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/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Thu, 8 Mar 90 01:30:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Thu, 8 Mar 90 01:30:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #122 SPACE Digest Volume 11 : Issue 122 Today's Topics: Re: Ulysses Update - 03/06/90 Re: Large antennas in orbit Re: space news from Jan 22 AW&ST Re: Payload Status for 02/27/90 (Forwarded) SR-71: LA to DC NASA hosts 21ST Lunar/Planetary Science Conference (Fowarded) Peterson named Deputy Director of Ames Research Center (Forwarded) Re: SR-71: LA to DC Re: space news from Jan 29 AW&ST etc Re: Space poem Re: Ulysses Update - 03/06/90 Re: Galileo Camera 'Blemishes' Re: Space capsules (was Re: space news from Jan 22 AW&ST) Re: Fun Space Fact #1: Launcher Development Costs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 7 Mar 90 18:05:29 GMT From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!ists!yunexus!utzoo!henry@ucsd.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Ulysses Update - 03/06/90 In article khai@amara.uucp (S. Khai Mong) writes: >> It is interesting to point out that Ulysses will arrive at Jupiter before >> Galileo. > >How does the payload weight of Ulysses and Gallileo compare? Ulysses is much lighter, partly because there were originally going to be a pair of them -- one European, one US -- on the same Shuttle-Centaur launch. (The US reneged on its half of the deal.) -- MSDOS, abbrev: Maybe SomeDay | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology an Operating System. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 90 03:54:44 GMT From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!b-tech!kitenet!russ@ucsd.edu (Russ Cage) Subject: Re: Large antennas in orbit In article <9003030322.AA19251@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts) writes: >object to get meters per second squared. Thus for LEO, the gravitational >gradient is about 2.7E-6 s^-2. (Does anybody have a more exact figure?) >This is not a strong gradient, but it is enough to eventually force elongated >objects to point toward the center of the earth. Pointing a very large >antenna might be difficult if it is not carefully balanced. Tidal torques can only act on an object with a dipole asymmetry. If you design your antenna so that it has no such asymmetry (equal moments of inertia around all 3 axes), then you'll get no torques. Also, tidal torques fall off with the cube of distance; in GEO, the gradient is only about 1/250 as large as in LEO. At L4 or L5, they will be negligible. For radio astronomy, going further away from Terra's noise may very well be worth the expense. -- I am paid to write all of RSI's opinions. Want me to write some for you? (313) 662-4147 Forewarned is half an octopus. Russ Cage, Robust Software Inc. russ@m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 90 19:45:38 GMT From: sei!firth@PT.CS.CMU.EDU (Robert Firth) Subject: Re: space news from Jan 22 AW&ST In article <1990Mar3.082009.25732@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >Feature article on Lawrence Livermore's "Great Exploration" proposal, >doing Moon and Mars bases by the year 2000 for total cost of about $10G >(compared to NASA's 25 years and $400G). It's caught the eye of a lot >of people; NASA's response has been very negative. The primary authors >are Lowell Wood, Rod Hyde, and Yuki Ishikawa. Good grief, these people are offering essentially a duplicate mission at 2.5% - ONE FORTIETH - of the cost of the primary. If it looks even remotely feasible, surely it should be funded at once, not as an alternative to NASA, but as a parallel effort. This must be close to the cheapest risk reduction exercise in the history of technology. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 90 23:31:48 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!haven!grebyn!pat@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Pat Bahn) Subject: Re: Payload Status for 02/27/90 (Forwarded) In article <43835@ames.arc.nasa.gov> yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) writes: >Daily Status/KSC Payload Management and Operations 02-27-90 >- STS-32R SYNCOM/LDEF (at SAEF-2) >LDEF deintegration continues. > You know Shouldn't the correct term be disintegration? >- STS-35 ASTRO-1/BBXRT (at O&C) - > >Today velcro patch installations, and payload envelope Also are the satellites really held together in part with velcro? sorry, but I couldn't resist the first one. -- ============================================================================= Pat @ grebyn.com | If the human mind was simple enough to understand, 301-948-8142 | We'd be too simple to understand it. ============================================================================= ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 90 19:59:12 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!jarthur!jokim@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (John H. Kim) Subject: SR-71: LA to DC Just heard this on the news this morning. The SR-71 for the Smithsonian made the trip from Los Angeles to Washington DC in 68 min, 15 sec. The target time was 64 minutes. Does anyone have any more info like exact distance travelled, altitude, etc? -- John H. Kim | (This space to be filled when I jokim@jarthur.Claremont.EDU | think of something very clever uunet!muddcs!jarthur!jokim | to use as a disclaimer) ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 90 20:12:56 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: NASA hosts 21ST Lunar/Planetary Science Conference (Fowarded) Charles Redmond Headquarters, Washington, D.C. March 6, 1990 Pam Alloway Johnson Space Center, Houston RELEASE: N90-14 EDITORS NOTE: NASA HOSTS 21ST LUNAR/PLANETARY SCIENCE CONFERENCE Some 750 scientists from around the world are expected to attend the 21st Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, March 12- 16, at the Johnson Space Center, Houston. Scientists and scholars will present approximately 375 papers covering such subjects as a Venus overview prior to Magellan; lunar meteorites, geology and resource utilization; cosmic rays; comets and orbital dust collection; the outer solar system; Martian geophysical and tectonic evolution, volcanic evolution, climate histories and craters; solar nebula and planetary origins; heavy metal meteorites; Triton and Phobos and planetary geological processes. There will be two public sessions including a March 12 discussion of President Bush's Moon/Mars exploration initiative featuring JSC Director Aaron Cohen and a March 14 special Voyager 2 session featuring the California Institute of Technology's Andrew Ingersoll. The Voyager 2 spacecraft in August 1989 sent back data and images of Neptune. Both programs will begin at 8 p.m. in Teague auditorium in Bldg. 2 and are free of charge. An 8:30 a.m., March 14 technical session will feature discussions on interplanetary dust and LDEF findings. Concurrent sessions are scheduled each day at 8:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. On March 16, sessions are scheduled for 8:30 a.m. and 10:15 a.m. in the JSC Gilruth Center. Media interested in covering the conference should register in the Gilruth Center, Room 216, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. March 12- 15 or in the morning of March 16. Conference abstract volumes of several scientists' papers will be available at the Gilruth Center or on request from JSC's newsroom. All times are EST. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 90 20:15:19 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Peterson named Deputy Director of Ames Research Center (Forwarded) Mary Sandy Headquarters, Washington, D.C. March 6, 1990 Del Harding Ames Research Center, Mountain View, Calif. RELEASE: 90-36 PETERSON NAMED DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF AMES RESEARCH CENTER Dr. Dale L. Compton, Director of NASA's Ames Research Center, Mountain View, Calif., today named Victor L. Peterson, Deputy Director of the Center. Peterson, 55, has served as Ames' Director of Aerophysics from 1984 and as the Center's Acting Deputy Director since 1988. He has held various positions at Ames, including Research Scientist, Chief of the Aerodynamics Branch and Chief of the Thermo and Gas Dynamics Division. He was one of the originators of the NASA initiative to develop the Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation System, the leading computational resource for the nation's aerospace program. Peterson joined Ames in 1956 after receiving a bachelor's degree in aeronautical engineering from Oregon State University. He also holds a master's degree in aeronautics and astronautics sciences from Stanford University and a master's degree in management from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he was an Alfred P. Sloan Fellow. Peterson has served on many national boards and committees, including a National Science Foundation committee chartered to assist with the creation of national supercomputer centers at several universities. He has written about 50 technical papers and reports in the fields of fluid and flight mechanics and on the use of supercomputers in science and engineering. He was awarded the NASA Outstanding Leadership Medal in 1984 and was elected a Fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics in 1986. A native of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada, Peterson and his wife, Jacqueline Dianne, reside in Los Altos, Calif. They have three children. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 90 13:29:48 GMT From: mstar!mstar.morningstar.com!bob@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) Subject: Re: SR-71: LA to DC In article <4847@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> jokim@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (John H. Kim) writes: ...SR-71... LA to DC in 01:08:15... target time was 01:04:00... Yeah, those darned unforecast headwinds mess up my leg times, too :-) ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 90 18:07:48 GMT From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!turnkey!orchard.la.locus.com!prodnet.la.locus.com!todd@decwrl.dec.com (Todd Johnson) Subject: Re: space news from Jan 29 AW&ST etc In article <1990Mar6.043010.20491@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: > >Truly recommends to Space Council that "the first decade of the 21st >century" be the target goal for a lunar base. [Call it 19 years. >Apollo took 8. I'm not impressed.] We have paid for that 8 year leap every day since then. The quick 8 years was a "go there and do it" plan, it did not have the staying power required for a permanent manned presence (or a permanent observing presence, let alone manned). I suspect that the 19 years includes building up an infrastructure and producing maintainability. >MSDOS, abbrev: Maybe SomeDay >an Operating System. Or is it: Maybe SomeDay OS/2? -- lcc!todd@seas.ucla.edu {randvax,sdcrdcf,ucbvax}!ucla-se!lcc!todd {gryphon,turnkey,attunix,oblio}!lcc!todd ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 90 23:06:58 GMT From: cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!daver!lynx!vik@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Vikram Sohal) Subject: Re: Space poem In article jeffc@ncr-fc.FtCollins.NCR.com ( Jeff Cook) writes: >At the end of the ABC movie about Challenger, they recited a poem that >begins with (something like): > >"I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth..." > >Can someone e-mail me the text of this poem, and the name of its author? >I'll post the reply. > >-- > The author is John Gillspie Magee Jr. and the poem is called "High Flight" It is actually my favorite poem, and i'll try to post the text as soon as I find it in this electronic toybox... Regards, Vic Sohal ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 90 03:20:12 GMT From: pasteur!helios.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!umich!sharkey!amara!khai@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (S. Khai Mong) Subject: Re: Ulysses Update - 03/06/90 In article <2988@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov> baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > Earth-Jupiter transfer orbit. Ulysses will arrive at Jupiter in March 1992. > It is interesting to point out that Ulysses will arrive at Jupiter before > Galileo. How does the payload weight of Ulysses and Gallileo compare? -- Sao Khai Mong: Applied Dynamics, 3800 Stone School Road, Ann Arbor, Mi48108 (313)973-1300 (uunet|sharkey)!amara!khai khai%amara.uucp@mailgw.cc.umich.edu ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 90 21:54:16 GMT From: snorkelwacker!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!uniblab!stevo@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Steve Groom) Subject: Re: Galileo Camera 'Blemishes' In article <9003061355.AA16952@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de> u515dfi@mpirbn.UUCP (Daniel Fischer) writes: >The Venus shot by the Galileo spacecraft in Av.Week 19 Feb. p.25 shows >"several ring-shaped shadows" - who knows what precisely has caused them? >I recall the same phenomenon from Viking Orbiter pictures and from Voyager 2's >camera. In the latter case the rings were seen only in highly enhanced images >(like of Uranus' disk), but the defective Galileo frame doesn't look much >processed. > Will it be possible to suppress these "blemishes" (AW&ST) by use of a >suitable flatfield or will they spoil every Galileo picture ? I was always a >bit scared by the fact that there's just o n e camera going on this big >journey, compared to the 4 cameras on the two Voyagers. > > Daniel Fischer, Max Pl. Inst. Radioastron., FRG [u515dfi@mpifr-bonn.mpg.de] That problem is currently being worked on here. The rings are shadows created but dust particles and/or defects in the camera. These things are normal, i.e. it's unusual not to have any. These are normally compensated for during systematic ground processing because their effect can be calculated in advance during calibration. However, it seems that some of the Galileo calibration is still a little bit off, and the effects were overcompensated for. Work is underway to determine the exact source of the problem and fix it. The raw data is not affected by this problem. It has rings in it, and there's nothing that can be done to prevent them. The problems here have been in the processing of that data and overcompensating for the rings. There is nothing wrong with the camera. (I am not personally working on the Galileo imagery. This is what I understand from my colleagues here.) -- Steve Groom, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA stevo@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov {ames,usc}!elroy!stevo ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 90 17:23:57 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!ists!yunexus!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Space capsules (was Re: space news from Jan 22 AW&ST) In article <2001@wrgate.WR.TEK.COM> dant@mrloog.WR.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque) writes: >> - Reliance on existing technology... >> No new launchers: hardware goes up on Titan 4s and Deltas, >> people on the shuttle or in Apollo-type capsules... > >I'm not sure that Apollo-type capsules can be considered existing >technology, unless they're Russian capsules. Also, I don't think any of >the current expendables are man-rated ... Apollo-type capsules are sort of loosely current technology, in the sense that we could build one in fairly short order and be confident that it worked. (Of course it would take NASA ten years, but that's another story...) Man-rated versions of both Titan and Atlas have existed in the past, and it probably wouldn't be too hard to man-rate them now, especially with a bit more acceptance of risk than usual. -- MSDOS, abbrev: Maybe SomeDay | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology an Operating System. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 90 19:57:02 GMT From: concertina!fiddler@sun.com (Steve Hix) Subject: Re: Fun Space Fact #1: Launcher Development Costs In article <9003052116.AA09333@ti.com>, mccall@skvax1.csc.ti.com writes: > >> uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu > >> But I don't think the 747's safety margins are much smaller than > >> those of a Cessna; if anything, it has to meet rather tougher > >> standards. > And is the 747 also no more complex than the Cesna? Complexity is > swapped off with the stress the parts have to take. That's what > that redesign you say is necessary *does*. > > [The 747 also requires significantly more maintenance hours than a > Cesna, I suspect. Which was my point in the first place.] Assuming 300 passengers in the B-747, its maintainance requirements in man-hours/passenger-mile probably isn't any more than the 150 Cessna 152's that would be needed to carry the same number of people. Likely quite a bit less. ------------ "...Then anyone who leaves behind him a written manual, and likewise anyone who receives it, in the belief that such writing will be clear and certain, must be exceedingly simple-minded..." Plato, _Phaedrus_ ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V11 #122 *******************