Space Digest Mon, 9 Aug 93 Volume 17 : Issue 002 Today's Topics: "Kit Rockets/Launchers" and how!? computer softwares (2 msgs) Do astronauts use sleeping pills? Low Tech Alternatives, Info Post it here! Malin Space SS (2 msgs) Mars Observer's First Photo (2 msgs) Mars Observer's First Photo (MEDIA WANTS DIGITAL IMAGES!) Satellite of the Month Sea/Ocean/Floating Launchers! Simple Space Plane! (3 msgs) Space Infrasture/Old Launchers. Support the Shuttle (2 msgs) WFPC-2 Installation into HST Why I hate the space shuttle Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 17:33:25 GMT From: nsmca@ACAD3.ALASKA.EDU Subject: "Kit Rockets/Launchers" and how!? Newsgroups: sci.space I saw a news spot on CNN recently (today), about the BD-10 Kit Jet. Other than the obvious use as a "toy", I wonder if you can add hard point? But the question is, I wonder if soem one can design, and build "Kit Space Launchers"? and what regulatory and such harrassment would you have to go thru to do teh original design work, and certification, and then the person who bought it, and act as pilot, how much certification and trainign would a "Kit Launcher"owner have to go thru?? I'm mostly think of the future on this... If you can have a "private kit launcher/rocket" how hard would it be to buy a kit, build it, and use it for small launches.. === Ghost Wheel - nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 93 03:50:06 GMT From: "S.H." Subject: computer softwares Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.space For those who need inputs and informations on computer software/ hardwares, i.e. Mathlab, Dsp..., below are two interesting groups to check. math.comp.symbolic, comp.dsp Although, these two groups seeme to be Group oriented. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 06:45:02 GMT From: Frank Pinto Subject: computer softwares Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.space In <53096@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> sr600uab@imath1.ucsd.edu (S.H.) writes: >For those who need inputs and informations on computer software/ >hardwares, i.e. Mathlab, Dsp..., below are two interesting >groups to check. > math.comp.symbolic, > comp.dsp >Although, these two groups seeme to be Group oriented. Well For those whom are interested in teaching "calculus", there is a wonderful software called TEMATH (Tools for Teaching Math.) Well folks.... Try it. It was Written by two fine prof. from UMASS-Dartmouth (Robert Kowalczyk and Adam Housknecht) and apart from 3-dimention it (I garantee)will do the job. Frarank Pinto -- Frank Pinto (XICO)|Smallness of mind is the cause of stubbornness, and we do Mathematics & | not credit readily what is beyond our view. Computer Science &| Philosophy | LA ROCHEFOUCAULD ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 1993 12:02:10 -0400 From: Pat Subject: Do astronauts use sleeping pills? Newsgroups: sci.space NASA select has done some stuff on teh astronauts sleeping in the STS. they seemed to be sleeping just fine. the flight crew have it the hardest, they have to sleep while not bumping any switches or their heads. besides, godon cooper proved that sleeping is quite easy in even the worst of conditions. pat -- I don't care if it's true. If it sounds good, I will publish it. Frank Bates Publisher Frank Magazine. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 1993 12:20:09 -0400 From: Pat Subject: Low Tech Alternatives, Info Post it here! Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Aug7.130804.27636@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes: |>milligram off it. Ordinary engineering companies can build stuff much |>cheaper than aerospace companies, *if* you don't care too much about the |>total weight -- aerospace companies specialize in minimum weight at |>maximum cost. | |Sure Henry, cast iron is our specialty. What I'm saying though, is that |sending a Saturn up 1/3 full because the mission doesn't require a heavier |payload, doesn't reduce the launch cost one penny. The $2,000 a pound |cost only applies if the launcher is loaded to max gross. Unless you |custom tailor the payload so that it masses exactly the max load for |the launcher, and you generally can't do that unless your cargo is |some bulk material you can load in arbitrary quanity, then your mission |cost is not going to track the mythic $2,000 a pound figure the launcher |is theoretically capable of achieving. | I am sure henry can do better justice, but he's probably trying to say that more mission can be achieved at far lower costs when you have really broad weight and performance measures. besides, no launcher flies truly full. i suspect 85% is a good working figure. the X/lb is just for scaling information. besides, what henry is trying to avoid is the custom tailoring of the payload to the launcher. rather just some reasonable approximation. most of our launchers throw between 20K-40K to LEO. with the SV you can throw up to 250K to LEO. if you remember, the SV was also a fully configurable system. if you wanted 130K, you used a S1B, or you could drop the SIVB and go for lwess weight. pick the convenient increment and go from there. and that weight budget margin gives a lot of room at cost reduction in the payload. |As an extreme example, suppose I have a vital one pound payload I need |to launch. I'm not going to say, "Hey Saturn only costs $2,000 a pound" |and go try to launch my one pound on the Saturn for $2,000. It's going |to cost me $500 million to use the Saturn to launch one pound the same |as if it were at max gross. That's my *mission* cost for that launcher. of course, rapid response is not the Saturn nor the Shuttles forte. As Mohney and i have discussed, when a smoke shifter is needed tomorrow at SSF, it won't go on either the STS or the saturn. although i suspect a saturn had a better track record at launch time then the shuttle ever did. |Instead, I'm going to look at Scout for $10 million, or Pegasus for |$15 million, or even Atlas for $35 million. All of them have a lower if you have the time to wait for an atlas, you have the time to wait for a saturn mission as a parsitic payload. |mission cost even though the cheapest of them has the highest per |pound cost. I might even put my pound in a GAS can and get it in |orbit for only $10,000. That would be the lowest mission cost I |could find, even though Shuttle has a high cost per pound. It *can* |easily be fitted with several payloads that can share the cost |where as multiple payloads on Saturn hasn't been done, and if it |were it would have to be done as an integrated package that costs |big bucks and major time. | I don't know gary. the french demonstrated shotgun launches on the Ariane 4 a while ago, the Proton i believe is doing shotgun launches for iridium and the Delta? is a routine double stack launcher. if you wnat to get picky, the saturn V was a double stack launcher. the CSM launched free of the SIVB-LEM stack. now it could have picked another trakectory, but it chose not too. instead it flew back and mated with the second payload. I suspect multiple payloads to orbit is far easier and cheaper then you suspect. MIRV warheads are stacked payloads, and they were developed back in the 60s? and they have to handle a pretty rough environment:-) trh trick is keeping the cost down on stacked warheads. cargo drops are stacked payloads, delivered at quite reasonable costs. so are roll on roll off freighters. aero-space has chosen to be on the costly difficult road, i am not certain it is neccessary. pat -- I don't care if it's true. If it sounds good, I will publish it. Frank Bates Publisher Frank Magazine. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 1993 05:04:29 GMT From: Jeff Bytof - SIO Subject: Malin Space SS Newsgroups: sci.space [response to S.H., a fellow Triton]: >just 400 km (248 mi) above the surface on Nov. 22. The Mars >Observer Camera was developed by and is operated under contract ^^^^^^^^ >to Jet Propulsion Laboratory by an industry/university team led ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >by Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, Calif. > Name of the University ? Probably Arizona State University - as far as I know UC San Diego has no personnel on the staff whatsoever. > How much do the students who were on `duty' getting paid ? If students were hired, they were probably graduate students in the middle of the MS or PhD work (in the planetary sciences), looking for space mission operations experience. I figure they are under a two- year contract at approx. $3000/month. > What kind of `duty' do they do ? Lots and lots of vi work. I also understand that Thanksgiving dinner will be catered. They are paid for 8 hours/day, but are expected to work 14. They can eat at a large and very expensive table but have to cover it with a plastic sheet first. They take turns sitting inside Dr. Malin's personal Mars simulator. Exploding head tests? > Just for the curosity. You are forgiven. I was also curious, once. -rabjab, AstroZionist Donkey Driver ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 93 05:56:27 GMT From: "S.H." Subject: Malin Space SS Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.math In article <2421gt$qm2@pravda.sdsc.edu> u1452@sluggo.sdsc.edu (Jeff Bytof - SIO) writes: > What kind of `duty' do they do ? > >Lots and lots of vi work. I also understand that Thanksgiving dinner >will be catered. They are paid for 8 hours/day, but are expected to >work 14. They can eat at a large and very expensive table but have >to cover it with a plastic sheet first. They take turns sitting >inside Dr. Malin's personal Mars simulator. Exploding head tests? > vi: ) Juan, July 26, 2:30pm......apple talk... later,..... S.H. | Donkey and Donkey_Driver detector ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 16:22:14 GMT From: John Manuel Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary In article henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > If all they want to do is degrade > resolution, dynamic range, etc., that is easy to do digitally, without > the cumbersome kludge of printing the image out and re-scanning it. A friend of mine had one of those printed-and-then-re-scanned images from a previous mission (I can't remember which) and did some image processing on it to see if he could sharpen it up a bit... he found fingerprints! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 18:40:12 GMT From: "Richard A. Schumacher" Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary In <6AUG199317574752@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: >I can't speak for the other NASA centers, but the Public Information Office >at JPL purchased a color scanner last year specifically to scan in the >public released photos and convert them to GIF images. The Mars Observer Why scan photos, instead of directly converting the data stream to GIF or other format? Was it cheaper to buy a scanner and pay a flunky rather than pay to have the code written? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 17:01:42 GMT From: apryan@vax1.tcd.ie Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo (MEDIA WANTS DIGITAL IMAGES!) Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary In article <1993Aug7.073331.20854@ee.ubc.ca>, davem@ee.ubc.ca (Dave Michelson) writes: > Actually, this brings up an interesting point. What form does the media > want imagery to be provided in? With the increasing use of workstations > in newspaper and magazine publishing, it might not be too long before they > start asking for the imagery to be provided in digital form... As member of "media" by virtue of publishing news-stand magazine, WE would like images in digital form, by email. i.e. NOT colour prints or transparancies by snail (which works more expensive for all concerned)! Ron Baalke mentioned images could be released by scientists earlier than the 6 month period at their discretion. Seems to me that these images were pure 'publicity' shots. There can't be that much scientific merit, certainly not compared to ultimate resolution M.O. is capable of. Has anyone approached scientists involved to ask for digital version of these images? You can tell them from me that that IS what this media group wants. Thanks. -Tony Ryan, ASTRONOMY & SPACE magazine published by: Astronomy Ireland, P.O.Box 2888, Dublin 1, Ireland. (ONE OF WORLD'S LARGEST ASTRO. SOC. per capita - email re any larger! 0.039%) Tel: 0 8 9 1 - 8 8 - 1 9 - 5 0 for U.K. Hotline (new message Mondays) (dial 1550-111-442 in Republic of Ireland) ------------------------------ Date: 7 Aug 93 21:13:08 GMT From: Bruce Watson Subject: Satellite of the Month Newsgroups: sci.space Earth Satellite USA-33 (NORAD #19625, COSPAR 1988-099A) was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base on 1988 Nov 6 with a Titan 34D launch vehicle. This satellite is in an orbit inclined to the earth's equator by 97.9 degrees. It makes one revolution every 97.5 minutes and and currently comes to within 267 km of the earth's surface and is most distant at 1006 km. It is roughly cylindrical with a 3.0 m diameter and length of 15.0 m--similar in size and shape to the Hubble Space Telescope. It is thought to be a Keyhole 11 optical surveillance satellite and is designated KH 11-8 in Ted Molczan's list of 730+ two-line elements. KH 11-8 is in what is called a "sun-synchronous" orbit. Such an orbit's nodes (intersections of the orbit plane with the earth's equatorial plane) precess, due to the earth's equatorial bulge, at the same rate as the earth's revolution about the sun. This causes the satellite to pass over a place on the earth's surface at approximately the same local time at that place (a favorable situation for an earth resources or surveillance mission). In this orbit it can be seen only during the summer when the sun's rays shine over the pole. In the north hemisphere we are now well into summer and KH 11-8 will be visible for the next month or so. It can be seen around 10:20 pm +/- 50 min (your daylight savings time zone) traveling from SSE to NNW on its way to the other side of the earth where it is 10:20 am (or so) local time. Unlike KH11-8's older brother KH11-6, KH11-8 still has fuel for maneuvering and changes its orbit frequently. The orbit change is a repositioning of the orientation of the ellipse and a lowering of perigee. Inclination changes little. I have observed KH11-8 from Denver 12 times the last four summers mainly at magnitude +2 with a variation of about 1 in visual magnitude from pass to pass. KH 11-8 15.0 3.0 0.0 4.6 1 19625U 88099 A 93210.14283180 .00013300 00000-0 13778-3 0 08 2 19625 97.9201 273.3573 0527429 314.1837 45.8162 14.77718520 07 -- Bruce Watson (wats@scicom.alphacdc.com) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 04:43:00 GMT From: nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu Subject: Sea/Ocean/Floating Launchers! Newsgroups: sci.space What ever happened to the project/idea of using the sea or a lake based system of launching rockets, and then use something like modified Polarises (or Polaris 2?).. Also what about the idea someone once had, c.1939 or so, of a floating launch pad. Kind of like a oil derrick, but instead of oil exploration, you use it for lauching satellites into orbit.. (the idea actually was for floating air ports and the distances between america and europe.. One way to get around many of the problems of commericial wants, as well as distance/safety and such.. You can anchor the launch site, on either coast, if the launcher goes bad, well you will probably have plenty of sea/ocean to have it drop into. Also You can charge peopel to get to the station, and security is easier, and less problems with birds, and such. Of course the might haev to figure out a way to cool down the exchaust (to keep the eco-nuts happy).. === Ghost Wheel - nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 1993 00:32:54 -0600 From: "Mr.HolierThanThou" Subject: Simple Space Plane! Newsgroups: sci.space Try working with this: The space plane's rocket engine starts and pushes the plane to Mach 1 and shuts down, at this point the plane's ramjet starts and gets the plane to Mach 6-8 at about 31 km and shuts down as the rocket starts again. Use a thrust to mass ratio of 1:1 to start with. And the engine is the RD 171. RD 171 fuel: kerosene and LOX mass: 8755 kg thrust: 7903.77 kN vac 7256.56 kN sl spimpulse: 308 sec sl 337 sec vac And for the real adventurous the heat sheild is about 3.28 kg/m^2, as for tanks and internal structures I couldn't even guess. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 93 08:13:33 GMT From: "S.H." Subject: Simple Space Plane! Newsgroups: sci.space What was your question ? How did you design that exercises ? Must be somewhere you can get data? Would you describle how did you get the data ? And where did you get them? Are you also one of the inter_net or somebody were using you ? I know the internal stucture. Perhaps, you may not wish to hear about. It is the most stunning one. S.H. | " I only speak for myself ! " | I heard such claim or discliam million times. | | _" History of united_K" ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 93 12:14:26 GMT From: Paul Dietz Subject: Simple Space Plane! Newsgroups: sci.space In article <2426mm$k6g@triton.unm.edu> carls@unm.edu (Mr.HolierThanThou) writes: > Try working with this: > The space plane's rocket engine starts and pushes > the plane to Mach 1 and shuts down, at this point the > plane's ramjet starts and gets the plane to Mach 6-8 > at about 31 km and shuts down as the rocket starts > again. Use a thrust to mass ratio of 1:1 to start > with. And the engine is the RD 171. (figures deleted) Hell, why bother with the ramjet? With that performance, the RD 171 (?) should be able to serve in an SSTO. If engines must deliver a total delta-V of 10000 m/s, and the Isp is 308 during the first 3000 m/s and 337 during the last 7000 m/s, then the mass ratio is 23, which should be achievable with lightweight tanks (the volume required is actually less for a given burnout mass than in a LOX/LH2 SSTO, although more/larger engines are needed to deliver the higher liftoff thrust.) A dual-engine SSTO using both an RD 171 and LOX/hydrogen engines could do even better. Folks have looked at this and dual-fuel engines for decades in SSTOs. I really don't understand this obsession with jets and wings. Paul F. Dietz dietz@cs.rochester.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 04:06:31 GMT From: nsmca@ACAD3.ALASKA.EDU Subject: Space Infrasture/Old Launchers. Newsgroups: sci.space Here is how it works: Atleast how to get into space and such, namely commericial space.. Is to sell off many of the old launchers (atlas/titan and such), to get the cost of launchers down, and then as the old launchers wear out, and such, you then start building newer model lauchers. Namely build the infrastruture then worry about what you are using for the launcher.. Basically worry about having cloths before you worry about which raybans to wear.. for without a infrastructure, all you have is a bunch of parts, and parts is parts, aint it?? === Ghost Wheel - nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 93 03:20:17 GMT From: Rob Schultz Subject: Support the Shuttle Newsgroups: sci.space Pat (prb@access.digex.net) wrote: : It's the Ken program re-implemented with an even more : aggressive tone. You think they managed to get the "spreadsheet generator" subroutine to work the time? :-) -- Rob Schultz | | There is no such thing as over-kill... robs@eskimo.com | | ...only under-targeting. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 1993 11:58:06 -0400 From: Pat Subject: Support the Shuttle Newsgroups: sci.space no. -- I don't care if it's true. If it sounds good, I will publish it. Frank Bates Publisher Frank Magazine. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 18:05:02 +0000 From: Chris Marriott Subject: WFPC-2 Installation into HST Newsgroups: sci.space In article <53007@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> sr600uab@sdcc16.ucsd.edu writes: > >What kind of mission are you doing ? > >Below is your message: > >===================================================================== > >In article <5AUG199318052296@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov > (Ron Baalke) writes: >From the "JPL Universe" > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > ??? > >July 16, 1993 > >Putting WF/PC-2 in place may require the hands of a surgeon >By Diane Ainsworth [ lots of stuff deleted] MUST you quote 150 lines of message in order to ask a 1-line question? Chris -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Chris Marriott | chris@chrism.demon.co.uk | | Warrington, UK | 100113.1140@compuserve.com | | Save the whales. Collect the whole set. | CompuServe: 100113,1140 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 93 04:32:18 GMT From: "S.H." Subject: Why I hate the space shuttle Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Aug8.013430.25558@ucc.su.OZ.AU> dan@aero.ae.su.OZ.AU (Dan Newman) writes: >>>There are airliners that don't have big wings. (Hint: Chinook.) >>I thought those big things on top that go round and round were called >>rotary wings. >Bad choice of flight vehicle. The RAAF found its Chinooks (C models) to >be the most expensive aircraft it ever operated, had to keep about half >its fleet in storage because it couldn't keep up the supply of spares >and highly trained technicians, and in general had life cycle costs >orders of magnitude greater than the initial purchase price indicated. It was because highly trained technicians simply did not do any better job than technicians who had min experience but can adapitively learn to perform well. Quite often, many experts did their work to *demonstrate* their techniques instead of solving problem. >If this is meant to exemplify DC-X's future, MD should stop work now. What is MD ? There must be lots of gain back for them if they did not stop. >Dan Newman dan@aero.ae.su.OZ.AU >Sydney NSW 2006 ------------------------------ To: bb-sci-space@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU, bb-sci-space@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Xref: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu sci.space:68666 Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!network.ucsd.edu!sdcc12!imath1!sr600uab From: "S.H." Newsgroups: sci.space Subject: Re: Mars Observer's First Photo Message-Id: <53091@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> Date: 8 Aug 93 01:42:42 GMT References: <6AUG199317532429@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> <6AUG199321052962@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> Sender: news@sdcc12.ucsd.edu Organization: University of California, San Diego Lines: 74 Nntp-Posting-Host: sdcc16.ucsd.edu Source-Info: Sender is really news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU In article <6AUG199321052962@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: >In article <6AUG199317532429@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes... >>Also, note that the scientists have proprietary rights to >>the science data for one year. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Do they ? >They may release the images before that at their own discretion. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Really? Are you a scientist ? >This grace period varies by mission but it is normally one year. I just >found out for the Mars Observer mission the grace period is 6 months. Longer than FLT ? ___ _____ ___ > /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov > | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | > ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | When given a choice betwee ===================================== Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary Subject: Re: Mars Observer GIF Image Summary: Expires: References: <6AUG199317481308@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> Sender: Followup-To:sci.math Distribution: world Organization: University of California, San Diego Keywords: Mars Observer, JPL In article <6AUG199317481308@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > > ========================== > MARS OBSERVER GIF IMAGE > August 6, 1993 > ========================== >just 400 km (248 mi) above the surface on Nov. 22. The Mars >Observer Camera was developed by and is operated under contract ^^^^^^^^ >to Jet Propulsion Laboratory by an industry/university team led ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >by Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, Calif. Name of the University ? How much do the students who were on `duty' getting paid ? What kind of `duty' do they do ? Just for the curosity. > ___ _____ ___ > /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov > | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | S.H. | " Reading the stories of KGB is always exciting." | " A trip to explore the United_K - KGB, KKK... is worth millions." ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 17 : Issue 002 ------------------------------