Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Wed, 27 Sep 89 05:22:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4Z895O-00VcJA3Hk4=@andrew.cmu.edu> Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Wed, 27 Sep 89 05:22:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #81 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 81 Today's Topics: Re: Mars Mission ship design Re: Re: Saturn V & F-1 Re: NASA forced to photo Cydonia Galileo Jovian atmospheric probe -- is it sterilized??? Plutonium-power for space craft .. how ? National student winners named in space science competition (Forwarded) Re: Galileo Jovian atmospheric probe -- is it sterilized??? Re: More details about the Soyuz TM-8 docking Ulysses at Jupiter Re: Printing On a LaserWriter -- hints ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 16 Sep 89 05:16:39 GMT From: ogccse!blake!wiml@ucsd.edu (William Lewis) Subject: Re: Mars Mission ship design In article <842@gtisqr.UUCP> kevin@gtisqr.UUCP (Kevin Bagley) writes: >In article <7152@rpi.edu> jesse@pawl.rpi.edu (Jesse M. Mundis) writes: >>Just some general details/suggestions for design: > > 1) Design the upcomming space station to withstand a specific > amount of thrust. If the soviets can live in MIR for a > year, surely some hardy US astronauts could manage a couple > of years in something as plush as Freedom. > > 2) If it's decided there has to be gravity, use two modules > connected with an access tunnel. Start it spinning. > Cheaper and easier to build than a ring. Also, I don't > think we need enough space to warrant a ring. > __________ __________ > | Gravity | Access_Tunnel | Gravity | > | Module =============(_)============= Module | > |__________| Connects to Freedom |__________| As someone else already remarked before I could reach the F key (rehrauer@apollo.hp.com), this could cause problems thrusting and stuff, so using cables and a winch is probably better. And I'd think easier, safer (less puncture/crack surface area), lighter, etc. What about changing step 1 to read ".. to withstand a specific amount of thrust [along one axis only necessary], as well as putting a big hook at one end." Then the diagram would look like this: _____ ____________ (_____) (string) | Fuel for | *============\_)---------------------(*) return | (_____) (winch)^| trip | (hook) |__________| Space Station | Freedom =*>--' (engine on boom) Actually I guess the winch isn't necessary, although it may be useful to vary the speed of rotation of the whole thing (by reeling the fuel tanks & station in and out). My freshman physics fails me when I try to remember whether reeling things in and out (without changing the rotational inertia) will change the pseudo-gravity. In any case, reeling it WAAAAY out might be useful for small course corrections; the engine can fire on an arc, without having to de-spin the assembly and re-spin it (which would take fuel!). The problem is, the "craft" needs to be able to: 1. Stop itself when it gets to Mars (difficult with no gravity assisit available?) as well as stopping the fuel tanks for 2 and 3. 2. Bump itself outof Mars orbit and back into transfer orbit (them ellipses's got a name -- Hohmann?) as well as bumping the fuel for step 3. This is easier than #2, but only because you don't have to accelerate as much fuel. Same delta-v though... 3. Stop once you're at earth. Use the moon for gravity assist. Note I left out step 0, accelerating all 3 fuel tanks and the station, but presumably we can put all sorts of crud in orbit for that. I wouldn't want to rely on a catcher for the return trip -- what if the launch gets delayed? =8( > 3) Attatch boosters, BIG fuel tanks, landing, and exploration ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ouch, yep. > 2) Anybody know the estimated mass of Freedom. Using Lunar gravity > assist, how much fuel/thrust would be needed. Don't forget the > return home requirements. probably something along the lines of "REALLY, REALLY HEAVY. YOU EXPECT TO MOVE THAT THING? YOU'RE CRAZY". =8( . Oh well, it was a good idea. > > 3) How long would the trip take? How long would it take to build > this contraption? > > 4) How many people should go? How long should they stay? > I seem to remember in some story (probably Heinlein's The Rolling Stones) that the correct alignment of Earth and Mars occurs every 26 months (or something close). This is an alignment such that going into a transfer orbit at Earth will actually arrive at Mars, instead of "arriving foolishly at some totally untenanted part of Mars' orbit" (one of my favorite quotes from tRS..). Presumably it's once-every-26 months going the other way, too, although (fortunately) not the same orbit (otherwise you'd have to leave as soon as you got there...) Unfortunately I don't have any hard numbers handy, so I can't calculate much... However, the length-of-stay is contant: there are `windows' for leaving Mars, too. Presumably we'd want to leave as soon as possible! Looking at the shape of the orbit I'd **guess** that the trip time would be 7 or 8 months, each way. It's some function of Terran and Martian year lengths, greater than Earth's half-year but less than Mars'. A wild guess gives a couple months' time in Mars orbit for the trip. If/when I find real numbers I'll work it out and post the results (assuming (a) people are still interested, and (b) no-one else does it before me). --- phelliax "I'm not a professional calculator of transfer orbits, but I play one on Usenet." -- wiml@blake.acs.washington.edu (206)526-5885 Seattle, Washington ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 89 07:01:45 GMT From: bfmny0!tneff@uunet.uu.net (Tom Neff) Subject: Re: Re: Saturn V & F-1 In article <2006@hudson.acc.virginia.edu> gl8f@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes: >Of course, the main competition to the S5 would be the shuttle-C. The main >engines for the shuttle-C are flying today. By your own argument, it must >be cheaper to build shuttle-C using existing components than to reconstruct >the Saturn V from rusting originals. It might indeed be cheaper to do this if an industrial consortium hired the engineers and said, "do it." If we wait for NASA to do it, however, it will cost much more. A good rule of thumb is: whatever NASA finally does ends up costing more than anything else they might have done. -- 'We have luck only with women -- \\\ Tom Neff not spacecraft!' *-((O tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET -- R. Kremnev, builder of FOBOS \\\ uunet!bfmny0!tneff (UUCP) ------------------------------ Date: 16 Sep 89 12:13:24 GMT From: b.gp.cs.cmu.edu!Ralf.Brown%B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU@pt.cs.cmu.edu Subject: Re: NASA forced to photo Cydonia In article <124798@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>, kschmahl%hastings@Sun.COM (Ken Schmahl) wrote: >building things from those of humans. What he's looking for are unusual >geometric patterns that indicate the presence of intelligence. "I The question, of course, is on which side of the camera the intelligence is located.... -- UUCP: {ucbvax,harvard}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf -=-=-=-=- Voice: (412) 268-3053 (school) ARPA: ralf@cs.cmu.edu BIT: ralf%cs.cmu.edu@CMUCCVMA FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/46 FAX: available on request Disclaimer? I claimed something? John Gilbert on a Chordal Graph handout: "Lemma 3 very pretty, with conditions very few, but the proof of the poor lemma is impossible to do." (quoted in Upson's Familiar Quotations) ------------------------------ Date: 18 Sep 89 16:38:47 GMT From: hubcap!mage@gatech.edu (Steve L Vissage II) Subject: Galileo Jovian atmospheric probe -- is it sterilized??? If some Earth bugs actually do have the tenacity to travel sevaral hundreds of millions of miles to Jupiter, is it not likely that most life on Jupiter will have the tenacity to survive it? Steve L Vissage II mage@hubcap.clemson.edu ------------------------------ Date: 18 Sep 89 15:03:41 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!yunexus!tony@rutgers.edu (Tony Wallis) Subject: Plutonium-power for space craft .. how ? (Sorry if this has been covered in sci.space or sci.space.shuttle. I do read sci.physics and sci.energy regularly.) There are media reports of attempts to legally halt the launch of Galileo on the grounds that it contains many kilos of Pu in its power source, and should there be a launch accident there would be lots of plute all over the place etc. etc. Other reports emphasize that there is NOT a nuclear REACTOR on board Galileo. So .. *physics* question : how do you use many kilos of Pu to provide power at space craft levels without using a self-sustaining fission chain-reaction ? Follow-ups to sci.physics -- Tony Wallis tony@yunexus.UUCP (York U. Toronto Canada) ------------------------------ Date: 18 Sep 89 21:30:54 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: National student winners named in space science competition (Forwarded) Terri Sindelar Headquarters, Washington, D.C. September 18, 1989 RELEASE: 89-146 NATIONAL STUDENT WINNERS NAMED IN SPACE SCIENCE COMPETITION NASA and the National Science Teachers Association held the 9th annual Space Science Student Involvement Program (SSIP) competition in Washington, D.C., the week of Sept. 14-16. National SSIP winners were selected in three competition categories: Space Station Freedom experiment proposal, school newspaper promotion, and Destination Mars team competition. In the Space Station Freedom experiment proposal competition, eight national winners presented proposals to the selection panel on Sept. 14. Selected from over 1,600 proposals, the following are the three national scholarship recipients, their proposals and awards: First Place: Diane M. Fogel, Landsdale, Pa. Topic: "The Effects of Calcitonin in Establishing Calcium Homeostasis in Microgravity." The proposal examines the effects of the hormone calcitonin and Vitamin D in reducing bone loss in microgravity. Fogel was awarded a $3,000 scholarship and a Tandy computer. Second Place: Bianca Santomasso, New York City. Topic: "Determing the Effect of Microgravity on Circulation to the Hands and Feet in Humans through the Measurement of Nail Growth." Her proposal states that because circulation to the hands and feet has been shown to have an effect on nail growth, measuring this growth in microgravity would help determine whether weightlessness has some effect on circulation to these areas. She was awarded a $2,000 scholarship and a Tandy computer. Third Place: Mark G. Baxter, Durham, N.C. Topic: "Effect of Microgravity on the Membrane Transport System of Chorella." This research, on the ion absorption rate in the active transport system of algae, could shed light on the ability to grow hydroponic plants in space as a potential food source and as a water purification system. Baxter won a $1,000 scholarship and a Tandy computer. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Sep 89 12:38:27 GMT From: cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!mailrus!sharkey!itivax!vax3!aws@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Allen W. Sherzer) Subject: Re: Galileo Jovian atmospheric probe -- is it sterilized??? I while back somebody posted details of an Air Force launch from Vandenberg where the rocket exploded and dumped an RTG into the Pacific. The story went on to say that the Air Force found the RTG, cleaned it up, and used it for another satellite. Can anybody post the details (names & dates)? We need the information for a letter to the editor. Allen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Allen Sherzer | DETROIT: | | aws@iti.org | Where the weak are killed and eaten | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 18 Sep 89 21:01:28 GMT From: crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen@uunet.uu.net (Wm E Davidsen Jr) Subject: Re: More details about the Soyuz TM-8 docking glenn@VLSI.LL.MIT.EDU (Glenn Chapman) writes: | | Some more information was given on the shortwave about the USSR's | Soyuz TM-8 mission. About 48 hours after launch the Soyuz approached the | Mir station slowly at its Kvant (rear) end. A few meters from the docking | port the autodock system failed. The crew of Alexander Viktorenko and | Alexander Serebrov then pulled the capsule away from the station. After | a conference with the ground controllers it was decided to go ahead and | try a manual docking rather than another automatic attempt. This was quickly | accomplished. This brings back a faint memory which someone can probably clarify. At one point in time the US and USSR had a docking in space, and my recollection is that the final manuver was done by the US because the USSR did not have a reliable computer assist on their vehicles. More recently I thought that the USSR was able to do unmanned dockings. I am obviously not remembering all of the details, could someone fill in on either or both of these examples of the status of automatic docking? Was the unmanned docking actually human controlled by a remote? The time lag is short enough that I suspect it could be done that way. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon ------------------------------ Date: 19 Sep 89 00:44:51 GMT From: mcsun!ukc!icdoc!cam-cl!ksh@uunet.uu.net (Kish Shen on jenny) Subject: Ulysses at Jupiter I got one reply by e-mail to my question about Ulysses and its encounter with Jupiter: -------- # #I cannot post to the system so perhaps you could forward this. # #Ulysses carrries nine instruments. # #Magnetometers to measure magnetic fields in space. # #Solar-wind plasma experiment to study protons, electrons in the solar wind. # #Solar-wind ion-composition spectrometer # #Energetic-particle composition experiment # #Low-energy charged-particle detector # #Cosmic-ray and solar-particle instrument # #Unified radio and plasma-wave experiment # #Solar flare x-ray and cosmic gamma-ray burst experiment # #Cosmic dust experiment # #Coronal sounding # #Gravity wave search # #Ulysses is designed to study solar physics and I believe the flyby of #Jupiter is too fast to do anything meaningful there. # #Also, Galileo will get to Jupiter in 1995 and stay there for 5 years. # #Hema Murty , Institute for Aerospace Studies, University of Toronto, #4925 Dufferin St., Downsview, Ontario M3H 5T6 ------ Would Ulysses be flying past Jupiter much faster than the Voyagers and the Pioneers? Also, can't some or even most of the instruments return useful data at Jupiter as well, even though they were designed for solar physics? Since the flyby of Jupiter is for "free", surely some useful data can be returned. I assume that any data collected could be used to compliment data gathered by Galileo, which would of course return much better data of Jupiter. However, would it not be a bonus to be able to gather data from different points in the Jupiter system at the same time? Kish Shen Computer Lab. University of Cambridge U.K. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Sep 89 09:10:58 PDT From: Peter Scott Subject: Re: Printing On a LaserWriter -- hints *What* is this thread doing in SPACE Digest??? It seemed obvious that the first posting was sent to the wrong group, but why is it being continued by at least 3 posters in this group? Or have I missed some magical esoteric connection with space? Peter Scott (pjs@grouch.jpl.nasa.gov) ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #81 *******************