Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from hogtown.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 ; Mon, 13 May 91 02:33:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Mon, 13 May 91 02:33:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #540 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 540 Today's Topics: United Space Federation,Inc. Update 3 Re: air-breathing first stages Re: Saturn V and the ALS Re: Terraforming Mars? Why not Venus? Info wanted: VOYAGERS & PIONEERS Mir Sweepstakes - Cancelled Re: Advancing Launch Technology 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: 10 May 91 02:39:51 GMT From: vax5.cit.cornell.edu!usf@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu Subject: United Space Federation,Inc. Update 3 ****************************************************************** * UNITED SPACE FEDERATION,INC. / UPDATE FOR 9th of MAY 1991 * ****************************************************************** * An International Civil Space Agency By 1993 * * An Idea Whose Time Has Come ! * ****************************************************************** What is the USF The United Space Federation is a not-for-profit corporation which was concieved and founded in 1986 in Virginia Beach, VA.,USA, the purpose of which is to establish an international civil space agency with a mandate to promote and and implement multinational commercial and scientific exploration of space. The charter of this proposed space agency would forbid it to work with national military organizations and would discourage projects which entertain narrow political and/or economic biases. The hope of the Founder and Directors is that the USF's efforts will produce more rapid advancement in already existing fields such as space physics and engineering, life sciences, Earth obsorvation, astronomy, meterology, and telecommunications than is possible when scientific work and civil commercial activities are overly restrained by national barriers. This proposed international civil space agency would also stimulate research and exploritory efforts into the developement of extra-global ( e.g. Lunar, Martian, Ect. ) resource exploitation and transportation and into means of removing enviroment contaminating industrial processes to points beyound Earths eco-system. The preservation of industrial / technological civilization as we know it will require breakthroughs in these and other, as yet-undefind areas. International commitment to the above projects through this proposed international civil space agency will be an important step in the direction of the restructuring of national economies of major industial nations presently dependent of war-related research and production. Jobs in the war (defence) production sectors which are being threatened as a consequence of the winding down of the Cold War, between the USSR and the USA, could be rescued by redirecting them into the newly developing space-related science and technology sectors resaulting from the formation of this proposed space agency. The ideals of a viable global enviroment, world peace through international cooperation, and world wide prosperity comprise the basic elements of the good life desired by men and women everywhere regardless of nationality, religion, or political ideology. The USF will vigorously endeavor to realize these ideals through the world community by promoting and implementing space research, technology, and exploration. For more information, please contact: ( Send self addressed stamped envolope ) Board of Directors UNITED SPACE FEDERATION, INC. International Headquarters P.O. Box 4722 Ithaca, New York 14852-4722 In the United States of America E-MAIL : BITNET - USF@CRNL.VAX5 BITNET - USF@CORNELLA INTERNET - USF@CORNELLA.CIT.CORNELL.EDU VAX - USF@VAX5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU Thank you for your time and support, Godspeed! Sincerely, Rick R. Dobson Executive Director United Space Federation, Inc. ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 91 04:00:59 GMT From: usc!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@ucsd.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: air-breathing first stages In article <1991May9.224748.470@hardy.u.washington.edu> brettvs@hardy.u.washington.edu (Brett Vansteenwyk) writes: >[2].Jet engines have a poor thrust to weight ratio when compared to rocket >engines (this may be because you run jets for continuous use, and rockets >are meant to fry themselves after a few minutes)... Not really. High-performance jet engines need maintenance very frequently, and the better rocket engines are rated for surprising lifetimes. (The RL-10 is rated to fire, continuously or with up to ten restarts, on one mission with no maintenance, for *over an hour*. Mind you, this does assume you can somehow supply it with that much fuel...) A more fundamental issue is simply that air is not very dense; much of the complexity and mass of a jet engine is for handling huge volumes of low-density gas. -- And the bean-counter replied, | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology "beans are more important". | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 91 16:00:59 GMT From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!en.ecn.purdue.edu!irvine@purdue.edu (/dev/null) Subject: Re: Saturn V and the ALS In article <1991May10.022031.8172@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: > Nope. NLDP (which is not ALS but it is the new launcher program) is > a ten+ year program and will cost ten to fifteen billion. Next years > budget is only a few hundred billion and it could die in 93 but if > it doesn't we will be seeing billions spent on it. And if it works, the savings in launches will more than pay itself off quickly! > In that case, nothing has changed so we shouldn't waste the money. Just because something gets political to get funded doesn't mean it won't work. Look at the military hardware that has been 'pork-barreled' ove the last 40 years! It won a war with very little casualties on our side! > > My stock answer has never been 'they told me so'. My stock answer is that > 'they are willing to sign a fixed price contract'. Well, its really the same thing. 'THEY' being the companies. >That means if it > actually costs a billion they eat the difference. Unlike the NLDP > contractors, McDonnell and Martin are willing to put their money > where their mouths are. Fixed price contract sound 'no-nonsense' and 'tough yet fair' but until it is developed I would rather not see 'fixed' price spring up. The 'eating the difference' could kill the companies that are already struggling under a heavy debt-load of a decade of 'fixed price' contracts. I don't think that would serve anyone any good. Funding Research and Development / Re-Development is NOT like buying a stereo. Fixed price here is a poor choice. > sure makes it look like they have it thought out. Other aspects > like the fact that 90% of the parts exist today just give me more > confidence. What's wrong with that? Depends on what 90%. It makes me nervous having people toss around percentage figures - it gives false authority to statements made. 'A lot' is a much more accurate figure than '90%'. Unless you counted parts .... :) > to dvelop, what do we have to lose? A lot of money because we dont *know* it will be the cost of a shuttle flight through the duration of the shuttle program. And the costs we could have saved by having a cheaper launcher might hamper our ability in space - I do not look forward to multi billion dollar projects that could have been multi million if we had cheaper lift vehicles! > > Wrong answer. They aren't developing it because the market isn't there. > One option they gave the government was to just gurantee the market. > One of the above contractors said they wold pay development themselves > if Congress would just buy a set number of flights for a set price. Essentially subsidize them - "Hey government, create a market because one does not exist as of yet...' Also, if the 'set price' is too low, i don't see MDC and MArtin even lifting a finger to do anything. > > Again, in that case nothing has changed. How can you expect problems > to be solved when they won't admit there are problems? They don't have to. They just have to internally find out the 'weaknesses' of the shuttle and not do them again. The "Gee guy, we screwed up" won't get money from Congress - it will probably get them cut. Unfortunately politics rules Congress, not rational thought. > > >>Why is NASA the only agency who can build things? > > >they're the only ones willing to spend money to start a program? > > Again, wrong answer. Pegasus, AMROCK, SSI, Commercial Atlas... > (others left as an exercise for you; can you name others?). I know Pegasus was a government sponsored program, I don't know what AMROCK is, SSI is reselling Russian-Developed Launchers, Commercial Atlas was government prodding its contractor to do commercial launchings. I don't think you understood his point: None of these examples would have been feasible without NASA bucks (in 1958 or whenever). -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Society of Philosophers, Luminaries, | Brent L. Irvine | | and Other Professional Thinking People..... | Only my own ramblings | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 91 15:27:52 GMT From: mintaka!think.com!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Terraforming Mars? Why not Venus? In article <1991May10.042009.23660@agate.berkeley.edu> fcrary@lightning.Berkeley.EDU (Frank Crary) writes: >There are many problems with the SAS.... >It provides NO protection against micrometeors, while >the current station suit designs will protect against up to a 0.1 mm >object at up to 10 km/s... Are you sure you've *read* the SAS work? The SAS would have the same thermal/micrometeorite overgarment as the existing suits. It would replace only the pressure bladder and associated layers. >does not apply pressure evenly. While a fabric can easily put an even >pressure on a smooth uniform object (a forearm for example) it is not >at all good at putting equal pressure in cracks and crevices (between >fingers, say)... Definitely a problem, although in some places it can be solved by putting a small air-filled balloon inside the suit to fill the crevice. If I recall correctly, nobody got as far as trying to build an SAS-type glove. -- And the bean-counter replied, | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology "beans are more important". | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 9 May 91 14:28:18 GMT From: dftsrv!lheavx.gsfc.nasa.gov!kwok@g.ms.uky.edu (PING-WAI KWOK) Subject: Info wanted: VOYAGERS & PIONEERS Can anyone tell me the status of VOYAGER 1, 2 and PIONEER 10, 11? What are their current positions? A rough estimate will do. Thanks in advance Ping-wai Kwok ------------------------------ Date: 11 May 91 17:44:47 GMT From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!palmer@decwrl.dec.com (David Palmer) Subject: Mir Sweepstakes - Cancelled Once again the forces of Law & Order have overwhelmed the forces of Right & Good. From May 11 LA Times (pg A19) Contest for Soviet Space Trip Cancelled ---------------------------------------- Two Houston entrepreneurs who ran a sweepstakes that promised to send someone rocketing to the Soviet space station Mir for a week agreed to halt their contest in return for the dismissal of charges of operating an illegal lottery. David Mayer and James Davidson, founders of Space Travel Services Inc., told people to dial a 900 telephone number for a fee of $2.99 to enter the random drawing. Prosecutors said the sweepstakes drew about 10,000 telephone calls before it was halted after 24 hours. They said Mayer and Davidson have abiyt $30,000 on hand, half of which is owed to the operator of the 900 telephone service. Remaining funds will be split between the state and county, but callers will not receive refunds. -30- So, the DA gets ink, the state and county get money, and the public is protected against the possibility of achieving their dreams. Sounds like everyone's a winner :-(. -- David Palmer palmer@gap.cco.caltech.edu ...rutgers!cit-vax!gap.cco.caltech.edu!palmer "Operator, get me the number for 911" --Homer Simpson ------------------------------ Date: 11 May 91 20:27:40 GMT From: wuarchive!rex!rouge!dlbres10@decwrl.dec.com (Fraering Philip) Subject: Re: Advancing Launch Technology In article <2798@ke4zv.UUCP> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes: >...down from that of a rich man's toy to everyman's car. The T wasn't >high tech compared to the 1901 Olds, just big, dumb, reliable, cheap, >and made in huge quanities. It was larger than earlier cars, but the fundamental advance the model T made was in being mass produced. This would not have happened if Henry Ford had tried to achieve economy of scale by building cars large enough to hold several hundred people. -- Phil Fraering dlbres10@pc.usl.edu ''It's a Flash Gordon/E.E. Smith war, with superior Tnuctip technology battling tools and weapons worked up on the spot by a billion Dr. Zarkovs.`` - Larry Niven, describing the end to _Down in Flames_. ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #540 *******************