Re: 01022A-Information please

From: Jonathan T Wojack (
Date: Thu Jun 14 2001 - 11:32:25 PDT

  • Next message: Stuart Eves: "Possibly "silly" questions"

    > Nope, the standard method of film-return still has some advantages 
    > over
    > digital imaging, enough (at least for Russia) to keep using it.
    Hmmm....  if Russia always has at least one of these recon. satellites up
    there, that's a minimum of three launches per year.  I would think that
    would be the expensive way.  Maybe digital imaging technology is not
    available at "cheap" prices in Russia.  Possibly other factors, too.
    > (Who is "everybody" in this context, BTW?)
    Countries that orbit recon. satellites.
    > >I would think that the later would be cheaper - such a satellite 
    > would
    > >have a lifetime of around 10 years.
    > Well, if you manage to stuff it with enough propellant...
    > Optical spybirds usually tend to be in rather low orbits and need a
    > frequent reboost. 10 years is a _bit_ of an optimistic life 
    > expectancy
    > there...
    You're probably right - but I'm sure it's longer than 4 months (the
    lifetime of the non-digital sats).
    Jonathan T. Wojack       
    39.706d N   75.683d W           
    4 hours behind UT (-4)
    Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
    Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
    Unsubscribe from SeeSat-L by sending a message with 'unsubscribe'
    in the SUBJECT to

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 14 2001 - 11:41:29 PDT