Spacevidcast 2.20 – Guinness in space, JAXA Space Power, Ulysses is dead!


Posted in


  1. Shanuson on July 3, 2009 at 11:09 am

    – funny text at the beginning *lol*
    – LRO wont impakt the moon, LCROSS will!

    • cariann on July 3, 2009 at 1:35 pm

      I though they both will. LCROSS first, LRO takes measurements, and then LRO impacts as well. Please, if I am wrong, I am sorry. And I appreciate the correction. I just really thought that (eventually) they both “crash”.

      • Stefan on July 4, 2009 at 9:56 am

        Yes you are right. In the end both will crash on the moon. The difference is that before LCROSS chrashes on the moon, the upper rocket stage will crash first and so LCROSS has the opportunity to measure the impact cloud caused by the upperstage. For example if there are water vapor in it. Before LCROSS crashes, it will hopefully send the data back to earth.

        So we are not only getting more and more space debris we also get more and more moon debris ๐Ÿ˜‰

        Greetings from Heidelberg, Germany

        Sorry, English isn’t my first language

        • cariann on July 4, 2009 at 2:37 pm

          There is no need to apologize. I understood everything you said. It was perfectly clear!

          And thank you for the clarification. I appreciate it.

          Welcome from Minnesota, USA!


          • Shanuson on July 4, 2009 at 8:24 pm

            Thanks, looked it up, and i cant found it on nasas lro page how LRO’s live will end, but i think LRO will crash into the moon too. But unlike LCROSS LRO’s mission isn’t designed around that “i will hit the moon” part, it is just the way to dump a moon satellite. And while LCROSS will hit the moon in around 7 month i believe, LRO’s mission is at least one year long.

            And hi Stefan, like you, i’m from Heidelberg, Germany too. Funny that the only other german “SVCer” i know now, is also form Heidelberg.

  2. Benjamin Higginbotham on July 3, 2009 at 2:02 pm

    Is it just me, or does nearly every video on Spacevidcast get marked with 5 stars? If that’s the case, not so sure we need that feature on the site ๐Ÿ™‚

    • cariann on July 3, 2009 at 4:07 pm

      That’s because we have the COOLEST ‘casters around! ๐Ÿ˜€

  3. Zach McCauley AKA arma358 on July 3, 2009 at 7:01 pm

    Great cast guys. It was great being able to experience the show live with the chat for the first time. Post show was great. I think that I’ll be sticking around in the community…. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • Benjamin Higginbotham on July 3, 2009 at 7:26 pm

      Arma358, it was awesome to have you in the show! I’m glad you liked it and look forward to seeing you in the future!

      • Zach McCauley AKA arma358 on July 3, 2009 at 7:48 pm

        Thanks. I can’t wait for the next one, and now the theme is stuck in my head. BTW, I know of a PC program that has to do with realistic space flight simulation. I’ll email the info to you or Cariann.

        • Benjamin Higginbotham on July 3, 2009 at 9:14 pm

          Yup, that’s which we have not done a story on yet. Maybe we should in one of our dailies.

          • Zach McCauley AKA arma358 on July 3, 2009 at 9:39 pm

            It is a great program. I tried to do a TLI, and while I left Earth orbit, I didn’t come close to meeting up with the Moon.

  4. KaiYves (Go LRO!) on July 3, 2009 at 8:53 pm

    Has the SVC logo always been on the side of the thing the astronauts hold that says “Space News”?

    Random: is Guinness the beer run by the same family as Guinness World Records?

    And I think U2 calling the ISS is one of the coolest things ever! We can only imagine they talked about their mutual awesomeness.

    Oh, and Ben- How could you leave the Apollo 11 anniversary off the calendar?!?!?

  5. Paul Graham on July 3, 2009 at 9:31 pm

    I just have to say it – is how /You/ can get to space, not NASA. (and you know being an astronaut is mostly about E/PO.)

    So, Get involved, and we’ll get even more to space. Heck, we’ll have bootprints on the moon before NASA does.

    Paul Graham
    Your Moon, Your Mission, Get Involved –

    • Paul Graham on July 3, 2009 at 9:35 pm

      To clarify, before NASA does – again.

  6. David R Haslam on July 4, 2009 at 3:46 pm

    You guys are awesome! Don’t listen to the trolls! ๐Ÿ™‚

    All the best,

  7. Stefan on July 4, 2009 at 10:49 pm

    @Shanuson, or should I say Hello neighbour ๐Ÿ˜‰

    The reason why they dump a moon satellite in this way is quite interesting, a real topic for SVD. It is simply not possible to have a moon satellite for a long time in the moon orbit. The reason is that you have to have enough fuel left to make corrections, because of the mascons. Mascon stands for mass concentration and you can look it up on wikipedia (both in German or English). The mascons are located inside the big craters and they disturb the flight of the satellite quiet frankly. So the gravitational field around the moon is not as spherical as around the earth. The first map of the mascons was made by Lunar Prospector.

    I’m not an expert in this field, but I think that’s the reason you have to dump when the fuel is left.


    • Shanuson on July 5, 2009 at 1:25 pm


      • Robert Horning on July 8, 2009 at 1:23 am

        It turns out that the Earth is fairly uniform in terms of its mass distribution (with a few exceptions…. there are mascons on the Earth as well, but they aren’t nearly so pronounced as the lunar ones… Antarctica being one of them on the Earth… that impact the Southern Ocean as well). One of the side effects of this is that there are only 4 stable orbital “inclinations” or paths that can be used to orbit the Moon for a long period of time. (See for some additional details) These orbits work at 27ยบ, 50ยบ, 76ยบ, and 86ยบ, with the last one that is perhaps the best one for lunar mapping efforts like the LRO.

        NASA happen to get very lucky with Apollo 15 when a “sub-satellite” or a satellite was launched from the Apollo 15 command capsule while David Scott and James Irwin were having fun on the surface of the Moon. It happen to be released in one of these more stable orbits (at about 28ยบ inclination from the lunar equator), while a similar satellite launched on Apollo 16 crashed almost right away. “Stable” is relative as well, but it is significant that this information is something that was discovered by the Apollo program and wasn’t even considered as something worth bothering about by engineers who had only previous experience orbiting stuff around the Earth.

        BTW, after digging around, it appears as though the LRO is going to have an inclination of more or less 90ยบ (with some adjustment of about a degree or two during its expected lifetime in orbit). I think that the engineers are sacrificing some time in orbit to get more accurate maps… and trying to map the polar regions of the Moon. It is hoped that water ice is going to be found in the lunar polar regions in what is called an “ocean of eternal darkness” (see for details… cool names if I ever hears of some).

  8. Rick Boozer on July 5, 2009 at 7:46 pm

    The cause of commercial manned spaceflight has been dealt a political blow.

    The Orlando Sentinel reports:
    For months, a powerful Republican senator from Alabama has fought the Obama administration to block $150 million that the White House wanted to spend to help private companies build rockets capable of reaching the international space station.

    Now, it appears that U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby has won, in a decision that could have a major impact on the Cape Canaveral work force and America’s continued access to space.

    According to administration and industry sources, Shelby insisted that $100 million of the money โ€” part of $1 billion set aside for NASA under this spring’s economic-stimulus bill โ€” be diverted to Constellation, the troubled rocket program meant to replace the space shuttle after its 2010 retirement.

    Read more about it here:,0,4053077.story

    Even the very conservative, pro-Republican Rand Sindberg on his Transterrestrial Musings website remarked:
    “It (Constellation) canโ€™t use it in any way thatโ€™s beneficial to either the taxpayer, or a space enthusiast. I almost weep when I think of the useful things we could do with a mere hundred million dollars. Shelby is quickly making himself public enemy number one of anyone who wants a sane and cost-effective space program. More over at the Sentinel.


    • Rick Boozer on July 5, 2009 at 7:48 pm

      Sorry, I meant to italicise Rand’s comments rather than bold face them. Too little time and in too much of a hurry, as usual! ๐Ÿ™

Leave a Comment