Given the rut in which the U.S. aerospace industry toils, the Gravity Probe
B spacecraft may well have been designed and built using IFP (everything
except the instruments themselves).  --  Jason

----- Original Message -----
From: Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 3:57 PM
Subject: [USMA:29545] NASA is at it again


> Dear All,
>
> Over the last few days, I have been hearing excitedly breathless reports
> about the 'Gravity Probe B' space mission. Sadly, all of the data I heard
on
> radio was in old inch-foot-pound measures.
>
> For example:
> .   the craft is to fly at 400 miles high
> .   the gyroscope sphere was to be an almost perfect 1.5 inches diameter
> (when it wasn't 'about the size of a golf ball)
> .   if the gyroscope was expanded to the size of the Earth its biggest
bulge
> would be 8 feet
> .   the Dewar flask to contain the science module is 9 feet tall
> .   the Dewar flask holds 645 gallons of superfluid liquid helium
>
> I suspected that the radio stations were simply reporting directly from a
> NASA site, and sure enough, I found it at:
>
> <http://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/f_gpb-parts.html>
>
> It amused me somewhat to see this line:
>
> 'If Albert Einstein were alive today he'd be relaxing in his easy chair,
> pipe in hand, very calmly awaiting the results of this historic mission
and
> probably marvelling at the technology it takes to probe his 89 year-old
> theory'.
>
> Perhaps, what they meant to say was:
>
> 'If Albert Einstein were alive today he'd be "frantically worrying " while
> . . .  awaiting the results "(he couldn't possibly know who was doing what
> conversions, from what old measures, with what conversion factors, and
with
> what errors)" of this historic mission and probably marvelling at the
> technology "(at least wondering how NASA could possibly produce such
> advanced technology when they are clearly dedicated to the encouragement
of
> seriously old and proven difficult-to-use measures)" it takes to probe his
> 89 year-old theory'.
>
> Let us hope that the remaining components of this mission aren't equally
> suffering from the same mish-mash of old and new measuring units that led
to
> the loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter.
>
> I can only hope for the best for this extremely important mission, as
quiet
> confidence in sound technology, well-applied, is clearly out of order
given
> the above context.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pat Naughtin
> Geelong, Australia
> --
>

Reply via email to