Message-ID: <QbWLRxS00VcJEBKE4q@andrew.cmu.edu>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
Date: Tue,  8 Jan 1991 02:40:48 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #025

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 13 : Issue 25

Today's Topics:
		      Re: Air pressure questions
			   MIR sweepstakes
			  Energia derivative
		       Re: Interstellar travel
    Re: Information sources for frequent space questions (2 of n)
  NASA and ESA sign agreement for a joint Saturn mission (Forwarded)
		     space news from Dec 10 AW&ST

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  space+@andrew.cmu.edu.  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests,
  should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to
			 tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 2 Jan 91 12:55:52 GMT
From: world!ksr!clj%ksr.com@uunet.uu.net  (Chris Jones)
Subject: Re: Air pressure questions

In article <1990Dec28.212625.10995@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo (Henry Spencer) writes:
>
>Skylab (I think) and the Shuttle (definitely) have opted for mixed-gas
>atmospheres for various secondary reasons, at the price of heavier and
>more complex life-support systems and long prebreathing delays before EVAs.
>The spacesuits still use low-pressure pure oxygen.

Correct.  The shuttle's atmosphere is basically earth sea-level, while Skylab
used an 80% O2 20% N2 mixture at a reduced pressure (I seem to recall it was
higher than 5 psi, but I don't have a reference handy).
--
Chris Jones    clj@ksr.com    {world,uunet,harvard}!ksr!clj

------------------------------

Date: 2 Jan 91 12:14:22 GMT
From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!gecrdvm1!gipp@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Subject: MIR sweepstakes

There seems to be an awful lot of emotion flying about on this issue.
Why?  Because we're all upset that the prize isn't a trip on the
shuttle?  What's the big deal? Lotterys (sp) happen all the time. A
better issue is: who is this company that is running the lottery? What
are their credentials?  If they are merely attempting to turn a profit
via this "scam"/chance of a lifetime, it sounds kind of questionable (but
then if I were imaginative I wouldn't be working at GE).  If they've got
another product/service to sell, the advertising off this sweepstakes should
be worth far more than ten million (supposed cost of MIR ticket): World-wide
headlines during announcement,selection,training and launch.  Or they could
be just hoping that the winner takes the alternative prize (1.5 million
according to one posting). I know I would, if I actually pried 3 bucks out
of my wallet to enter. one week in space (and probably wetting my pants at
liftoff) would be neat, but I'd rather be rich the rest of my life. No great
contribution to science, either, so my conscience can rest easy.  Besides,
actual government approval to launch (USA or USSR) would probably delay
liftoff for years (great advertisement for sweepstakes company-controversy).
I seem to recall Henry Spencer gave a good character reference for one of
the main guys in the company, so that seems to be a positive (unless you
recall that he was willing to trade Quebec for California,not exactly a good
bargain for Canada :-) ).
Anybody have any background on this sweepstakes company? HOw long have they
been in existance, what are their credentials, do they do anything besides
announce sweepstakes? How many dreamers/contestants/suckers have called so
far?
Another thought to worry the winner: with the Soviets possibly heading for
collapse or crunch, who's to say that MIR or MIR 2 will actually be there
when launch time comes?  I'm sure recent alarm about USSR reverting to
hardline police state must be sending a shiver of concern through the
Sweepstakes company, and constestant hopefuls.

------------------------------

Date: 2 Jan 91 14:08:53 GMT
From: world!ksr!clj%ksr.com@uunet.uu.net  (Chris Jones)
Subject: Energia derivative

According to the 17 December 1990 AW&ST, the Soviet Union has begun launch pad
engineering tests (whatever that means) of a reduced size Energia booster.
This booster apparently uses the same strap-ons, but has a substantially
smaller core vehicle (still H2/O2 powered, though).  This booster could put 40
metric tons into orbit, compared to 100 metric tons for the full-scale model.
In some configurations, four strap-on boosters would be used.
--
Chris Jones    clj@ksr.com    {world,uunet,harvard}!ksr!clj

------------------------------

Date: 3 Jan 91 17:00:18 GMT
From: swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!euclid.jpl.nasa.gov!pjs@ucsd.edu  (Peter Scott)
Subject: Re: Interstellar travel

In article <1990Dec30.222559.2826@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:

> The best way to build an Orion is to take it to its logical extreme and
> use fusion microexplosions ignited by particle beams (lasers are probably
> too heavy for spaceflight applications) and channeled by a magnetic nozzle.
> This is a bit unsatisfactory because we can't quite build one of those
> yet, while we could build a more orthodox Orion, but the microexplosion
> approach is generally a better drive.

Exactly the approach used by BIS in their Daedalus design, which holds
up very well after - what? - 15 years?  And you don't have the weight
penalty of carrying shielding and detonators for each fusion bomb,
you carry only the fuel and the particle accelerators to implode them.

I don't have my copy of the Daedalus report handy.  Didn't they use
lasers?  If so, they must have found a way around the weight problem
Henry mentions.

-- 
This is news.  This is your       |    Peter Scott, NASA/JPL/Caltech
brain on news.  Any questions?    |    (pjs@euclid.jpl.nasa.gov)

------------------------------

Date: 3 Jan 91 18:23:24 GMT
From: prometheus!pmk@mimsy.umd.edu  (Paul M. Koloc)
Subject: Re: Information sources for frequent space questions (2 of n)

In article <1991Jan2.123119.9520@nas.nasa.gov> eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya) writes:
>
>   Subject: Planetary Probe posting for Frequently Asked Questions

>    VIKING 1 ..        . .       .      .      went into Martian
>orbit on June 19, 1976, and the lander set down on the western slopes 
>of Chryse Planitia on July 20, 1976.   ... scientists learned was that 
>Mars' sky was pinkish in color, not dark blue as they originally
>thought (the sky is pink due to sunlight reflecting off the reddish
>dust particles in the thin atmosphere).

A femto point:  the PINK is due to a combination of very blue (violet) 
sky scattering and the reddish iron oxides.  A not too clever person
with a couple of hands, a pair of prisms and a room with a small 
single source of sunlight is all that is needed to confirm this 
hypothesis.  Of course, it doesn't beat "being there".   

Kind of a pretty effect if I do say so myself..         :-)

+---------------------------------------------------------+**********+
|                                                         +Commercial*
| Paul M. Koloc, President          (301) 445-1075        ***FUSION***
| Prometheus II, Ltd.; College Park, MD 20740-0222        ***in the***
| mimsy!prometheus!pmk; pmk@prometheus.UUCP               **Nineties**
+---------------------------------------------------------************

------------------------------

Date: 3 Jan 91 21:15:21 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA and ESA sign agreement for a joint Saturn mission (Forwarded)

Debra J. Rahn
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                    January 3, 1991
(Phone:  202/453-8455)

Paula Cleggett-Haleim
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.
(Phone:  202/453-1547)


RELEASE:  91-1

NASA AND ESA SIGN AGREEMENT FOR A JOINT SATURN MISSION


    NASA and European Space Agency (ESA) officials recently 
signed an agreement to cooperate in the development of the 
Cassini spacecraft to study Saturn.  NASA Administrator Richard 
H. Truly and ESA Director-General Jean-Marie Luton signed the 
agreement.

    The Cassini spacecraft will explore the Saturnian system,  
which contains a host of volatile-rich bodies with a record of 
processes that have modified these bodies.  The Cassini 
spacecraft will be composed of the Saturn Orbiter provided by 
NASA and the Huygens Probe System provided by ESA.  It is 
currently scheduled for launch by NASA on a Titan IV/Centaur 
vehicle in April l996.  NASA will provide overall Cassini mission 
operations and ESA will support probe operations.

    The flight trajectory requires approximately 7 years from 
launch to Saturn orbital insertion.  Once at the Saturnian 
system, the mission baseline lifetime is 4 years.

    The Saturn Orbiter will deliver the Huygens Probe to Titan 
and will make repeated close flybys of Titan to allow intensive 
study of this moon of Saturn.  The mission also will conduct 
detailed observations of several other moons of Saturn, the 
Saturnian rings, atmosphere and magnetosphere.

    Enroute to Saturn the spacecraft will pass through the 
asteroid belt and make observations of a least one asteroid, and 
thereafter fly by Jupiter making observations of the planet and 
its environment.

------------------------------

Date: 4 Jan 91 03:12:24 GMT
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@ucsd.edu  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: space news from Dec 10 AW&ST

Langley engineers pleased:  Atlantis's tires showed neither a spin-up gouge
nor excessive wear after the KSC landing Nov 20.  The changes to the runway
surface, meant specifically to reduce tire damage, appear to have been
successful.

Ames has been "reorganized", with Kenneth J. Szalai of Dryden named deputy
director of Ames for Dryden.  This restores a good deal of Dryden's original
autonomy, lost after it was merged with Ames in 1981 to save money.  The
change was made to "improve Dryden's flight research effectiveness".  [Rumor
hath it that fairly high levels within NASA have been Seriously Unhappy
with Ames's management of Dryden for some time, and problems with shuttle
processing after landing were the last straw.]

Military weather satellite launched by Atlas from Vandenberg.  Noteworthy
in that it was the first Atlas launch supervised by USAF Space Command,
rather than by Systems Command.

Landsat 6 launch slips another six months, to May 1992.  Eosat (the operator)
blames slow delivery of rad-hardened electronic parts.  GE (the builder)
declines to comment on the slip, but admits problems in getting delivery
of the parts.

Must Be A Full Moon Dept:  SDI proposes "Brilliant Eyes", a large fleet of
small missile warning/tracking satellites, as a derivative of Brilliant
Pebbles.

Only 14 months after original contract signing [!], McDonnell Douglas
completes negotiations with NASA over three Delta launches of science
payloads within the next five years.

Columbia and Astro in flight, with both astronauts and engineers sweating
over hardware problems.  First the star trackers had software problems,
delaying telescope activation to day three.  Then, one by one, both of
of the Dedicated Display Unit computers failed with "a smoky smell".
Astro now running mostly on manual control by the astronauts, with fair
success, at the price of giving the astronauts less opportunity to
interact usefully with the observations.

NASA and USAF squabble about cloud-cover safety rules late in Columbia
countdown.  Dan Brandenstein, flying abort patterns in the shuttle
training aircraft, reported acceptable visibility from up top, but
USAF range-safety people reported clear view from the ground only up to
7000ft, against rules requiring 8000.  (The range-safety issue is that
at low altitude, tracking radar does not give enough information to make
a sufficiently quick decision on destroying the SRBs after an accident.)
The dispute was resolved by putting a range-safety officer into a
helicopter above the cloud deck; this worked, but may not be acceptable
as a routine solution to such problems.

Busiest week of manned spaceflight yet, as in addition to seven people
aboard Columbia, the Soviets launch a Soyuz with two cosmonauts and the
Japanese journalist to Mir.  Mir was seen from Columbia, although an
attempt to make shortwave radio contact did not succeed.

Toyohiro Akiyama, the commercial cosmonaut, doing well despite problems
with spacesickness.  Tokyo Broadcasting System is cautiously pleased
with the results, but is unhappy about all the add-on charges the Soviets
tried to impose on top of the $12M basic price; negotiations on some of
the details will continue after the flight.  The basic problem seems to
be that Glavkosmos is no longer in overall control of commercial contracts
the way it used to be, and various other groups in the USSR tried to pad
the bill.  "[We] don't think they realize what importance it is to
have a good image over the long term, especially when you enter the
commercial business..."  However, TBS says it's generally happy with the
chance to fly the mission.  "Although we have close ties with the US,
we never would have been able to work out such a flight with NASA.  Even
if we wanted to arrange to have an experiment fly on the NASA shuttle
without a Japanese astronaut, it would take years, and we'd have to go
through all kinds of red tape."

Soviets confirm that Salyut 7 will make an uncontrolled reentry early
in 1991.  It has been dormant since June 1986, and is no longer controllable.
Apparently the Soviets have rejected doing a repair mission like the one
in 1985.  Soviets say reentry expected in January; USAF expects February.

Soviets plan another Mir hatch-repair spacewalk.  The attempt to replace
the hinge pin during the Oct 30 repair didn't work, because the pin is
bent.  The revised plan is to replace the whole hinge.

The Chinese feel that the Long March 2E gives them a sufficiently large
booster to consider manned spaceflight [at 9 tons to low orbit, I should
hope so!] and is studying the possibility of a four-man capsule.

Soviets planning next Buran flight, using the second orbiter, now being
checked out at Baikonur.  The flight will be unmanned.  It will start
with a docking to Mir, where the cosmonauts will run tests for two days.
Then the orbiter will separate from Mir and dock with the manned Soyuz
carrying the next Mir crew, to demonstrate rescue techniques.  After
another two days, the orbiter will return to Earth unmanned, while the
Soyuz goes on to Mir.  Apparently the Soviets still can't do an automatic
docking except on Mir's axis:  the orbiter will dock to the docking ball
on the Kristall module, but the module will have to be moved temporarily
to the axial position on Mir's own docking ball for this to be done.
Mission set for late 1991.

NASA signs $184M deal with Spacehab for 2/3 of their middeck-expansion
module's capacity on its first six shuttle flights.  This capacity will
be made available to researchers through NASA's commercial-programs
office.  Only about 8 of the orbiter's 50 lockers are available for
secondary payloads, while Spacehab can hold up to 71 more (although
its usual load will be about 50).  Spacehab has an agreement with NASA
covering eight launches, and intends to keep on flying the module,
offering to process and fly payloads with as little [!] as 18 months
lead time.  The NASA contract is a major boost but is not considered
enough to bring Spacehab into the black by itself.

Spacehab's NASA contract had been expected for months, but was stalled
over "political risk", i.e. the possibility that NASA might simply renege
on its promises, as has happened before.  Spacehab could buy insurance
against other forms of problem, e.g. another shuttle launch hiatus, but
this was a sticky one.  Spacehab's backers wanted to be covered, and
NASA balked at paying for it.  In the end, it proved possible to get
commercial insurance, with NASA paying part of the cost.  This is felt
to be an unusual case, given perceived strong support from both NASA
and Congress, and the insurers warn that political-risk insurance is
not going to be routinely available.

Photos of separation test of the biggest Titan IV payload fairing, 86ft
long and roughly duplicating the dimensions of the shuttle payload bay.
This test and another later this month will clear the fairing for flight.
The test fairing is reasonably representative, although in the near term
most of the flight fairings will be custom-built to some extent, as use
with payloads built for the shuttle has turned out to require structural
modifications, access doors, and acoustic insulation (to approximate the
more benign shuttle launch conditions) in various combinations for various
payloads.

Inmarsat picks GE to build at least 4 and up to 9 Inmarsat 3s, for launch
starting in 1994.  The 3 will include dynamic reshuffling of power and
frequency between spot beams and broad beams, an L-band-to-L-band package
to permit direct links from one customer to another (such links currently
have to go via a ground station), and a Navstar/Glonass-like navsat
package to fill coverage gaps in the two military navsat systems and
provide continuous reporting of their accuracy (which is important to
users like aviation who want to know at once when something goes wrong).

France decides to abandon the idea of building follow-ons to the TDF-1
and -2 high-power broadcast satellites, opting instead for Eutelsat's
proposed network of smaller satellites.  The high-power birds are felt
to have been rendered obsolete by improvements in receivers.

Letter clarifying the reasons behind the drop in price for Landsat data
more than two years old:  Eosat has relinquished its exclusive marketing
rights on such data, making it possible for the US government to resume
at-cost distribution of it.
-- 
"The average pointer, statistically,    |Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
points somewhere in X." -Hugh Redelmeier| henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V13 #025
*******************