Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V09_2/V9_287.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 17KB

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/kY6D8=y00UkZAKJE5C>;
          Sat, 11 Mar 89 05:16:43 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 89 05:16:36 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #287

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 287

Today's Topics:
         Re: SR71 to be retired October 1st.
           Condensed CANOPUS, January 1989
         Pegasus 3rd stage static test firing
             Solar flare and Mir
               Re: Solar flare and Mir
               looking for a simulator
              Re: Babies born in space.
    Re: USSR's Progress 40 performs interesting operations at Mir
        Re: Baseball Statistics as a test of Astrology
             Rats in Space (was Re: arf!)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 7 Mar 89 13:22:38 GMT
From: thorin!lhotse![e-mail]  (James Symon)
Subject: Re: SR71 to be retired October 1st.

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Pat Wimmer) writes:
> [. . . discussion of SR-71 alternative missions . . .]
>     Put yourself in the perspective of the Soviet Union.  You know
>     you cannot knock down the plane with conventional weapons.
> . . .

Is this true? Why? On television (the show Wings, I think) I saw stuff
about old ABM type missiles that could take out incoming ICBMs
(assuming single warhead, no decoys, etc.) Why shouldn't they be able
to take out something doing a measly Mach 3 or 4?

This brings to mind a question I asked a while back that no one
answered but which still intrigues me.

If/when an aerospace plane is developed with orbital, sub-orbital
ballistic, and hypersonic air capabilities, the line between recon
satellites and recon airplane overflights will be changed to a
continuum. I assume that the Russians and Americans would shoot down
any airplane overflight but we allow satellites to pass overhead.

Where could the new line be drawn? Have there been any official policy
pronouncements on the issue?

jim
[e-mail]
{decvax uunet}!mcnc!unc!symon

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

Date: 7 Mar 89 23:31:44 GMT
From: cfa!cfa250![e-mail]  (Steve Willner P-316 x57123)
Subject: Condensed CANOPUS, January 1989


Here, at last, is the condensed CANOPUS for January 1989.  There are
12 articles, 4 given in condensed form and 8 by title only.  The NASA
FY-1990 budget request will be posted separately.  CANOPUS is
copyright American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, but
distribution is encouraged.  See full copyright information at end.

Contents of this posting:
NASA'S OFFICE OF EXPLORATION RELEASES ANNUAL REPORT - can890101.txt - 12/19/88
SHUTTLE-C MOCKUP IS STARTED - can890102.txt - 12/20/88
SPACE SHUTTLE STATUS - can890103.txt - 12/21/88
NASA/USBI SIGN BOOSTER CONTRACT EXTENSION - can890108.txt - 12/29/88

NASA'S OFFICE OF EXPLORATION RELEASES ANNUAL REPORT - can890101.txt - 12/19/88

The report was described by the past and current assistant
administrators for exploration, John Aaron (now a special assistant
to the director of Johnson Space Center) and Frank Martin,
respectively.

The latest Code Z report focuses on manned missions to the Moon and
Mars.  Notably absent are the robotic exploration of the solar system
and the Mission to Planet Earth outlined in Ride's original report.
Aaron said these were not examined because they are being implemented
at various levels. A number of planetary missions are being developed
or proposed, and the Earth mission will be developed as the Earth
Observing System.

According to NASA, a "major conclusions in the report is that
independent of what type of future exploration course is chosen, the
United States must now lay the foundation by beginning a modest but
vital effort in detailed research, technology development and
concentrated studies in addition to a sustained commitment to the
current ongoing NASA programs.  By pursuing a modest near-term
investment of resources in the 1990s in long lead technologies and
capabilities, the U.S. will preserve the ability to pursue a wide
range of opportunities at the turn of the century."

SHUTTLE-C MOCKUP IS STARTED - can890102.txt - 12/20/88

A full-scale Engineering Development Unit for the Shuttle-C program
is being assembled at Marshall Space Flight Center using leftovers
from the early days of the Shuttle program.

SPACE SHUTTLE STATUS - can890103.txt - 12/21/88

Processing of the three Space Shuttle orbiters is proceeding
normally, according to NASA reports. Two minor propulsion problems
have been reported.

A small crack has been found in the bearing of a Space Shuttle main
engine flown early this month on STS-27, but the impact on the
planned STS-29 launch in February is uncertain, according to NASA.

A small nick has been found in an O-ring of an STS-27 booster, but it
caused no problem in the mission, NASA stated in announcing that
disassembly of the STS-27 solid rocket boosters at Cape Canaveral has
been completed and the post-flight assessment team members are
returning to their respective organizations.

The overall condition of the boosters is excellent.  While
disassembling the nozzle of the lefthand SRB, the inspectors did note
a small nick in the "wiper O-ring."  This would have occurred during
assembly of the nozzle into the rest of the solid rocket motor,
according to Royce Mitchell, SRM Project Manager at Marshall Space
Flight Center.  "The nick did not interfere with the O-ring's
function during nozzle assembly, which is to wipe the joint adhesive,
a polysulfide material, ahead of it and protect the primary O-ring
from contamination," Mitchell said.  No degradation in performance
resulted, and the joints performed as intended, he added.

NASA/USBI SIGN BOOSTER CONTRACT EXTENSION - can890108.txt - 12/29/88

     NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala., and USBI
Co., a subsidiary of United Technologies Corp., Hartford, Conn., have
finalized the restructuring of USBI's Space Shuttle solid rocket
booster assembly and refurbishment contract.  The new contract
significantly increases the scope of work.  The extension, effective
Sept. 30, 1989, through Sept. 30, 1994, adds $1 billion to the total
contract value for the assembly and refurbishment of Space Shuttle
solid rocket boosters.  This brings the total contract value to $1.6
billion.

----------------END OF CONDENSED CANOPUS-----------------------------

This posting represents my own condensation of CANOPUS.  For clarity,
I have not shown ellipses (...), even when the condensation is
drastic.  New or significantly rephrased material is in {braces} and
is signed {--SW} when it represents an expression of my own opinion.
The unabridged CANOPUS is available via e-mail from me at any of the
addresses below.

Other articles, not posted:
PLANETARY RESEARCH ANNOUNCEMENTS RELEASED - can890104.txt - 12/29/88
NASA LAUNCH SCHEDULE IN CANOPUS - CAN890105.TXT - 1/3/89
{available in on-line CANOPUS}
SHUTTLE-C USER'S WORKSHOP PLANNED - can890106.txt - 1/3/89
SPACE STATION FREEDOM POWER SYSTEMS TESTING FACILITY TO OPEN - can890107.txt -
1/3/89 {at NASA Lewis}
TANNER NAMED DIRECTOR SPACE STATION FREEDOM PROGRAM - can890109.txt - 1/3/89
{E. Ray Tanner, formerly at Marshall}
NASA SEEKS NEW STARTS FOR TWO PLANETARY MISSIONS - can890110.txt - 1/9/89
{NASA budget request, to be posted separately}
SHUTTLE NOTES - can890111.txt - 1/17/89, mod 1/20/89
NASA REDEFINES SPACE CREWS; PICKS IML-1 PAYLOAD SPECIALISTS - can890112.txt -
1/17/89

Copyright information:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CANOPUS is published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics.  Send correspondence about its contents to the executive
editor, William W. L. Taylor ([e-mail];
e-mail to [e-mail] will probably be forwarded).  Send
correspondence about business matters to Mr. John Newbauer, AIAA,
1633 Broadway, NY, NY 10019.  Although AIAA has copyrighted CANOPUS
and registered its name, you are encouraged to distribute CANOPUS
widely, either electronically or as printout copies.  If you do,
however, please send a brief message to Taylor estimating how many
others receive copies.  CANOPUS is partially supported by the
National Space Science Data Center.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Steve Willner            Phone [phone]         Bitnet:   willner@cfa
60 Garden St.            FTS:      830-7123           UUCP:   willner@cfa
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA                 Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: 6 Mar 89 20:56:59 GMT
From: mailrus!wasatch!uplherc!esunix![e-mail]  (Bob Pendleton)
Subject: Pegasus 3rd stage static test firing


Today, March 6, 1989, the 3rd stage of Pegasus was successfully tested
in a static firing. This is the only static test that will be
conducted on the 3rd stage. My understanding is that a stage will only
be tested once unless the first test is a failure.


            Bob P.

P.S.

Hopefully this will get to you before you read about it in Aviation
Leak.
--
-              Bob Pendleton, speaking only for myself.
- UUCP Address:  decwrl!esunix!bpendlet or utah-cs!esunix!bpendlet
-
-             Reality is stranger than most can imagine.

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

Date: 8 Mar 89 14:27:42 GMT
From: aramis.rutgers.edu!paul.rutgers.edu![e-mail]  (Steve Masticola)
Subject: Solar flare and Mir


I heard on NPR last night that the largest solar flare in 5 years
happened a couple days ago. The electrons from the flare are due to
reach Earth in about 12 hours (6 PM EST).

This made me wonder whether the Mir cosmonauts are in danger, and if
so, what precautions they can take. It seems like the biggest problem
they'd have would be X-rays from the electrons striking Mir's hull.
Comments?

- Steve ([e-mail])

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

Date: 8 Mar 89 17:11:41 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx![e-mail]  (Marc Bonin)
Subject: Re: Solar flare and Mir

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Masticola) writes:
>
> I heard on NPR last night that the largest solar flare in 5 years
> happened a couple days ago. The electrons from the flare are due to
> reach Earth in about 12 hours (6 PM EST).
>
> This made me wonder whether the Mir cosmonauts are in danger, and if
> so, what precautions they can take.

  They are still below the Van Allen radiation belts, which ought to help.
If they were on an interplanetary flight they might have more of a problem.
See James Michener's 'Space' for a fictional treatment of this.
Of course, they can always jump into their Soyuz and be back on earth in
an hour, although not necessarily at the most ideal landing site :-)


                      Marc Bonin

                      University of Texas at Austin

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

Date:         Wed, 08 Mar 89 09:58:13 EST
From: Eric Harnden <[e-mail]>
Subject:      looking for a simulator

     First, my apologies to the Usenet people. I had assumed that when
I sent a memo to space-request, it would be gated by an administrator, as
opposed to simply distributed into the net as by space. Also, my thanks to
the responses on the question of digest operation.
     What I really want now, though, is a program or group of programs to
simulate various aspects of orbital and/or celestial mechanics. Even a non-
game space shuttle simulator would be interesting. I have IBM/CMS, AT&T UNIX,
Macintosh, and IBM PC available as platforms, and compilers for C, Pascal, and
LISP for most of them, so any source would probably be of some use. Yes, I can
run FORTRAN, but would certainly prefer not to. Anything out there in the
public domain?

Eric Harnden (Ronin)
EHARNDEN@AUVM

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

Date: 8 Mar 89 17:10:07 GMT
From: silver![e-mail]  (Dave Compton)
Subject: Re: Babies born in space.

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
: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.

    You are correct in saying that it is impossible to say exactly
what will happen, but we can make some logical guesses.
Psychologically, I don't think there will be much harm.  The
adaptability shown by the young(of humans and other mammals) will let
them cope with the situation.  Physically, there is a high probability
that there could be major problems with the development of a
functional muscular system.  Most of you probably know that the
Russians have had problems with muscle degeneration in cosmonauts.  It
would be interesting to see what would happen to young animals.

dave
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| [e-mail]     |  These are only my opinions,          |
| iuvax!silver!compton@iuvax          |  but I'm an opinionated person!       |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 8 Mar 89 13:19:24 GMT
From: rochester![e-mail]  (Paul Dietz)
Subject: Re: USSR's Progress 40 performs interesting operations at Mir

>    I find it interesting in the middle of the manned vs unmanned debat here
>the Soviets maintain a continously crewed space station while sending at
>the same time their most complicated interplanetary mission to Mars.  Maybe
>we should learn a bit from their style of space operations.

Yes.  What, in particular, should we learn from the observation that
even with a launcher 4 or 5 times cheaper than the shuttle (Proton),
they have a space station only a fraction the size of Skylab?  Perhaps
that NASA's priorities are seriously skewed?

    Paul F. Dietz
    [e-mail]

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

Date: 7 Mar 89 21:33:21 GMT
From: att!homxb!mtuxo![e-mail]  (54317-T.EBERSOLE)
Subject: Re: Baseball Statistics as a test of Astrology

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter Owings) writes:
>
>     I just can't believe that someone still takes astrology serious
> enough to study it...
>
>     Peter..

About ten years ago, I read in some magazine (how's that for citing
accurate references?) that the USofA supported about 25000 astrologers
at an average salary of something like 60000$/year and about 2500
professional astronomers at about 30000$/year. I doubt that we're doing
any better now. Anyone have any accurate ideas on current number of
astronomers and average salaries? I know their average salary, at least
that component due to astronomy, but how many amateur astronomers are
there in this country, and elsewhere?

Tim Ebersole  mtuxo!tee

--
Tim Ebersole ...!att!mtuxo!tee
                 or {allegra,ulysses,mtune,...}!mtuxo!tee

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

Date: 8 Mar 89 16:50:58 GMT
From: rochester![e-mail]
Subject: Rats in Space (was Re: arf!)

From: dietz

In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>>Why is it not possible to launch pregnant rats (for example) in an
>>unmanned returnable capsule?
>
>If all you're interested in is birth and the period immediately before
>and after, this should work.  I don't think anybody's built an automatic
>life-support system that can keep rats alive and healthy for long periods
>in space, which is what you'd really like.  (To judge by the Spacelab
>experience, we don't know how to keep *anything* alive and healthy up
>there if it isn't smart enough to use the Shuttle toilet...)

The question about rats was in response to someone claiming that a
space station is necessary to study *fetal* development.  One should
be able to rig up a pregnant rat so that food/water are supplied by
tubes and the rat is immobilized in a harness that sucks away waste
products.  Indeed, didn't the Soviets orbit a biosatellite just
recently (the one in which a monkey got an arm free)?

    Paul F. Dietz
    [e-mail]

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #287
*******************