Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V08/V8_268.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 19KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Received: from andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for [e-mail]
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/andrew.cmu.edu.436.1.0>;
          Mon, 11 Jul 88 06:54:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by andrew.cmu.edu (5.54/3.15) id <AA00432> for ota+space.digests; Mon, 11 Jul 88 06:53:12 EDT
Received: by angband.s1.gov id AA10310; Mon, 11 Jul 88 03:26:15 PDT
    id AA10310; Mon, 11 Jul 88 03:26:15 PDT
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 88 03:26:15 PDT
From: Ted Anderson <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: SPACE Digest V8 #268

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 8 : Issue 268

Today's Topics:
          Coming to the National Air & Space Museum
          Soyuz TM-5 mission to USSR's Mir set to go
           comments/reply for SPACE_DIGEST
           comments/reply for SPACE_DIGEST
               Re: SPACE Digest V8 #244
            What's going on here?
            NSS, Spacepac, and Spacecause
           USSR's Soyuz TM-5 mission begins
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 1 Jun 88 15:25:59 GMT
From: ulysses!mhuxo!mhuxt!mhuxi!mhuxh!mhuxu!att!chinet!mcdchg!clyde!wayback!atux01![e-mail]  (J. Collymore)
Subject: Coming to the National Air & Space Museum

I am cross-posting this netnews article from comp.sys.mac.  I think that some of
you in these newsgroups may also be interested in this.

                    Jim Collymore
===============================================================================

-----------------------------------------------------------
Students Give Museum Visitors A Chance To Launch Rockets

Washington, DC. May 3, 1988. Millions of visitors to the Smithsonian's National
Air and Space Museum soon will be able to test their own abilities to design
and launch rockets into space.  They'll do it with the help of a computer
program created by three college students.

The program is the winning entry in the "Race for Space Software Chase," a
nationwide software writing contest sponsored by the Smithsonian and
Apple Computer, Inc. of Cupertino, Calif.

Undergraduate and graduate students at leading universities across the country
were challenged to write computer programs that would let museum visitors
actually experience some of the ways computers are used in aviation and space
flight.  The best entry was promised a place in a new air and space museum
gallery that will showcase the vital role that computers play in aerospace
technology.  The gallery, called "Beyond the Limits" will open in May 1989.

Three students from the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Calif.,
captured the grand prize with a program on rocket design.  The winning software
was designed by Pierce T. Wetter III, a junior electrical engineering major
from Simi Valley, Calif.; Mike Meckler, a sophomore physics major from
Columbus, Ohio; and Glenn C. Smith, a junior physics major from South Pasadena,
Calif.

The software will allow museum visitors to see how changing variables such as
thrust, weight and fuel type affect a rocket's ability to overcome gravity and
leave the earth's atmosphere.   Once a visitor arrives at a workable design,
the program "launches" the rocket, calculates the maximum altitude it will
reach and compares these results with attempts by other visitors.

"The museum as a teaching institution hopes to stimulate thought -- on both a
scientific and a popular level -- about the challenges and excitement of
aerospace technology," said Martin O. Harwit, director of the National Air and
Space Museum.  "We are happyto exhibit the work of the grand prize winning
students in our new computer gallery and to expand our role of educating the
public."

"Creating highly interactive, graphically sophisticated software is no small
accomplishment--one that would have been unheard of for students just a few
years ago.  Today's computing tools give students both the means and the
motivation to solve real-world problems," Dave Barram, Apple's vice president
of corporate affairs, said today in announcing the winners at a news conference
at the museum.

The grand prize includes a summer internship at the museum for one member of
the Cal Tech team and 10 Macintosh II computers, donated by Apple to the
university.

In addition to Cal Tech, four other schools earned honors in the contest: the
University of California at Davis for a program that simulates effects of a
wind tunnel;Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois for software that
demonstrates how air crews use computers during reconnaissance flights.
Stanford University in Palo Alto, Calif. and the University of Notre Dame in
South Bend, Indiana, which each submitted programs that simulate the results of
aircraft design decisions.  Each university was awarded two Macintosh II
computers.

All entries were required to be two-minute, interactive demonstrations that
show how computers are used in aerospace engineering.  The entries were judged
in four categories; content, creativity, ease of use, and use of computer
science methodology.

The competition was judged by distinguished names in the aerospace and computer
industries:  Burt Rutan, designer of the aircraft Voyager, which in 1986 flew
around the world non-stop without refueling; Paul MacCready, creator of the
Gossamer Condor and other human- and solar-powered aircraft; Alan Kay,
scientist and Apple Fellow whose ideas and innovation in programming languages
were critical to the development of personal computers, including Apple's
Macintosh; Robert E. Holzman, manager of computer graphics lab at Jet
Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., which is well-known for its computer
animation of the flights of Voyager II and other unmanned flights into deep
space; and Paul Ceruzzi, associate curator in the Space Science and Exploration
Department.

About nine million people visit the museum each year to view 23 exhibition
galleries displaying some of the most significant aircraft and spacecraft ever
assembled in one place.  The museum's new gallery will demonstrate the role
computers play in aerospace technology--including design, testing,
manufacturing and production, simulation and training, navigation and ground
control, on-board control and air and space operations.

Apple, the Apple logo and Macintosh are regisitered trademarks of Apple
Computer, Inc.

Press Releases
Headlines & Guide

   __________________________________________________________________________
    Ken Eddings                 CSNET: [e-mail]
    Department of Philosophy  ARPANET: eddings%andy.bgsu.edu@csnet-relay
    Bowling Green State Univ.   ALink: UG0182 attn: Ken Eddings
    Bowling Green OH 43403      GEnie: K.EDDINGS
   __________________________________________________________________________
       "The prudent mariner never relies solely on any single aid
        to navigation."                 -=Old Mariner's Proverb=-
   __________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 Jun 88 09:47:02 EDT
From: Glenn Chapman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Soyuz TM-5 mission to USSR's Mir set to go

     The Soviets are set to go ahead with the launch today of the Russian/
Bulgarian mission (Soyuz TM-5) to the Mir/Kvant complex.  According to their
news announcements the vehicle has been checked out and the lift off will take
place in the evening, Moscow time, (about noon hour today Eastern Daylight
Time).  One interesting point is they gave some costs for the typical mission
this year.  Roughly the booster (A2 class) is about $5 million per launch,
while the capsule costs $8 million.  The booster cost is consistent with their
charge of $10 million for a launch on the A class vehicles for your satellite
- just contact Space Commerce Corp. in the USA for the arrangements.  By the
way talking to a Space Commerce officer I learned that the USSR really
is offering room for paying passengers to Mir (they have done this already for
the Austrians).  Also they are now modifying some of their communications
satellites to meet the standard Hughes type specifications.  If they cannot
sell their boosters for launching Western satellites then they will try and
sell both the satellites and the boosters.  It will be interesting to see
what they are supplying in terms of guarantees for lifetimes or replacements.
From the point of view of most countries they do not care whether they by from
Western or Soviet suppliers.  All that matters is price, delivery time and the
service they get from the satellite.  US manufacturers beware, you may stop
them from selling here but there is a whole world out there that wants
satellites of their own.  This country must meet their prices or fail in the
space business.
     Well at least the shuttle is going through a count down test today, that
is some progress.

                                              Glenn Chapman
                                              MIT Lincoln Lab

------------------------------

Date:     Tue, 7 Jun 88 15:37 EST
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  comments/reply for SPACE_DIGEST

From SPACE_DIGEST Vol8 No.253:
Date: 23 May 88 02:38:06 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]
Subject: Re: cooling by radiation

>So, just what are Lithium batteries, and why would they be prohibited on
>a space flight, when I am allowed to take one in my watch and mingle
>around thousands of people in public places? Are they radioactive?  What
>about a leak?

I'm no battery expert, but I have a feeling that for powering a satellite there
might be a size or weight issue at stake here(I've always thought they[watch
batteries] were heavier than they looked), and since the space-faring variety
 are much bigger that their timepiece
counterparts, maybe they just weigh too much.  Also, isn't there a warning on th
e
back of just about any battery to ``avoid extreme heat or fire''??--If the bay
is pointed sunward, or the shuttle is on re-entry, I'd say that that might
just be heat enough.

                                Flames, comments,etceterizations to
                                Steve Okay ([e-mail])


"A Joke??--No, a sales campaign!"

------------------------------

Date:     Tue, 7 Jun 88 15:37 EST
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  comments/reply for SPACE_DIGEST

From SPACE_DIGEST Vol8 No.253:
Date: 23 May 88 02:38:06 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]
Subject: Re: cooling by radiation

>So, just what are Lithium batteries, and why would they be prohibited on
>a space flight, when I am allowed to take one in my watch and mingle
>around thousands of people in public places? Are they radioactive?  What
>about a leak?

I'm no battery expert, but I have a feeling that for powering a satellite there
might be a size or weight issue at stake here(I've always thought they[watch
batteries] were heavier than they looked), and since the space-faring variety
 are much bigger that their timepiece
counterparts, maybe they just weigh too much.  Also, isn't there a warning on th
e
back of just about any battery to ``avoid extreme heat or fire''??--If the bay
is pointed sunward, or the shuttle is on re-entry, I'd say that that might
just be heat enough.

                                Flames, comments,etceterizations to
                                Steve Okay ([e-mail])


"A Joke??--No, a sales campaign!"

------------------------------

Date:         Tue, 07 Jun 88 08:25:32 EDT
From: Bruce Humphrey <[e-mail]>
Subject:      Re: SPACE Digest V8 #244

Having read Space Digest for a couple months now, I have a question
for the more technologically literate in the group (please humor
an old liberal arts grad):
How accurate is the book 'Deep Black', about american photorecon
history and capabilities?
I was generally impressed by its completeness (excepting any mention
of special imaging/sensing capabilities), but as a historian I have
some suspicions of anything written by non-experts--particularly
self-taught jouurnalistic 'experts'.  There is a certain "gosh-wow"
attitude by the writer concerning the analytical side, rather than
anything worthwhile about the training/accuracy of image analysts.
Also, while he makes some deductive speculations about the state
of photorecon, they do not always reflect the more expert opinions
I've seen on the net.

If you have anything specific for me:
Bruce Humphrey
Bruce@TEMPLEVM

------------------------------

Return-Path: [e-mail]
Date:         Tue, 7 Jun 1988 21:55 CDT
From: H. Alan Montgomery <[e-mail]>
Subject:      What's going on here?

Somewhere along here I have lost track of what we are trying to do. I
thought maybe if I displayed my train of logic someone could show me
where the flaw in my thinking is.

First off, I am a task oriented person who is not very socially adept.
To me when a problem comes up you marshal your forces, get the best
people available to attack the problem and then go until the problem
is either solved or has become acceptablely uncomfortable. The best
people in any field normally come with alot of unwanted baggage and are
generally not people you would hang out with for fun. You work with the
best whether you like them or not, because they get results.

I have noticed in this list and in the SIG on CompuServe and in
the various space publications that there is alot of hopelessness out
there. The dream of easy access to space in our lifetime seems to be
drifting slowly but surely out of our reach. The response to this
goal denial is a search for a scapegoat, someone to take the blame for
the unacceptable possibility that no one alive right now, today will
will get to space in person before they die. To me as a social misfit
the concept of a scapegoat seems silly, not only a waste of time, but
making the possibility of goal acheivement even more remote.

In the Seventies, a great many mistakes were made by the NASA, space
activists, and other involved individuals. We cannot change those
mistakes. We cannot do anything to make those mistakes go away by
attacking the people who made them. Do you think that the people who made
the mistakes are feeling great about the mistakes? Do you think the
administrators at NASA is saying, "Wow, we sure did make a good choice in
making the Shuttle the only access to space"? Come on, get real! We live
in an imperfect world, a good choice now sometimes becomes a disasterous
choice later.

Right now the majority of America's corporations are owned by
institutions (mutual funds, pension plans, insurance companies, etc.) who
are risk averse. The money which could come from large corporations is
just not there. Looking for Boeing or GM or Rockwell to move into space
without government support is just wishful thinking. Any manager in
today's economic environment who suggested a program which did not pay
off in six months is looking to be unemployed.

It may turn out that NASA was in league with the tooth fairy to
deny us access to space on purpose. I doubt it though. I would believe
in stupidity, short sightedness, and just plain ignorance before I
would believe malice.

So what does all this mean. To me it means that the bickering and witch
hunting have got to stop. It means that we have got to start looking to
lower the capital risk to getting to space. It means that we cannot
depend on THEM (whoever they are) to get us to space. Something has to
done to make each step into space profitable. Not twenty years in the
future, but six months in the future. It means that we need to keep NASA
plugging ahead, so that at least some door is open, some option
available.

As long as space has a greater than six month payoff, no non-astronaut
is going to visit there. If you truely want to go to space, stop bitching
about the people who are working toward the same goal you are, no matter
how flawed you think they are, because they at least agree with you in
principle. Somehow or another the space movement has gotten sidetracked
into looking at the causes of our failures and stopped searching
for answers to our problems. NASA and the big companies will not search
for solutions. If you go to bed at night screaming "I WANT TO GO!!!!",
then you best start looking for ways to lower the payoff time for a space
venture. Does that mean that we need a cost to orbit of $2/pound? No, it
means that an investor can get a positive rate of return within six
months. The rate of return does not even have to be above 5%. So the
bottom line here is that we need many small moneymakers which add up to
a big project, not one big project which just MIGHT be a big moneymaker.
You best also stop feeling hopeless and helpless, because both
of those emotions cause you to do stupid, self-destructive things.

------------------------------

Date:     Wed, 8 Jun 88 07:45 EDT
From: RON PICARD <[e-mail]>
Subject:  NSS, Spacepac, and Spacecause

Can anyone tell me the different roles Spacepac and Spacecause
play and their relationship, if any, to NSS?

Ron Picard

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jun 88 11:51:14 EDT
From: Glenn Chapman <[e-mail]>
Subject: USSR's Soyuz TM-5 mission begins

    The USSR' s Soyuz TM-5 mission successfully began yesterday at 18:03 (Moscow
Daylight Time - 11:03 EDT).  The crew is listed as Anatoly Yakovlevich Solovyov
(rookie cosmonaut age 40: commander), Viktor Petrovich Savinykh
(flight engineer age 48: with 75 days on Soyuz T4/Salyut 6 and 168 days on
Soyuz T13/Salyut 7 in June '85 - the Salyut rescue mission) and
Alexander Alexandrov (Bulgarian age 36: backup on Soyuz 33 - Apr. '79) (note:
there were some errors in my prelaunch posting about the crew, thanks to
Jonathan Mcdowell at Harvard for pointing them out).  The launch was televised
"live" on Soviet and Bulgarian TV (and I think CNN got the same feed but was not
able to watch them then).  The crew will dock with the Mir/Kvant complex on
June 9th, and stay for 8 days on the station.  Mission experiments will include
space physics, remote sensing, biology and medicine, though few details have
been given.
    One funny point.  This was not even a high profile mission on Soviet
shortwave broadcasts.  Usually a takeoff is the number 1 or 2 event.  This time
it was 3rd on their broadcasts.
    One point to note is that most news reports, NBC, CBS, the NY times etc
called this the first Soviet manned mission of this year, and did not mention
that they were visiting a crew already on board the Mir station (CNN did it
correctly).  This makes it seem like the Russians are doing little in manned
flights, when the opposite is true.  I guess they feel if they just hide their
heads in the sand the Soviet missions will just go away.

                                                    Glenn Chapman
                                                    MIT Lincoln Lab

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V8 #268
*******************