-
#40
by
dutch courage
on 19 Sep, 2006 15:17
-
DaveS - 19/9/2006 4:55 PM
rdale - 19/9/2006 4:52 PM
"what caused it to fly off?"
Wouldn't we need to identify what it could be before asking that question?
Exactly. Right it still an unknown object. It can be anything from a single tile to Atlantis's own shadow being magnified.
To me it looked like the orbit was different and far lower. The camera angle had to be changed constantly.
It was fairly large so I bet they know what that was at NORAD.
-
#41
by
DaveS
on 19 Sep, 2006 15:50
-
Did you see that? Multiple shiny objects.
-
#42
by
DaveS
on 19 Sep, 2006 15:52
-
-
#43
by
chksix
on 19 Sep, 2006 15:58
-
The shiny objects, could they be droplets or exhaust from the nozzles?
I'll stop guessing now....
(The lack of info is frustrating)
-
#44
by
Bubbinski
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:01
-
Hopefully they'll have spy satellites trained on Atlantis also to figure out if everything is okay. Did the crew or onboard sensors report any unusual vibrations or impacts/hits before the object was seen?
-
#45
by
DaveS
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:02
-
They're waving off tommorow's planned landing at KSC due to the bad weather expected.
-
#46
by
dutch courage
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:14
-
POST MMT BRIEFING comming up with Wayne Hale.
-
#47
by
MKremer
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:15
-
Post-MMT briefing coming up in a bit.
-
#48
by
chksix
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:27
-
If they could have pointed two cameras at the object they would have gotten the distance and it's size. As I understand it one camera at a time can be controlled only.
Hopefully it was just the gapfiller/spacer that was hanging out before.
-
#49
by
Jorge
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:35
-
chksix - 19/9/2006 11:14 AM
If they could have pointed two cameras at the object they would have gotten the distance and it's size. As I understand it one camera at a time can be controlled only.
Only one camera can be controlled at a time, but control can be switched back and forth between cameras fairly rapidly, at least from the aft flight deck control panel. I'm not sure how fast the INCO can switch between cameras from the ground. However, triangulation is only practical if the object is fairly close, within about 240 ft or so. The pan-tilt units on the cameras are belt-driven and the digital pan-tilt angles are open-loop, so they are not terribly precise. So attempting triangulation with the payload bay cameras will not necessarily give good information.
It appears that the strategy is going to be centered on inspecting the orbiter rather than identifying the object.
--
JRF
-
#50
by
psloss
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:47
-
Kyle Herring relayed that the next MMT meeting is scheduled for 4 pm Eastern, with a briefing following the meeting NET 6 pm Eastern.
-
#51
by
DaveS
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:53
-
Crew has spotted the object and managed to photograph it. This was just after the post-MMT meeting breifing had started.
-
#52
by
chksix
on 19 Sep, 2006 16:58
-
Wasn't that just an audio replay from the time they spotted the first object? Or is that a new one?
Nice view of the three spacecraft and their positions
-
#53
by
psloss
on 19 Sep, 2006 17:00
-
DaveS - 19/9/2006 12:40 PM
Crew has spotted the object and managed to photograph it. This was just after the post-MMT meeting breifing had started.
Thanks for the update, Dave...can't monitor air-to-ground right now...
Anybody know if it's possible to use a rendezvous laser (handheld) to do a distance estimate?
Might not be a good target, but just wondering...
-
#54
by
DaveS
on 19 Sep, 2006 17:01
-
chksix - 19/9/2006 6:45 PM
Wasn't that just an audio replay from the time they spotted the first object? Or is that a new one?
Nope. It was from just after top of the hour. I guess they're waiting for the next good KU pass to downlink the photos.
Also, it wasn't the crew that was the first to spot the object, it was the INCO officer while doing some standard Earth observation ops with the payload bay cameras.
-
#55
by
chksix
on 19 Sep, 2006 17:02
-
OK thanks!
RMS in use now to allow the elbow cam to get better views of the payload bay.
-
#56
by
Jim
on 19 Sep, 2006 17:35
-
dutch courage - 19/9/2006 11:04 AM
It was fairly large so I bet they know what that was at NORAD.
Too small
-
#57
by
Radioheaded
on 19 Sep, 2006 17:41
-
Jim - 19/9/2006 1:22 PM dutch courage - 19/9/2006 11:04 AM It was fairly large so I bet they know what that was at NORAD.
Too small
Jim,roughly how small would be too small for NORAD? (Hope that isn't classified )
-
#58
by
dougb
on 19 Sep, 2006 18:04
-
I have read they track object 4" and bigger.
I don't know their true capability.
-
#59
by
MKremer
on 19 Sep, 2006 18:08
-
About 10cm for LEO. The type of object can affect detection ability, too (how well the material its made of reflects radar, or its shape).
