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 ; Sat, 9 Mar 91 01:40:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sat, 9 Mar 91 01:40:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #244 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 244 Today's Topics: Re: New Shuttle computers planet stats. Ulysses Update - 03/06/91 Gold plating Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D Navstar GPS PRN 9 Permanently Turned Off Re: Neptune CD-ROMs? Re: Terraforming, sun shield Re: New Shuttle computers Re: Japan's Space Industry Any upcoming launches at the Cape? 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: 7 Mar 91 17:29:37 GMT From: agate!stanford.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: New Shuttle computers In article dlbres10@pc.usl.edu (Fraering Philip) writes: >How difficult would it be to build a test chamber that simulated the >radiation environment inside the shuttle cabin (or of any manned >spacecraft in leo) in order to see whether or not the electronics >could hold up? Pretty easy. The radiation environment in low orbit is not a lot worse than on Earth's surface. Commercial laptop computers have been used without modification, although one would want to be a little bit more cautious about flight-critical systems. -- "But this *is* the simplified version | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology for the general public." -S. Harris | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 91 22:22:23 GMT From: bbn.com!nic!bunny!hhd0@eddie.mit.edu (Horace Dediu) Subject: planet stats. I am trying to test an n-body simulator with real data. I'd like to simulate the solar system. Could someone e-mail me the following information about the planets in the solar system: mass x y z vx vy vz Sun 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mercury Venus Earth Mars Saturn Jupiter Neptune Uranus Pluto (did I miss any?) where x,y,z are position coordinates relative to the Sun (pick a random time/date) and vx, vy, vz are velocities. The mass of the Sun would also be useful. SI units preferred. I'd like to feed the simulator these numbers and see if the planets crash into the Sun or orbit properly. Thanks in advance. -- Horace Dediu \"That's the nature of research--you don't know |GTE Laboratories (617) 466-4111\ what in hell you're doing." `Doc' Edgerton |40 Sylvan Road UUCP: ...!harvard!bunny!hhd0................................|Waltham, MA 02254 Internet: hhd0@gte.com or hhd0%gte.com@relay.cs.net..........|U. S. A. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Mar 91 22:46:27 GMT From: rex!wuarchive!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov!baalke@g.ms.uky.edu (Ron Baalke) Subject: Ulysses Update - 03/06/91 ULYSSES STATUS REPORT March 6, 1991 Today the spacecraft is 344 million kilometers (214 million miles) from the Sun, traveling at a heliocentric velocity of 93,400 kilometers per hour (58,000 miles per hour). Its distance from Earth is 256 million kilometers (159 million miles). Routine science observations and spacecraft housekeeping remain the main activities as Ulysses continues to venture away from the Sun. All systems and science instruments are functioning normally. Flight controllers have seen no return of the wobble in the spacecraft's rotation that occurred several weeks after launch last fall. In February 1992 Ulysses will fly by Jupiter, where the gravity of the giant planet will send the spacecraft into an orbit over the north and south poles of the Sun. The five-year mission to study the Sun's poles and interstellar space beyond the poles is conducted jointly by the European Space Agency and NASA/JPL. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | Is it mind over matter, ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |___ M/S 301-355 | or matter over mind? /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | Never mind. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | It doesn't matter. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 20:57:06 EST From: John Roberts Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement. Subject: Gold plating >From: davidle@microsoft.UUCP (David LEVINE) >Subject: Re: Outgassing >Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA >That's one reason why the $2.50 DB-25 connector you use on your computer >costs JPL $75 (other reasons are gold plating, plastic forms that don't >melt under your soldering iron and much higher tolerances). Of course, gold plating isn't very expensive - probably just about always less than 50 cents per contact, and a *lot* less for wire-wrap pins. For space applications, I expect the testing costs a lot more than the gold. Isn't it Lexus that has been bragging in TV commercials about how they splurged and used gold-plated contacts for their air bags? I expect in their next commercial they'll say: "We were going to use big pretzel sticks as axles in our car, but then we decided to go whole-hog, hang the expense, and make them out of genuine *steel*." :-) John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 91 17:52:59 GMT From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!dil@purdue.edu (Perry G Ramsey) Subject: Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D In article <236.27D4C8A6@nss.FIDONET.ORG>, Paul.Blase@nss.FIDONET.ORG (Paul Blase) writes: > The military and NASA have two things in common: Each must have the very > best equipment in order to preserve lives - indeed in order to get the > job done at all, and each has the money to pay for state-of-the-art > technology to ensure that it has the very best. Of course, in the 'Upgrading Shuttle Computers' thread we've been seeing how NASA spares no expense in getting only the very latest in computer technology. (1000 :-)). NASA, by and large, in not pushing the limits of any technology anywhere. Back in the old days, when I was on Space Station, one of the big shots said that there were no real technical issues with SS, only managerial ones. I heartily agree. NASA's prime goal now is to boldly manage where no man has managed before. > is probably for the better). This leaves NASA as the prime agency that > can support the leading-edge development of high technology; that can > afford to pay the millions of dollars that it takes to do something USEFUL > with the products of the research laboratories. If NASA was doing its job right, that would be true. If NASA was doing its job right, it would be supporting real technical pathfinder efforts like you're talking about. (Ion engines are one thing that comes to mind; less expensive chemical rockets are another.) Unfortunately, they aren't. > > Paul Blase - via FidoNet node 1:129/104 -- Perry G. Ramsey Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences perryr@vm.cc.purdue.edu Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN USA dil@mace.cc.purdue.edu *** IMAGINE YOUR LOGO HERE ****** Ten thousand low-lifes a day read this space. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Mar 91 13:01:16 AST From: Richard Langley Subject: Navstar GPS PRN 9 Permanently Turned Off The navigation signals from Navstar GPS satellite PRN 9, the one that was being spin stabilized to provide service for the Gulf region (and coincidently western North America) during the war, have been permanently turned off. The following is the official announcement from Falcon AFB via the U.S. Coast Guard and the Naval Observatory: USCG GPS INFORMATION CENTER (GPSIC) RECORDING AS OF 1400 UTC, MARCH 7, 1991. 1. THE GPS CONSTELLATION CONSISTS OF 15 SATELLITES. 2. PRN09's NAVIGATION SIGNAL WAS TERMINATED AT 0342 UTC ON 6 MAR; PRN09 WILL NOT RESUME SERVICE. 3. PRN12 IS UNUSABLE BEGINNING AT 1535 UTC ON 6 MAR AND WILL REMAIN UNUSABLE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. ADDRESS QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS REPORT TO THE GPSIC AT 703-866-3806; HOURS OF OPERATION ARE 8:00 AM TO 4:00 PM EASTERN TIME, MONDAY THRU FRIDAY, EXCEPT FEDERAL HOLIDAYS; SEE FILE GPSIC FOR MORE INFORMATION. P R 061613Z MAR 91 FM 2SCS FALCON AFB CO//DOS// UNCLAS //NANU// NOTICE ADVISORY TO NAVSTAR USERS (NANU) 063-91065 SUBJ: TERMINATE OPERATIONS FOR PRN9 DAY 65 AT 0342 UTC 1. FORECASTS/ADVISORIES AS OF DAY 65 (06 MAR 91): A. PRN9 (MCS: SVN6) TERMINATED NAVIGATION/POSITIONING OPERATIONS ON DAY 65 (06 MAR 91) AT 0342 UTC. PRN9 IS NOT USABLE AND WILL NOT RESUME SERVICE. B. PRN17 (MCS: SVN17) WILL BE REPOSITIONED ON DAY 72 (13 MAR 91): PRN17 IS EXPECTED TO BE UNUSABLE BEGINNING 0900 UTC FOR UP TO 24 HOURS. PAGE 17 OF SUBFRAME 4 OF ALL SATELLITES WILL CONTAIN A SPECIAL MESSAGE DESCRIBING THIS EVENT. THIS MESSAGE WILL READ: 310HDD9010000000000000 AND SHOULD BE INTERPRETED AS MONTH 3 (MAR) MESSAGE 1 (FIRST MSG) PREVIOUS MESSAGE 0 (NONE) SVID H (PRN17) STATUS D (UNUSABLE) DAY D (13) HOUR 9 (0900 UTC) MINUTE 0 (00) DURATION DAY 1 (1 DAY) HOUR 0 (0) MINUTES (0). THE REMAINDER OF THE MESSAGE IS BLANK OR ZEROS. C. PRN12 (MCS: SVN10) WAS UNUSABLE ON DAY 65 BEGINNING 1535 UTC. AT THIS TIME, THE SATELLITE HAS NOT RETURNED TO SERVICE. USE PRN12 BROADCASTS FOR REAL-TIME STATUS. NANU 064-91066 WILL CONFIRM START/END TIMES OF THIS OUTAGE. 2. RECOMMENDATION: CONFIRM AVAILABILITY OF SATELLITES PRIOR TO USE. 3. POINT OF CONTACT: MAJ WILLIAM FAUVER AT COMMERCIAL (719)550-6379 OR AUTOVON 560-6379. RECEIVED AT USNO VIA COURIER 7 MAR. ============================================================================== Richard B. Langley BITnet: LANG@UNB.CA or SE@UNB.CA Geodetic Research Laboratory Phone: (506) 453-5142 Dept. of Surveying Engineering Telex: 014-46202 University of New Brunswick FAX: (506) 453-4943 Fredericton, N.B., Canada E3B 5A3 ============================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: 8 Mar 91 22:30:30 GMT From: rex!samsung!news.cs.indiana.edu!ariel.unm.edu!phobos.unm.edu!carls@g.ms.uky.edu (Bruce Carlson) Subject: Re: Neptune CD-ROMs? I would like to know about any new cd releases too, as well as any sci. cd's I don't know about yet. We have : Voyager disks 1-8 (Uranus, Saturn, and Jupiter) Pre-Magellan Venus radar data Einstein X-ray disks (source disks and image disks) Side Looking Airbourn Radar data Astro sources disk (not Hst or Hipparcus) If any one knows about any other sci. cd's please write me at carls@carina.unm.edu Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Mar 91 22:09:52 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!csn!magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!linus!linus!cyclone!sokay@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (S. J. Okay) Subject: Re: Terraforming, sun shield In article <1991Feb27.214032.7928@athena.mit.edu> hbh@athena.mit.edu (Heidi Hammel) writes: >henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >> dafuller@sequent.UUCP (David Fuller) writes: >> > I find the concept that humans find "uninhabited" planets fertile ground >> > for cultivation repulsive, ignorant and a propulsion of the status quo. [And on and on....] >I guess my answer to your question, Henry, is that those plants and animals >are cultivating the barren wastelands into a viable ecosystem, with checks >and balances. Humanity so far has only demonstrated a marked ability to >*destroy* stable ecosystems, returning them to barren wastelands. I find it interesting that you base your conclusions on a obviously meticulous and carefully studied sample size of 1. >I think that what humans have done recently to the Hawaiian Islands is >repulsive. Oahu is, for the most part, ugly and seriously overdeveloped. >Maui is rapidly heading that way. Humanity (in particular Western >civilization) hasn't yet learned to live on the Earth without destroying >it; it hardly seems appropriate to move on to the next planet. But how are we to learn if we can't/don't deal with planets outside of our own?. And as you and others point out, experimenting on our own planet isn't the best idea. A lifeless gasball or rock with a environment hostile to life seems much more preferable to one that already houses life or life-possible conditions. I think you are also operating on the false assumption (and one that is quite readily and eagerly propagated by the media) that every planet we might colonize in the future will be a lush,verdant, eden-like world, totally unspoiled by humans, when all the evidence we have seems to indicate the opposite. ---Steve ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 91 21:10:28 GMT From: mcsun!hp4nl!phigate!philtis!munk@uunet.uu.net (Harm Munk) Subject: Re: New Shuttle computers >From: sking@nowhere.uucp (Steven King) >Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle >Subject: Re: New Shuttle Computers >Date: 6 Mar 91 06:30:34 GMT > > While its encouraging that NASA is finally moving beyond core memory > for the shuttle ( welcome to the 90's ), why use writeable memory for > program storage? As their code is extremely stable, it shouldnt be any > problem to put everything they use into masked roms without any great > penalty in weight or size ( mask roms have much better density than > static rams ) with it all non volatile, non writeable. > Sorry, you're wrong. The shuttle programs are more or less rewritten for every mission. A few years ago, a number of articles appeared in the Communications of the ACM on the subject of computers in space. One of the articles was an interview with a bunch of people (IBM-ers, I think) involved with writing the shuttle software. Just a minute, I'll look it up...Ah, here it is: The Space Shuttler Primary Computer System by Alfred Spector and David Gifford Comm. of the ACM, september 1984, page 874-900 Yes, the interviewed people were all IBM-ers at the time. Harm Munk Philips Centre for Software Technology ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 91 20:49:39 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!nss!Paul.Blase@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Blase) Subject: Re: Japan's Space Industry >>WRONG!!! The Japanese ARE spending serious money on the subject. They >>intend to MAKE A PROFIT!!!!!!!!! (at our expense). FP> Funny, when BP goes into the wilds of some desolate Middle FP> Eastern country and drills a well, noone talks about how they FP> are making a profit at Chinese expense. You see, as I detailed FP> a while back on this group, the medieval Chinese invented the FP> oil/natural gas "drilling" rig. .... I rather meant that they would make a profit through selling goods and services to us, instead of us being able to go into space and do it ourselves. --- 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: 8 Mar 91 13:14:20 GMT From: haven!adm!lhc!lhc!sandro@louie.udel.edu (Michael D'Alessandro) Subject: Any upcoming launches at the Cape? I'll be in Florida from March 17-24 and I'm wondering if there will be any manned or unmanned launches occurring over that week. I realize that the shuttles won't be going up - but perhaps a communications bird may be going up. The last time I was there you could call a phone number and get a launch update - does anyone know if such a number still exists? Michael -- Michael D'Alessandro, M.D. The Lister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications Educational Technology Branch The National Library of Medicine sandro@lhc.nlm.nih.gov ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #244 *******************