Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V09_2/V9_284.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 18KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
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/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/gY5sFYy00UkZQCbE5B>;
          Fri, 10 Mar 89 03:16:36 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 89 03:16:27 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #284

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 284

Today's Topics:
           Space Shuttle Keplerian Elements
         Re: First concert from space--update
              Re: Babies born in space.
              Re: Babies born in space.
              Re: Mars the Movie
            Saturnian atmospheric featurs
             Manned vs. Unmanned (again)
               Re: SPACE Digest V9 #257
              Re: Photo identification?
              Forward Unlimited
          Re: European Space Policy ... (SPACE #270)
               Re: Black hole trolling
              Re: 1992 moon base
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 7 Mar 89 08:50:13 GMT
From: jarthur![e-mail]  (John J. Lulejian)
Subject: Space Shuttle Keplerian Elements

I am interested in obtaining a rough set of Keplerian Elements for the next
shuttle mission.  It is supposed to lift off on Saturday and I would like to
run some orbit calculations before then.  Also, once it has reached a stable
orbit, I would appreciate it if someone would post or send me the current
Keplerian element set.

Thanks.

John Lulejian (KA6TCY)

President
Claremont Colleges Amateur Radio Club

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

Date: 4 Mar 89 22:51:39 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: First concert from space--update

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ruaraidh Gillies) writes:
>>What, pray tell, is wrong with carrying people into orbit for a fee?
>>The airlines carry senators, teachers, and singers into the sky all the
>>time.  "Things that make profits don't have to make excuses."
>
>The fact is that there's a helluva difference between airlines sending up
>non-airline people and space agencies sending up non-space people...

Please explain:  what *is* the difference?

>When the
>Wrights got their plane working in 1912 they weren't trying to book passengers
>within 24 hours...

The Soviets have been flying Soyuz missions for a lot more than 24 hours.
And the "A" booster they use to launch it has flown over 1000 times,
starting with Sputnik 1 (and that doesn't count its still-earlier history
as an ICBM).

>... at the moment pure passenger space flights are unfeasible.
>... NASA, ESA and whoever control Soviet, Chinese, etc
>space flights are not yet *ready* to start into human commerce...

ESA and the Chinese, true.  NASA, yes with reservations.  The Soviets?
Nonsense.  *They* have truly operational space systems.  "A" boosters
have been rising from the pad at least once a week for two decades now.
They *are* ready to start human commerce -- they're quoting prices and
flight dates today.

>Challenger tragedy put back the US space program by 32 months...
>... It took *loads* more than 25 flights before
>airliners were conceived, and now they are so common that although
>disasters happen, people will still step on a plane the next day.

The latest major Soviet space problem -- the Soyuz reentry foulup -- put
their program back maybe two or three weeks.  They know how to manage
problems, as opposed to running in circles and screaming for a year first.
(Apollo 1 put the US space program back only 18 months -- the situation
is deteriorating, not improving, as the US gets more experience.)  They
still have problems, but their cosmonauts get into the capsule a few
weeks later with reasonable confidence that the situation is under control.
Which it is.  The USSR is a spacefaring nation; they have routine access
to space.  Don't lump them in with NASA.
--
The Earth is our mother;       |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
our nine months are up.        | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 5 Mar 89 00:38:14 GMT
From: vsi1!v7fs1![e-mail]  (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: Babies born in space.

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jean-Marc Debaud) writes:
>What would be the reactions of an child conceived in space,
>who spend its featal time in space, is born in space, live a few
>years in space ?
>
>Could anyone tells me if any studies have been made on the
>reaction of the immune system, psychology, agility under 0g
>conditions and problems that he/she would have on hearth,
>bornwith instinctive reactions... etc..

None has been done whatsoever.  At least not by us.  I don't
know if MIR does any animal experiments.

This is one of the many things that can't be done with robot probes.
The only way we are ever going to find out is to put up a permanent
space station, raise some animals in it (you don't want to try this
with humans first!), and see what happens.

I wonder if it would be necessary to send up pregnant female rats,
though.  I'm not sure rats have enough brains to figure out how to
accomplish zero-G sex.  (This sounds silly, but may be a serious
question for animal studies.  Depending on the animal.  Monkeys might
do better.)  I am very interested in the results from raising several
generations of rats or spider monkeys or whatever in zero-G.

Of course, the robots-can-do-everything people don't seem to think
there's a bit of value in this kind of research.  After all, I can hear
them say, living in zero-g is utterly pointless; we should wait until
we've got gravity generators.  (arf!)  Or, nobody in the entire future
history of the human race is ever going to want to live in space, so
it's an irrelevant question.  (arf! arf!)
--
"Ain't nothin' in the middle                  Mike Van Pelt
o' the road, 'cept a yellow                   Video 7
line and dead 'possums."                      ...ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp

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

Date: 5 Mar 89 01:11:20 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Babies born in space.

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jean-Marc Debaud) writes:
>What would be the reactions of an child conceived in space,
>who spend its featal time in space, is born in space, live a few
>years in space ?

Nobody knows.  For a guess, development before birth would probably be
nearly normal, since the fetus is pretty much weightless (floating in
fluid).  Details might differ, perhaps important ones.  Afterwards, it's
impossible to say.

>Could anyone tells me if any studies have been made on the
>reaction of the immune system, psychology, agility under 0g
>conditions and problems that he/she would have on hearth,
>bornwith instinctive reactions... etc..

Basically, no.  It's never been tried, and we have no idea how much of
our 1G experience is applicable.  Some human psychology is "wired in",
instinctive or nearly so, but how much?  As for physiology, we don't
fully understand the effects of free fall on *adults*, never mind babies.
The one prediction that seems safe is that such a baby would have a lot
of trouble if suddenly placed in a 1G field.
--
The Earth is our mother;       |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
our nine months are up.        | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun,  5 Mar 89 11:43:21 PST
From: Peter Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mars the Movie
X-Vms-Mail-To: EXOS%"[e-mail]"

I saw in _Sky & Telescope_ that the Astronomical Society of the Pacific
is marketing "Miranda The Movie", along with a flick about Uranus titled
"I Have Seen Such Things" (which I believe I have seen in the auditorium
here), for what is doubtless a reasonable price if they only expect to
sell a handful.  Possibly the same group plans to market "Mars The Movie"
(bundled with what?  "War Of The Worlds"?).

Peter Scott ([e-mail])

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

Date: Sun,  5 Mar 89 11:47:32 PST
From: Peter Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject: Saturnian atmospheric featurs
X-Vms-Mail-To: EXOS%"[e-mail]"

The current issue of _Astronomy_ carries a short piece near the beginning on
how a guy pieced together pictures of Saturn and put them through
transformations to get a polar view, and discovered that the north pole is
surrounded by hexagonal jetstreams.  Is there any precedence for this
elsewhere in atmospheric dynamics?

Peter Scott ([e-mail])

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

Date: Sat,  4 Mar 89 11:11:33 PST
From: Peter Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject: Manned vs. Unmanned (again)
X-Vms-Mail-To: EXOS%"[e-mail]"

minke![e-mail]  (Nick Szabo) writes:

>Polls show that the public prefers unmanned planetary probes
>over manned missions.

What is your source on this please?

Peter Scott ([e-mail])

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

Date: 5 Mar 89 12:18:39 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]  (Paul L Schauble)
Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V9 #257

>slides his cat through the tube....

Now how does he get rid of the cat hair??

  ||PLS

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

Date: 5 Mar 89 12:26:56 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]  (Paul L Schauble)
Subject: Re: Photo identification?

>Interesting, can it be a coincidence that Feb 26, 1979 was the date of the
>most recent total eclipse of the sun in the continental US?

Not a coincidence at all. One of them is a very beautiful shot of the
moon's shadow on the Earth. I'd like to know what spectral band these
photos used and if it is possible to find an IR cloud cover photo of the
same scene.

My eye says that this was taken from geosync orbit. My very uninformed
guess is that it is from GOES West.

  ++PLS

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

Date: Sun,  5 Mar 89 11:05:23 PST
From: Peter Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject: Forward Unlimited
X-Vms-Mail-To: EXOS%"[e-mail]"

I responded to an earlier posting in SPACE Digest advertising Bob Forward's
MIRROR MATTER newsletter by sending a postcard to the address asking to be
put on the mailing list.  I've met Dr. Forward before and knew he was a
generous man, but still was not prepared for about 1 lb of newsletters and
technical report that arrived in a thick envelope the other day!

Now, I see from the back of one newsletter that the NSS is doing printing
and mailing for him, at cost.  Nevertheless, I assume that he's paying
out of his own pocket the approximately $1 per issue per subscriber, so
I'm going to send him a small donation.

Peter Scott ([e-mail])

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

Date: Mon, 06 Mar 89 10:43:05 SET
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Subject: Re: European Space Policy ... (SPACE #270)
Date: 06 March 1989, 10:12:58 SET
From: Lutz Massonne             (+49 6151) 886.701   ESC1325  at ESOC
To:   [e-mail]

To understand the ESA policy one should note that ESA is
  1 - a multi-national organisation
  2 - a non-profit organisation

Point 1 implies a complicated decision process and several constraints
on the ESA policy.

E.g. the mebership of neutral countries as Switzerland and Sweden
forbids ESA to think about any military space activities.  This was one
major point in the Space Station negotiations with NASA.  The ESA
projects are divided up into the scienitific projects. The participation
on these projects is mandatory for all ESA members, the decisions on the
scientific projects come from the ministerial council.

The ESA members have decidided on a long term science programme called
"Horizon 2000" which defines some major "cornerstone missions" which are
funded by a long-term financial planning.  Of course, some discissions
about priorities etc. are giong on all the time.

On the other hand, the application projects are not mandatory for all
ESA member states. Here the national policies are involved.  Hermes for
example is one of these programmes, the development of the space station
module and the man-tended free flyer is another.  For all projects the
involved member states are eager to get exactly the amount of money they
pay back to their countries, either as harware orders to the national
industries or in the form of studies and software development contracts.

Point 2 is the reason for the founding of companies like Arianespace,
Eumetsat and Eutelsat.  The parts of the space business that become
self-financing like the launch business, the selling of communication
channels and weather images and in future perhaps the remote sensing
(SPOT was a national french development, but ERS-1 is an ESA project)
have to be taken out of ESA.  However, some activities remain at ESA,
like the operations of the Meteosat weather satellites which are based
here at the ESOC.  In future the operations will be much more
de-centralised.  A number of control centres based in several member
states will be set up, each supporting a specific mission.  For the
manned european missions the final planning is not yet finalised, but I
think that to get the large amounts of money needed nearly every member
state will get a "part of the cake".  Maybe the Hermes operations will
be based in France, the Space station module centre in Italy and the
Man-tended free flyer centre in Germany.  ESA establishments will then
perform the overall coordination and the mission planning.

Concerning the national influence, the British policy is perhaps the
most "money-return" oriented.  The French have a strong feeling about
national pride, and most of the projects that are future-oriented and
ensure European self-reliance and autonomy have been initiated by them.
They pay a large share for them, too.  The German space policy was for a
long time driven by the support of a strong cooperation with NASA.
Therefore the German money mostly went not into the "autonomous"
projects like Ariane but into the Spacelab development.  After the
negative experiences with NASA cooperation and the public criticism in
Germany the German space policy seems to have changed a bit in the last
years.  The smaller member states don't have much influence on ESA
policy.  Italy is a strong supporter of the manned space programme, and
many of the other member states support the European space activities as
a way to improve their own aerospace industry.

I hope these lines may help the people on the "other side" to understand
what's going on here.

Regards, Lutz

Disclaimer:
These are my personal views on the ESA policy. Neither ESA
nor mbp are responsible for them or are obliged to share them.

+--------------------------------------+
| Lutz Massonne    [e-mail] |
| European Space Operations Centre     |
| Robert-Bosch-Str. 5                  |
| D-6100 Darmstadt, FRG                |
+--------------------------------------+

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

Date: 6 Mar 89 22:30:53 GMT
From: phoenix![e-mail]  (Keith P. Mancus)
Subject: Re: Black hole trolling

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>What would happen if someone dropped a sensor on a tether through the event
>horizon of a black hole while in orbit just above the event horizon?
>
>Would the tensile strength be guaranteed to be exceeded for an arbitrarily
>small distance across the membrane? Would reeling it in require
>"infinite energy"?
>
>My intuition says it won't work, but won't tell me why...
    Easy.  The forces that hold a macroscopic object together are
electromagnetic.  They require the exchange of virtual photons between
the particles to be held together.  When the object extends across the
event horizon, the photons can no longer go from the atoms inside the
black hole to the atoms outside.  Thus the tether is neatly sliced.
    The only problem with this is that we haven't got a theory of
quantum gravity.  Hawking radiation, which is based on quantum jumps
across an event horizon from inside to outside, messes things up.
Might there be a physicist out there who can state that quantum
tunneling occurs too infrequently to be of use in holding the tether
together, or is this still too poorly understood?

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
-Keith Mancus <[e-mail]>  <- preferred
              <[e-mail]>

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

Date: 6 Mar 89 10:58:04 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]  (Paul L Schauble)
Subject: Re: 1992 moon base

Bob,
  Then would you please enlighten us with some information on the current
status of robot hands?

  Let's take a specific case. I want the robot to open a screwed on access
cover, remove a circuit card from a card case, put it into a test fixture,
run test points on the traces (let's say .03" design rules), and finally
remove and replace a soldered chip and reassemble the unit. Can you point
to any of this being done even in a controlled ground environment?

  ++PLS

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #284
*******************