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 ; Wed, 6 Jun 1990 01:59:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Wed, 6 Jun 1990 01:59:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #495 SPACE Digest Volume 11 : Issue 495 Today's Topics: Re: Sex in space NASA selects instrument for Advanced X-ray Astrophysics Facility (Forwarded) Re: T.A.F. -- Tough Apollo Trivia Re: mars vs. venus, which is easier to terraform? Re: space news from May 7 AW&ST Re: DSN Reliability and Resources Question Habitable Planets For Man Plutonium Re: Plutonium NSS Phone Tree Alert on "Plymouth" Administrivia: Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to space+@andrew.cmu.edu. Other mail, esp. [un]subscription notices, should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 5 Jun 90 15:46:00 GMT From: agate!volcano.Berkeley.EDU!dankg@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Dan KoGai) Subject: Re: Sex in space In article osawa@csl.sony.co.jp (OSAWA Ei-ichi) writes: >Have you ever thought that some countries including USSR are able to >send human kind, both women and men, to space? They might have done >it much more than you estimate, or expect :-) He's got a point: 1st Female Astronaut (Cosmoronaut) was a Soviet whose name is Teresicova (I'm not sure about spelling) back in 60's. For U.S. we had to wait untill Space Shuttle and Sarry Ride--I don't know why NASA didn't include female in Apollo missions. They also have more Cosmoronauts and longer experience or Gross Orbit-hours. They are obviously ahead in manned space missions. And it's fair to assume they've already done it. I hope Perestroika will reveal us how it was like. And to add more flame, it doesn't take married couple to experiment intercourse--why didn't NASA and USSR do international interspace intercouse in Apollo-Soyuz joint mission? And to add even more flame, why does it have to be women and man? what's wrong with homo-sex? And what's wrong with chicken or sheep? Scientific interest waives all taboos! I wanna see my cum forms a ball :) ---------------- ____ __ __ + Dan The "nasty" Man ||__||__| + E-mail: dankg@ocf.berkeley.edu ____| ______ + Voice: +1 415-549-6111 | |__|__| + USnail: 1730 Laloma Berkeley, CA 94709 U.S.A |___ |__|__| + |____|____ + "What's the biggest U.S. export to Japan?" \_| | + "Bullshit. It makes the best fertilizer for their rice" ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 90 22:23:01 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: NASA selects instrument for Advanced X-ray Astrophysics Facility (Forwarded) Paula Cleggett-Haleim June 5, 1990 Headquarters, Washington, D.C. (Phone: 202/453-1548) Allen Kenitzer Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala. (Phone: 205/544-0034) RELEASE: C90-t NASA SELECTS INSTRUMENT FOR ADVANCED X-RAY ASTROPHYSICS FACILITY NASA has awarded a contract to the Smithsonian Astrophysics Observatory, Cambridge, Mass., to provide a high resolution camera for the space-based Advanced X-Ray Astrophysics Facility (AXAF). This cost-reimbursement-no-fee contract is for $26.7 million. The contract will include development of the high resolution camera, one of four candidate AXAF instruments, through launch and 2-1/2 half years of on-orbit operation. Other instruments include a charge-coupled device x-ray camera, which is in final negotiations with Pennsylvania State University, State College, and an x-ray spectrometer, being developed by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. In addition, NASA is continuing definition studies on a Bragg Crystal Spectrometer at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. In Fiscal Year 1989, Congress approved the initiation of technology development for AXAF's high-resolution mirror assembly. In Fiscal Year 1990, Congress provided initial instrument funding. This will be a 3-year program which, if successful, should lead to a development start for the AXAF spacecraft in Fiscal Year 1992. The AXAF is scheduled for launch in 1997 and will be the third in NASA's series of space-based great observatories following the Hubble Space Telescope, which was launched April 24, and the Gamma Ray Observatory, which is currently scheduled for launch in November. These observatories, as well as the proposed Space Infrared Telescope Facility which would follow AXAF, will operate for the next few decades above the haze of Earth's atmosphere. This family of telescopes will permit simultaneous, complementary observations of astrophysical phenomena over different wavelengths of the spectrum. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala., has management responsibility for the telescope and will manage the contract. The Advanced X-Ray Astrophysics Facility program is under the direction of NASA's Office of Space Science and Applications, Washington, D.C. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 90 16:37:18 GMT From: att!watmath!watserv1!utgpu!utzoo!henry@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: T.A.F. -- Tough Apollo Trivia In article <5603@helios.TAMU.EDU> chrisd@photon.tamu.edu (Chris Duhon) writes: > 2) Earth Orbit Rendezvous ... > 3) Lunar Orbit Rendezvous ... > >The question I have is this -- Why did they not use a combination >of options 2 and 3. That is, launch the LM on one rocket, then >launch the CSM (Command Service Module) on another, redezvous, >then go. That might mean using half the fuel, rockets that >were less powerful than the trouble plagued F-1's, and thus >launch vehicles less complex and powerful than a Saturn V. Basically, they didn't consider an EOR/LOR combination because it seemed unnecessarily complex and new-rocket development was needed anyway. None of the existing boosters had a hope of being big enough for a lunar mission, even used several at a time. You'd need at least three launches even with Saturn IBs, because you need CSM, LM, and translunar-injection stage. The Saturn V could do that last with a second burn of its third stage, but the Saturn IB didn't have any upper-stage fuel to spare. This means you need three launches in fast succession, and a three-way rendezvous; the complexity is escalating rapidly. "Trouble plagued"? The F-1 development was, on the whole, fairly smooth, and apart from a bit of a problem with pogo oscillation -- not uncommon in new rockets -- it never gave the slightest trouble in flight. The J-2 engines for the upper stages were not so cooperative, alas. (However, if you're going to do it with Saturn IBs, you need the J-2 anyway, since the IB second stage used it.) -- As a user I'll take speed over| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology features any day. -A.Tanenbaum| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 90 03:45:38 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!umich!ox.com!kitenet!russ@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Russ Cage) Subject: Re: mars vs. venus, which is easier to terraform? In article <996@unicorn.WWU.EDU> n8740929@unicorn.WWU.EDU (Michael Kinsella) writes: >Which do you expect to be easier to terraform, mars or venus? Mars. >why? Mostly, it needs an addition of greenhouse gases and maybe water. These substances are available. There are certain chlorofluorocarbons (you know, the nasty stuff that kills ozone?) which last a long time and have excellent greenhouse properties. Our current manufacturing here on Terra is nearly sufficient to do the job, so I do not think it would be all that difficult. Sequestering the atmosphere of Venus, or removing it, is a vastly bigger task. (As Henson pointed out, with nanotech it's all about the same.) >how long do you think it would take if the level of government interest >was equal to government interest in 'atomics' during the cold war? A very long time. Our government is not efficient. If, however, a warmer Mars made it easier to mine for some valuable mineral... >how would you proceed? Set up the Halon plants and start pumping. As warmth increases, the polar caps will lose their CO2 component, then the water will melt. Orbiting mirrors would certainly help. If there is not enough water on Mars, adding some is possible. Hard-landing comets or carbonaceous chondrites on the polar caps would contribute their volatiles to the atmosphere and vaporize the cap quickly as well. -- Oversimplification doesn't solve problems, it just (313) 662-4147 changes them into less tractable problems. Russ Cage, Robust Software Inc. russ@m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 90 16:43:32 GMT From: snorkelwacker!spdcc!ima!haddock!news@think.com (overhead) Subject: Re: space news from May 7 AW&ST In article <1990Jun5.041131.9222@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >[This will be a real quickie, as I'm preparing to be away for two weeks >and time is short.] >Major article with pictures of HST deployment and a detailed account of >the various post-deployment headaches. [Sorry, I just don't have time >to summarize two pages of dense information.] Let's see, May 7th... The first picture: an open star cluster, about 1,500 light years from Earth, NGC 3532. Focusing test delayed by a week due to various problems. The high gain antenna problem caused cascading problems for most of a week. A communications blackout for 3 hours... The telescope entered an "inertial safe mode", from which recovery was relativly quick. When controllers commanded Hubble's aperture door to open, two gyros went offline, causing it to enter "software safe mode", but with a reasonable attitude. 34 hours later, new data and commands were sent to Hubble to reconfigure it out of safe-mode. More high-gain antenna based delays. The low gain antenna was used to get engineering data from Hubble to deduce what was going on. Final photos of Hubble from Discovery showed the wire bowed slightly out of place near the #2 dish antenna. Tinkertoy technology & high tech graphics were used to model the problem. The high gain antennas were reconfigured. Checkout continued, but when checking the Pointing and Safe mode Electronics Assembly, they forgot to inhibit the aperture door. The door closed, causing motion, causing entry into safe mode again. About five hours later, they were able reopen the door. Henry does a great job at these AW&ST space news summaries. They are quite time consuming. I'd have missed the bit about Japanese Astronaut. No way I'd have remembered the Journalists... Stephen. suitti@ima.ima.isc.com ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 90 20:01:27 GMT From: sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!aristotle!pjs@ucsd.edu (Peter Scott) Subject: Re: DSN Reliability and Resources Question In article <00937BE8.0A0B2C80@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>, sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) writes: > Speaking of reliablility, what would happen if something Bad happened > to Goddard Space Flight Center? (Fire, chemical spill, plane crash, other > act of god). Hubble is controlled from there, and probably other gizmos as > well. Does NASA keep "hot sites" available at JPL? Or just pray a lot? We are backup navigation for just about every mission; although on the manned missions we are so far back in the chain that it would take a nuclear war to put us in charge, on unmanned missions we are usually primary or secondary navigation provider. There's not much to do after launch, though. We also provide navigation for non-US western launches, such as ESA and the Japanese. There's a navigation "War Room" downstairs from me that has links to tie in to launch site nets. I don't know whether we have the capability here to actually control Hubble, but I bet it could be done in an emergency. This is news. This is your | Peter Scott, NASA/JPL/Caltech brain on news. Any questions? | (pjs@aristotle.jpl.nasa.gov) ------------------------------ Date: 3 Jun 90 21:16:11 GMT From: att!watmath!maytag!watdragon!watyew!jdnicoll@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Brian or James) Subject: Habitable Planets For Man Anyone out there know if this book is still in print [I can hear people falling over laughing already]. The author was Stephan Dole [I think], but the only copy I ever saw was in the Engineering, Math and Science library at UW, and *sniff* they take such a dim view of selling their books [And, of course, people who steal from libraries should have their thumbs crushed]. First printing was in the early sixties, I'm pretty sure. JDN ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jun 1990 8:22:39 EDT From: KLUDGE@AGCB7.LARC.NASA.GOV Subject: Plutonium X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"space+@andrew.cmu.edu" Pu is toxic if breathed. It tends to form "non-healing granulatomata" in the lungs, which become cancerous nodules, which spread all over the place and do nasty things. But it's not absorbed through the skin, and if ingested won't be any more poisonous than any other heavy metal (such as lead). That's not to say that it won't hang around inside your body and irradiate you for a while, but it won't act as a metabolic poison in any fashion other than the standard heavy-metal poisoning. And if you ingest enough that heavy-metal poisoning is a problem, radiation is a much greater worry. Since Feynman speaks about placing his hands on a warm globe of plutonium, and he lived for a good forty years afterward, I can point out a few excellent examples of how little damage the radiation does. On the other hand, I am sure you can point out some other ones in the opposite direction, which just points out that individual cases are worthless and a statistic like the LD50 of radiation is required. --scott ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 90 15:39:28 GMT From: thorin!homer!leech@mcnc.org (Jonathan Leech) Subject: Re: Plutonium In article <900605082239.21000116@AGCB7.LARC.NASA.GOV> KLUDGE@AGCB7.LARC.NASA.GOV writes: >Since Feynman speaks about placing his hands on a warm globe of >plutonium, and he lived for a good forty years afterward, I can point out >a few excellent examples of how little damage the radiation does. Since Feynman died of cancer, perhaps this is not such a great example. Followups to sci.med. -- Jon Leech (leech@cs.unc.edu) __@/ ``My goal is simple. It is complete understanding of the universe, why it is as it is and why it exists at all.'' - Stephen Hawking ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 90 16:50:22 GMT From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!umich!ox.com!itivax!vax3.iti.org!aws@ucsd.edu (Allen W. Sherzer) Subject: NSS Phone Tree Alert on "Plymouth" June 5, 1990 Official NSS Phone Tree Alert Subject: the ABC TV program "Plymouth" They may not even show the pilot!!! Call the ABC Audience Information Line at (212) 456-7477 and ask 'em when they are going to show the pilot. Write a letter to: Robert Enger President, ABC Entertainment 2040 Avenue of the Stars Century City, CA 90067 and send a copy to John Barber VP Current Series Programs (same address) asking them to turn the pilot into a regular TV series. Background: "Plymouth" is a proposed TV movie and pilot about a town which is moved to a company's mining facility on the moon. The company is having trouble turning a profit on its mining operations because they can't get anybody to make a commitment to stay long enough. The people of Plymouth (in a nutshell) agree to go. A neat twist is that the show takes place in 1989 to show what would be happening if we hadn't abandoned space after Apollo. If properly done this show represents a good opportunity to capture the public imagination. Just as "Top Gun" stimulated interest in the Navy and as "LA Law" has increased law school applications, "Plymouth" could interest people in space. By reaching a mass audience "Plymouth" can generate more interest in the colonization of space then we could ever do on our own. Properly done, however, doesn't mean great special effects or total technical accuracy. In fact, technical accuracy could be one of the least important aspects of the show. What will matter is the shows human aspects. People didn't watch "Hill Street Blues" because the procedures were 100% correct, they tuned in because they liked and cared about the characters. If the viewers like and empathize with the characters of "Plymouth" the show can do well. In the meantime, they will see what might have been and what still could be. But (you knew there had to be one of these didn't you?) just because we are not producing the show doesn't mean space activists have nothing to do. "Plymouth" has great potential and our help is needed so it can achieve that potential. We need to watch the show and get our friends to watch as well. If the show looks good, write to both the network AND the sponsor(s). Getting people to watch can be hard and new shows don't get much chance to gain audience before they are canned; our help will be needed. But getting the show on the air is the first step, so please act on this activation today! ttf@iti.org (Tihamer T. Toth-Fejel) Industrial Technology Institute, P.O. Box 1485, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 office: (313) 769-4248 fax: (313) 769-4064 home: (313) 622-4741 *----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----* ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Allen W. Sherzer | Real men write self modifying code. | | aws@iti.org | | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V11 #495 *******************