Interesting read, Dwayne- and as you say, much info has yet to be released..... or maybe like X-20 or MOL, some will never be released.It goes without saying (so I'll say it anyway ) that much of the push for military & NRO to go Shuttle was based on early, and wildly optimistic flight-rate predictions... nearly one a week was projected in the early '70's. If something were going up that often, it made economic sense to hitch a ride on it.But- for polar orbits- they certainly never expected one per week out of Vandenberg. So were the Vandenberg facilities justified simply for "standardization?"
BTW, what was the reason that DoD required the Shuttle to be able to return to VAFB after a single orbit?
BTW, what was the reason that DoD required the Shuttle to be able to return to VAFB after a single orbit? Was there concern about Soviet countermeasures?
Quote from: Proponent on 01/15/2010 05:33 amBTW, what was the reason that DoD required the Shuttle to be able to return to VAFB after a single orbit? Was there concern about Soviet countermeasures?Detection, at least, if not countermeasures.A single-orbit mission from VAFB with an inclination of 104 degrees would have had a groundtrack that never passed within range of Soviet ground stations.
Quote from: Jorge on 01/16/2010 01:33 amQuote from: Proponent on 01/15/2010 05:33 amBTW, what was the reason that DoD required the Shuttle to be able to return to VAFB after a single orbit? Was there concern about Soviet countermeasures?Detection, at least, if not countermeasures.A single-orbit mission from VAFB with an inclination of 104 degrees would have had a groundtrack that never passed within range of Soviet ground stations.Wouldn't you be able to see it launch from LA?
I am skeptical that there was a real requirement for a DoD shuttle to launch from Vandenberg, deploy a satellite, and land in one orbit. I'd have to see a document from the time that clearly stated that.There was a crossrange requirement dictated by abort concerns. In other words, if they launched and had a problem, they had to be able to recover at Vandenberg because they did not want a shuttle with a spysat making an emergency landing in Russia.But I'd like to see documents.
Quote from: Jorge on 01/16/2010 01:33 amQuote from: Proponent on 01/15/2010 05:33 amBTW, what was the reason that DoD required the Shuttle to be able to return to VAFB after a single orbit? Was there concern about Soviet countermeasures?Detection, at least, if not countermeasures.A single-orbit mission from VAFB with an inclination of 104 degrees would have had a groundtrack that never passed within range of Soviet ground stations.The Soviet Union had Oko early warning satellites which would have picked up the launch.
I doubt you could open the payload bay doors, deploy a satellite and close the doors within about half an orbit, e.g. in the 45 minutes before deorbit burn. As for grappling one with the RMS in the same time: No way.
Quote from: Blackstar on 01/16/2010 02:59 pmI am skeptical that there was a real requirement for a DoD shuttle to launch from Vandenberg, deploy a satellite, and land in one orbit. I'd have to see a document from the time that clearly stated that.There was a crossrange requirement dictated by abort concerns. In other words, if they launched and had a problem, they had to be able to recover at Vandenberg because they did not want a shuttle with a spysat making an emergency landing in Russia.But I'd like to see documents.I have the documents, somewhere. May take a while to find. They were Baseline Reference Missions 3A (deploy) and 3B (retrieve) and the documents were dated in the 1974-75 timeframe. They are on paper but if I find them I'll scan a few representative pages if that will be enough to convince you.