 California
Gold Rush...)  The spacecraft team hopes to use observations in
multiple spectral bands to identify varying mineral concentrations on
the Moon and Geographos. So they named her after the girl in the song.
 
Would have been a better name for an orbiter with a gamma-ray
spectrometer, like the apparently-moribund Lunar Prospector.  But
we'll think of a name when such a thing flies... in fact, I have my
own pet name.  I would name it after a space pioneer.
 
He dreamed of flying to the Moon, and even beyond, at a time when it
was hardly fashionable to do so. Novel space propulsion concepts
sprang from his fertile mind; he is widely recognized as the first to
articulate many important ones. Yet he had the soul of a poet, and loved 
to spin philosophical and literary ideas as well as technical ones.  
 
Most appropriately of all, if you think of a gamma-ray/neutron
spectrometer as a sensitive "Nose" that sniffs out the chemical
elements of the Moon, there can be only one person to name the
spacecraft for:
 
That indefatigable space traveler, Cyrano de Bergerac (1619-1655),
author of *Les Estats et Empires de la Lune et du Soleil* (The
States and Empires of the Moon and the Sun)!
 
Bill Higgins                           | "I shop at the Bob and Ray
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory  | Giant Overstocked Surplus
Bitnet:           HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET  | Warehouse in one convenient
Internet:       HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV  | location and save money besides
SPAN/Hepnet:           43009::HIGGINS  | being open every evening until 9."

	LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Clementine, the spacecraft on a mission to
map the moon, made a final pass by Earth before entering lunar
orbit this weekend.
	``It's doing wonderfully,'' Lt. Col. Michael Stepp, a spokesman
for the Defense Department's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
in Washington, said Tuesday. ``We have high hopes it will continue
to go as smoothly as it has been.''
	Clementine, which is about the size of a compact car, was
launched Jan. 25 and encountered some early communications
problems.
	Since then, it has been circling Earth in progressively wider
orbits and will begin circling the moon Saturday. On Sunday, it
will enter an orbit allowing it to start mapping the lunar surface.
	The seven-month, $75 million Pentagon mission is designed to
test military sensors developed to detect and track missiles.
	After two months circling the moon, the spacecraft returns to
Earth orbit before continuing on to the asteroid Geographos,
passing within 75 miles of the asteroid on Aug. 31.

Article: 83155
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: What's new with Clementine?
From: bakeris@nrlvx1.nrl.navy.mil
Date: 15 Feb 94 14:23:49 -0400
Organization: NRL SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION
 
In article <CL8KHM.79p@odin.corp.sgi.com>,
nstrauss@netmare.corp.sgi.com (Nicholas Strauss) writes: 

> OK, now we know how to pronounce the name...but what's up with the
> spacecraft?
> 
> Shouldn't it just about be ready to head off to lunar orbit?  Are the
> guidance problems truly solved?  

Currently, there are no problems with any of the s/c subsystems,
including the sensors.  We are taking images of celestial bodies and
stars and doing some sensor calibration tests.  We just finished
downloading images of Madagascar. 
 
Expected lunar orbit insertion is 02/19/94 12:55:12 UTC.  All maneuvers
so far have been within expected ranges. 
 
The interstage adaptor (ISA) is functioning nominally though it only
has a lifetime of 90 days from separation. 
 
I heard that our Titan II second stage blew up in orbit the other day.
It was supposed to re-enter in a few days.  DSPSE was well into the
phasing loops by then. 
 
Dean Bakeris
DSPSE Trajectory Analyst

                                            

Article: 3758
From: clarinews@clarinet.com (AP)
Newsgroups: clari.tw.space
Subject: Spacecraft To Map The Moon
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 94 1:30:11 PST
 
	LOS ANGELES (AP) -- America's first lunar mission in 21 years
gets down to business Sunday. 

	The Deep Space Program Science Experiment, dubbed ``Clementine
One'' for short, will go into orbit around the Moon at 2:28 p.m. EST.
Its two-month mission is to map the entire surface of the Moon.
Scientists say the information may be used for a future lunar landing.

	Afterward, Clementine will head toward an asteroid named
Geographos, testing new missile tracking technology on the way. Then,
like Clementine in the old folk song, scientists say the space probe
will be ``lost and gone forever.'' 

Article: 83319
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Clementines to Mars?
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 19:10:53 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <CLMFA0.FEv.3@cs.cmu.edu> mgills@cclu.lv (Martins Gills) writes:

>Does anybody know the latest news in connection with Mars exploration
>and Clementine...
 
The idea of sending Clementine 2 to Mars in 1994 was advanced fairly
seriously.  It would have been feasible (just).  However, it had only
one really substantial advantage:  it could have been ready for the
1994 launch window, whereas the other proposals typically needed too
much preparation time.  Against this, its instruments weren't really
designed for the job -- they would have done useful work, but not
nearly as much as ones purpose-built for Mars -- and the idea was
politically unpopular for several reasons (in Congress because of the
military tie-in, at JPL because it wasn't done by JPL). 
 
Proposals to use Clementine-type spacecraft to carry MO-spare
instruments were all for 1996 launch, I believe.  The only reason why
Clementine 2 could have been ready for 1994 was that the engineering
was done and the hardware was mostly already on hand (the Clementine
project having bought two sets of parts, not just one). 
 
In any case, that whole family of ideas is dead.  C2-in-1994 died of a
combination of politics and a decision that waiting two years to send
a better spacecraft was a good tradeoff.  And I don't believe that the
Mars Surveyor plans include use of Clementine spacecraft, although
they may well be using some Clementine technology. 
 
Precisely what (if anything) will be done with Clementine 2 is not yet
decided, last I heard. 
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 83398
From: malin@esther.la.asu.edu (Mike Malin)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine II to Mars
Date: 23 Feb 94 21:36:30
Organization: TES Project, ASU, Tempe AZ
 
In post <wilson.761963832@moonshine>, Mike Wilson of LLNL notes that
Clementine II had an additional advantage in application to a Mars
1994 mission besides the one mentioned by Henry Spencer (i.e., that it
could have been ready for the November launch).  Wilson states:
 
"I believe it was also substantially cheaper."
 
The estimates were that Clementine II would cost no less than $40M,
more likely $60M, and if the modifications proposed to the instruments
and spacecraft were made, probably closer to $70M.  The MO spare
spacecraft and payload were estimated to cost no less than $100M, and
the estimate made last November after the Stephenson Committee's
findings were available (JPL Pub. 93-28 - Mars Observer Loss of
Signal: Special Review Board Final Report) was about $120M.  Thus,
Clementine II cost about 1/2 of what a MO refly would cost (not
counting launch vehicle costs which were screwed up because of Shuttle
entanglemenment  As I noted at the time (25 Sept 93 post
9309252129.AA16423@esther.la.asu.edu "MOC PI Comment Re: Use of
Clementine II at Mars"), the Clementine II payload would accomplish
very little of the Mars Observer science goals, and while doing some
science, it wouldn't be important science, just pretty science.  As
most of the scientists involved in the studies of what should be done
noted at the time, you could address essentially none of the science
objectives for $60M or all of them for $120M.  Since at the time there
wasn't a specific concern about funding (MO had nearly $70M "coming"
over the subsequent two years from MO&DA), the question really wasn't
cost but veracity.  In the final analysis, none of the options
explored (commercial small-sat, in-house JPL, BMDO or other national
assets, and MO spare) were credible for a 1994 launch.
 
Mike Malin

ex-Mars Observer Camera Principal Investigator
Mars Surveyor 1996 Orbiter Camera Principal Investigator

Article: 83589
From: jtk@s1.gov (Jordin Kare)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Date: 1 Mar 1994 00:31:02 GMT
Organization: LLNL
 
marting@col.hp.com (Martin Guth) writes:

>Magnus Olsson (magnus@thep.lu.se) wrote:
>: I haven't seen anything on this newsgroup about Clementine for a while.
>: According to an article in Astronomy, it should have begun lunar mapping
>: a few days ago. Anybody know whether it's on schedule?
>
>Last I heard a few days ago from TV news is that it's in orbit around the moon.
>No word as to whether it's working or not. I really don't know what the big
>secret is, other than it's a Defense Dept. mission (partly, anyway).
>
>Martin Guth  marting@col.hp.com
 
No big secret, just a strong desire not to put out premature
(mis)information and (I suspect) bureaucratic delays in a system that
hasn't done anything like this before.  I believe the information
drought will be relieved once lunar mapping is well started and people
involved can think about other things for a while. 
 
Meanwhile, to reassure the Net, I will take the liberty of stating
that as of last Thursday -- when I had a chance to stop in at the
operations center -- everything was fine.  Clementine was in Lunar
orbit and sending down images that looked very nice to my (untrained)
eye. All instruments were working.  Mapping hadn't started (there was
some "checkout and tuneup" time built in to the schedule) but was
expected to in the next few days. 
 
A spectacular success so far, in my opinion.  Keep your fingers
crossed and stay tuned. 
 
	Jordin ("Was that a _McDonalds_ in that crater?!") Kare
 
Article: 83593
From: wilson@moonshine.llnl.gov (Mike Wilson )
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Date: 1 Mar 94 00:45:33 GMT
Organization: Magnetic Fusion Energy - LLNL
 
marting@col.hp.com (Martin Guth) writes:
 
>Last I heard a few days ago from TV news is that it's in orbit around the moon.
>No word as to whether it's working or not. I really don't know what the big
>secret is, other than it's a Defense Dept. mission (partly, anyway).
 
There isn't any secret.  The people involved simply are not used to
public exposure.  In addition, realize that the staffing levels on the
project are quite low, and most people who are involved in it
currently are working huge hours.  Btw, to comment on your last
thought:  To the best of my knowledge, the clementine mission is 100%
DoD funded. 
 
-mike
--
 
mikew@s1.gov  Systems Manager, Advanced Technology Program, LLNL

Article: 83605
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: fcrary@benji.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Sender: usenet@cnsnews.Colorado.EDU (Net News Administrator)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 1994 03:34:05 GMT
 
In article <wilson.762482733@moonshine>,
Mike Wilson  <wilson@moonshine.llnl.gov> wrote:

>>Last I heard a few days ago from TV news is that it's in orbit
>>around the moon. 
>>No word as to whether it's working or not. I really don't know what the big
>>secret is, other than it's a Defense Dept. mission (partly, anyway).
 
>There isn't any secret.  The people involved simply are not used to public
>exposure.  In addition, realize that the staffing levels on the project are
>quite low, and most people who are involved in it currently are working
>huge hours.
 
That isn't entirely the reason. I a mission scientist told me that the
images returned so far are _very_ impressive and could have been made
public a week ago. Limited staff and work loads aren't the problem. As
I understand it, the man in change of the mission wants to be careful.
His entire career is going to be made or ruined by Clementine's
success. So, understandably, he wants to make sure the instruments are
working and properly calibrated before going public with the results.
That avoids any embarrassing retractions like the Viking pictures
showing Mars with a blue sky (proper calibration after the images had
been made public showed a red sky.) So the Clementine pictures will
only be released on March first, after a week of work to make sure
they are accurate and that the instruments are working properly. 
 
                                                    Frank Crary
                                                    CU Boulder

Article: 83612
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Date: 1 Mar 1994 06:23 UT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
 
In article <CLyv8t.EuB@cnsnews.Colorado.EDU>,
fcrary@benji.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes... 

>That isn't entirely the reason. I a mission scientist told me 
>that the images returned so far are _very_ impressive and could 
>have been made public a week ago. Limited staff and work loads
>aren't the problem. As I understand it, the man in change of the
>mission wants to be careful. His entire career is going to be 
>made or ruined by Clementine's success. So, understandably, he
>wants to make sure the instruments are working and properly 
>calibrated before going public with the results. 
 
A recent Aviation Week shows two images of Earth taken by Clementine.
One image shows the entire Earth, but only the narrow part of the limb
is visible, and it is in color.  To tell you the truth, I didn't even
recognize it as being the Earth until I read the caption next to it.
The other image was better but in black-n-white, and was taken with
the star scanner (?!) showing part of the US.  It still looked a bit
over-exposed. 

     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab | 
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   Galileo S-Band     | Failure is success if we
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | learn from it.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |             Malcom Forbes

Article: 984
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Clementine imaging
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 1994 22:19:48 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1994Mar1.170123.26070@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
andy@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Andy Clews) writes: 

>Given that Clementine is due to map almost(?) the entire lunar surface,
>what are the chances of it picking up Apollo landmarks? I don't mean
>landing sites, because I realise that the maximum resolution of Clementine
>images will be of the order of 30 meters, which would obviously rule out
>details such as LM descent stages...
 
Actually, it should be adequate to see the *shadows* of the descent stages.
Maybe even the descent stages themselves:  they will be bright objects
against a very dark landscape -- the lunar surface is pretty black, it
looks bright only because it's in blazing sunlight -- -- so they may show
up as bright specks even if you can't quite resolve them.
 
I remember seeing a Lunar Orbiter photograph of Surveyor 1.  It was well
below the LO resolution -- the Surveyors were only a couple of meters
across -- but it was visible as a bright spot with a long shadow.
 
>However, I wondered about things like
>impact craters from jettisoned LM ascent stages and S-IV stages, some of
>which I believe were deliberately impacted so as to test the seismographic
>experiments. Are the precise locations of these impact areas known? And how
>about the impact craters from the early Rangers and other probes?
 
Some of those locations are known precisely, because the craters were found
on Lunar Orbiter photographs.
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Actually, imaging the landing sites is a mission goal, and getting 
good pictures of the lander itself is an unofficial goal. Imaging
the landing sites is scientifically very important, since those are
the only places where we have "ground truth." It's common to use
these sites as a calibration point for Earth-based observations of
other planets and asteroids; the spectrum of the rocks returned by 
Apollo can be carefully measured in the lab, a scientist can point
his telescope at the (presumably) similar landing site and 
calibrate his instruments. Although it's a very common procedure,
it has problems: Is the spectrum of the landing site's general
region really like that of the rock brought back? That assumes
the entire area, over a range of tens or hundreds of kilometers,
is pretty much the same. Detailed pictures of the landing site
would remove this problem. That's the scientific reason for 
imaging the landing sites. Unofficially, alot of people involved
just think it would be cool to have an image of the Apollo 
landers. Currently, the high resolution camera is getting a
resolution of about 10 m: Not enough to resolve the landers.
However, they plan on lowering Clementine's orbit at some 
point. That should give resolution of two or three meters, enough
to resolve the landers and the landing site (tire tracks, etc...)

                                                     Frank Crary
                                                     CU Boulder

Article: 15780
From: clarinews@clarinet.com (AP)
Newsgroups: clari.news.gov.usa,clari.tw.space,clari.news.military
Subject: Low-Budget Craft Shoots Moon
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 94 14:30:16 PST
 
	WASHINGTON (AP) -- The former Star Wars team in the Pentagon,
now with a new name and more-public pursuits, showed off the early
results of its mission to map the Moon Wednesday and pronounced the
effort a success. 

	Using commercially produced hardware and electronics, the new
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization built a small spacecraft called
Clementine -- because it will be lost and gone forever -- and sent it
off toward the Moon on Jan. 25. 

	It returned familiar images of the Moon -- for instance, the
site where the astronauts of Apollo 16 landed -- and of Earth.  When
it has done its two-month job of making pictures of the entire Moon,
Clementine will journey outward to make a rare picture of an asteroid.

	What distinguished Clementine is the fact that it was built
``faster, cheaper and better,'' than any comparable space probe. 

	For $75 million -- $55 for Clementine and $20 million for its
launch -- the team spent less than two years from concept to launch. 

	Being a defense organization, BMDO had to select targets for
its spacecraft, in this case Earth, the Moon, and the near-Earth
asteroid Geographos.  It calls Clementine a dual-use spacecraft ``to
demonstrate military systems and provide new astronomical data.'' 

	When it takes fly-by photographs of Geographos, Clementine for
the first time will make readings good enough to provide topographic
data to scientists. 

	``This is an engineering program, not a science program,'' Lt.
Col. Pedro L. Rustan told a Pentagon news conference.  Clementine has a
number of novel sensors for mapping the surfaces of both the Moon and
the asteroid. 

	BMDO displayed the cameras and guidance mechanisms.  The 
work of a 40-pound camera was done by a new one of only one pound.
Electronics that usually are housed in six black boxes now fit
comfortably into one box.  And guidance systems were reduced to the
size of softballs. 

	Asteroids are rocks in space that mostly exist between Mars
and Jupiter in an orbit around the Sun.  They are usually spotted as
trails against the black background of space.  But in recent years the
Galileo space probe to Jupiter photographed ones called Gaspra and Ida, 
and radar images were made a few years ago of the asteroid Toutatis when
it came near Earth. 

	At Geographos, more than 2,000 pictures will be made showing
objects as small as 16 feet long.  It will also record the impact of a
comet with the planet Jupiter. 

Article: 3797
From: clarinews@clarinet.com (Reuters)
Newsgroups: clari.tw.space,clari.news.gov.usa
Subject: U.S. Releases Moon Photos from New Spacecraft
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 94 12:20:43 PST
 
	 WASHINGTON (Reuter) - The United States Wednesday released
high-resolution color photographs of the Moon taken from a spacecraft
launched five weeks ago to jointly test anti-missile military
technology and help explore space. 

	 The first such close-up U.S. pictures of the Moon taken from
space since the Apollo 17 Moon landing in 1972 were snapped by several
cameras on the Clementine spacecraft, launched January 25 from
Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. 

	 The computer-enhanced pictures clearly show pits and mountains 
in the Moon's service from distances of about 1,400 miles away. 

	 Unmanned Clementine, designed and built by the Defense
Department to test sensors and other technology which might eventually
be used to help track and shoot down nuclear missiles, was placed in
Moon orbit February 21. 

	 As part of the Clinton Administration's push for ``dual use
military-industrial technology, it is also being jointly used by the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to help map the
Moon and take a close look at asteroids. 

	 While clear pictures can be taken of parts of the Moon from
Earth, officials said Wednesday that Clementine's cameras can cover
the entire surface and will enable scientists to map the Moon even in
terms of rock types. 

Article: 53606
From: chrisl@lpl.arizona.edu (Chris Lewicki - LPL)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Clementine Info available by FTP/GOPHER/WWW
Date: 3 Mar 1994 12:47:36 GMT
Organization: SEDS
 
JPG, (Corrected) GIF, and TGA images of the Clementine Imagery Data
are now available for (FTP/GOPHER/WWW) at: 
 
SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU in /pub/clementine/images
 
	An index with image size and brief descriptions has been created, 
although it's accuracy cannot yet be guaranteed.  
 
	For WWW users, the home page can be found through:
http://SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU/
 
	A browse page of the images has been set up.  By clicking on
the images, you can download the full resolution GIF.  If you prefer
TGA or JPG, you can use the FTP link supplied on the page, or direct
ftp as mentioned above. 
 
-Chris Lewicki
Chrisl@LPL.Arizona.EDU
Maintainer of SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU
'Legendary' Mars Observer GRS Flight Investigation Team
UA SEDS President
SEDS-USA Director of Special Projects
 

could someone pull these over and make them available internally?

Tony

    re .-1
    
    You should be able to access the WWW location directly (*). There is a
    relay node within Digital that allows HTTP to be spoken to the outside
    world. (It's far too slow from down here mind.)
    
(*) Need workstation and XMOSAIC or equivalent.

For those of you still saddled with DECnet:  pragma::public:[nasa.clementine]


Otherwise get them directly via the Web (per previous reply) or you can pick
them up on the Web at the local archive:

   http://www-space.lkg.dec.com/space-archives.html

- dave

Article: 83808
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: fcrary@benji.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Sender: usenet@cnsnews.Colorado.EDU (Net News Administrator)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 1994 05:29:30 GMT
 
In article <1MAR199406233144@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>,
Ron Baalke <baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

>A recent Aviation Week shows two images of Earth taken by Clementine.  
>One image shows the entire Earth, but only the narrow part of the limb
>is visible, and it is in color.  To tell you the truth, I didn't even 
>recognize it as being the Earth until I read the caption next to it.
>The other image was better but in black-n-white, and was taken with 
>the star scanner (?!) showing part of the US.  It still looked a bit
>over-exposed. 
 
Those are star-tracker images. All in all, I think they are fairly
impressive: The star-tracker is just a third-rate, low resolution
camera designed to pick out bright stars and let Clementine know what
direction it's pointed in. The simple fact that they provide _any_
image of the Earth is impressive, even if it isn't doesn't have great
resolution. The pictures from the UV-Visible and near infrared cameras
(now available to the public) are much better. Even so, they aren't as
good as the will be: The lunar shots were taken from 2100 km. I
understand the spacecraft's altitude may be lowered below 100 km by
the end of the Lunar mapping mission. That should give resolution of 2
to 3 m. 
 
                                                        Frank Crary
                                                        CU Boulder

Article: 83888
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: JPL Play Key Role in Clemetine Mission
Date: 5 Mar 1994 22:07 UT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
 
From the "JPL Universe"
February 25, 1994
 
Lab playing key role in Clementine mission to map moon, fly by asteroid
By Mark Whalen
 
     JPL is playing an important role in a joint
military-scientific mission that will space-qualify lightweight
sensors and component technologies for the next generation of
Defense Department spacecraft, map the Moon, and conclude with a
close encounter with a near-Earth asteroid.

     The Clementine mission, sponsored by the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization (BMDO) (formerly known as the Strategic
Defense Initiative Organization) was launched Jan. 25 from
Vandenberg Air Force Base on a Titan II-G rocket; the
231-kilogram (508-pound) spacecraft went into a polar lunar orbit
Feb. 19. Systematic lunar mapping is scheduled to begin about a
week later and continue through early May, followed by the first
flyby of the near-Earth asteroid 1620 Geographos. The $75-million
mission took only 22 months from conception to launch.

     Designed and built by the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL),
the spacecraft was originally conceived to test advanced,
lightweight technologies for ballistic-missile defense
applications. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory of
California built most of the scientific payload. NASA became
involved when scientists arranged to participate in the mission
to create unprecedented maps of the moon in addition to the
asteroid encounter.

     The Lab is supporting the mission on four fronts, with teams
overseeing a radiation and reliability experiment for advanced
microelectronic devices; dynamical, photometric and cartographic
studies; Deep Space Network (DSN) tracking and navigation; and
engineering studies of the Clementine systems' performance and
Clementine's daughter satellite, the Interstage Adapter Satellite
(ISAS).

     Dr. Satish Khanna of the Center for Space Microelectronics
Technology Division 820 is program manager for RRELAX (the
Radiation and Reliability Assurance Experiment), which will
characterize the radiation resistance and reliability of three
advanced microelectronic devices:  charged-couple devices,
complementary metal oxide silicon and static random-access
memory. The experiment, whose principal investigator  is Dr.
Martin Buehler of Section 346, comprises two hardware boxes, one
on the spacecraft and one on the ISAS.

     Khanna said that "within nine months, we designed,
fabricated, tested and delivered the two RRELAX boxes to NRL for
integration into the spacecraft and ISAS.

     "This experience will be useful for JPL's plan to
participate in cheaper, faster and better missions," he added.

     Tom Duxbury of the Geology and Planetology Section 326 is
one of the three JPL members of the NASA-sponsored science team.
"We will obtain high-resolution coverage of the moon," he said,
"with precision radio science yielding the gravity field, a laser
altimeter giving topography, and stereo imaging giving a global
cartographic control network--the first time we have had those
simultaneously."

     The total amount of data transmitted from the moon mapping
will be comparable to that obtained during the first Magellan
mapping cycle of Venus. "It's global coverage, not just bits and
pieces or strips (of the moon)," Duxbury added. Earlier missions
to the moon, including Apollo, mainly orbited the equatorial regions.

     Clementine is scheduled to reach Geographos on Aug. 31,
after which time more than 2,000 images will be recorded and
stored on board in the solid-state memory for later playback to
Earth. Duxbury said the cigar-shaped asteroid measures about 1
1/2 km by 4 km (9/10 mile by 2 1/2 miles), and its orbit is
inclined about 16 degrees to Earth's ecliptic plane. The
spacecraft will pass within 100 km (62 miles) of Geographos, when
it will be 8 million km (5 million miles) from Earth.

     Clementine's cameras will be programmed to autonomously
track the asteroid while passing from the dark to the sunlit side
at close range; as the spacecraft goes by, most of the
illuminated side will come into view. (A three-member optical
navigation team from JPL's Section 314 will support this part of
the mission.) Close-range images, when combined with Light
Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) measurements, will enable an
accurate determination of the asteroid's shape and size.

     JPL tracking stations at Goldstone, Calif.; Madrid, Spain;
and Canberra, Australia--in conjunction with an NRL station in
Pomonkey, Md., and a number of Air Force stations--will support
the Clementine mission, according to Ray Amorose, manager of the
TDA Mission Support and DSN Operations Division 440.

     "In general," he said, "we are using our 26-meter subnet,
with some 34-meter support; in late May, it will be all 34-meter
coverage because the spacecraft will be out of range of the
26-meter antennas. When the spacecraft gets to the asteroid,
there will be a couple of days of 70-meter coverage.

     "We're doing navigation and orbit-determination work,"
Amorose added. "Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland is
assisting NRL in orbit-determination and dynamics work on the
early part of the mission; when it leaves the moon, then JPL
becomes a major player for the navigation."

     About 30 JPL staff members are working on the mission.
Amorose noted that a particularly special effort has been made in
recent weeks by Al Berman of Division 440, the project's tracking
and data system manager, whose Granada Hills home was severely
damaged by the Jan. 17 Northridge earthquake. "He came in anyway
and did his job," Amorose said. "He is a pretty dedicated guy."

     In addition to the on-Lab support, Dr. Henry Garrett of
Division 52 is currently on detail to the Clementine program
office. Garrett heads the Clementine engineering team, which is
evaluating the overall performance of the advanced technologies
being tested on the vehicle. He is also program manager for ISAS,
which was left behind by the main Clementine spacecraft following
the first lunar transfer orbit injection.

     The ISAS carries a copy of the RRELAX experiment, a dust
detector provided by NASA's Langley Research Center, and several
microelectronics experiments provided by NRL. The NRL-designed
package cost less than $1 million and is intended to serve as a
test of Clementine's microelectronics in the Earth's radiation
environment, Garrett said. JPL is currently receiving data on the
radiation environment and on the performance of the RRELAX test
devices from both the ISAS and Clementine.

     The Clementine mission is the first non-NASA deep-space
mission conducted by the United States. "As far as the NASA
science community is concerned, it's a high-payoff mission,"
Duxbury said. "For the Defense Department, it's testing specific
technology it needs to do its business."

     According to a BMDO statement, "The use of celestial bodies
such as the moon and a near-Earth asteroid makes ideal targets to
flight-qualify advanced lightweight technologies developed by
BMDO. The added cost of the mission by going to deep space is
actually less than the cost of developing and deploying the targets 
that would be required to test the payload in low-Earth orbit.

     "By performing a joint mission with NASA and forming a
NASA-selected science team to enhance the scientific value of the
mission, it will also be possible to transfer these technologies
for future space exploration."
 
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab | 
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   Galileo S-Band     | A mind stretched by a new
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | idea can never go back to
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | its original dimensions.


Article: 83912
From: malin@esther.la.asu.edu (Mike Malin)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: More re: Clementine II to Mars (MOC PI Response to Wilson Post)
Date: 4 Mar 94 21:26:06
Organization: TES Project, ASU, Tempe AZ
 
Not withstanding his disclaimer that he has "no professional knowledge
on the subject" of the Clementine II to Mars study, Mike Wilson takes
exception to several points I raised in my post of last week comparing
the science/cost ratio for the Clementine II compared to a refly of
Mars Observer.  This post addresses his points: 
 
>I suspect that the $70 mil figure for clementine II included
>launching.  Can anyone clarify?  The $120 mil does *not* include MOII
>launch cost, correct?  Regardless, I *personally* feel that $50
>million is a fair amount of pockchange to save.
 
Neither figure includes launch costs.  People familiar with my posting
know that I state explicitly what I include in costs, in order to
avoid exactly these types of questions.  The comparison was between
spacecraft and payloads only.  As I noted in the original posting
responding to the idea that Clementine II could have accoplished 70%
of Mars Observer's science, I disclaimed any responsibility for NASA
launch vehicle costing that makes Shuttle "free."  Wilson is correct
in assuming that the Clementine II launched on a Delta II (several
groups, including NRL and the Titan II manufacturer, did not support
the early BMDO and LLNL contention that a TII could get Clementine II
to Mars) would cost significantly less than a MO refly launched via
Shuttle/IUS or Shuttle/TOS.  I, too, feel $50M is a lot of money--too
much to waste on a spacecraft whose payload, although technically
marvelous, DOESN'T MEET THE SCIENCE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROPOSED
MISSION!  Perhaps one should have abandoned the MO objectives.  Or
proposed a different set of instruments.  But as proposed the
Clementine II mission didn't do what was needed. 
 
>I'm not qualified to evaluate the significance or "pretty" value of
>the science.  I can say that some of your comments in your posting
>were completely off the mark.  Specifically, (off the top of my head
>without refering to your post) you made some comments about the
>camara having to be in such a low orbit as to be useless because of
>orbital velocity?  I do not believe that is an issue.  You also gave
>some unspecified critism of BMDO "light weight" technology...unless
>your more specific that really doesn't hold any water.
 
You probably should refer back to that post, but to reiterate my view,
the comment was specifically aimed at the contention that the high
resolution camera had a color capability.  My comment was that even if
the already relatively wide bandpasses were opened up, the exposures
would be too long to acquire unsmeared images, and hence the stated
resolution was incorrect.  I NEVER claimed that they would be "useless
owing to orbital velocity," only that the high res camera wasn't
capable of doing what it was being "sold" to do.  I believe it WAS
capable of collecting unsmeared data through the "clear" filter, and
stated as much in my post. 
 
My criticism of the "vaunted BMDO light weighting technology" had to
do with the inability to enlarge the propellant tanks to accommodate
sufficient fuel to insure the injection to Mars from the direct ascent
trajectory (which was the only way the Titan II could have come even
close to being able to launch Clementine II to Mars).  The
lightweighting of the tanks to meet BMDO mission requirements had
apparently limited the ability to increase their size (the tank walls
would have had to have been thickened if the tanks were enlarged,
making them even more than proportionally heavier).  I should add this
is not my assessment, but what I wrote in my notes from the BMDO
presentation and response to questions at the presentation at JPL.  I
could be an inaccurate reporter, and would welcome comment by someone
familiar with the design and fabrication of the Clementine propulsion
system.  So, in a sense, it isn't water that my comment didn't hold,
but fuel that the Clementine tanks didn't hold. 
 
>>Since at the time there wasn't a specific concern about funding (MO
>>had nearly $70M "coming"...
 
>Money doesn't "come".  I assume that is the operations budget, which
>will have to be reallocated in a future FY?
 
Forgive my colloquialism.  You are correct--money doesn't come.
Rather, Mars Observer had had nearly $70M authorized in FY 94 and
requested in FY 95 which would have been available within NASA's
budget for MO recovery efforts, subject to Executive Branch and
congressional review and approval. 
 
>>...over the subsequent two years from MO&DA), the question really wasn't
>>cost but veracity.  In the final analysis, none of the options
>>explored (commercial small-sat, in-house JPL, BMDO or other national
>>assets, and MO spare) were credible for a 1994 launch.
 
>Well, IYHO.  I think that there are people who would dispute that.
 
Well, actually not "IMHO".  I, unfortunately, didn't have a say.  It
was in the (possibly not so humble?) opinion of Mr. Goldin (among
others).  I have no doubt that there are people who would dispute the
conclusion--indeed, I have corresponded with some at Wilson's own
institution.  However, in the marketplace in which the Clementine II
was offered, the customer wasn't buying.  That, IMHO, was not the
customer's fault.  If we are giving opinions, and if it had been put
to a vote, my first vote would have gone to MO refly, my second to
Spectrum Astro's MSTI-based model (at least they made an effort to
address the MO science objectives), and a distant third would have
been JPL's in-house effort of hand-me-downs.  As presented, the
Clementine II effort didn't even rate a vote, IMNSHO.   8^) 
 
Of course, much of this is moot now.  Within a few months, the Mars
Global Survey Orbiter spacecraft will be selected and efforts will be
underway to attempt to recover part (but noticably not all) of the MO
science objectives.  I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a
Clementine-like response to JPL's RFP.  Maybe in the new environment
it'll be better received. 
 
Mike Malin
ex-Mars Observer Camera Principal Investigator
Mars Global Survey Orbiter (1996) Camera Principal Investigator

Article: 83919
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: magnus@thep.lu.se (Magnus Olsson)
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Sender: news@nomina.lu.se (USENET News System)
Organization: Dept. of Theoretical Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 00:10:46 GMT
 
In article <1994Mar4.211120.21446@octel.com>,
Robert Rouse <rkrouse@octel.com> wrote:

>Why does the DoD need to be doing this mission?  How is this protecting
>the people of the USA?  Surely, there must be a logical explaintion.
 
There is a perfectly logical explanation, but you might not like it.
The BMDO (Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, previously known
as SDIO) wanted to test some new hardware for detecting enemy missiles.
However, the arms-control treaties forbid testing it on real missiles
(even American ones), so they decided to test it on natural objects as
well, viz. the moon and an asteroid. Since the data returned will be
of scientific as well as engineering value, they decided to let civilian
scientists use the data. This not only saves a lot of money for the
scientists, it also meens good PR for the BMDO.
 
BTW, I've noted a curious fact (and this should *not* be taken as 
in any way criticizing you, Robert): Clementine was discussed very
throughly on sci.space a few months ago. Now that it's up there, most
sci.space posters seem never to have heard of it before. Is this
because there's been a large, recent influx of new participants to
this newsgroup, or is there another explanation?
 
              Magnus Olsson                | \e+      /_
    Department of Theoretical Physics      |  \  Z   / q
        University of Lund, Sweden         |   >----<           
 magnus@thep.lu.se,  thepmo@selund.bitnet  |  /      \===== g
PGP key available via finger or on request | /e-      \q

Article: 83926
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 04:45:16 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1994Mar7.001046.6013@nomina.lu.se> magnus@thep.lu.se
(Magnus Olsson) writes: 

>...BMDO... wanted to test some new hardware for detecting enemy missiles.
>However, the arms-control treaties forbid testing it on real missiles
>(even American ones), so they decided to test it on natural objects...
 
Magnus, please be specific:  *WHICH* treaties forbid this?  Please cite
chapter, verse, and exact wording.
 
I'm getting tired of hearing this fairy story.
 
There is nothing, repeat *nothing*, in any law or treaty that forbids BMDO
to test sensors against real missiles.  They do it constantly, using
sounding rockets, Vandenberg test launches, etc. etc.
 
It happens that for *this* particular collection of sensors, natural objects
are perfectly adequate, and substantially cheaper.  It will also get them
some good public relations, and do some neat space exploration (which some
of the folks there care about, although they can't justify programs based
on it).  They're doing it this way because it's better, not because they're
Evil Military Vermin scheming to find a way around treat limitations.
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 83935
From: charles@tranquest.com (Charles Radley)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 94 11:46:30 GMT
Organization: Tranquest Corporation
 
In article <1994Mar7.001046.6013@nomina.lu.se> magnus@thep.lu.se writes:

>In article <1994Mar4.211120.21446@octel.com>,
>Robert Rouse <rkrouse@octel.com> wrote:
>>Why does the DoD need to be doing this mission?  How is this protecting
>>the people of the USA?  Surely, there must be a logical explaintion.
 
A member of the Clementine team told me this reason:
 
In previous years, underground nuclear tests were used to collect
radiation effects data on electronics.
 
The moratorium on nuclear tests in part gave rise to Clementine.
The high radiation environment within and beyond the Van Allen
belts is now the only way to get data on high doses of radiation on
electronics.
 
--
Charles F. Radley          Telephone / Fax:   1-216-888-3992
                                   Address:   P. O. Box 30236
                                              Cleveland, 
                                              OH 44130-0236
Internet : charles@tranquest.com              U. S. A.

Article: 83943
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 16:28:53 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <763040790.47snx@tranquest.com> charles@tranquest.com
(Charles Radley) writes: 

>In previous years, underground nuclear tests were used to collect
>radiation effects data on electronics.
>
>The moratorium on nuclear tests in part gave rise to Clementine.
>The high radiation environment within and beyond the Van Allen
>belts is now the only way to get data on high doses of radiation on
>electronics.
 
I think something must have been lost from this explanation at some stage
along the way.  Reactors and particle accelerators are perfectly usable
as radiation sources for qualifying rad-hard electronics.  In fact, that
is how it is normally done:  electronics manufacturers typically did not
have access to nuclear tests even in the days when they were still done,
and you want your electronics qualified and tested *before* launch.
 
Clementine itself did not spend all that long in the Van Allen belts,
for good reason.  (Its interstage adapter, which is instrumented as a
secondary satellite, is still in an orbit which passes through them with
some regularity.)  The radiation environment outside the belts, while
hotter than the usual Earth-surface one, is not particularly severe
except when the Sun flares.
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 83952
From: crdmi@vulcan.giss.nasa.gov (Daniel M. Israel)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine???
Date: 7 Mar 1994 13:18:42 -0500
Organization: NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, NYC
 
In article <CMA2JI.LxH@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry
Spencer) writes: 

> In article <1994Mar7.001046.6013@nomina.lu.se> magnus@thep.lu.se
(Magnus Olsson) writes: 
> >...BMDO... wanted to test some new hardware for detecting enemy missiles.
> >However, the arms-control treaties forbid testing it on real missiles
> >(even American ones), so they decided to test it on natural objects...
> 
> Magnus, please be specific:  *WHICH* treaties forbid this?  Please cite
> chapter, verse, and exact wording.
 
I attended a lecture on future missions funding about a year ago where
we were told that BMDO was forbidden from firing missles interceptions,
i.e. simulating shooting down enemy missles, regardless of what the
intercepted object was.  For this reason, BMDO was doing a scientific
mission to an asteroid.  According to the lecturer, BMDO required the
"probe" to collide with the asteroid - bad science, but a good missle
test.  No mention was made of treaty regulations on testing sensors on
a non-collision mission. (BMDO was specifically interested in what they
could hit, apparently, which was what caused the whole charade in the
first place.)  No mention was made of the Clementine mission, as I
recall, and I don't know if this is still accurate for the asteroid
flyby (the lecture was about a year ago.)  The lecturer was a reliable
person, a professor involved in several planetary missons.  (I don't
know if there is any good reason not to give his name, but I don't
really feel comfortable doing so without his permission.)
 
-- 
Daniel M. Israel                   
<crdmi@vulcan.giss.nasa.gov>       
Goddard Institute of Space Studies 
2880 Broadway, New York, NY

Article: 84033
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: A look @ C's pix (was Re: Clementine info available by FTP/WWW/GOPHER)
Date: 8 Mar 94 10:02:05 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
[This fell into a black hole Thursday night.  George Herbert says
the mail glitches on sci.space.science may be fixed, so I'll try again.]
 
We're back to the Moon again!  Hot dog!
 
In article <2l4m6t$9r@auggie.CCIT.Arizona.EDU>, chrisl@lpl.arizona.edu
(Chris Lewicki - LPL) writes: 

> JPG, (Corrected) GIF, and TGA images of the Clementine Imagery Data are now 
> available for (FTP/GOPHER/WWW) at:
> SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU in /pub/clementine/images
[...]
> 	For WWW users, the home page can be found through:
> http://SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU/
 
Okay, I've had a look.  I got some files from the Livermore site and
later went after more from the Arizona site, which proved to be a much
faster link for me.  It's truly wonderful for Mike Wilson and the rest
of the Clementine team to make these available to us.
 
The "Moon_Surf" series show part of the crater Nansen, about 110 km
diameter, near the Moon's north pole and close to the eastern edge of
the farside.  That is, it's near the top of the Moon and to the right
of the north pole if you view it from the northern hemisphere of
Earth.  You might be looking down at some of those fabled hypothetical
ice deposits in some of those shadowed craters!
 
This area of the Moon is very poorly covered by Lunar Orbiter images,
and I'm having trouble finding it in the Boys' Big Book of Moon
Pictures, better known as *Lunar Orbiter Photographic Atlas of the
Moon* by D. Bowker and J.K. Hughes.  I think part of it might appear
in Plate 42, picture IV-68-H3.  The little map included in one of the
Clementine images was very helpful, and I've got the crater well
located on my Russian charts, where it is labeled "HaHceH," of course...
 
I've spend years accumulating books, globes, slides, and maps of the
Moon.  It's about time I got to use them for something.
 
The GIF images don't appear to have any captions or text to go with
them.  I wish I could learn more about the science value of these
images.  Mike?  Chris?  Are there captions or press releases
somewhere? [In correspondence, Mike tells me not yet, but soon.]
 
There are two shots named "HiRes-Apollo_16.gif" and
"UV_Vis-Apollo_16.gif." In alt.sci.planetary, I think, Frank Crary
mentioned that getting images of the Apollo (and Luna?) landing sites
was an important objective, to compare Clementine's data to the
appearance of lunar materials returned by previous missions.   So from
the title we may presume that we're looking at the Apollo 16 site.
(Haven't checked maps and slides of this yet-- I'm supposed to be
packing for a trip to Florida.  If the Shuttle launch is delayed one
to three days, I'll be able to catch it.)  [Monday:  Damn thing
launched on time.  Another NASA blunder.]  Is one of those white
splotches a landing site?  Perhaps "rays" of bright stuff kicked up by
the exhaust of the LM *Orion's* ascent stage or descent stage?
 
> 	A browse page of the images has been set up.  By clicking on the 
> images, you can download the full resolution GIF.  If you prefer TGA or 
> JPG, you can use the FTP link supplied on the page, or direct ftp as 
> mentioned above.
 
WARNING:  The image "Clementine_Imagery," which is a very nice
comparison of Clementine's various sensors looking at the same spot,
is EXTREMELY large...  the GIF is over 800 Kbytes, and the viewing
programs I've tried seem to need about 3 Mb to display it fully.  A
JPEG version of about 300 K is available-- I recommend you snag that. 
All the inset images in this big file are available as smaller
individual files.  If your file-fetching bandwidth is limited, get
them instead.
 
I'm looking forward to more.  
 
-- 
     O~~*           /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
   - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /       \                          (_) (_)                    / | \
 |       |     Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 \       /     Bitnet:     HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET
   -   -       Internet:  HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
     ~         SPAN/Hepnet:      43009::HIGGINS 

Article: 84042
From: butler@cluster.gps.caltech.edu (Bryan Butler)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: A look @ C's pix (was Re: Clementine info available by 
             FTP/WWW/GOPHER)
Date: 9 Mar 1994 04:02:24 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
 
In article <1994Mar8.100205.1@fnalv.fnal.gov> higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov
(Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: 
 
>The "Moon_Surf" series show part of the crater Nansen, about 110 km
>diameter, near the Moon's north pole and close to the eastern edge of
>the farside.  That is, it's near the top of the Moon and to the right
>of the north pole if you view it from the northern hemisphere of
>Earth.  You might be looking down at some of those fabled hypothetical
>ice deposits in some of those shadowed craters!

Be careful about this.  the generally proposed regions for ice
deposits are "permanently shadowed" places.  by definition, then, the
ice will be in shadow in any image.  therefore, unless the dynamic
range of the instrument is extremely high, you won't see the ice, as
it'll be in shadow.  if the instrument is sensitive enough, and the
ice is reflective enough, you _might_ be able to pick up photons which
have been reflected off of the crater wall or floor, then off the ice.
 
        -bryan
         butler@cluster.gps.caltech.edu, or butler_b@caltech.edu
 
"Instead of all of this energy and effort directed at the war
to end drugs, how about a little attention to drugs which will
end war?"	Albert Hofmann
 
Article: 3244
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
Subject: <None>
Date: 8 Mar 94 22:34:38 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
In article <2ljhog$70f@gap.cco.caltech.edu>,
butler@cluster.gps.caltech.edu (Bryan Butler) writes: 

> In article <1994Mar8.100205.1@fnalv.fnal.gov> higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov
(Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: 
[regarding Clementine images of the north polar region of the Moon]

>>You might be looking down at some of those fabled hypothetical
>>ice deposits in some of those shadowed craters!
> 
> be careful about this.  the generally proposed regions for ice deposits
> are "permanently shadowed" places.  by definition, then, the ice will be
> in shadow in any image.  
 
I have a bit of common sense, and enough technical knowledge, to know
that we almost certainly aren't getting any *reflections* from ice in
these pictures!  I expected readers to infer that I was talking about
the inky black parts of the images.  Why, ice illuminated during the
lunar day wouldn't have a snowball's ch... er, it would sublimate quickly. 
 
> therefore, unless the dynamic range of the
> instrument is extremely high, you won't see the ice, as it'll be
> in shadow.  if the instrument is sensitive enough, and the ice is
> reflective enough, you _might_ be able to pick up photons which have
> been reflected off of the crater wall or floor, then off the ice.
 
I have heard vague speculation that Galileo's instruments (NIMS,
perhaps?) might be able to do this, but never seen calculations.  It
doesn't sound promising at first glance...
 
Speaking of polar ice, Bryan, since you are one of the people who
found peculiar radar reflections on Mercury, can you give us a
thumbnail account of recent progress?  Is polar ice still a viable
explanation for these?  Are there competing theories?  Are you (or
other groups) undertaking more studies of Mercury?
 
Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey              | In a churchyard in the valley
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory  | Where the myrtle doth entwine
Bitnet:           HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET  | There grow roses and other posies
Internet:       HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV  | Fertilized by Clementine.
SPAN/Hepnet:           43009::HIGGINS  |

Article: 84070
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Clementine Images
From: bakeris@nrlvx1.nrl.navy.mil
Date: 9 Mar 94 11:40:14 -0400
Organization: NRL SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION
 
In article <CM82BD.n21@cnsnews.Colorado.EDU>,
fcrary@benji.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes: 

> In article <1994Mar4.204159.1239@nrlvx1.nrl.navy.mil>,
>  <bakeris@nrlvx1.nrl.navy.mil> wrote:
>>> Quick question to anyone: how is it that Clementine orbits a few times
>>> and then leaves orbit? They give it a kick, I presume?
> 
>>Clementine has an onboard propulsion system which includes a 110 LB motor.
> 
> Isn't Clementine going to do a couple of lunar fly-bys after it
> leaves lunar orbit, to get enough energy for the asteroid encounter?

We only do one lunar gravity assist to get into heliocentric space. 
We do several orbits around Earth to get the timing correct for the
swingby.  Actually, the s/c doesn't pick up a lot of energy from the
swingby - something around 150 m/sec. 
 
Dean Bakeris
DSPSE Trajectory Analyst
 
Article: 84072
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: More re: Clementine II to Mars (MOC PI Response to Wilson Post)
From: bakeris@nrlvx1.nrl.navy.mil
Date: 9 Mar 94 11:54:25 -0400
Organization: NRL SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION
 
> My criticism of the "vaunted BMDO light weighting technology" had to
> do with the inability to enlarge the propellant tanks to accommodate
> sufficient fuel to insure the injection to Mars from the direct ascent
> trajectory (which was the only way the Titan II could have
> come even close to being able to launch Clementine II to Mars).  The
> lightweighting of the tanks to meet BMDO mission requirements had
> apparently limited the ability to increase their size (the tank walls
> would have had to have been thickened if the tanks were enlarged,
> making them even more than proportionally heavier).  I should add this
> is not my assessment, but what I wrote in my notes from the BMDO
> presentation and response to questions at the presentation at JPL.  I
> could be an inaccurate reporter, and would welcome comment by someone
> familiar with the design and fabrication of the Clementine propulsion
> system.  So, in a sense, it isn't water that my comment didn't hold,
> but fuel that the Clementine tanks didn't hold.
 
The Clementine II proposed spacecraft had the same delta V capability
as the first spacecraft - over 1700 m/sec. Also, since the third stage
of the Delta II was suficient to get the spacecraft to Mars, we were
also going to propose to add a small STAR motor to bring the orbit
apoapsis at Mars down to the mapping orbit within the first few days,
rather than the four months of maneuvers and aerobraking. 
 
> Well, actually not "IMHO".  I, unfortunately, didn't have a say.  It
> was in the (possibly not so humble?) opinion of Mr. Goldin (among
> others).  I have no doubt that there are people who would dispute the
> conclusion--indeed, I have corresponded with some at Wilson's own
> institution.  However, in the marketplace in which the Clementine II
> was offered, the customer wasn't buying.  That, IMHO, was not the
> customer's fault.  If we are giving opinions, and if it had been put
> to a vote, my first vote would have gone to MO refly, my second to
> Spectrum Astro's MSTI-based model (at least they made an effort to
> address the MO science objectives), and a distant third would have
> been JPL's in-house effort of hand-me-downs.  As presented, the
> Clementine II effort didn't even rate a vote, IMNSHO.   8^)
 
IMHO, the MSTI based model was overstated. They were geared toward
LEO operations, not deep space. And doing a MO re-fly would have
been a repeat of disaster. As much as I would have liked NASA to pick
Clementine as an alternative to MO, I'm glad to see that they did not rush
into a decision. Clementine II was never proposed to REPLACE MO (there's
only so much you can do with $70 million) but it was an alternative that 
would have been able to deliver significant data from a proven design.
 
Dean Bakeris
DSPSE Trajectory Analyst

Article: 3246
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: ice on Mercury
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 18:17:13 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1994Mar8.223438.1@fnalv.fnal.gov> higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov
(Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: 

>Speaking of polar ice, Bryan, since you are one of the people who
>found peculiar radar reflections on Mercury, can you give us a
>thumbnail account of recent progress?  Is polar ice still a viable
>explanation for these?  Are there competing theories?  Are you (or
>other groups) undertaking more studies of Mercury?
 
I'm not Bryan, but I can throw in one interesting bit of data...  I've
gotten rather behind in my reading of Science, and just ran across a
paper from a few months ago that is relevant.  For the strong radar
echoes observed near Mercury's poles to be ice, you need a process
known as "coherent backscatter".  CB is not observed from ordinary
ice, but has been postulated as the easiest way to explain very bright
radar returns from several astronomical objects, notably some of the
Jovian satellites and the poles of Mercury.  It *has* now been
observed in parts of the Greenland ice sheet, with overall
characteristics quite similar to those of the astronomical echoes. 
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 54243
From: obyrne@cp.dias.ie (Chris O'Byrne)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.space.policy,sci.space.science
Subject: Clementine mission patch/symbol has "9"?
Date: 13 Mar 1994 15:38:29 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
 
The symbol (mission patch?) for Clementine has the eponymous girl
holding a shield. She is situated against a starry background with the
Moon in front which has an american flag planet upon it. In the stars
to the upper right of Clementine is what appears to be the asteroid
Geographos but there is a large number 9 with a cardinal number symbol
before it ("#9") covering much of Geographos. 
 
What does the "#9" signify?
 
-David Moore BSc FRAS, Editor, ASTRONOMY & SPACE magazine published by:
 Astronomy Ireland, P.O.Box 2888, Dublin 1, Ireland. VISA/MC accepted.
 (ONE OF WORLD'S LARGEST ASTRO. SOC. per capita-email any larger! 0.048%)
Tel:   0 8 9 1 - 8 8 - 1 9 - 5 0     for U.K. Hotline (new message Mondays)
(dial 1550-111-442 in Republic of Ireland)         EMAIL: OBYRNE@CP.DIAS.IE

Article: 54312
From: buenneke@rand.org (Dick Buenneke)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Clementine mission patch/symbol has "9"?
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 1994 15:05:02 -0800
Organization: RAND -- Santa Monica, Calif.
 
From the lyrics of "Oh, My Darling Clementine"

(courtesy of waissrc:/Other Gopher Information Services/Wide Area
Information Service/lyrics.src at sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu
 
In a cavern, in a canyon,
Excavating for a mine,
Dwelt a miner, forty-niner
And his daughter Clementine.
 
     Oh my darling, oh my darling
     Oh my darling, Clementine
     Thou art lost and gone forever,
     Dreadful sorry, Clementine.
 
Light she was and like a fairy,
And her shoes were number nine,
Herring boxes without topses
Sandals were for Clementine
 
     CHORUS
 
Drove she ducklings to the water
Every morning just at nine,
Hit her foot against a splinter
Fell into the foaming brine.
 
[rest of song's mauldlin lyrics deleted]
 
-- 
Richard H. Buenneke Jr.                     Tel: (310) 393-0411, Ext. 7382 
RAND Graduate School                        Fax: (310) 393-4818
1700 Main Street                              Internet: buenneke@rand.org
P.O. Box 2138                                  "All opinions are mine
alone,
Santa Monica, Calif.  90407-2138           All facts speak for themselves"

Article: 54316
From: bhill@trifle.gsfc.nasa.gov (Robert Hill)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.space.policy,sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Clementine mission patch/symbol has "9"?
Date: 14 Mar 1994 19:38:29 GMT
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- InterNetNews site
 
Ah what the benighted sections of the world missed not being able
to watch Huckleberry Hound as youngsters!  
 
"... and her shooooz were number nine!"
 
--
Robert.S.Hill@gsfc.nasa.gov
Not speaking for any of the following:
Hughes STX Corp., Code 681, NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD 20771

"Don't agree with me until I'm finished talking!" -- Darryl F. Zanuck

Article: 5432
From: "Walter K. Daniel KE3HP" <wk02593@worldlink.com>
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
Subject: Clementine ftp site
Date: 22 Mar 1994 14:05:28 -0800
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Sender: daemon@news.arc.nasa.gov
 
[Here's info about the ftp site for Clementine images and information.  
Please note that I am not involved with Clementine in any way, so I am 
not the person to ask about this site.  I am simply forwarding this from 
another list.  --WKD]
 
CLEMENTINE IMAGES
 
The Clementine spacecraft is currently in orbit around the moon and will
remain there until May  5 when it will leave lunar orbit and pass by the
Earth on its way to  fly by asteroid 1620 Geographos on August 31, 1994. 
 
During the flight, selected images taken by the on-board cameras will be
made available on a regular basis through this Internet node. Instructions
for transfer of the images by either ftp and E-mail are provided later in
this file. Programs to decode the images on most computers connected to
Internet are contained in directory /pub/binaries/...
 
 
Background
 
Clementine is a Department of Defense Program to demonstate a new
generation of technolgy for DOD and civilian space applications.
 
Clementine was launched on January 25, 1994 from the Vandenberg Air Force 
Base on a Titan IIG.
 
Clementine is the first mission to the moon by the United States since
the Apollo Program. 
 
The Clementine mission was sponsored by the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization, BMDO, with support by NASA. 
 
The Clementine spacecraft was designed, built and operated by the Naval
Research Laboratory, NRL, in Washington DC.
 
The camera suite was provided by the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, LLNL.
 
More detailed technical information on the spacecraft, cameras and
lunar orbital characteristics can be found in  the directory 
/pub/clementine/information.
 
 
Directory structure
 
The structure  for  directory /pub/ is:
 
/pub/clementine/images/gif		-contains gif encoded image files
/pub/clementine/images/gif/Chant	-images of the crater Chant 
/pub/clementine/images/gif/Ryberg	-images of the crater Ryberg
/pub/clementine/images/gif/general	-general interest images
/pub/clementine/images/gif/general/old	-older general interest images
/pub/clementine/images/gif/orbit_80	-some interesting NIR images taken
					 when clementine crossed the 
terminator
/pub/clementine/images/targa		-contains targa encoded image files
/pub/clementine/images/targa/old	-older general interest images
/pub/clementine/information		-contains ASCII text information on
				         mission technical characteristics
/pub/binaries/pc/dos			-contains binaries to view and
				         decompress images under MS-DOS (or
			                 compatable) operating system. Also
                                         contains ftp binaries.
/pub/binaries/pc/windows		-contains binaries to view and
				         decompress images under MS-Windows
/pub/binaries/sun/sparc/sunos	        -contains binaries to view images
					 under SunOS 4.1.*
/pub/binaries/sun/sun3/sunos		-contains binaries to view images 
					 under SunOS 4.1.*
/pub/binaries/sgi			-contains binaries to view images 
					 under SGI Irix 4.0
/pub/binaries/mac			-contains binaries to view and ftp
			                 images under the Macintosh OS
 
 
Current Clementine Images
 
Images sets will be updated once a day. 
 
Two sets of images will be available at any one time.
 
The Clementine spacecraft is currently in a polar orbit about the Moon
at the eastern (viewed from the Earth) edge of the visible lunar surface
near the Mare Orientale. 
 
The images contained in pub/clementine/images are:
 
Clementine camera image montage
HiRes - Apollo 16 landing site
HiRes - Moon surface
LWIR - Moon surface
NIR - Moon surface
Star Tracker - Big Dipper
Star Tracker - Earth Limb
Uv/Vis - Moon surface
Uv/Vis - Earth
Uv/Vis - Apollo 16 landing site
Uv/Vis - Hesiodus crater
 
 
These images are available both as gif and targa files.
 
Instructions for transfer by ftp or E-mail are given below.
 
 
               *    *    *
 
Accessing Clementine Imagery via ftp:
 
	To access data collected by the clementine mission by the ftp
protocol, you first must have an ftp client (it ships with most unix
operating systems) and TCP/IP access to the Internet.  If you don't have
ftp (you have a mac or pc) and are connected to the Internet, you may 
obtain an ftp client via our email file server with the following
instructions:
 
1) mail ftpmail@clementine.s1.gov
2) The body of the message should say HELP
3) The subject line may be blank, it does not matter.
 
This will send you instructions to help you get a pc or mac ftp program
from the ftpmail server (via email).  One key point of information 
that you will need: the programs are located under the directory
structure /pub/binaries (this will make sense after you have read
the help file).
 
Once you have satisified the two requirements (ftp & tcp/ip), you
activate your ftp program and call clementine.s1.gov by typing:
 
	ftp clementine.s1.gov 
 
If your computer has trouble figuring out where clementine.s1.gov is,
you can try the less human-friendly command:
 
	ftp 128.15.32.9
 
You'll then get a prompt, that asks what your Name is.  Just type in "ftp".
It will then ask you for a password.  By net convention, you should type
in what your email address is.  An example might be "John.Doe@nowhere.gov".
We ask for this just so we can keep track of how many people are using
the services we provide.  The ftp server (the machine you just opened
up the connection with) will not echo back what you type as your password.
Just hit return when you've typed it.  
 
After you've logged in, you'll see a few automatic messages, and get 
a prompt that looks like the following:
 
	ftp>
 
At this point, you have several options.  You can use "ls" or "dir" 
to show the contents of the directory your in.  In this case (assuming
you typed "dir", it would look something like the following:
 
	ftp> dir
	200 PORT command successful.
	150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for /bin/ls.
	total 8
	-rw-r--r--  1 root     staff        1487 Mar  6 10:34 README
	dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     staff         512 Mar  1 07:37 bin
	dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     staff         512 Mar  1 07:38 dev
	dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     staff         512 Mar  1 07:40 etc
	dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     staff         512 Mar  5 17:46 msgs
	dr-xr-sr-x  4 root     staff         512 Mar  6 07:10 pub
	dr-xr-xr-x  3 root     staff         512 Mar  1 07:43 usr
	226 Transfer complete.
	426 bytes received in 0.14 seconds (3 Kbytes/s)
	ftp> 
 
The only thing of real interest in this directory is the README 
file.  To get it back to your system (so you can read it) type:
 
	ftp> get README
 
Your computer will deposit it on your system as the filename README,
then you can use your favorite editor to examine the contents.
 
To find something more interesting to look at, use the cd command to
go down into the "pub" (stands for public) directory.  To do this,
you would type:
 
	ftp> cd pub
 
You'll then want to use either "ls" or "dir" again, to see where
to go.  Essentially, you will need to look around a bit to figure
out where the data you want is located.  The file README at the
top level should help you get some idea.  
 
Advanced features:
Clementine.s1.gov's ftp server supports automatic file compression
and tarring (unix tar command).  Simply specify the filetype 
(extention) to have the file compressed or the directory tarred up.
Example:
 
	ftp> get tga.tar.z 
 
This would automatically make a tar file of all files in the tga 
directory, and would then compress the tar file using the gnu 
gzip program.  You would recieve the file as "tga.tar.z".
Accessing Clementine imagery via E-mail
 
 
               *    *    *
 
Accessing Clementine imagery via E-mail:
 
Clementine.s1.gov supports file transfers by electronic mail.  Any data
available by FTP is also available by E-mail.
 
To communicate with the FTP-Mail service, send your requests by Internet
E-mail to the address ftpmail@clementine.s1.gov.  The procedure to send E-mail
varies widely between service providers, so please ask your service provider
for instructions if you do not know how to send Internet E-mail.
 
When sending requests, the 'Subject' line is ignored by FTP-Mail.  It doesn't
matter what you put there.  It may be blank.
 
In the body of your message, you enter a series of commands which are
collected and placed into a request queue.  The commands in this queue
are executed in the order that the messages are received.
 
Here is a very brief summary of FTP-Mail commands.  In the following text,
square brackets '[' and ']' surround optional parts of FTP-Mail commands.
The word 'pathname' refers to a file name, which may or may not also have
a directory name as part of it.  The word 'number' just means a whole
number.
 
Don't despair if you don't understand all of this right away.  After the
command summary, there are several examples of messages you might send to
FTP-Mail, and each example has an explanation of what it will do.
 
Summary of FTP-Mail commands:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
help			Just send back help.  You will get a text
			document E-mailed to you that looks much like this
			document.
open			Prepare FTP-Mail for FTP commands.
quit			End of input - ignore any following lines.
			This is useful if your mail signature contains
			something that might be interpreted as a FTP-Mail
			command.
 
FTP commands:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
cd pathname		Change current directory.
ls [pathname]		Short listing of pathname, default is current 
directory.
dir [pathname]		Long listing of pathname, default is current 
directory.
get pathname		Get a file and E-mail it back.
compress		Compress files/dir-listings before E-mailing back.
gzip			GZip files/dir-listings before E-mailing back.  This
			is NOT the same as .ZIP format!
uuencode		Convert binary file to uuencode format for E-mailing.
btoa			Convert binary file to btoa format for E-mailing.
force uuencode		Force all files/dir-listings to be uuencoded.
force btoa		Force all files/dir-listings to be btoa'd.
 
mime			Send the result as a MIME Version 1.0 message.
			Text will be sent as text/plain charset=US-ASCII
			Non-text as application/octet-stream.
			If the file is split up into multiple messages then
			it will be sent as a message/partial.  MIME format
			is by far the easiest to use if your E-mail program
			is capable of using it.
 
force mime		As mime, but force text files to be sent as
			application/octet-stream.
 
no compress		If you previously told FTP-Mail to run compress,
			this command turns off compress.
no gzip			If you previously told FTP-Mail to run gzip,
			this command turns off gzip.
no uuencode		If you previously told FTP-Mail to send files
			in uuencode format, this turns btoa format off.
no btoa			If you previously told FTP-Mail to send files
			in btoa format, this turns btoa format off.
no mime			If you previously told FTP-Mail to send files
			in MIME format, this turns MIME format off.
 
size number[K|M]
			Set the maximum size a file can be before it
			is split up and E-mailed back in parts, with
			each part no larger than the given number of
			kilobytes (K) or megabytes (M).
			This is limited to 102400.  The default size
			is 60K bytes.
 
mode binary		Change the mode selected for the get command to
			binary.
mode ascii		Change the mode selected for the get command to
			ASCII.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
 
The defaults are:
 
Directory listings are sent as ASCII.
All files are considered binary.
Binary files are sent uuencoded, with no compression.
Files are split up into messages of 60K bytes in size.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
 
Here are some example messages you might send to FTP-Mail.  Each
example has an explanation of what it does.
 
EXAMPLE 1:
 
open
dir
quit
 
WHAT IT DOES:
This sends back a listing of the contents of the top level directory.
 
The directory listings are in UNIX(R) format.  An example:
 
total 12
-rw-r--r--  1 root     staff        1487 Mar  6 10:34 README
dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     staff         512 Mar  1 07:37 bin
dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     staff         512 Mar  1 07:38 dev
dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     staff         512 Mar  1 07:40 etc
dr-xr-xr-x  2 root     staff         512 Mar  5 17:46 msgs
dr-xr-sr-x  4 root     staff         512 Mar  6 07:10 pub
dr-xr-xr-x  3 root     staff         512 Mar  1 07:43 usr
 
One important thing to know about this listing is that a letter 'd' in
the first column indicates that the name in the last column is a
subdirectory, which may contain more files.  You send the 'cd' command
followed by a 'dir' command to FTP-Mail in order to list these subdirectories.
In the example listing above, only README is a file name- the other six names
are subdirectory names.  On clementine.s1.gov, only the pub (it's short for
"public") subdirectory in the top level directory has anything interesting
in it.  It itself has several subdirectories within it, and so on.
 
UNIX(R) is a trademark of Unix System Laboratories.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
 
EXAMPLE 2:
 
open
cd pub/clementine/images
dir
quit
 
WHAT IT DOES:
This sends back a listing of the contents of the directory named
pub/clementine/images.  Note that directory names are separated
by a forward slash (/), not a backslash (\), period (.), or colon (:),
which are used by other operating systems to indicate a subdirectory.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
 
EXAMPLE 3:
 
open
cd pub/clementine/information
get clementine_overview
quit
 
WHAT IT DOES:
This sends back the file clementine_overview in the directory
pub/clementine/information.  This file is uuencoded but not compressed
or gzipped, because this is the default.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
 
EXAMPLE 4:
 
open
cd pub/clementine/images/tga
dir
mime
gzip
get Clementine_Imagery.tga
quit
WHAT IT DOES:
This first sends back a directory listing of the contents of the directory
pub/clementine/images/tga.  Then, it sends back the file 
Clementine_Imagery.tga.
As this is a binary file it has to be transfered in binary mode.  The file
will be processed by gzip to make it smaller, and afterwards it will be
encoded in MIME format.  Since this particular file is very large, it will be
sent back in over sixty parts.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
 
EXAMPLE 5:
 
open
cd pub/clementine/images/gif
get LWIR-Moon_Surf.gif
cd ../tga
compress
ls -ltra
quit
 
WHAT IT DOES:
 
This sends back the file LWIR-Moon_Surf.gif in the directory
pub/clementine/images/gif.  Because it is binary it will automatically be
uuencoded (the default binary encoder).  Then FTP-Mail will change the
current directory to ../tga.  The '..' portion of the file name means the
'parent' directory ABOVE this directory.  In the case of
pub/clementine/images/gif, the 'parent' directory is pub/clementine/images.
And '../tga' would mean pub/clementine/images/tga.  After the current
directory is changed, it will mail back a compressed directory listing.
Although compressing ls output makes it binary, which then has to be
encoded with uuencode, it still ends up smaller (and quicker to transfer)
than the original directory listing in ASCII.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
 
If all else fails, and you cannot find anyone nearby to help you, you can
try sending E-mail to help@clementine.s1.gov and someone will try to assist 
you.

Please keep in mind that this person is a volunteer whose time is limited, so
only send mail if you really have no other option.  Thank you.

Article: 3426
From: chrisl@lpl.arizona.edu (Chris Lewicki)
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary
Subject: More Clementine info available
Date: 3 Apr 1994 21:46:24 GMT
Organization: SEDS
 
	A lot of new Clementine information has been made available by
the Clementine project.  Unfortunately, they are only offering that
data via WWW. 

	For the many of you who do not have access via WWW, I have
placed these files on SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU, which is available through
WWW, FTP, _and_ gopher. (Sorry - no ftpmail server yet!) 
 
	There are both images and mpeg animations now available.  The
images are some descriptive "slides" featuring information on the
instruments, and the animations present a "theatrical" overview of the
Clementine mission. 
 
	If you DO have access to WWW, the data is available through the
URL:      http://SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU/clem/clementine.html
 
Here are the descriptions of the images.  I've tried to keep the same
names as the source, but some of them are unforgivingly long, and thus
have been abbreviated. 
 
# SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU
# Directory: /pub/spacecraft/CLEMENTINE/images/mpeg
# Date: 4/3/94
# Clementine Animations
 
Cutaway.mpg     Progressive cutaway views of the Clementine spacecraft
Earthrise.mpg   An "Earthrise" Pan from Clementine data
FlyBy.mpg       A Fly-By of Clementine on it's way to the Moon
Laser_Trans.mpg Representation of Clementine's Laser Altimeter operating
LostGone.mpg    Clementine after it passes Geographos (disappearing
                into a starfield) 
 
# SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU
# Directory: /pub/spacecraft/CLEMENTINE/images/sensors
# Date: 3/29/94
 
HiRes.gif	Slide describing the High Resolution Camera
LWIR.gif	Slide describing the Long Wave Infrared Camera
NIR.gif		Slide describing the Near Infrared Camera
StarTracker.gif	Slide describing the Star Tracker
UVVIS.gif	Slide describing the Ultra-Violet/Visible Camera
index.gif	Mosaic of the images in this directory
 
---
-Chris Lewicki
Chrisl@LPL.Arizona.EDU

Maintainer of SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU
'Legendary' Mars Observer GRS Flight Investigation Team
UA SEDS President
SEDS-USA Director of Special Projects
 

Article: 3476
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Clementine Lunar Water Leak
Date: 15 Apr 94 01:50:46 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
On Tuesday, 12 April, the *Washington Times* reported that radar
experiments with the Pentagon's Clementine spacecraft had found
evidence for frozen water at the south pole of the Moon.
 
The Naval Research Laboratory, which operates Clementine, disavows
this unofficial claim and says that the radar data have yet to be
analyzed.
 
I heard about this affair a couple of days ago and have tracked down
the details with the help of several other people.
 
THE *TIMES* STORY
 
The 12 April *Washington Times* carried a story by David Alan Cole
headlined "That may be an icy smile on the man in the moon."
It's centered around a few quotes from John Brandenburg of Research
Support Instruments in Hunt Valley, Maryland.  He "responsible for
calibrating and integrating Clementine's instruments."
 
Clementine entered lunar orbit on 19 February.  The spacecraft's 
payload is mostly optical, infrared, and ultraviolet sensors designed
for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, and it has returned
many images of the lunar surface.  But Clementine's communications
system can also be used in a radar experiment.  In a "bi-static"
(two-station) system, Clementine aims its radio beam at the Moon's
surface, and reflected echoes are detected on Earth by the large
antennas of NASA's Deep Space Network.
 
"The radar signature indicates ice," Brandenburg is quoted as saying.
"I feel like we're riding point on the human race."  The article goes
on to explain the significance of radar evidence for ice, quoting
Steven Maran of the American Astronomical Society and Donald B.
Campbell of Cornell University.  Water vaporized in the impact of
comets may hang around the Moon's ultra-thin atmosphere and eventually
condense in cold, permanently shadowed areas near its poles. 
Recent radar studies of Mercury have suggested the presence of ice in
that planet's polar regions, strengthening speculation that the same
thing could exist on the Moon.
 
Other quotes from Brandenburg:
 
"If we see it, [the ice] probably exists in fairly substantial
quantities."
 
"It's a difficult angle from Earth to get radio waves down into the
craters [of the Moon's] poles." (But Clementine can illuminate the
polar regions from directly overhead.)
 
"We got some really nice data this weekend.  It looks like we hit the
jackpot."
 
The only other quote from a Clementine person was from Chris Lichentberg, NRL
communications engineer, and it was a mild "We've got good raw data."
 
More background about Clementine concluded the story.
 
Reportedly the *Times* carried another story Wednesday; I haven't seen
it yet.
 
THE NRL STATEMENT 
 
The Public Affairs Office at the Naval Research Laboratory 
in Washington, D.C. had this to say:
 
"Data on the Moon's south polar region, recently obtained using the
transmitter aboard the Clementine spacecraft and ground sites at the
NASA Deep Space Network (DSN) Tracking Facilities, have not been
analyzed.  Data from these bi-static radar tests were received and
recorded at the DSN Tracking Facilities on 9 April.  It will be at
least two weeks before the data taken at the Goldstone DSN site in
Califronia will arrive at NRL for analysis.  And it will be several
additional weeks before data taken at overseas DSN sites will be
received.  Analysis of the data will be conducted jointly by NRL and
the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA.  Information on the
findings from these data will be forthcoming when the data have been
received and analyzed by the Clementine scientific team."
 
WHAT HAPPENED?
 
My guess is that Mr. Cole, the *Washington Times* reporter, found that
Mr. Brandenburg was willing to talk about the data despite the
fact that its principal users want to perform a careful analysis
before announcing any conclusions.  Such caution is normal for any
scientific team.
 
A friend has passed on the theory that Cole confused *looking* for ice 
with *finding* ice. The quotes from Brandenburg cast doubt on this idea.
 
The Clementine scientists will hold a press conference on Thursday,
5 May, at 1 PM EDT, a couple of days after the spacecraft departs
lunar orbit and begins navigating towards its encounter with the
asteroid 1620 Geographos on Wednesday, 31 August.
 
WHAT'S SO INTERESTING ABOUT ICE ON THE MOON?
 
The Moon is poor in volatile substances and particularly in hydrogen.
Since hydrogen is the best practical rocket fuel, a source of it on
the Moon means that it's possible to build an extraterrestrial
refueling station someday.  This could change the economics of space
development radically, since it costs a lot to lift rocket propellant
from the surface of the Earth into space;  lifting it off the Moon
could potentially cost much less.  
 
Hence lunar ice has been a tantalizing possibility to people planning 
cislunar and interplanetary transportation systems, industries, and
outposts.
 
Water ice may also be a more practical source of oxygen than other
minerals available on the Moon.  I'd speculate that where water ice
survives, it's likely to be mixed with carbon dioxide and other
compounds of carbon and maybe nitrogen.  These could all be useful to
lunar-based industries, if they're accessible in quantity.
 
In addition, the scientific value of ice deposits could be of great
significance.  Seems to me that cometary material would accumulate in
layers roughly in chronological order, so that a core of the stuff
would provide a history (for isotopic and chemical analysis) of
cometary composition going back tens of millions of years, or even
longer. In between impacts, you get a sample of solar wind
bombardment, too!
 
Most of this speculation goes back to a detailed 1979 paper by James
Arnold, although the suggestion of frozen lunar polar volatiles
appeared in the Sixties.  It's been controversial-- radiation and
solar wind might sputter away ice even in dark places, for instance--
and there has not been much evidence in favor of polar ice.  Finding
evidence for ice in Mercury's polar regions, a couple of years ago,
gave a real boost to the Moon's prospects.  
 
MORE ABOUT CLEMENTINE AND RADAR
 
I was hoping to give you some technical information, but the material
in (mostly excellent) the launch press kit has failed me; it says very
little about Clementine's communcations, except that there's a
"DSN-compatible transponder without encryption" and a 128 kb/s
downlink and 1 kb/s uplink.  A diagram shows two transmitter-receiver
pairs connected to the antennas through a diplexer and transfer
switch.  I hope some of our Usenet correspondents can tell us more
about frequencies, power, and other parameters.  I will send copies of
this message to people familiar with Clementine and people who work on
planetary radar studies.  It would be nice to see a
back-of-the-envelope calculation about this situation.
 
I note that bistatic radar tests are *not* listed among the science
or engineering objectives of the mission.  Possibly they were added
late in the game, or had a very low priority?  Clementine does not
have a dedicated radar instrument on board, so the communications
system must have been used for these experiments.
 
A few months ago, near the end of its research program, the Magellan
spacecraft, orbiting Venus, became the transmitter for a similar
bistatic radar.  (This was not its usual mode of operation.) I
gathered these tests worked; Magellan folks said they might try it
again later.
 
Meanwhile, Clementine is doing a fine job of imaging the Moon at a
variety of wavelengths.  To see some of these pictures, consult the 4
April issue of *Aviation Week*, or FTP them from clementine.s1.gov or
seds.lpl.arizona.edu.  
 
THANKS FOR THE HELP
 
I'd like to thank Dee Ann Divis, who tipped me off about the existence
of the *Times* stories, Henry Vanderbilt and Pat
(prb@access.digex.com), who supplied me with faxes of them, and Jim
Gately of NRL who sent their statement.  Mike Wilson of Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory has fed my curiosity with a steady
stream of Clementine images.
 
DISCLAIMER
 
Opinions expressed in this posting are mine, and not those of
Fermilab, Universities Research Association, or the U.S. Department of
Energy.  This is always true of my postings, but it's a good idea to
point it out once in a while.  A government contractor employee can't
be too careful these days.
 
     O~~*         /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
   - ~ -~~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /       \                        (_) (_)                    / | \
 |       |   Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 \       /   Bitnet:                          HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET
   -   -     Internet:                      HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
     ~       SPAN/Hepnet/Physnet:                  43009::HIGGINS
 

    I have felt before the the  Clementine mission lacked something,
    in not being able to search for water... and now they pull this
    out of their hat. I got to hand it to them.
    
    Positive evidence will be great, but even negative evidence has
    good scientific value.
    
    Gil

Article: 4035
From: clarinews@clarinet.com (AP)
Newsgroups: clari.local.los_angeles,clari.tw.space
Subject: Data May Reveal Ice On Moon
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 94 10:30:08 PDT
 
	LOS ANGELES (AP) -- So maybe the moon's not made of green cheese,
but scientists are looking at the intriguing prospect that its deep
craters contain something familiar to earthlings: ice.
	This week, they will begin analyzing signals recently beamed by
the moon-mapping Clementine spacecraft into a huge crater on the
lunar South Pole.
	``It's so dark and deep the sun can never shine in there. But
there might be ice from the early days of its formation that has
not been heated and evaporated,'' said Air Force Lt. Col. Pedro
Rustan, mission director for the Clementine program at the
Pentagon.
	``It will take probably four to six weeks before we know if the
data indicates that there is or is not ice,'' he said.
	Because the moon has no atmosphere to trap gases and moisture,
signs of ice there would offer intriguing new clues about its
origins more than 4 billion years ago.
	``I'm sure scientists would be very interested in the
composition of the ice. It doesn't have to be water. It could be a
mixture of frozen gases,'' said Patrick So, an astronomer at the
Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles. ``There would be speculation
about where did it come from. Was it gas that was collected during
the formation of the solar system?''
	Astronomers ``believe ice is going to be found, most likely in
the craters on the North or on the South Pole,'' said Rustan, an
electrical engineer at the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization.
	So far, the mission has confirmed the existence of a giant
crater on the South Pole that Rustan estimates to be ``tens of
kilometers wide.''
	``We have a complete mosaic picture of the South Pole and it
shows a very large-size crater,'' he said Friday. But because ice
can't be detected from the Clementine images alone, additional
testing was required to see what's inside the craters.
	During the weekend of April 9-10, radio astronomy experts from
Stanford University and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in
Pasadena sent a signal from the Clementine spacecraft into the
crater.
	The reflection of the signal was picked up by the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration's Deep Space Network. Two
signals were received at the Goldstone tracking station near
Barstow, Calif.; another at a station in Canberra, Australia, and
another at Madrid, Spain, Rustan said.
	A preliminary review of the data is scheduled early this week at
JPL and additional analysis will take place back at the Pentagon,
Rustan said.
	Similar tests for ice on the moon's North Pole will be done next
weekend.
	``If we were to find ice in this huge crater, it provides the
possibility of future space exploration in which this ice could be
utilized by humans at the moon,'' Rustan said. ``It would provide
an interesting twist into space exploration.''
	Clementine was built by the Naval Research Laboratory. The
spacecraft, launched Jan. 25 from Vandenberg Air Force Base in
California, is on a $75 million mission to test ``Star Wars''
sensors developed to detect and track missiles. During the course
of the mission, the sensors are being aimed at Earth, the moon and
the asteroid Geographos.
	The spacecraft is due to depart the moon on May 3. It will
return to an Earth orbit before continuing on to Geographos,
passing within 75 miles of the asteroid on Aug. 31.
	Clementine, about the size of a compact car, originally was
called the Deep Space Program Science Experiment. It got its new
name from the old song because it will be ``lost and gone forever''
after passing the asteroid.

From:	VERGA::US4RMC::"davida5625@aol.com" "MAIL-11 Daemon"  1-MAY-1994 
To:	nss-chapters@hela.iti.org
CC:	
Subj:	Press release

The following is a hot press release about Clementine for use by May
3. Thanks to Bruce Moomaw of Sacramento L5 for his work producing the
release. 
____________________________________________

 For Immediate Release

         U.S. Space Probe Prepares to Leave Moon,
              Set Out for Asteroid Rendezvous

The small, but sophisticated, space probe Clementine 1 - the
product of a unique collaboration betweeen the United States
civilian and military space programs - is preparing to leave
its first stop at the Moon, and set out for the first close up
look at a near Earth asteroid in August.

On May 3, Clementine will fire its rocket engine and leave lunar
orbit, setting out on a journey for Geographos, a tiny asteroid
two miles long and one mile wide, and will fly past it at
high speed on August 31, 1994. Geographos belongs to a group of 
asteroids which cross the orbit of Earth, and are thought to 
crash into Earth periodically. Such an asteroid collision may 
have been responsible for the extinction of the dinosaurs.

Clementine - which weighs only 508 lbs. dry - was designed to test
new super-miniature cameras, and other electronic devices of the
type that may be used in future anti-missile interceptor warheads
by Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, to see how well they
operate after long exposure to the radiation of space. It was
designed and built for only $55 million by the Naval Research
Laboratory, and is testing the cameras by using them to take 
photographs of the Moon and Geographos.

Clementine, launched on January 25, has returned back to Earth 
over 1 million high quality photos of the lunar surface, showing 
details only a few hundred feet across. Thus far, the probe 
has been working flawlessly. 

For more information about the Clementine space probe, please
contact {your name}, {your title} of {your chapter}, a chapter
of the National Space Society at {your telephone number}. 

end release

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% From: davida5625@aol.com
% X-Mailer: America Online Mailer
% Sender: "davida5625" <davida5625@aol.com>
% Message-Id: <9405012305.tn38042@aol.com>
% To: nss-chapters@hela.iti.org
% Date: Sun, 01 May 94 23:05:17 EDT
% Subject: Press release

Hmmm...that's funny.  The WWW site at clementine.s1.gov says the departure date
is May 5.  I wonder who is right?

Burns

Article: 532
From: jdg@zeus.jpl.nasa.gov (Jon Giorgini)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Clementine Dodges Axe
Date: 4 May 1994 16:52:16 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
 
   A New York Times article today indicates Clementine was almost shut
down yesterday.... 
 
    "... But the [DOD] officials, relenting under congressional
pressure, agreed at the last minute to find an estimated $3.2 million
necessary to keep the spacecraft working through its flight by
asteroid 1620 Geographos at the end of August." 
 
    "Without the money ... the mission would have been shut down Friday..."

From Jonathon's Space Report:

The Deep Space Program Science Experiment probe, known to its friends as
Clementine, has completed mapping the Moon (and returned some
spectacular images!). Dean Bakeris reports that  Clementine left lunar
orbit on May 4 at 0324:15 UTC. Perigee was due on May 8 at 0556, and
apogee will be at 0530 on May 16, when a targeting maneuver will be
performed. Second perigee will be around May 24, and Clementine will fly
past the moon again on May 27 on its way to solar orbit. It will reach
asteroid (1620) Geographos at 2116 UTC on Aug 31. It is hoped to send
the probe on to fly by the unnumbered minor planet 1983 RD in October
1995.

Article: 4021
From: clarinews@clarinet.com (AP)
Newsgroups: clari.tw.space,clari.news.usa.military
Subject: Satellite Malfunctions
Date: Mon, 9 May 94 15:30:37 PDT
 
	WASHINGTON (AP) -- The satellite Clementine suffered a
malfunction on Saturday that will prevent the craft from completing
a mission to fly by and photograph the asteroid Geographos, the
Pentagon said on Monday.

	The satellite's on-board computer mistakenly activated several
thrusters, burning up much of its fuel supply, a statement said.

	Clementine cannot be sent in the direction of the asteroid, but
will continue to perform a military mission that will test 23
``advanced technologies,'' the statement said.

	``The Clementine engineering team is examining several mission
options which would continue to yield useful data,'' the statement said.

	Since Jan. 25, the satellite has recorded over 1.5 million
images, including many high-quality topographical pictures of the moon.

	The craft is a landmark for space projects, since it
demonstrates that small, highly capable satellites can be built and
launched for under $100 million and in less than two years.

Article: 582
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Spinning & out of ACS fuel (was Re: Clementine problems?)
Date: 11 May 94 00:01:19 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
In article <9MAY199421303284@lmsmgr.lerc.nasa.gov>,
olson@lmsmgr.lerc.nasa.gov (SANDRA OLSON) writes: 

> I just heard on TV that Clementine had a problem this weekend and by the 
> time we regained communications/control that all her fuel was spent.  She 
> therefore won't be able to make her rendezvous with that asteroid.
 
This is correct.  Despite safeguards, the attitude control jets fired
continuously until all fuel was gone.  The spacecraft is spinning at
about 80 RPM.  All her other systems are still working nominally.
 
According to Dean Bakeris, it's impossible to send the spacecraft to
Geographos now.  Her present course will take it through a
gravity assist past the Moon and into heliocentric orbit; on 24 May
Clementine's controllers will attempt a maneuver to keep her in the
vicinity of the Earth.
 
Although her planetary-science days are over, it's still useful to
gather data on the operation of Clementine's high-tech gadgets for as
long as possible.
 
She may not be "lost and gone forever," but those ruby lips above the
water are blowing bubbles soft and fine...  We haven't seen her
scientific results yet, but the fact that Clementine returned a ton of
data from lunar orbit makes her a pretty successful mission in my book.
 
*NY Times* on Laurence "Green Card" Canter, who | Bill Higgins
posted his ad to thousands of newsgroups:       | Fermilab
"So pleased his he with the response, in fact,  | Internet:
fact, that he said he planned to write a book   | higgins@fnal.fnal.gov
on how to advertise on the Internet." (19Apr94) | Bitnet:   higgins@fnal

Article: 583
From: fcrary@benji.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Clementine Malfunctions
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 06:06:22 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
 
In article <1994May10.031419.20674@cs.rochester.edu>,
Paul Dietz <dietz@cs.rochester.edu> wrote:

>Just saw the report: a computer malfunction on Clementine has
>caused it to waste much of its remaining fuel, so the Geographos
>flyby is now impossible.  Too bad.
 
It's a bit worse than "wast[ing] much of its remaining fuel." Last
weekend, they were testing the attitude control maneuvers for the
Geographos encounter. A computer error caused the attitude control
rockets to fire and continue firing until all their fuel was consumed.
At that point, the spacecraft was spinning at 80 rmp. This is not a
recoverable failure. I understand they are still in communication with
the spacecraft (omni-directional antenna?) and that BMDO can still
accomplish some of the tests they had wanted to do (I assume this is
the lifetime and radiation-hardening questions about the craft's
computers.) But for all scientific purposes, Clementine (all too aptly
named) is "lost and gone forever." 
 
                                               Frank Crary
                                               CU Boulder

Article: 1760
From: nigel@access.digex.net (Nigel Tzeng)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Clementine Malfunctions
Date: 10 May 1994 11:02:07 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
 
In article <2qn79k$7s4@crl2.crl.com>, George Herbert <gwh> wrote:

>I will be drinking a toast to missions we have not quite flown tonight.
 
Hmmm...well hopefully they fund Clementine II anyway.
 
>In article <1994May10.031419.20674@cs.rochester.edu>
>dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes: 
>>Just saw the report: a computer malfunction on Clementine has
>>caused it to waste much of its remaining fuel, so the Geographos
>>flyby is now impossible.  Too bad.
 
Yep...it turns out that while ACS (Attitude Control System) was
loading some software (I presume for the kick-out burn) they lost
telemetry.  20 minutes later they reaquire and notice two very bad
things.  The spacecraft is spinning and they are out of fuel.
 
They still have lock (ie can still get telemetry and send commands)
and still have fuel to do the kick out but with no ACS fuel...
 
Last I had heard they were trying to reduce the spin with the momentum
wheels but the rumor is that the spin is pretty bad.
 
Clementine produced some wonderful pictures (and science) of the moon
and for a satellite with practically zip in redundancy has done quite
well.  With a little luck they might find ice on the moon with the
existing data and have a solid (pun not intended) reason for doing
Clementine II.  That would be pretty neat...
 
Nigel
 
Article: 1767
From: jtk@s1.gov (Jordin Kare)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Clementine Malfunctions
Date: 10 May 1994 21:08:10 GMT
Organization: LLNL
 
In article <1994May10.031419.20674@cs.rochester.edu>
dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes: 

>Just saw the report: a computer malfunction on Clementine has
>caused it to waste much of its remaining fuel, so the Geographos
>flyby is now impossible.  Too bad.
 
Regrettably, I can confirm the problem.  The malfunction occurred 
Saturday morning at 9:39 EST, during a 20-minute communications interrupt, 
and apparently turned on several ACS thrusters; by the time comm came
back on, the ACS fuel was gone and the S/C was left spinning.  There's 
still plenty of fuel for the main engine, and the rest of the S/C is
apparently still fine.  I'm told it's not yet known whether the fault was
in the hardware or software.
 
There's still results to be gotten, e.g., on sensor lifetime and performance,
but the Geographos flyby is indeed almost certainly impossible.  
 
	Jordin Kare

I wonder how they might stop the spinning if they have lost attitude fuel? 
Maybe some alternate thrusters?  They supposedly have plenty of manuvering fuel.

Burns
----------------------

	WASHINGTON (AP) -- Managers of the experimental satellite
Clementine will try to save the craft, which has been spinning out
of control, by firing some of its thrusters to slow its spin, a
Pentagon spokesman said on Wednesday.
	It is hoped the craft could then be sent on its planned mission
to photograph the asteroid Geographos in August.
	On Saturday, a malfunction in the craft's computers caused it to
burn fuel, sending it into an improper orbit and threatening its
August mission.
	Pentagon spokesman Air Force Maj. Bob Potter said managers of
the craft will attempt to slow it in the next several days. They
may know the results sometime next week.
	The satellite is a landmark space project because it was built
and launched for under $100 million and in less than two years.

Partial answer to my previous question from the usenet:

They will attempt to pulse the main engine to slow the spin.   (Does it start up
with asymetrical thrust?  I don't know how this stops the spinning, but hey, if
they get it to work, it will be quite something!)

Burns

From:	US4RMC::"buenneke@rand.org" "Dick Buenneke" 13-MAY-1994 05:00:24.72
To:	usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	Clementine: the official story

[From Clementine's World Wide Web server. The URL is http://clementine.s1.gov]

Clementine Spacecraft Status

Status as of May 10, 1994 

After successfully completing a mission using advanced ballistic
missile defense technologies to map the entire surface of the moon,
the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's Clementine satellite
suffered an on-board malfunction at 9:39 a.m. EST, Saturday. The
likely result of this malfunction will be to prevent Clementine from
performing the planned close fly by of the near-Earth asteroid
Geographos in August 1994, and for the satellite to point its cameras
and sensors. 

Preliminary analysis has traced the cause of the malfunction to the
on-board computer which controls most of the satellite's systems
including the attitude control thrusters. The computer activated
several thrusters during a 20 minute telemetry interrupt with the
ground station, thus depleting all the fuel in the Attitude Control
System (ACS) tanks. It has not been determined as yet whether the
fault was in the computer software or in the computer's electronic
chips. The primary processor on the computer is a radiation hardened
Military Standard 1750A computer, which is not experimental technology. 

Clementine's mission control center in Alexandria, VA. is continuously
monitoring the satellite. It has been determined that all instruments and
systems are continuing to function well with the exception of the ACS. 

Although it may be difficult to Clementine to make the close fly by of
the asteroid, the satellite will continue to perform its intended
military mission to test 23 advanced technologies. The Clementine
engineering team is examining several mission options which would
continue to yield useful data. Since January 25, 1994, Clementine's
cameras have recorded over 1.5 million images including the
topographical surface of the moon. Analyzing this data, including
results of the search for the existence of ice on the lunar surface,
will continue to occupy scientists for many years. 

The Clementine project is managed by BMDO, built by the Naval Research
Laboratory, and its instruments constructed by industry and the
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. It has been a landmark project since it
demonstrates that small, highly capable satellites can be built and
launched for under $100 million and in less than two years, using
advanced miniaturized technology and a streamlined management approach. 

-- 
Richard H. Buenneke Jr.                    Tel: (310) 393-0411, Ext. 7382 
RAND Graduate School                       Fax: (310) 393-4818
1700 Main Street                             Internet: buenneke@rand.org
P.O. Box 2138                                  "All opinions are mine alone
Santa Monica, Calif.  90407-2138      All facts speak for themselves"

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% From: buenneke@rand.org (Dick Buenneke)
% Newsgroups: sci.space.news,sci.space.tech,sci.space.policy
% Subject: Clementine: the official story
% Followup-To: sci.space.tech
% Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 18:24:49 -0800
% Organization: RAND -- Santa Monica, Calif.
% Approved: sci-space-tech@isu.isunet.edu
% Apparently-To: usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov

Article: 610
From: knight@world.std.com (Chris Knight)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Despinning Clementine (and other news Clem related news)
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 18:49:19 GMT
Organization: The Thousand Acre Forest
 
In article <2qv4jdINN2fa@hydra.cs.unc.edu> leech@cs.unc.edu (Jon Leech) writes:

>In article <2qth2p$lcb@gap.cco.caltech.edu>,
>David M. Palmer <palmer@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
>>The press reports that the Clementine team is going to try to slow the
>>spacecraft's spin down from its current 80 RPM to 60 RPM using the main
>>thrusters.
>
>    Can someone describe how the main thrusters are laid out such that this
>is possible? My naive model of a "main thruster" is something exerting force
>along the spin axis through the COM, which doesn't seem to be true for
>Clementine.
>    Jon
>    __@/
 
After talking to someone who visiting the bat cave last week, he said
they are hoping to use thruster misalignment to create a counter-spin
torque.  Unfortunately the guys did such a good job aligning the main
engine thrust vector that they are not very optimistic about this approach. 
 
BTW- An article was released in the Kirtland AFB daily newspaper about
a Phillips Lab experiment called ACAT, or Advanced Concept
Architecture Test which recently demonstrated BMDO interceptor
technology applied to lunar landers.  The vehicle was hover tested and
delivered a micro rover to the simulated lunar surface after a free
flight hover test.  Look for it in upcoming AV Week and Space News. 
Philiips Lab point of contact is Mr. Rich Garcia at (505) 846-1911. 
 
Chris Knight
--
knight@world.std.com

Article: 611
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Clementine's recovery (was Re: Clementine salvageable?)
Date: 13 May 94 14:14:21 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
In article <cleff-120594104150@goldie.jpl.nasa.gov>,
cleff@haleakala.jpl.nasa.gov (Craig Leff) writes: 

> I heard that Clementine has two propulsion systems.  The binary system is
> the one that failed.  It was used for orbit trims and trajectory changes. 
> A mono system, used for attitude control, was being used to stabilize the
> spin and should have enough oomph left to reach Geographos.  Can someone
> confirm/deny/expand on this story, please?  It would be good news.
 
I think you are correct about the dual systems, but you have the
problem exactly backwards.  I can't provide a lot of technical
detail-- I'll have to start carrying around the Clementine presskit in
my briefcase... 
 
The monopropellant attitude control system thrusters kept firing last
Saturday, draining the hydrazine supply and spinning up the spacecraft
to 80 revolutions per minute. 
 
The bipropellant (monomethyl hydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide) main
engine is okay.  Controllers will attempt to fire it in carefully
timed pulses to slow down the spin.  I'm guessing it's gimbaled and
can file slightly off-axis.  I have no idea how accurately they can
time these firings.  If they can get the spin below 30 RPM, the star
trackers will become useful and it may be possible to get the solar
panels rotating to track the sun-- crucial for maintaining the
spacecraft over a long lifetime. 
 
The plan is to keep the spacecraft near Earth, perhaps in a low enough
orbit to use magnetic torquing to reduce the spin still further.  (I
don't know what they'd torque *against*-- Clementine doesn't have a
built-in magnetic torquing system, but one could imagine using a large
current loop somewhere in the spacecraft's power system). 
 
In a very optimistic scenario, if everything goes right, they may be
able to get three-axis-stabilized again by September.  Guessing again,
I presume this means getting the spin rate below the speed where the
internal flywheels can handle attitude control.  Then they can resume
long-term operations, image the Earth and Moon, and wait to see what
*else* fails aboard Clementine-- a useful thing for a technology
demonstration!
 
I'm sure smarter people will correct me if I am wrong about some of
these details.
 
(By the way, Clementine has now been discovered by the Saucer Loons. 
A friend pointed out a posting in misc.activism with subject "NASA
Cover-up" this week.)
 
-- 
     O~~*           /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
   - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /       \                          (_) (_)                    / | \
 |       |     Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 \       /     Bitnet:     HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET
   -   -       Internet:  HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
     ~         SPAN/Hepnet:      43009::HIGGINS 

Article: 2087
From: lsw@popeye.jsc.nasa.gov (Lou Wheatcraft)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: Clementine Success and the Future
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:32:49 -0700
Organization: Barrios Technology, Inc.
 
In article <2qs5e6$hfk@access2.digex.net>, prb@access.digex.net (Pat) wrote:
 
> In article <2qo9tf$m5s@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>, Mark Perew
> <perew@kaiwan.com> wrote: 
> >I do hope that all of the NASA bashers will carefully chew that slice of 
> >humble pie which they have just served up to themselves.  It just goes to 
> >show that designing, building, launching and operating spacecraft is not 
> >a simple task.
> 
> That NASA is trying to still re-learn.
> 
> Even if Clementine is canceled today,  which it won't be,  it is still
> a highly successful mission.   DSPSE,  was put together on time and on
> budget,  successfully tested a whole slew of new devices and made some
> potentially landmark scientific discoveries.
> 
> The primary mission of lunar mapping  was 87% achieved.  Numerous secondary
> science objectives (Bi-static radar)  were performed.  The Interstage
> adapter flew successfully.  Numerous new space devices were flown
> successfully.
 
In all the press about Clementine and the "faster, better, cheaper" type of
mission I never once heard anyone refer to "designing, building, launching
and operating spacecraft" as "a simple task"!!!!!!!  Certainly not any of
us on the Clementine team - in fact when considering the three onboard
computers and associated imaging, GNC, command and control, etc. software
as well as only a one year software development cycle and the two years to
design, build, and launch on time and on budget - this was perhaps the most
challenging and complex mission ever attempted.  The star trackers gave the
spacecraft a "lost in space" attitude determination capability and the
onboard propagators allowed the spacecraft to not only keep track of its
own position but that of Earth, the Sun, and the Moon - so a command could
be given to "point the high gain antenna to Earth" and the spacecraft would
do it.
 
One of the big points of this "faster, better, cheaper" mission is that new
technologies where being tested while the technologies were new - not 4-10
years old that you see in the "big" programs.  In fact there were over 30
new technologies demonstrated on Clementine which was the primary objective
of the mission -  not lunar mapping nor pictures of an asteroid. From a
technology standpoint all mission objectives have been met except closed
loop tracking using sensor imaging during the flyby. If you look at all the
technology demonstration objectives that were accomplished, this one is a
very small percentage of the total.
 
From a science standpoint (secondary objective),for the moon we did image
99.9% of the surface with most of the sensors and filters.  The number is
less for the HiRes camera because of its smaller field of view.  On May 3,
the NASA science team briefed the Clementine team on the scientific
findings so far based on the review of a very small amount of the data
collected.  The LIDAR has provided some very good data on the depth of some
of the craters and the gravity data has caused lunar geologists to re-think
several theories.  The Bi-static Radar Tests may also result in some
significant findings.  These are in addition to the 5000 images taken every
orbit for two months. If you ask the lunar scientists on the science team
and through out the world Clementine was a 110% success!!!!
 
As for the future.  Given the space science budget is limited it would be
much better to fly five $100 million missions than one $500 million
mission.  The same money is spent and the same number of people or maybe
even a few more would be employed.  The main problem is that one of the
major ways to cut the program costs is to limit the number of people on the
program using a single integrated development, launch, and operations team.

The way NRL did this is not to use one of the big integrating contractors
(and associated costs) but to do the integration themselves.  Even so only
16% of the program costs went to government wages - the rest went to 41
different government contractors. 
 
What people are complaining about is that very few of the "big" contractors
with big bucks for lobbying were part of the 41.  So the issue isn't that
industry didn't get the dollars - it is that certain big companies didn't
get a piece of the action and if NASA was to do the SAME thing NRL did then
these companies could be out of business (at least not as big a profit). 
 
This was said very well in a New York Times NATIONAL article, on May 4, by
John Wilford: ""... the project demonstrated that space missions did not
have to cost so much.  But no big money means no big backers in the world
of government power and finance."  Also in this article James P. Morgan, a
Virginia Democrat Representative stated "This is the most modest,
unassuming, cost-conscious operation I've ever seen run by the Government. 
But they can't really afford to do the kind of lobbying the large weapons
systems people do."  Finally, Danielle Brian, director of the Project on
Government Oversight said that the efficiencies, low budgets and low
overheads that make such a program successful, "doom them in the world of
competing bureaucracies."  In that world, she said, large contractors,
high-priced lobbyists, and Government agencies promote and protect big
programs at the expense of the small ones."
 
This would seem to imply that while talk about "faster, better. cheaper" is
the wave of the future, reality is that the only programs that have a
chance of success are the big, long-term, expensive ones and thus the real
goal is a "jobs program."  (Actually jobs program is the politically
correct term because to "increase the company's' and share holder profits"
doesn't sound as good.)  If you look at all the restructuring and
downsizing that the commercial world is going through to reduce overhead
and stay competitive you should ask why doesn't the government aerospace
contractors do the same?  The answer is that the current "way of doing
business" is for the government to continue to pay these high overhead
costs and support an inefficient bureaucracy that drives costs through the
roof.
 
There is another consideration for the "faster, better. cheaper" way of
doing business - If a program only last 4 - 5 years from start to end of
mission, what do you do with the folks working on the program after it is
over?  (No one wants to be laid off.) One answer is to do what Dan Goldin
wants to do - have 3 or 4 new starts a year and as one program ends or ones
role on a program ends, the personnel would start supporting another
program. But this can only be done if the missions are in the $100 million
range.  Another (see below) is to stop issuing separate program contracts
and start using more institutional support contracts spanning multiple
missions and technology development.
 
So we have a apparent paradox - how can we carry out 3 - 4 new "faster,
better. cheaper" type missions and still use the big integrating
contractors?  To solve this paradox new roles for the prime contractors
need to be developed - maybe a government and "primary" contractor
arrangement for program integration eliminating the duplication and being
supported by smaller contractors as part of one integrated team.  
 
Another (additional) approach (which is a big reason for Clementine's lower
costs) is to separate technology development from technology demonstration.
(The cost of most of Clementine's technologies was paid for by BMDO over
the last 10 or more years.) NASA should have a technology development
program to develop those technologies needed for future space science
missions (and later manned missions) such as thermal, power,
communications, etc.  This effort would be in partnership with industry,
DOD and universities (and international sources) to develop one or two
common spacecraft busses and subsystems so that each mission would not be
"re-inventing the wheel". Although unlike BMDO or DOD, NASA's mission's
primary objective would be science and exploration with technology
demonstration a secondary objective - in fact the technology would mainly
enable the mission to meet its science and exploration objectives. (DoD
could continue to participate in the technology demonstration objectives as
partners with NASA.)  Before NASA can develop such a technology development
program, NASA (really the Nation) needs a clear picture of what the goals
for space exploration are for 5 - 10 years in the future and what new
technologies will be needed to meet these goals.  Then as a separate budget
item, NASA Centers would divide the technology development tasks between
their respective engineering directorates to develop these technologies in
cooperation with industry, DOD and universities (and international sources.)
 
With this done the 3 - 4 new starts each year would take the applicable new
state-of-the-art technologies "off-the-shelf" (thus reducing program cost
and schedule risk) and perform the mission.  I think the standard should be
3 years from go-ahead to launch - mission lifetime would depend on the
mission goals.  Mission objectives and technologies would be filtered
against cost and schedule.   Rather than have all interplanetary missions
being tied to one center and one geographical area these missions should be
divided among several NASA centers.
 
Sorry this is so long but I have one more point.  With all the uncertainty
in the aerospace world, we all should be trying to keep the existing
employees employed.  One way of doing this is very radical in NASA and NASA
contractor terms - rather than putting out an RFP for each new program,
have institutional contracts to support technology development and to
support multiple space science mission design, development, integration and
test, launch, and mission operations.  Using this idea, a Center could keep
their existing contractor base, employees, and on and off site facilities
and do the missions "in-house".
         
************************************************************************
Lou Wheatcraft     Barrios Technology, Inc.         Phone: (713)280-1892
lsw@popeye.jsc.nasa.gov
************************************************************************

Article: 2104
From: Peter.R.Gluck@jpl.nasa.gov (Peter R. Gluck)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: Re: Clementine Success and the Future
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 10:12:23 -0800
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
 
In article <lsw-120594123249@mdlmac.jsc.nasa.gov>, lsw@popeye.jsc.nasa.gov
(Lou Wheatcraft) wrote:
 
> In article <2qs5e6$hfk@access2.digex.net>, prb@access.digex.net (Pat)
> wrote:
> 
> > In article <2qo9tf$m5s@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>, Mark Perew
> > <perew@kaiwan.com> wrote: 
> > >I do hope that all of the NASA bashers will carefully chew that slice of 
> > >humble pie which they have just served up to themselves.  It just goes to 
> > >show that designing, building, launching and operating spacecraft is not 
> > >a simple task.
> > 
> > The primary mission of lunar mapping  was 87% achieved.  Numerous secondary
> > science objectives (Bi-static radar)  were performed.  The Interstage
> > adapter flew successfully.  Numerous new space devices were flown
> > successfully.
> 
> new technologies demonstrated on Clementine which was the primary objective
> of the mission -  not lunar mapping nor pictures of an asteroid. From a
 
Exactly. The primary objective of Clementine was technology demonstration,
not science. It is a *very* different thing to begin from a set of science
objectives and then design a mission to achieve those objectives and a
spacecraft to accomplish that mission.
 
Lou, I liked a lot of what you said, but, at the risk of sounding
parochial, I must take issue with the following statement:
 
> against cost and schedule.   Rather than have all interplanetary missions
> being tied to one center and one geographical area these missions should be
> divided among several NASA centers. 
>          
> ************************************************************************
> Lou Wheatcraft     Barrios Technology, Inc.         Phone: (713)280-1892
> lsw@popeye.jsc.nasa.gov
> ************************************************************************
 
If we are to be more efficient, we must concentrate on our strengths. While
there are certainly similarities to all space missions, interplanetary
missions are quite different from Earth-orbiting missions in many respects.
Mission design, navigation, flight software, thermal control, command and
telemetry, power sources, and the spacecraft environment are areas where
this is particularly true. Distributing interplanetary missions to several
NASA centers would require duplication of skill and experience that is only
attainable and applicable in a very narrow field. I do not think that this
would be in the best interest of NASA or the public.
 
Peter Gluck
Peter.R.Gluck@jpl.nasa.gov
 
-- 
"I yam what I yam what I yam." -- Popeye
 
P.S. The popeye thing is just a coincidence! :)

Article: 615
From: wilson@fastrac.llnl.gov (Mike Wilson)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Clementine Malfunctions
Date: 14 May 1994 16:16:52 -0700
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Atmospheric and 
              Geophysical Sciences Division
 
prb@access.digex.net (Pat) writes:
 
>as the mission progressed,  new activities kept getting added,
>i wonder how frozen the mission requirements were at the end.
 
New activities have been proposed throughout the mission, but
the essential engineering requirement of testing the technologies
was completed the day after lunar injection.  Seeing as the majority
of the engineering staff has been reassigned, I doubt that there
is much consideration for ongoing vehicle evalutaion.  I sure there
are a few folks who would like to see engineering data forever, but
there just isn't any money to do it.
 
>but no matter what, it was a highly succesful mission and in
>proving out the new technologies did what i thought NASA has
>been desperately deficient in doing, that is creating engineering
>testbed vehicles and jamming together all sorts of hardware for the
>purposes of qualification.
 
>I wonder if a Clementine 2 mission could be cobbled together to
>proof out the gear in the inner planets environment?
 
Could isn't the question, the question is will there be a clementine2...
and who will do it.
 
-mike

Article: 616
From: wilson@fastrac.llnl.gov (Mike Wilson)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science
Subject: Re: Despinning Clementine (and other news Clem related news)
Date: 14 May 1994 16:21:04 -0700
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Atmospheric and 
              Geophysical Sciences Division
 
knight@world.std.com (Chris Knight) writes:
 
>After talking to someone who visiting the bat cave last week, he
>said they are hoping to use thruster misalignment to create a
>counter-spin torque.  Unfortunately the guys did such a good
>job aligning the main engine thrust vector that they are not
>very optimistic about this approach.

To clarify: the batcave is the nickname for the Allied Signal building
that clementine is controled out of. 

I'm fairly certain that they will use a change in cg to produce the
wobble, and then pulse the engine... 
 
-mike

Article: 2152
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: Number of Clementine images? (was Re: Clementine question)
Date: 17 May 94 19:07:13 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
In article <1994May16.183835.4221@chemabs.uucp>, nar07@cas.org () writes:

> Does anyone know aproximately how many pictures were taken by Clementine?
> and how many are publicly available from the ftp site?
 
About 1.5 million images were made, enough for an essentially complete
map of the Moon in many wavelength bands.  Also a laser altimeter
measured lunar topography across the globe (I don't know how much data
this represents), and various other scientific studies were done.
 
I have not counted the number of pictures on the FTP site at
clementine.s1.gov.  There are many dozens of nice PR pictures, and
raw-data images from three different orbits are also available.  I
would guess over 300 images are involved, but I could be way off.
 
The Clementine project plans eventually to make all the data available
on CD-ROM-- probably pretty inexpensively, if other projects are
similar.  I'm sure it will take some years to integrate all the
pictures and laser data into a nice new Moon map.  In fact, I'm not
sure that anybody is funded to do this.  
 
"Pethane me photoniko thanato   | Bill Higgins
 skouliki isvolea!"             | Fermilab
 --Archimedes                   | Internet: higgins@fnal.fnal.gov
     at Syracuse                | Bitnet:   higgins@fnal

Article: 1876
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Current trajectory (was Re: Clementine: the official story)
Date: 17 May 94 13:57:11 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
In article <2r0hrs$go@grover.jpl.nasa.gov>, gam@keaggy.jpl.nasa.gov
(Glenn Macala) writes: 

> No mention is made about where the S/C is:  Earth orbit;  Earth/Moon orbit;
> about to crash into the moon;  about to crash into the Earth;  out of
> Earth orbit; ....
 
When the failure occurred ten days ago, Clementine had left lunar
orbit and was heading for the Earth.  I presume it's now in some very
large orbit around the Earth. 
 
Here's the way things were *supposed* to go:
 
3 May     Leave lunar orbit   V=540 m/s
6 May     Perigee #1          V=7.7 m/s      24,237 km
16 May    Apogee              V=5.6 m/s     554,899 km
25 May    Perigee # 2                        19,134 km
27 May    Lunar swingby                   Closest approach 7,342 km
 
(The chart I'm looking at doesn't specify WHAT these speeds and distances 
are relative to, so you can have as much fun as I in guessing!) 
 
> Can you say anything about the trajectory Clementine now has?  Also, can the
> bi-prop system be used?
 
I'd suspect that the spacecraft is probably in a big ellipse similar
to the originally planned one, and that it has just passed apogee.
They plan to do a manuver on 24 May to keep Clementine close to the
Earth instead of doing a lunar swingby.  If the maneuver doesn't work,
the Moon will bend Clementine's path into a heliocentric orbit, but it
will not be precise enough to come anywhere near Geographos. 
 
Obviously, if the asteroid rendezvous mission is dead, it will be more
convenient to have Clementine in Earth orbit, where they can talk to
her with Navy facilities and Deep Space Network assets are not
required for regular monitoring of her systems.
 
The bipropellant big thruster will be fired in 40-millisecond pulses.
The current axis of spin is not coincident with the axis of the
thruster (called the "delta V engine"), so timing is important.  
It's all very iffy.  Keep your fingers crossed. 
 
-- 
     O~~*           /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
   - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /       \                          (_) (_)                    / | \
 |       |     Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 \       /     Bitnet:     HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET
   -   -       Internet:  HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
     ~         SPAN/Hepnet:      43009::HIGGINS 

From:	US4RMC::"henry@zoo.toronto.edu" "Henry Spencer" 30-MAY-1994 01:17:09.38
To:	usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	Clementine news

Stewart Nozette, sensors manager for Clementine, gave the after-dinner
talk at the ISDC awards banquet tonight.  Some highlights... 

First, the lunar-ice situation.  He described the preliminary findings
as "tantalizing but not conclusive".  On being pressed for detail, he
said that when the radar data for the first pass came in, they did an
"instant science" test by essentially printing out the graphs and
holding them up to the light for comparison.  The distinctive
polarization pattern of ice echoes is there but weak ("one sigma").  A
firm answer requires a much more sophisticated analysis of the
combined data from all the passes; this is now in progress, being done
by the same people who mapped the ice on Mercury.  He expects word in
perhaps a month. 

As for the state of Clementine, he says partial control has been
regained -- "we're not dead yet" -- but the Geographos flyby is
looking unlikely. 

More when I've recovered a bit.  Busy weekend.
-- 
"...the Russians are coming, and the    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
launch cartel is worried." - P.Fuhrman  |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

From:	US4RMC::"yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov" "Peter Yee"  3-JUN-1994 17:54:00.57
To:	usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	Clementine produces first global digital map of Moon [Release 94-84]  

Michael Braukus
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.			  May 26, 1994
(Phone:  202/358-1547) 				

RELEASE:  94-84

CLEMENTINE PRODUCES FIRST GLOBAL DIGITAL MAP OF MOON 

	The Clementine mission, sponsored by the Department of Defense 
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, has completed systematic
mapping of the Lunar surface to produce the first global digital map of
the Moon.  NASA's Clementine science team has mapped the topography and
composition of major regions of the Moon in detail and produced other
important science results released today at the spring meeting of the
American Geophysical Union in Baltimore, Md.

	The digital data set covers 38 million square kilometers
of the Moon mapped in 11 colors in the visible and near infrared parts
of the spectrum during the mission's 71 days in lunar orbit, providing
the first view of the global color of the Moon.

	"The scientific significance of the lunar data set from
Clementine is immense.  For the first time, multi-spectral imaging data
of consistent viewing geometry, resolution, and lighting conditions
have been obtained for the entire Moon," said Dr. Jurgen Rahe, NASA
Program Scientist.  "With Clementine data, we have begun a new era in
the exploration of the geology of the planets using global
multi-spectral data sets."

Composition of Lunar Surface Studied

	The color of the Moon in the visible to near infrared part
of the spectrum is sensitive to variations in both the mineral
composition of surface material and the amount of time that material
has been exposed to space.  Color filters for the two principal mapping
cameras, the ultraviolet- visible camera and the near infrared camera,
were selected to characterize the overall surface composition and to
search for titanium- rich rocks.

	By combining information obtained through 11 filters,
multi-spectral image data are used to map the distribution of rock and
soil types on the Moon.  Preliminary studies of areas of already known
geological complexity, including the Aristarchus crater and plateau,
the Copernicus crater and the crater Giodano Bruno, allow scientists to
identify and map the diversity within and between geologic areas which
have both impact and volcanic origins.

	The mission also provided tens of thousands of high resolution
and mid-infrared thermal images.  The topography of the Moon was
mapped using a laser ranger.  Knowledge of the surface gravity field of
the Moon was improved through analysis of radio tracking data.  A
Charged Particle Telescope characterized the solar and magnetospheric
energetic particle environment.

Surface and Subsurface Structure

	In addition to compositional data from the images, Clementine
has produced views of either previously unknown regions of the Moon or
previously known areas from a different and unique perspective, in both
cases yielding new insights into lunar evolution.

	Scientists measured the topography of large, ancient impact
features, including the largest (1,600 miles/2,500 km in diameter) and
deepest (more than seven miles/12 km) impact basin known in the Solar
System.  Preliminary analysis has deciphered the gravity structure of a
young basin on the limb of the Moon, showing that a huge plug of the
lunar mantle has been uplifted from below its surface.

	The Science Team completed a mosaic of the South Polar region
of the Moon using over 1,500 images obtained during the first month of
systematic mapping.  A striking result from this mosaic, depicted by an
extensive region of shadow, is the discovery of a large depression
centered very near the South Pole.  Scientists believe this is almost
certainly an ancient impact basin about 190 miles (300 km) in
diameter.  They also believe that large parts of this dark area may
never receive any sunlight because the MoonUs rotation axis is nearly
perpendicular to the plane of its orbit around the Sun.

	If this region receives no sunlight, it possibly will be about
minus 230 degrees Celsius.  This fact is significant because water
molecules from impacting comets may have found their way into such
'cold traps' and accumulated in significant amounts over billions of
years.  Clementine beamed radio waves into the polar areas and the
scattered radio signals were received by the large antennas of NASAUs
Deep Space Network.  This Tbistatic radarU experiment was designed to
look for echoes that would indicate the presence of water ice
deposits.  The results of this experiment may not be known for many
months as the data will require thorough analysis.

Topographic and Gravity Studies

	Laser ranging data from Clementine allow a nearly global view
of topography (or relief) of the lunar surface.  A striking result from
these data is the confirmation of a population of very ancient, nearly
obliterated impact basins, randomly distributed across the Moon.  The
presence of these basins was inferred from obscure circular patterns
found in photographs taken by NASA's Lunar Orbiter spacecraft in the
1960s.

	Clementine laser ranging has provided dramatic confirmation of
their existence, including their surprising depth, typically three to
four miles (five to seven km), even for the most degraded features.

	Another major result is the confirmation of the largest impact
basin on the Moon, the 1,600 mile (2,500 km) diameter South Pole-
Aitken basin.  This feature is about over seven and one-half miles (12
km) deep, making it the largest and deepest impact crater known in the
Solar System.

	Gravity data obtained from radio tracking of Clementine
indicate that these great holes in the MoonUs crust are compensated by
structural uplift of dense rocks from the mantle beneath each impact
basin.

	The Clementine data, together with the lunar rock and soil
samples of known geologic context which were returned to Earth from the
Apollo and Luna programs, constitute unique data sets which do not
exist for any other body in the Solar System, including the Earth.  On
the basis of the initial study of the Clementine data, new insights are
likely into how the Moon has evolved over its protracted and complex
history.  NASA plans to sponsor a multi-year peer-reviewed program of
lunar data analysis, which will include the extensive Clementine data sets.

Article: 3766
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Clementine's troubles
Date: 7 Jul 94 18:43:59 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
I asked Dean Bakeris (bakeris@nrlvax.nrl.navy.mil), who works on
Clementine at the Naval Research Laboratory, for a status report on
the unfortunate spacecraft.  
 
You'll recall that after a successful mission orbiting the Moon for a
couple of months, sending back 1.5 million images and a bunch of
other data, Clementine left lunar orbit and began an Earth swingby. 
On 9 May a computer failure caused her to use up all her
attitude-control propellant and left her spinning at a high rate.
The accident made impossible the planned excursion to fly by the
asteroid Geographos in August.
 
Controllers attempted to change the orbit and spin rate with a series
of maneuvers in late May.  With a lot of luck, they hoped to keep
Clementine orbiting Earth rather than sailing off into a heliocentric
orbit.
 
Here's what Dean has to say-- not good news:
 
    Clementine is pretty much a goner. Soon after the maneuvers to
    setup for the double lunar swingby, the s/c started losing power
    quickly despite successful efforts to move the solar panels to a
    more favorable position for sun soak. The s/c eventually went into
    undervoltage and most systems shut down automatically. The battery
    temperature is very low (<-5 C). Most power is being drawn
    directly off the solar panels by the transmitter which was left
    on. Many attempts have been made to shut the transmitter off with 
    none being successful.
 
    The current orbit is not the desired one. The second lunar swingby
    was close to what we had wanted but we were unable to perform a
    correction maneuver before the swingby occurred due to the
    undervoltage condition. At this time, no maneuvers can be
    performed. On about July 20th, the s/c will be perturbed by the
    moon enough that it will leave its loose Earth orbit and enter a
    heliocentric orbit.
 
Well, it was fun while it lasted.  Let's do something like this again,
real soon!
 
Kepler: "Did you know that Tycho,  | Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey
my boss, had an artificial nose?"  | Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory  
Galileo: "An artificial nose!      | Bitnet:           HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET  
How did he smell?"                 | Internet:       HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV  
Kepler: "Terrible!"                | SPAN/Hepnet:           43009::HIGGINS  

Article: 68869
From: mrastro@aol.com (Mr Astro)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: S&T News Bulletin
Date: 21 Aug 1994 18:37:04 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
 
SKY & TELESCOPE'S NEWS BULLETIN -- August 20, 1994
 
COMET N-N-M, 1994m
 
The brightness of Comet Nakamura-Nishimura-Machholz, 1994m, remains near
8th magnitude.  This week it leaves the circumpolar region and begins a
dive toward the celestial equator, which it will cross the first week of
September.  Your attempts to find the comet might be thwarted by a big,
bright Moon, but try anyway.  Here are equinox 2000 positions for 0 hours
Universal Time:
 
            R.A. (2000) Decl.
            =================
Aug  21    23h 34m    +49.5dg
Aug  23    23  18      44.9
Aug  25    23  03      39.5
 
A NEW COMET MACHHOLZ
 
Not content to rest on his laurels, amateur Donald Machholz has visually
discovered *another* comet, this one on August 13th.  As with the last
discovery, 1994o is also situated among the north circumpolar stars.  A
preliminary orbit suggests it will reach perihelion on September 13th, at
a point inside Earth's orbit roughly 0.76 astronomical unit from the Sun. 
But it's only 10th magnitude, so for those who like observational
challenges, here are the positions:
 
            R.A. (2000) Decl.
            =================
Aug  20     6h  4m    +57.1dg
Aug  22     6  27      54.7
Aug  24     6  47      52.2
 
GEOGRAPHOS BUZZES EARTH
 
Had things gone better, scientists would have been preparing this week for
the flyby of the Clementine spacecraft past the asteroid 1620 Geographos. 
But Clementine failed, so now it is up to you to make the observations. 
The asteroid will be making its closest brush with Earth since its
discovery in 1951.  That will occur at 10 hours UT on August 25th, at
which time it will be 4.98 million km away.  Unfortunately, it will also
be in the constellation Pavo and thus unobservable from mid-northern
latitudes.  Though only 3 to 4 km long, Geographos might brighten to 10th
magnitude.  But it will probably be closer to 12th by the time it reaches
the celestial equator headed north in early September.  Full details
appear in the August issue of SKY & TELESCOPE, page 75.
 
PERSEID WRAP-UP
 
In case you missed last week's Perseid report, Europe and the Eastern
United States saw no unusual activity; the zenithal hourly rates, or ZHRs,
varied between 50 to 100. But an outburst occurred over the Western U.S.
starting around 9:30 Universal Time on August 12th.  The ZHRs peaked near
300 around 11:00 UT before dropping abruptly.  Thereafter, observers in
Hawaii or Asia saw nothing extraordinary.
 
WATER FROM COMET S-L 9?
 
Here's late word about the impact of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 with Jupiter.
Scientists who used the Kuiper Airborne Observatory to observe the comet's
crash into Jupiter last month report that they *did* detect water in the
hot fireballs of fragments G and K.  Their evidence suggests the water is
from the comet itself, not from Jupiter.
 
IAU UPDATE
 
Next week we hope to have some results from the tri-annual meeting of the
International Astronomical Union, which just concluded in the Netherlands.
 
======================================================================
The News Bulletin is provided as a service to the amateur-astronomer
community by Sky & Telescope magazine.  Electronic distribution is
engouraged; however, this text may not be published without permission of
Sky Publishing Corp. At the present time, the News Bulletin is not
available via electronic mailing list.
======================================================================
 
   *------------------------------------------------------------*
   | Stuart Goldman         Internet: sgoldman@cfa.harvard.edu  |
   * Associate Editor                 mrastro@aol.com           *
   | Sky & Telescope                                            |
   * P. O. Box 9111           Sky & Telescope: The Essential    *
   | Belmont, MA  02178           Magazine of Astronomy         |
   *------------------------------------------------------------*

Article: 68914
From: richmond@spiff.princeton.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.astro.research
Subject: SN 1994Y in NGC 5371
Date: 22 Aug 1994 09:50:10 -0500
Organization: Princeton University
Sender: astres@pecos.msfc.nasa.gov
 
   Bill Wren has discovered a SN in NGC 5371, a nice spiral galaxy,
via a _visual_ search with the McDonald 0.9-meter (in moonlight, 
no less!).  The object was about mag 15 on 19 Aug 1994.  SN 1994Y
is located 34.5 arcsec W, 11.4 arcsec N of the galaxy's nucleus.
 
   When we went back to our SN search images of this galaxy, we found
that it appeared clearly in an image taken Aug 12.  However, its
measured FWHM was a bit small in one direction, so we classified
it as a cosmic ray and ignored it.  Sigh :-(
 
                  Michael
 
-- 
-----                                                    Michael Richmond
"This is the heart that broke my finger."    richmond@astro.princeton.edu

Article: 5285
From: charles@tranquest.com (Charles Radley)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: SPACECAUSE Official Alert
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 21:52:12 GMT
Organization: Tranquest Corporation
 
        Official SPACECAUSE Alert      August 31st, 1994
 
        Subject:  Clementine-2 and DC-X
 
        1) DC-X has been funded $ 50 Million by the House Armed Services
           Committee, but zeroed out by the Senate ASC.
 
      All persons are requested to call the two co-Chairs of the joint
      House - Senate Conference committee, to encourage them to include
      the House language rather than the Senate language in the final
      DOD Appropriations Bill.
 
      Rep John Murtha (D-PA)      Telephone (202)-225-2069
 
      Sen Daniel Innouye (D-HI)   Telephone (202)-224-3934

 
        2) Clementine-2
 
        Clementine-1 program has stated a 60 % probablity of water ice at
        the South pole of the Moon.   A proposal has been suggested for a
        Clementine-2 to determine one way or the other.
 
        All persons are requested to call the above two co-chairs to ask
        that Clementine-2 be approved.  Also, please call the Chief of
        Staff at the U.S. Air Force re Clementine-2 only:
 
        General Merrill McPeak   Telephone  (703)-697-9225
 
      The conference committee is expected to meet and decide these issues
      on September 13th.   Please therefore call these people before close
      of business (Washington D.C. time) September 12th.
 
      Thank you, and   Ad Astra !
 
      Charles F. Radley - Spacecause Volunteer
 

Article: 3426
From: malin@esther.la.asu.edu (Mike Malin)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Clementine Failure Info
Date: 10 Sep 94 12:45:56
Organization: TES Project, ASU, Tempe AZ
 
James Marr asked (<james.c.marr-0709941659320001@137.78.212.100>):
 
>Does anyone know where I can find out what the latest thinking is
>regarding the details of the Clementine failure?
 
A description of the failure was given at the Clementine Technology
Workshop last July by the NRL Project Manager.  My notes are somewhat
cryptic (and remember I'm a geologist, not an engineer), but the
failure went something like this:
 
They were testing the spacecraft's ability to operate autonomously,
using the Moon as a target to simulate the asteroid encounter.  A
patch to the Flight Software (FS) to handle timing problems (I believe
between the R3000 and the housekeeping processor), used throughout the
mapping mission, had not been uploaded when the spacecraft was put
into the autonomous mode.  Normal error handling in the FS uncovered
the fact that the patch was missing (a condition that had not arisen
before and, I believe, had not been tested for during the development
of the patch) and put garbage out on the interprocessor bus.  By bad
luck, the form of the garbage matched part of the thruster control
IC's input--the fire thruster part--but not another part of the
command--setting the duration countdown timer.  The result was an
unterminated reaction control system (RCS) burn.  While not trying to
assign "blame," it was pointed out that both hardware and software
were involved in the failure--a problem in the software in an untested
mode and the hardware for accepting garbage on the line and for
accepting a partial command.
 
Discussion at the meeting centered on the absence of a "watchdog"
timer in the FS and associated fault protection.
 
Perhaps someone with more understanding of the details might comment,
and correct anything I got wrong.
 
Mike Malin
Principal Investigator
Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter Camera

Article: 3435
From: prb@clark.net (Pat)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Clementine Failure Info
Date: 11 Sep 1994 22:15:13 -0400
Organization: .
 
Mike seems to have done a complete job of describing the technical
problems in the clementine probe.   Of course there were a few
other things that contributed to the accident scenario.  
 
Due to budget cutbacks, the Clementine Operations team was running
with a skeleton crew.  This substantial over-work led to a human
factors related error in not including the full patch library to the
s/c after an onboard crash of the 1750A, led to a re-link and upload
of all s/c software.  The clementine did not have her operating
programs in rom or EEPROM  but in RAM and on the solid state disk.
 
Concerns over the memory integrity were raised after the crash
and so it was re-loaded from the ground.   
 
Subsequent to the spin-up,  a plan was developed and implemented
to begin de-spinning the s/c using inertial damping and pulsing
of the motor located off center of the vehicle center of mass.  
 
While this plan was being executed and slowing the s/c, a problem
developed in the solar array pointing controls in part due to the
excess speed of the vehicle.  this led to inadeqaute charging which
threw the vehicle into an unrecoverable watchdog safety mode.
 
Essentially the s/c began waiting to recharge it's batteries which
it could not do due to it's high rate of spin.
 
However  on the bright side, the error is well understood,  the mission
was 70+% successful, and clementine 2 looks quite promising for a
mission to the lunar south pole and deployment of three rovers
(Huey, louie, and dewey.)  to explore dark craters on the moon for
ice and to deploy a simple optical interferometer on the lunar
surface as an engineering prototype for future unmanned interferometer
arrays suitable for a search toward other planetary systems.
 
pat
 
-- 
You guys just converted a Billion dollar asset into
a multi-billion dollar Liability -- Investment banker commenting on TMI
Nuclear accident.

Article: 3439
From: wilson@fastrac.llnl.gov (Mike Wilson)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Clementine Failure Info
Date: 12 Sep 1994 00:29:49 -0700
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Atmospheric and
              Geophysical Sciences Division 
 
prb@clark.net (Pat) writes:
 
>Due to budget cutbacks, the clementine Operations team was running
>with a skeleton crew.  This substantial over-work led to a human
>factors related error in not including the full patch library to the
>s/c after an onboard crash of the 1750A,  led to a re-link and upload
>of all s/c software.  The clementine did not have her operating
>programs in rom or EEPROM  but in RAM and on the solid state disk.
 
I'd point out that even during development, the clementine staff could
be called a skeleton crew.  The 12-16 hr shifts I saw some of the
operations folks work were amazing.  Following the cutbacks in March,
I'd expect that the workload was staggering, even for this type of
mission. My understand is that the spacecraft did have a copy of the
OS in rom, but that version was from Nov-Dec?  It was quite buggy. 
During the mission, updates were continously applied (remember,
clementine design & programming began less than 2 years prior to
launch).  There was a facility to burn an extra set of EPROMS in
flight, but, it was not done because it was viewed as a risky
operation.  To clarify, during flight, when there was a computer crash
(not an infrequent event), the OS was reloaded from ground... 
 
-mike

Article: 4324
From: chrisl@SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU (Chris Lewicki)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: Recent lunar pics?
Date: 12 Sep 1994 07:48:44 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, CCIT
 
Joe Cain (cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu) wrote:

: 	Over the next two weeks the subject of my beginning planetary
: geology class will mostly be the Moon. Does anyone know where there
: are some gif files with the pictures, and/or topographic contours,
: from the recent Clementine mission?
 
Check out clementine.s1.gov in /pub/clementine/images.  Only about 15 
files have been added since april, but there are a lot of clementine 
images there.
 
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Lewicki  +  (602) 621-9790  +  (602) 621-9626  +  Chrisl@LPL.Arizona.EDU
Maintainer of SEDS.LPL.Arizona.EDU
             'Legendary' Mars Observer GRS Flight Investigation Team
UA SEDS President			 SEDS-USA Director of Special Projects
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article: 4326
From: lsw@popeye.jsc.nasa.gov (Lou Wheatcraft)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: Recent lunar pics?
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 08:13:00 -0500
Organization: Barrios Technology, Inc.
 
In article <34v4n5$atc@mailer.fsu.edu>, cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain)
wrote:
 
>         Over the next two weeks the subject of my beginning planetary
> geology class will mostly be the Moon. Does anyone know where there
> are some gif files with the pictures, and/or topographic contours,
> from the recent Clementine mission?
 
Using MacWeb or Mosaic you can go to Lawerence Livermore National
Laboratory's www Clementine Page:
 
 http://clementine.s1.gov/ 
 
and get a lot of Clementine information as well as photos.  If you do not
have WWW capability then you can FTP to clementine.s1.gov to down load the
images.
 
Another good source is from the Naval Research Labortory WWW pages at:
 
http://www.nrl.navy.mil/clementine/clementine.html  This also has a
pointer the the LLNL page.
 
Hope this helps.
 
==================================================================
Lou Wheatcraft   lsw&popeye.jsc.nasa.gov     Phone:  (713)280-1892
Barrios Technology, Inc.                     Fax:    (713)280-1901
http://popeye.jsc.nasa.gov/
==================================================================

Article: 4327
From: gardner2@nrlfs1.nrl.navy.mil (s.garddner)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: Recent lunar pics?
Date: 12 Sep 1994 15:58:47 GMT
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory
 
In article <34v4n5$atc@mailer.fsu.edu>, cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain)
wrote:
 
>         Over the next two weeks the subject of my beginning planetary
> geology class will mostly be the Moon. Does anyone know where there
> are some gif files with the pictures, and/or topographic contours,
> from the recent Clementine mission?
> 
>         I have found one gif on the jpl server from Gallileo.
> 
>         I have the Apollo 11 and 17 NASA films to show, but no stills
> other than some VERY old overheads of deteriorating quality borrowed
> from NASA. 
> 
>         We recently obtained a pc and projection system so it is
> possibly more convenient to pipe graphics through it than to run back
> and forth turning a 35 mm projector on and off (big class and room,
> but no TA help here, the overheads and video is enough work to
> manage). I could thus use any nice pics of the olde Apollo or Lunar
> orbiter closeups of the Moon that might show any detail as well.
 
Joe: 
 
You can access Clementine images via the NRL Mosaic Home Page at
http://www.nrl.navy.mil. Have fun!
 
Sheldon Gardner
gardner@ncst.nrl.navy.mil

Article: 4328
From: gordonb@freenet.scri.fsu.edu (Gordon Blackstock)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: Recent lunar pics?
Date: 12 Sep 1994 16:15:28 -0400
Organization: Tallahassee Free-Net
 
Joe Cain (cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu) wrote:

: 	Over the next two weeks the subject of my beginning planetary
: geology class will mostly be the Moon. Does anyone know where there
: are some gif files with the pictures, and/or topographic contours,
: from the recent Clementine mission?
 
The Clementine mission has its own WWW page at:
          clementine.s1.gov:80
There are several info areas, i.e., timeline info and images.
The images include pertinent data:
    feature name, imaging system, lambda of filter, lat/lon,
    orbit #, and time/date.
The first page (I didn't check the archive page) has small & large
formats of the same image.  They are in GIF format, so they should
load/display quickly for lecture.
 
: (woops) ave the Apollo 11 and 17 NASA films to show, but no stills
: other than some VERY old overheads of deteriorating quality borrowed
: from NASA. 
 
Try the www.gsfc.nasa.gov page.  It is a list of HTMLs.  If memory
serves, the NASA homepage HTML will get you to Apollo images.
 
Gordon

Article: 4325
From: cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: recent lunar pictures
Date: 12 Sep 1994 12:34:44 GMT
Organization: Florida State University Geology Dept.
 
Thanks to Jeff Foust, Bill Arnett and Jan Vorbrueggen for quick
replies I have some site information for recent lunar images. I have
extracted some from the first site and will look when I get to the office:  
 
ftp://clementine.s1.gov/pub/clementine/images
http://www.ksc.nasa.gov   (for Apollo images)
 
JSC is also supposed to be loading what they have, though no site
designation was indicated. 
 
Article: 4340
From: lsw@popeye.jsc.nasa.gov (Lou Wheatcraft)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space.science,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: recent lunar pictures
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 07:27:30 -0500
Organization: Barrios Technology, Inc.
 
In article <351ht4$rkl@mailer.fsu.edu>, cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain)
wrote:
 
> JSC is also supposed to be loading what they have, though no site
> designation was indicated. 
 
Try Daniel's Space Image Archive at:
 
     http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/~mccoy/Images/index.html
 
and NASA-JSC Image Sciences Division at:
 
     http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/html/home.htm
 
Perhaps the best at JSC is the Solar System Exploration Division's
Planetary Projects Office www server home page at:
 
     http://exploration.jsc.nasa.gov/
 
Hope this helps.
 
==================================================================
Lou Wheatcraft   lsw&popeye.jsc.nasa.gov     Phone:  (713)280-1892
Barrios Technology, Inc.                     Fax:    (713)280-1901
http://popeye.jsc.nasa.gov/
==================================================================

Article: 3496
From: lsw@popeye.jsc.nasa.gov (Lou Wheatcraft)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Clementine Failure Info
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 07:55:05 -0500
Organization: Barrios Technology, Inc.
 
In article <357pgd$buh@explorer.clark.net>, prb@clark.net (Pat) wrote:
 
> if i understand you,  the OS was on-board in ROM  but a whole set of patches
> were living in RAM or on disk,  and when a crash would occur, these
> patches would be up-loaded again.   
> 
> why didn't they burn new OS ROMs right before launch?  fear of even
> newer bugs then before?
 
They did burn new OS ROMs right before launch however because of several
reasons this did not have an impact on what happened. First the ROMs did
not have the capacity to hold everything that was needed - most of the
navigation software was in RAM on the SIP (R3000) and was loaded into the
1750A via ground command following a computer reset, and then any needed
patches were applied.   Second, the flight software was developed very
late because of lack of flight hardware to test on - the spacecraft was
not ready until late (final 6 months before launch) and the flight
configuration versus the test bed configuration were always a bit
different until just before launch when the ROMs were burnt in.  Also the
flight software had various operational modes depending on which mission
phase we were in.  Thus just before launch the main concern was the
software needed for LEO and the beginning of the phasing loops (Initial
attitude control, initial star tracker/attitude determination, spin
stabilization (spin rate, nutation control, precession, etc.) during the
SRM burn, RCS trajectory correction burns, inertial pointing, on board
state vector propagation etc.  While the test bed was used to develop and
test all the various modes it wasn't until the flight vehicle was
available could real testing be accomplished - unfortunately with a
"faster, better, cheaper" vehicle this didn't happen until AFTER launch. 
The main thing we did during the phasing loops was to test the software
needed for lunar mapping and real integrated lunar mapping simulations
using all the software where not possible until just days before entering
lunar orbit.  (Because the software was being tested, problems were found
and patches developed to fix these problems.) Then the first 5 - 7 days of
lunar orbit were used to further test the flight software.  This was a
monumental task but lunar mapping was accomplished with 99.99% of all the
surface of the moon imaged with multiple spectrum sensors.  To do the
lunar mapping another flight software package called the Spacecraft
Command Language (SCL) was used to develop and execute detailed command
scripts for controlling the spacecraft and sensors.  For each orbit a
different script was developed and uploaded to the spacecraft to
automatically configure the spacecraft and sensors, control attitude and
pointing, communications, and senors.  Each of these scripts had to be
developed, tested on the test bed, and uploaded before the required
orbit.  This had to be done for each 5 hour orbit for 2 months! 
 
Following Lunar mapping, a new set of software was needed for the asteroid
flyby and thus now this new mission phase was able to be addressed.  There
was a new version available for burning the ROM but because of the
critical trajectory adjust maneuver coming up when the spacecraft arrived
at Earth perigee it was decided to do the burn with known software -
software that supported more than a dozen critical RCS burns prior to this
time.  But Murphy finally caught up and the rest is history.
 
One thing that impressed me was the robustness of the flight computer
system at being able to be reset multiple times on orbit and being able to
recover the number of times we did.  If anything the major blame and
lesson learned (IMHO) is that the 1750A OS is hard to work with and when
you consider the multiple processes that were active at any one time, the
number of interrupts that needed monitoring/serviced, and the resulting
memory management with all these different processes swapping in and out.
The 1750A is of the old school of custom applications were integration is
very difficult. On the other hand the R3000 and R6000 processors using
VX-Works are a much better environment for reusability and integration of
multiple process and should be the processors of choice for future
spacecraft (which I think JPL is using for the next Mars missions) The
main problem for Clementine I was that the R3000 was not radiation
qualified so was not chosen for the prime processor.
 
==================================================================
Lou Wheatcraft   lsw&popeye.jsc.nasa.gov     Phone:  (713)280-1892
Barrios Technology, Inc.                     Fax:    (713)280-1901
http://popeye.jsc.nasa.gov/
==================================================================