Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site leadsv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!cae780!leadsv!morse
From: morse@leadsv.UUCP (Terry Morse)
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.space,net.research
Subject: Re: Seasat 1
Message-ID: <747@leadsv.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 6-Jan-86 19:06:51 EST
Article-I.D.: leadsv.747
Posted: Mon Jan  6 19:06:51 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 8-Jan-86 20:18:13 EST
References: <384@ukc.UUCP> <201@prometheus.UUCP> <3327@brl-tgr.ARPA> <787@petrus.UUCP>
Organization: Lockheed, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 16
Xref: linus net.physics:3459 net.space:3605 net.research:357

> Very true. Depending on which rumor mill you listen to, an alternative
> explanation for the failure of Seasat 1 is that somebody discovered it was
> able to detect the slight disturbances of the ocean surface caused by
> missile-carrying submarines underneath.
> 

I have always heard that Seasat died due to a single point of failure in
its linkage from the solar panels to the batteries.  I think that is called
a design flaw in aerospace jargon.  Translated, that means to start looking for
another line of work.

Of course, this is my opinion only and not that of my employer.
-- 

Terry Morse  (408)743-1487
{ ihnp4!amdcad!cae780 } | { allegra!sun!sunncal } !leadsv!morse