With reference to my email predicting the pass near here, I had about an hour available to draw attention to the pass owing to the delay to re-entry. When I commenced writing, the decision had been made to wait for one more orbit, and by the time I had finished they had scrubbed for a day. Therefore the information posted at the time was the best available in a limited time-frame to make a posting before the pass. I agree that in a changing situation one must ensure that one monitors for updates. Had observation been possible (and of course I would have allowed for flexibility in time of passes when observing in the circumstances) I would have been able to report on any changes to separation. Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erkenswick, Tom M. (JSC-DM3)" <tom.m.erkenswick@nasa.gov> To: <seesat-l@satobs.org> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 8:30 AM Subject: RE: Verify your Atlantis predictions. Chris, That is not what was meant by "earlier opportunity." The purpose of the burn is to change the orbit's major axis, thus affecting the orbit's nodal regression, which brings Edwards into the crossrange limits one rev earlier than with the current orbit - in other words, it "buys" us an extra deorbit opportunity on an earlier rev, and based on the quote below it sounds like they're trying to land prior to the forecasted wind increase. I believe the burn is posigrade, which means Atlantis will be later than current elements. Tom The opinions expressed are my own and not those of NASA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive: http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 21 2007 - 21:26:37 EDT