At the G.A.S. Symposium last year, the Charleston County Public School CAN DO Project outlined an ambitious educational program revolving around the photography of Comet Halley from the Shuttle using a GAS canister. The target flight was STS 61-E scheduled for a March, 1986, launch. Such strict time constraints and highly specific mission requirements made the CAN DO program even more risky than normal. In spite of this, almost all of the planned educational goals were achieved, even after the postponement of all Shuttle activities in January of 1986. This follow-up paper summarizes the effects of events on the program as proposed and the attempts to carry out as many of the activities as possible. It is hoped that this paper will suggest constructive ways in which to cope with the delays and mishaps that are the invariable lot of pioneers who break new ground and attempt the new and untried

Nicholson, James H.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

N87-20327
TO CATCH A CHILD'S IMAGINATION I!
Educational Update on C-AN DO
By James H. Nicholson
CAN DO Principal Investigator
Image Analysis Lab Supervisor
Department of Pathology
Medical University of South Carolina
Charleston, South Carolina 29425
(803) 792-4158
Closing the Loop
ABSTRACT
In the field of educational
activities, not unlike financial
investment, high return is usually
achieved only in ventures with high
risk. Innovative and exotic
activities such as the GAS program
will invariably carry significantly
more danger of failure and delay than
more conservative and conventional
endeavors, although the rewards can
be greater also. Planning to manage
such risks and building in
flexibility wit[, strong alternatives
should be part of any comprehensive
program.
At the G.A.S. Symposium last year,
the Charleston County Public School
CAN DO Project outlined an ambitious
educational program revolving around
the photography of Comet Halley from
the Shuttle using a GAS canister.
The target flight was STS 61-E
scheduled for a March, 1986, launch.
Such strict time constraints and
highly specific mission requirements
made the CAN DO program even more
risky than normal. In spite of this,
almost all of the planned educational
goals were achieved, even after the
postponement of all Shuttle activi-
ties in January of 1986.
This follow-up paper summarizes
the effects of events on the program
as proposed and the attempts to carry
out as many of the activities as
possible. It is hoped that this
paper will suggest constructive ways
in which to cope with the delays and
mishaps that are the invariable lot
of pioneers who break new ground and
attempt the new and untried.
179
ORIGINAL PAGE' FS
OF POOR QUALITY
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19870010894 2020-03-20T11:18:50+00:00Z
^OCTOBER, 1985 to JANUARY, 1986
At the time of the GAS Symposium
in October, 1985, the CAN DO project
was still far from assured of being
on an appropriate shuttle flight at
all. Under the rules governing the
GAS queue, whether or not G324 would
be eligible for a flight by March
depended on several factors including
whether the GAS Bridge had flown.
Worse yet, the only appropriate
flight, STS 61E, was already serious-
ly overweight and no GAS payloads
were planned for it, regardless of
number. Despite the gloomy outlook,
work proceeded in hopes of a change
since the only alternative would have
been to abandon all hope of photo-
graphing Comet Halley.
At the invitation of Dr. Mal
Neidner, the CAN DO team was able to
present its plans to the astronomers
working on STS-61E's primary payload,
the ASTRO ultraviolet observatory
which was planning to study Comet
Halley and other objects. The
scientists of the ASTRO HALLEY
SCIENCE TEAM, after a careful study,
decided that the CAN DO camera
package could serve as a useful
auxiliary to their own wide field
camera system pending a successful
resolution of the weight problem.
The subsequent removal of a
communication satellite because of
launch window incompatibility made
the additional weight available.
Suddenly, CAN DO ceased to be a GAS
payload and instead became an
auxiliary part of the ASTRO payload
utilizing GAS technology and with GAS
program technical support. From this
point, the main thrust was to modify
the original design to make the
payload as compatible as possible
with the ASTRO mission goals. These
design changes, to be discussed in
detail in a separate paper, included
the addition of an ultraviolet camera
and the design and construction of a
fused silica window to allow
photography at ultraviolet wave-
lengths. In addition, steps were
taken to improve mission life in
order to provide photographic
coverage for more of the planned
mission duration.
To insure a better percentage of
"hits" than would be possible with
the automatic digital video "comet
detector" of the original design, it
was decided to have the cameras under
active Astronaut control. The
cameras would be activated only at
those times when the payload was
oriented towards the comet and
conditions suitable for good
photography. Two members of the STS
61E crew, Pilot Dick Richards and
Mission Specialist David Leestma came
to Goddard Space Flight Center and
spent a day becoming fully acquainted
with the payload and the control
system.
Also during this period, the
payload was finished and fully tested
in facilities at both Langley
Research Center and Goddard Space
Flight Center. All tests were
successfully completed and the
payload fully integrated in time to
be delivered to the Kennedy Space
Flight Center by the flight deadline.
With the flight seemingly assured,
the NASA Educational Affairs Office,
under the direct guidance of the
Langley Research Center Educational
Affairs Division, took an active role
in publicizing the flight nationwide
in an effort to recruit the greatest
possible number of student partici-
pants. A twenty minute video tape
was produced outlining the upcoming
flight and giving the information for
schools to sign up for both the Comet
Halley Student Ground Research Team
and for the planned educational
packet to be made up using the CAN DO
photos and other material.
By January, the tape was finished
and a brochure already at the printer
for planned national distribution.
The day of the CHALLENGER tragedy was
the exact day that the payload was
scheduled to be delivered to the
Vehicular Assembly Building for
loading aboard the COLUMBIA.
180
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALn'Y
CARRYING ON
From the very moment of the
Challenger disaster, there was never
a serious debate about the necessity
of continuing the program. Despite
assurances received from many people
within NASA determined to continue
with the GAS program as soon as
possible, there was no possible hope
of any space flight during the period
of Comet Halley. While long range
plans to develop other appropriate
future deep-space photographic
targets were immediately begun, the
more difficult and pressing problem
was to decide how to salvage as much
as possible from educational
activities already under way.
The primary motivation for an
aggressive alternative effort was not
the loss of the scientific data.
From the beginning, CAN DO has been
designed as an effort to obtain good
quality wide-field color visible
light photographs of the Comet.
While it was hoped that these photo-
graphs would compliment the other
photographs being taken throughout
the world by such groups as the
International Halley Watch, it was
clearly recognized that an army of
amateur and professional astronomers
would be bringing an impressive array
of sophisticated equipment to bear on
similar goals. The loss of the CAN
DO photos was not apt to leave any
very serious gap in that coverage.
The program's primary goal had always
been as a vehicle for student
involvement and education and it was
in this same area that the real loss
was likely to occur.
The CAN DO project was primarily
targeted at the middle school level,
grades 6-8, which is a crucial period
when the child first begins to
develop many attitudes which he will
carry on into adulthood. The typical
child at this age has often not been
confronted with significant tragedy
or disappointment. Efforts had been
successful in getting the Challenger
launch carried live in a majority of
Fig. I: Director of Special Payloads
Leonard Arnowitz and Astro Mission
Manager Ron Kinsley inspect the
finished CAN DO payload.
classrooms in the area in hopes that
the "Teacher in Space" flight would
serve as a good introduction to
"their" upcoming flight. Instead,
these students were inadvertently
brought into a situation where they
felt a real personal involvement in a
very dramatic and tragic event. The
impression was profound, and it was
felt that any action would now serve
as an example, good or bad, on how to
deal with tragedy and disappointment.
Thousands of students now felt deeply
involved with the space program and
hopes and excitement had been built
for a project that could not be
completed as planned. To passively
admit defeat and suspend the project
would serve as one sort of lesson.
To pick up the pieces and carry on in
the best possible manner would be
another very different lesson much
more in the spirit of the Challenger
crew and the space program itself.
Therefore, with this in mind, the
search for constructive alternatives
was begun.
181
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALITY
JANUARY 28, 1986 to APRIL i, 1986
The first week following January
28 was taken up with the immediate
details of closing down the space
flight program including the
retrieval of the payload from the
Kennedy Space Flight Center. This
was followed by an immediate review
of the educational program in light
of the new circumstances. The
secondary activities including: the
interviewing of senior citizens who
remembered Comet Halley from 1910;
the preparation of a time capsule by
the Young Astronauts to be opened at
the time of Halley's next apparition;
the construction of a 17½ inch
telescope by a local middle school;
and the program of public and student
"sky parties" to observe the comet
and associated meteor showers were
already either underway or completely
planned. These programs had been
specifically intended to be
independent of, though complimentary
to, the Space Shuttle effort and no
direct impact was anticipated. In
fact, these separate activities
became even more important because
they could be completed successfully
even without pictures of the comet
being made from space.
On the opposite end of the
spectrum, activities specifically
geared to the orbital
environment such as the eleven student
experiments included with the payload
had to be indefinitely postponed
pending resumption of Shuttle activi-
ties. All of these experiments were
designed to test the effect of the
micro-gravity or radiation effects of
low Earth orbit on various material,
both man-made and biological. No
meaningful substitute could be
devised and it is to the credit of
the 28 young students involved that
they accepted their disappointment
with good grace and understanding
that belied their ages.
The areas where alteznatives could
salvage activities were those based
on the actual acquisition of photo-
graphs. These included the concur-
rent ground-based photography by the
students for later comparison to the
space-based photos, the student
evaluation and interpretation of the
CAN DO photos, and the publication of
a post-flight educational packet.
The importance of the Shuttle photos
were two-fold. First, to provide
pictures for comparison taken in an
environment not normally available to
students and such that the results
might, in fact, show meaningful
differences to pictures made from the
ground. Secondly, to provide added
interest and excitement by making
their "backyard" efforts part of a
larger program the included exotic
activities such as space flight.
!!iii!!!iii!!i¸ i¸lii!! ii!!iCii iiiii!!i!!/ )i i/i
Fig. 2: Chief Machinist Cliff Harvey and the author brief
STS-61E Mission Specialist David Leestma and Pilot Dick
Richards on the operation of the payload.
182
8CAN DO II -
THE SEARCH FOR ALTERNATIVES
Shortly before January, a team
from CAN DO and the National Geo-
graphic Society had traveled to the
McDonald Observatory in Fort Davis,
Texas, to conduct final film tests
under darker, clearer skies than
could be obtained in South Carolina.
These tests had not only made it
possible to select the best film, but
had indicated the potential of the
film and lenses to return high
quality photographs under the nearly
ideal conditions. One possible
alternative would be to return to
Fort Davis during March to take
comparative photos. Other
observatory sites considered were
located in Hawaii and Chile, although
all observatory locations were
already heavily committed during the
peak Comet Halley period.
During the same period, several
advisors mentioned that there were
two high altitude flying observa-
tories operated by NASA which were
being deployed to the Southern
Hemisphere during this period. These
potentially seemed to offer the best
opportunity of achieving a
"near-space" environment and meeting
the criteria for generating interest
and providing meaningfully different
photos. Efforts to make contact
final]y resulted in discussion being
opened with the Gerard P. Kuiper Air-
borne Observatory operated by Ames
Research Center at Moffett Field,
California. Observatory Director,
Louis Haughney, and Mission Director,
David Brown, were sympathetic and
interested, but several serious
handicaps make it unlikely that an
effort could be launched. First, the
Kulper was busy preparing for the
deployment in just a few weeks and no
wide-fleld cameras had ever been
mounted on the Kuiper. No hardware
existed for such a mounting nor
appropriate control equipment, and it
was unlikely that any could be
designed in time to be fitted and
tested before the aircraft was
already at Christchurch, New Zealand.
Secondly, the Kuiper has its primary
responsibility to the Astronomers for
which each flight is dedicated.
Unless it could be conclusively and
unequivocally proven that the
mounting of the CAN DO equipment in
n__ooway interfered with the operation
of the 36-1nch telescope, the
equipment could not be used. This,
for example, precluded the
possibility of including any internal
heat in the cameras as a heat source
near the head ring of the telescope
would completely distort data being
collected by the extremely sensitive
infrared sensors. This presented a
considerable obstacle since no one
was certain that any camera would
function in the anticipated -55°C
temperatures at 41,000 ft. Thirdly,
CAN DO had not funds available to
send a team to far-off New Zealand
and support them for the time
necessary to mount such a campaign,
especially one so apt to not be
allowed to operate. It would have
been more than understandable if, in
view of the time and mission
pressures involved, the Kuiper
Observatory had dismissed the idea
with polite good wishes and regrets
that this could not have been brought
up when there was time to adequately
consider such a major undertaking.
Instead, they were encouraging and
supportive and made it clear that if
we could design equipment that would
work without interference to the
other apparatus in time, and manage
to get to Christchurch, they in turn
would do everything in their power to
get us up and help us get our pic-
tures.
Once more, the design team was
challenged with a fourth major
redesign with two weeks in which to
have the plans submitted and approved
at Ames. Another paper at this sym-
posium will give the technical side
of this equipment, but I want to note
here that not only were the
impossible deadlines met but the
183
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALITY
equipment performed faultlessly and
created no problems for the other
researchers. The Nikon cameras also
rose to the occasion and experienced
not one failure in cold and near
vacuum far in excess of that for
which they were designed. The third
problem, that of funding, was solved
through the continued unflagging
support of the National Geographic
Society, the ASTRO mission team at
Marshall Space Flight Center and tile
NASA Education Office, who jointly
provided support for a team of three
to operate from New Zealand.
ABOARD THE KUIPER
The team that traveled to Christ-
church included the CAN DO Principal
Investigator, Chief Engineer and
"Teacher-in-Space" finalist, Nikki
Wenger. Ms. Wenger was chosen to
insure that the experience would have
a direct route back to the classroom.
As part of their duties, the
"Teacher-in-Space" finalists spend
much of their time touring schools
throughout the country and making
presentations about many different
NASA activities. Between April 6 and
April 21, the team made six flights
aboard the Kuiper Airborne
Observatory and after their
departure, the CAN DO equipment was
used by Kuiper personnel and several
university groups. Unfortunately,
this period was coincident with the
surprising period when Comet Halley
virtually "turned off" and the comet
was dim and showed only a few degrees
of tail. In spite of these less than
ideal conditions, good quality
photographs were obtained on every
comet flight. One set showed a dra-
matic "tail disconnection" event. In
addition, some of the first ever
ultraviolet wide-field photographs
were made. Overall, the results
obtained from aboard the Kuiper were
not dissimilar to the anticipated
results from aboard the Shuttle, with
the exception that the Shuttle flight
would have been at a time when the
comet was larger and brighter. From
a photographic point of view, there
seemed to be llttle difference
between the Kuiper's eight mile
altitude and the Shuttle's low Earth
orbit in either the visible light or
the ultraviolet.
The reception to the photographs
and the project was enthusiastic and
the CAN DO activities were
extensively covered by the New
Zealand press. Members of the team,
especially Ms. Wenger, were able to
visit several schools both in the
Christchurch area and as far away as
Australia. The Kuiper crew
themselves were enthusiastic about
the photos and hope to have similar
coverage on future missions.
Flg. 3: Teacher-in-Space Finalist
Nikki Wenger mounting the cameras in
the telescope bay of the Kuiper
Airborne Observatory.
184
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUAUTY
Fig 4: CAN DO Chief Engineer Tom
O'Brien and the author operating
the control equipment on board the KAO.
Fig. 5: The Control Unit
Fig. 6: Photograph of Comet Halley taken the night of April 8/9 showing a discon-
nection of the ion tail. Black and white reproduction of color original. 105mm
f 2.5 Nikkor lens/Ektachrome EES film processed in C41/5 minute exposure.
185
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALITY
Fig. 7: KAO at Christchurch.
EDUCATIONAL SUMMATION
Looking back over the originally
planned activities, the final score--
board shows the followJng:
PRIMARY STUDENT ACTIVITIES
Junior Design Team . . Completed
before
January
Student Space
Experiments ...... Postponed
Student Photo
Evaluation ....... Packets in
preparation
using Kulper
photos
SECONDARY STUDENT ACTIVITIES
Historical Research
and Interviews ..... Successfully
completed
Young Astronaut
Time Capsule ..... Successfully
completed
Sky Parties ...... Successfully
completed,
terrific
public inter-
est
Ground-Based
Studies ........ Handbooks
distributed,
success
somewhat
limited by
poor comet
performance
Radio Monitoring
of Shuttle ...... Postponed
(Radio groups
successfully
used to llnk
sky party
locations)
Construction of
17.5 inch telescope . . Completed in
time for sky
parties
CONCLUSION
While it is impossible to pretend
that the loss of such a unique oppor-
tunity to photograph the comet from
space was not a disappointment, the
experience still was a very positive
one. Educationally, we were able to
complete almost all of the original
goals. We developed an alternative
activity that has future potential in
Its o%m right. We hopefully
presented a positive example of
perseverance in the face of adversity
that may stand some young student
well in the future. Best of all, we
now have a fully built and tested
payload and considerable practical
experience in "near-space"
photography. When our turn comes
again, we will be ready to go. Older
and wiser, we should be able to con-
struct a new and better program to
reach even more students. Fortunate-
ly, each new year brings fresh astro-
nomlca] targets and a new group of
students.
186


To catch a child's imagination 2: Educational update on CAN-DO

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server