Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Mon, 10 Apr 89 03:16:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Mon, 10 Apr 89 03:16:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #354 SPACE Digest Volume 9 : Issue 354 Today's Topics: space news from Feb 13 AW&ST Re: Room Temperature fusion - possible indications? Re: Room Temperature fusion - possible indications? NASA tank reuse fiasco Re: Re: Babies in Space Re: more on Liberty Bell 7 (and other s'craft) Re: more on Liberty Bell 7 (and other s'craft) Re: SPACE Digest V9 #344 Re: Civilians in space (Was Re: First concert from space--update) Re: DSN mission launch dates A brief history of Soviet Mars probes. Re: Hubble Space Telescope ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 10 Apr 89 02:56:52 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: space news from Feb 13 AW&ST Construction of the mobile service tower for the Titan 4 pad at Vandenberg may be delayed due to incorrect fasteners: some of the one-inch-dia. bolts are too small for the nuts, causing stripping of threads. Martin Marietta and the USAF are trying to decide what to do. [Uh, change bolt suppliers?] NASA FY90 budget gets bipartisan support at its first Senate subcommittee hearing. Phobos 2 enters Mars orbit Jan 29. [I'll skip the details, since we all know that Phobos 2 is now dead. They really should have launched three of them.] Discovery launch preparations continue, with replacement liquid-oxygen pumps about to arrive at KSC. Data from the #3 engine on Atlantis shows that its cracked bearing was present at launch -- vibration levels were higher than usual, although within operating limits for the engine. Inmarsat decides to investigate using its satellites for land-mobile communication, in addition to their maritime and aviation roles. Test-firing of Pegasus third-stage engine is imminent [went fine]. The test will be run by a Pegasus flight computer in a blockhouse. A second-stage motor firing will follow in late March, and a first- stage motor in April. Only one test of each motor will be done before first flight. Hercules has started construction on the first flight motors. The first Pegasus is still on schedule for launch in late July. Scaled Composites [Rutan's company] has finished the top half of the wing and is finishing the bottom half. Subcontractors are starting to deliver flight hardware. A captive flight test on a B-52, using an inert model now under construction, will occur in late June. Two captive flight tests of the first Pegasus will be run before it is launched. Launch will be off Vandenberg. Assuming success, the second Pegasus goes up in September. The B-52 being government-owned, OSC is evaluating proposals from a number of aircraft cargo and leasing companies to provide either a Lockheed Tristar or a Boeing 747 for commercial Pegasus launches; OSC's studies showed these aircraft to be preferred. A 747 would carry Pegasus under its wing the same way the NASA B-52 will; a Tristar would carry it under the belly, with Pegasus's tail sticking up into the unpressurized cargo hold through a slot. European and Japanese companies, in addition to US ones, have offered aircraft leases on "interesting" terms. -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 00:47:37 GMT From: pyrnj!dasys1!tbetz@rutgers.edu (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: Room Temperature fusion - possible indications? Quoth mvp@v7fs1.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) in <296@v7fs1.UUCP>: [ "April Fool!" >SFX of four legs breaking< deleted ] |There is, however, a rather large fly in the ointment. There are two |places on this planet you can get platinum-group metals in quantity. |Both of these countries could become the super-OPEC of the 21'st |century. | |One of them is the Soviet Union. | |The other is South Africa. | |We *really* need access to the asteriods, which have plenty of platinum- |group metals. |-- |Mike Van Pelt Video 7 ...ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp Mike, you raise a good point... but can some more experienced folks here figure out how hard it would be, given a starter supply of Palladium and some other, more available elements, to recombine those more available elements and come out of it with Palladium? I mean, with a fusion plant, this shouldn't be >too< difficult. And of course, this will play >hell< with those who promote a return to the Gold Standard! ;^) -- "Still I sing bonny boys, bonny mad boys, | Tom Betz, 114 Woodworth Bedlam boys are bonny, | Yonkers, NY 10701-2509 For they all go bare, and they live by the air, | (914) 375-1510 And they want nor drink nor money." - Steeleye Span | tbetz@dasys1.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 01:33:00 GMT From: pyrnj!dasys1!tbetz@rutgers.edu (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: Room Temperature fusion - possible indications? Quoth alan@rnms1.paradyne.com (0000-Alan Lovejoy) in <5853@pdn.paradyne.com>: |In article <1989Mar26.003753.11770@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: |>Nonsense. Supplying artificial gravity using centrifugal force is no big |>deal, although getting the radius long enough to avoid inner-ear problems |>is certainly a nuisance. People have designed current-technology Mars |>missions which have artificial gravity. | |I'm not a spececraft engineer, so I won't debate you on the practicality of |designing centrifugal gravity craft. I had heard that this was not so simple |as all that, however. Perhaps I have heard wrong. Any spacecraft engineers |care to comment? | |>You've also forgotten at least two other ways out of the problem: better |>space propulsion to cut down the lengths of the missions, ... And, of course, if you keep your acceleration (a fusion powered drive would seem to be just the ticket for this) at a pretty constant 1 G, you can avoid the effects of 0 G pretty much altogether. Of course, to keep your v below c, you may have to be decelerating at 1 G almost as much as you are accelerating at 1 G, with brief spurts of 0 G while you're turning the ship around... and this doesn't help with the problem of guys out mining the asteroids. Perhaps they could sleep in ships doing the grand tour at 1 G to and from where they work. -- "Still I sing bonny boys, bonny mad boys, | Tom Betz, 114 Woodworth Bedlam boys are bonny, | Yonkers, NY 10701-2509 For they all go bare, and they live by the air, | (914) 375-1510 And they want nor drink nor money." - Steeleye Span | tbetz@dasys1.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 89 06:07:21 GMT From: amdahl!nsc!andrew@sun.com (andrew) Subject: NASA tank reuse fiasco I was horrified to read that more than $8B has already been junked by discarded fuel tanks; about $300M per tank. Over the next 10 years, with 10,000 tons of tankage to be *nearly* put into orbit, the loss of 30 ton tanks would amount to a cool $100B more. That's $100,000,000,000. Each empty tank weighs more than the total shuttle payload! How is it possible for rational men to continue such a profligate policy for such a long time? That's MY money, you know (and yours). It's dubious that anyone associated with such a scandal could dare call himself a manager, much less an engineer; I have a much better word. Perhaps a stint assisting with the education of America's homeless millions would jerk these jerks back to reality. Wouldn't it be so nice just to attach a parasitic mini-thruster and control system to all tanks, just to go that last ten yards? They would be so useful to have around; unlike NASA "technical managers". Despairingly, ===== Andrew Palfreyman USENET: ...{this biomass}!nsc!logic!andrew National Semiconductor M/S D3969, 2900 Semiconductor Dr., PO Box 58090, Santa Clara, CA 95052-8090 ; 408-721-4788 there's many a slip 'twixt cup and lip ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 17:10:09 GMT From: hpda!hpcuhb!hpcllla!hpcllmv!jbc@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Jeff Caldwell) Subject: Re: Re: Babies in Space >There are a great many differences between avian & reptilian, and >mammalian embryology, one of the most critical being the mode development >from the egg stage. > >Mammals, on the other hand produce a tiny egg, which upon being >fertilised, goes on to multiply many times (about 2^55 generations, taking >into account cell death) along with considerable RNA synthesis. > >I fully agree that bird eggs make a much easier model to work with than >any placental animal, but this does not make them a *suitable* model from >the point of view of ever being able to apply the results to non-avian >systems. Besides, how can you completely allow for all the differences >between the experimental and control groups such that micro-gravity is the >*only* variable. You really need fertilisation and normal gestation time >in a micro-gravity environment. Embryological experiments should wait >until Freedom is operational. Here Here! I think we should send up a dozen pregnant women on the next shuttle. Let's write a letter to NASA. -Jeff Caldwell _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ | Disclaimer: He without a claim has nothing to disclaim. | -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 89 14:35:12 GMT From: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu (Matthew T. DeLuca) Subject: Re: more on Liberty Bell 7 (and other s'craft) Ignore my last posting...I misread unmanned for manned... -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Matthew DeLuca : Georgia Institute of Technology : Certainty is the lot of those who ARPA: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu : do not question. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 21:58:47 GMT From: att!cbnewsl!sw@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Stuart Warmink) Subject: Re: more on Liberty Bell 7 (and other s'craft) In article <1749@wpi.wpi.edu> tmurphy@wpi.wpi.edu (Tom [Chris] Murphy) writes: >In article <389@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) writes: >> >>plutonium-powered thermionic generator of Apollo 13's LEM. >> >HUH? All American (and probably all Soviet) manned spacecraft use >fuel cells for electrical generation. The U.S. doesn't make much use >at all of nuclear-powered satilites, except for deep-space probes. The generator in question was to be used to power (and heat) the instruments left on the Moon. Wasn't it called "SNAPS" or something? I guess my original statement was somewhat misleading. (By the way, other than the new shuttle, the Soviets have always used solar power and/or batteries for their manned spacecraft.) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Captain, I see no reason to stand here | Stuart Warmink, Whippany, NJ, USA and be insulted" - Spock | sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (att!cbnewsl!sw) -------------------------> My opinions are just that <------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Apr 89 13:21 PDT From: Pete Nielsen Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V9 #344 Please remove me from this list. My addresses are: CSMSPCN@UCLAMVS (Bitnet) CSMSPCN@OAC.UCLA.EDU ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 89 21:52:18 GMT From: vygr!mae@sun.com (Mike Ekberg, Sun {GPD-LEGO}) Subject: Re: Civilians in space (Was Re: First concert from space--update) >In article <3015@eos.UUCP> steve@eos.UUCP (Steve Philipson) asks Henry: >> Citizens in this country can, and do, work to get more support for >>space activities, but we work within the constraints of our system. You >>seem to be upset with us for not doing enough. So what are YOU doing to >>promote space exploration? Henry is AW&ST_compress(1). Isn't that enough {:_>)? #mike (sun!mae), M/S 8-40 #"There's nothing human that's alien to us." - A. Einstein ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 89 21:01:21 GMT From: att!cbnewsl!sw@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Stuart Warmink) Subject: Re: DSN mission launch dates In article <890406114006.000007572C1@grouch.JPL.NASA.GOV>, PJS@GROUCH.JPL.NASA.GOV (Peter Scott) writes: > [interesting list of potential launch dates] > DFS-1 5/5/89 (but maybe 3/31 or 4/4 depending on Ariadne ^^^^^^^ "Ariadne" is the (pseudo-) collumnist in "New Scientist". You probably mean "Ariane", I hope! -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Captain, I see no reason to stand here | Stuart Warmink, Whippany, NJ, USA and be insulted" - Spock | sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (att!cbnewsl!sw) -------------------------> My opinions are just that <------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 89 14:07:49 GMT From: mtwain.dec.com!klaes@decwrl.dec.com (CUP/ML, MLO5-2/G1 8A, 223-3283) Subject: A brief history of Soviet Mars probes. Although the Soviets certainly have not had the best of luck in exploring the planet Mars with unmanned space probes - particularly in comparison to their Venus missions - they have had at least one completely successful Mars mission, with a number of partial successes, and a few firsts at the Red Planet. The only completely successful Soviet Mars probe was MARS 5, launched in 1973 and began orbiting Mars in February of 1974. Together with its sister probe, MARS 4, the orbiter took sixty photographs of the planet's surface, comparable in quality to the photos taken by the United States' MARINER 9 probe, which had studied Mars two years earlier. The rest of the unmanned space vehicles identified as Mars probes have not been as fortunate, but something was learned and achieved on all those missions. During the period from 1960 to 1971, there were also at least nine Mars attempts which did not even make it past Earth orbit, and these were never officially identified by the Soviets as Mars probes. The first announced unmanned probe to Mars was launched in November of 1962: MARS 1 got as far as 53 million kilometers from Earth before radio contact was lost in March of 1963. It did eventually pass Mars at a distance of 193,000 kilometers, but no data was ever returned. There was a nine-year gap between MARS 1 and the next "official" Mars missions, MARS 2 and 3. Both launched early in 1971, MARS 2 reached the planet in November and went into orbit, dropping a lander to the surface in the process. Though the lander apparently crashed instead of soft-landing as intended, the probe does hold the distinction of being the first human-made vehicle to reach Mars' surface. The problem was blamed on the huge dust storm enveloping the planet at the time, which was also affecting the observations being made by MARINER 9, already in orbit, and MARS 3, which also placed a lander on the surface the next month. This lander did reach the planet intact, but only transmitted some useless data for twenty seconds before going silent. The MARS 3 orbiter did function well, but it and its sister probe only returned a few poor photos of the dust-shrouded planet. The next "gap" in Soviet Mars exploration was far shorter and much more ambitious: Four unmanned vehicles were sent to Mars in 1973 - two orbiters (MARS 4 and 5) and two flyby/landers (MARS 6 and 7), all arriving at their destination the next year. MARS 4 went into a solar instead of Martian orbit when its breaking rockets did not fire as planned. The probe did manage to send back a few surface photos before passing its target into interplanetary space. MARS 5 was discussed above. MARS 6 sent a lander to the surface as the main bus flew past, but the lander signals ceased just a few seconds before touchdown. The lander did return information on the thin Martian atmosphere while it was descending. MARS 7 was not able to aim its lander properly, and it missed the Red Planet by 1,300 kilometers, sailing off into solar orbit. No doubt discouraged by the results of the MARS series, the Soviets did not send another unmanned probe (not even an unofficial attempt) until 1988, with the launchings of PHOBOS 1 and 2. Their unfortunate demise is well-known to USENET readers. This may come off as a bit naive, but perhaps these difficulties will encourage the Soviets to cooperate even more with the U.S. and other space-faring nations in planetary exploration. With our combined technologies, studying the other worlds and eventually sending humans to them should become a far easier task, and perhaps also ease political tensions through friendly cooperation. Larry Klaes ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 89 15:59:11 GMT From: uflorida!haven!uvaarpa!hudson!astsun1!gsh7w@g.ms.uky.edu (Greg Hennessy) Subject: Re: Hubble Space Telescope In article (Philip Verdieck) writes: # #What are the capabilities for rotating this baby and using it for #spying purposes??? Not much, since the detectors are sensitive enough to burn out. A KH-11 or KH-12 will do the job for you though. -Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia USPS Mail: Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA Internet: gsh7w@virginia.edu UUCP: ...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V9 #354 *******************