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 ; Thu, 4 Jul 91 04:44:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Thu, 4 Jul 91 04:44:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #778 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 778 Today's Topics: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #639 Re: United Space Federation IEC/BOD/Members & Supporters E-M Re: Access to Space mining asteroids Re: Mining El Dorado SPACE Digest V13 #643 SPACE Digest V13 #638 Gonetz = E-mail via Soviet Satellite 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: 22 Jun 91 00:11:22 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!hela!aws@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Allen W. Sherzer) Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #639 In article <9106212225.AA16709@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> space+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@msu.edu writes: >>Due to the probability of our achieving economical fusion in the near >>future, I seriously doubt SPS will ever be important. >Youv'e mixed your "probably" 's with your "will" 's. tsk tsk. Fusion has >'probably' been in our future for 30 years now. "It doesn't feel far away". It doesn't matter if we get fusion or not. If we don't get it then SPS is a good idea, if we do then we need a good source of Helium 3. Either way we need 'photons from space'. Allen -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Allen W. Sherzer | DETROIT: Where the weak are killed and eaten. | | aws@iti.org | | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jun 91 23:42:53 GMT From: van-bc!rsoft!mindlink!a684@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Nick Janow) Subject: Re: United Space Federation IEC/BOD/Members & Supporters E-M eder@hsvaic.boeing.com (Dani Eder) writes: > To the rest of the NET: I oppose the formation of a USF of the type > presentented by Mr. Dobson, for reasons which I will be happy to discuss > further with anyone who wants to. Yes, I think that would be an interesting topic for discussion. I haven't considered the various aspects of the issue carefully, but at first though I don't agree with the approach. Putting all the power in one organization is like "putting all your eggs in one basket." It's all too possible for such an organization to turn into a bureaucracy who's only purpose is to serve itself--at the cost of the ideals that brought it into existence. :( I'd much rather see the government provide long-term investment and support for space development. This should be risk-sharing, not outright funding. Even such an agency should not be overly powerful. It should allow private initiatives to compete fairly. -- Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jun 91 19:47:00 GMT From: munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!brolga!uqcspe!cs.uq.oz.au!rhys@uunet.uu.net (Rhys Weatherley) Subject: Re: Access to Space In <31559@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: >Manufacturing indeed creates wealth, as it adds value to something. What >does a comsat add value to? Airplanes don't create wealth, either, they >just provide a service. A comsat adds value to the information it transmits. Businesses rise and fall these days on the relibility and timeliness of the information they process. "Garbage-in Garbage-Out". If your business is processing incorrect or old data, then it's not going to get anywhere. I'm not much on history, but I believe that the Reuter's new service became extremely powerful because they kept finding better ways to get the news first - carrier pidgeons, the telegraph, etc. Computers have revolutionised the world, and comsats have made it much easier to transmit data around. I don't know the differences in cost between comsats and under-sea cables, but it all comes down to what I call the "interconnectedness of economies" (for want of a better term): Comsats allow information to be processed faster and in a more up to date way. Hence a business does better in the market-place. Hence the same business realises that comsats are beneficial and sinks more funds into satellites and other space services. Once you start getting into mass production and launching (metaphorically speaking) of comsats, the cost per comsat drops and more of the money being sunk into them can be used for other space projects at that point. Starts to look "self-sustaining" huh? You can then go onto to space-based mining using these extra funds, which will in turn create more revenue to be put into manned missions to the far reaches of the solar system if you like. It may take a while. Consider how long it took to get from the wheel to the steam engine. Just because we've gone from the steam engine to the computer in a few hundred years doesn't mean we have to go from the moon to Mars half a century. The Earth is going to be around for quite a long time yet. Stop being so impatient. The pen will always be mightier than the sword, and in this age, information is mightier than tin cans. :-) Rhys. +=====================+==================================+ || Rhys Weatherley | The University of Queensland, || || rhys@cs.uq.oz.au | Australia. G'day!! || || "I'm a FAQ nut - what's your problem?" || +=====================+==================================+ ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jun 91 15:42:14 GMT From: agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!nss!Paul.Blase@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Blase) Subject: mining asteroids to: sking@nowhere.uucp (Steven King), et al SK> Of course, all of this presumes that even if you were to get SK> there and the processes were viable, that the asteriod is yours SK> to mine. International law, as I understand it, is less than SK> clear on this issue. A few billion in precious metals might SK> buy a lot of influence, but it would also buy a lot of envy. I would be even more worried about the flack I'd be getting from the miner's and steelworker's unions! You would have to be very careful to make sure that few jobs are lost in the long run (retrain existing miners to work in space). --- via Silver Xpress V2.26 [NR] -- Paul Blase - via FidoNet node 1:129/104 UUCP: ...!pitt!nss!Paul.Blase INTERNET: Paul.Blase@nss.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jun 91 17:51:55 GMT From: tristan!loren@lll-winken.llnl.gov (Loren Petrich) Subject: Re: Mining El Dorado In article <12154@hub.ucsb.edu> 3001crad@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Charles Frank Radley) writes: >While the ancient El Dorado never existed, we now have >a confirmed sighting ( by NASA 0 as of a couple of weeks ago, >of a large near-Earth asteroid composed of metal. But if this asteroid is similar in composition to metallic meteorites, it would be mostly iron and nickel. I'm sure that there have been some studies of how much of the various elements there is in various iron/nickel meteorites; how much gold there is, for instance. Does anyone have any figures here? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster: loren@sunlight.llnl.gov Since this nodename is not widely known, you may have to try: loren%sunlight.llnl.gov@star.stanford.edu ------------------------------ ReSent-Message-ID: Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 91 17:42:24 EDT Resent-From: Tom McWilliams <18084TM@msu.edu> Resent-To: space+@andrew.cmu.edu Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1991 05:04:21 TZONE Reply-To: space+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@msu.edu From: space-request+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU%CARNEGIE.BITNET@msu.edu Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #643 Comments: To: space+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU To: david polito <15432DJP@MSU.BITNET>, Tom McWilliams <18084TM@MSU.BITNET> Subject: Re: Extra Solar Colonization >>>Also, they might preferentially settle stars totally unlike out sun. For >>>example, a planet in an open star cluster would be an ideal place for a >>>colony. There would be many planetary systems, all within a few light years. >>>If these were setteled first, it might be quite a while before anyone bothere >>Open clusters would be fairly bad for a civilization with a long term >>view, too violent and too short lived. If the halo population has >>planets it would be the best bet, although the stars may be too red >>and dim. In either case there are plenty of second generation G >>dwarfs, and we _know_ they can suffice. There are many multi-G-year old open clusters. They would be no good for living near because either they wouldn't have planets (building material), becasue they hadn't formed (or couldn't), or their planets would have been expelled or crushed to dust, or dumped on a star by interactions between the stars. Though with all their gas and dust, they would make good places to 'wind up' a ram jet, sort of like the ring a cyclotron starts a particle in. The halo population has almost no metal in the stars, and hence, are useless except as energy-producers. You couldn't build anything, unless of course someone perfects the transmutation of matter. >As a mechanism for slowing a colonization wave, open star clusters >fail; they could be filled by exponential growth in short order. They fail becuase no one would stop. (exept scientists and tourists) :-) Tom Acknowledge-To: <18084TM@MSU> ------------------------------ ReSent-Message-ID: Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 91 18:53:43 EDT Resent-From: Tom McWilliams <18084TM@msu.edu> Resent-To: space+@andrew.cmu.edu Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1991 02:13:39 TZONE Reply-To: space+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@msu.edu From: space-request+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU%CARNEGIE.BITNET@msu.edu Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #638 Comments: To: space+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU To: david polito <15432DJP@MSU.BITNET>, Tom McWilliams <18084TM@MSU.BITNET> Subject: Expedition to the stars (hypothetical) >If a team of explorers were to hop a ship to a nearby star, what >should they take and why? ^^^ Are they hitch-hiking? :-) Seeds - in case they find sunlight and liquid water. embryos, eggs, etc. - Same idea. Sunglasses - stars are really bright. Tom Acknowledge-To: <18084TM@MSU> ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jun 91 19:02:04 GMT From: well!antenna@apple.com (Robert Horvitz) Subject: Gonetz = E-mail via Soviet Satellite Last week I posted a query about "Gonetz," a store-and-forward packet radio data network based on constellations of low earth orbit satellites that the USSR plans to implement. Jane's Defence Weekly had a brief passage about it in their 1 June 1991 issue. It is apparently based on an existing military/security system called Sextet, which Jane's described as "the only truly operational lightsat system in the world." (Gonetz is a Russian word meaning "messenger.") Thanks to the magic of Usenet, Ed O'Grady (OGRADY_E@SPCVXA.BITNET) saw my query and replied by email. His company, DYJ Technologies, was misidentified by Jane's as providing marketing services for Gonetz. They are in fact consulting on the project, but not marketing it. Anyway, he provided more detail about Gonetz, and put me in touch with Vern Riportella, whose company is marketing Gonetz services in North America. Vern is well-known to ham radio operators for his involvement in AMSAT-NA and hamsat technology generally. To summarize a series of phonecalls with both men, the idea to market this technology outside the Soviet Union came from Soyuzmedinform (the All-Union Medical Informatics bureau of the USSR health ministry). They originally saw it as a way to send critical health information to and from areas not served by conventional electronic communications, especially in rural areas and developing countries. But recognizing that this application might not generate enough money or traffic to pay for the system, they began thinking in more general terms. They organized a "Consortium of Small Satellite Constructors and Service Providers (COSSCASP) to adapt the Sextet technology and make it available worldwide. In addition to Soyuzmedinform, the current members of COSSCASP are: NPO Precision Instruments: a Moscow-based organization that designs scientific equipment. They will design Gonetz's space and terrestrial segments, and develop functional compatibility standards for user terminals produced by others. NPO Applied Mechanics: a large production facility based in Krasnayarsk, they build most of the Soviet Union's satellites. (By the way, NPO is a Russian acryonym for "scientific production organization.") Network Services International: NSI is Riportella's company (see below for address). Many aspects of the system have yet to be defined. They expect the orbital configuration ultimately to involve 5 or 6 orbital planes with 6 satellites in each plane. (Sextets are launched 6 at a time on one rocket.) That way, users anywhere in the world would not have to wait more than 20 minutes for a satellite to came into "view." Gonetz is expected to serve both fixed and mobile terminals with a variety of digital modes, primarily email, but also fax and maybe voicemail. Apparently the digital links in the USSR's phone system use continuously variable slope delta modulation, so they are thinking of using that for voice in the Gonetz system. Riportella is arguing for linear predictive coding, as that requires much lower data rates. But they are still unsure what applications will be most attractive to users, and are assuming the basic service will be email. It is also unclear what radio bands will be used, or whether a new international allocation is needed. Gonetz was originally planned for the 200-400 MHz range, but that presents some coordination problems with US military systems. The Sextet framework is apparently flexible enough that the radio issues don't have to be nailed down just yet. O'Grady said they will probably go along with whatever WARC-92 decides. They hope to launch the first batch of satellites in the fourth quarter of 1993. Initially, all messages will be processed through ground stations to reach end users. The process will be fully automated. A computer will read the destination address and determine which satellite provides the fastest delivery route. By 1995, they hope to have narrowband inter-satellite links working. That will eliminate the ground link in many cases, speeding delivery and supporting two-way real-time interactive channels. They anticipate that handheld terminals will communicate at 9600 baud, fixed terminals at 56KB. Recognizing that the USSR has problems with quality control for consumer goods, they will encourage third parties to design and manufacture equipment for end users. All of the handheld units will be built outside the USSR. No price schedule or rate card has been devised yet. Because the satellite technology is already mature, and Soviet launch services are relatively inexpensive, they expect the entire system to be built for around a billion ruples. Pick your favorite conversion ratio to figure that in dollars, but it should be less than half the cost of Iridium, and the user fees will hopefully be competitive with Orbcomm's. For more information about Gonetz, contact: Vern Riportella COSSCASP VP for Marketing Network Services International P.O. Box 357 Warwick, NY 10990 USA voice: 1-914-986-6904 fax: 1-914-986-3875 email: rip@cdp sfmt: rip mcimail: 324-7389 ---Robert Horvitz Internews Radio Consultant Independent Electronic Media Program for East & Central Europe 1122-1/2 E Street, SE Washington, DC 20003-2232 USA email: antenna@well.sf.ca.us rhorvitz@uunet!capital.com (follow-ups to sci.space, please) -- !.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.|.!.| Robert Horvitz 1122-1/2 E St. SE Washington, DC 20003-2232 USA uucp: ...uunet!capital!rhorvitz ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #778 *******************