Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V10_1/V10_157.TXT

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/YZEYHjq00VcJ8:9U5Z>;
          Sun, 22 Oct 89 18:53:36 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 89 18:53:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #157

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 157

Today's Topics:
            Re: potential fall of GALILEO
           Re: Try thinking before stinking
      Re: Plutonium in space (was Risk of NOT launching Galileo)
         NASA Headline News for 10/16/89 (Forwarded)
               toxic substances
               TDRS vs military
        Re: Re: Will NASA Contaminate Jupiter?
                Re: "The Plan"
           Re: A small voice, a small plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 16 Oct 89 13:08:59 GMT
From: gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!mailrus!sharkey!itivax!vax3![e-mail]  (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: potential fall of GALILEO

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Adrian Jones) writes:
>Apparently, lot of folks are (or were) worrying about Galileo's launch.
>...
>Even more stupid, I heard there exists a plot of the CIA associated with
>some Real Estate agents to blast Atlantis. Therefore, plutonium would be
>spread all over Florida. A lot of fellows would quickly get away from the
>(potentially) doomed zone. Hence, real estate prices would fall and
>speculators would buy huge properties, then calm the panick and make a nice
>profit. Ain't it nice ?


Nah, He has the wrong CIA plot. The real estate scam was tried 10 years
ago with the Voyager probe. The plot failed when the bomb in the Voyager
probe failed to go off.

This time it is related to the war on drugs. The government wants to kill
all the drug users in the country. Plutonium is a good way to do it but
you need to get the victim to inhale the PU for it to be effective. The
solution was to rig the shuttle to explode over southern Florida. This
will coat all the crack entering the country with plutonium. When the
users inhale it they will die.

You think it was a coincidence that the engine controller failed? HA!
That is where the bomb is.

    Allen

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Allen Sherzer                     | DETROIT:                            |
|  [e-mail]                       | Where the weak are killed and eaten |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 16 Oct 89 13:40:02 GMT
From: tank!eecae!netnews.upenn.edu!delany.cis.upenn.edu![e-mail]  (Walter Santarelli)
Subject: Re: Try thinking before stinking

I would like to show some support for Christpher Rapier. I am an
ardent supporter of space exploration myself, and I think that people
are concerned because of the seemingly endless delays which have
hampered the Galileo mission. The RTG's which everyone is arguing over
have been slowly depleting over the past 4-6(?)years while the vehicle
languishes waiting for shuttle time. If NASA had maintained any sort
of expendable launch vehicle capability during the '70s Galileo could
probably go up on a much more reliable vehicle. Let's face it, with so
few launches the shuttle doesn't have a gleaming performance record
when compared with the Atlas program for instance.

The real culprit here is not people who have legitimate concerns about
technological growth outstripping our ability to control it.  It is
the system that ignores the pleadings of engineers who warn that
o-rings are unsafe and is unwilling to fund these programs to the
extent that would ensure a higher degree of safety.


I wouldn't want to be living in So. Florida if something does go
wrong. Perhaps we should find a more isolated launch facility.

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

Date: 16 Oct 89 01:05:00 GMT
From: mirror!frog![e-mail]  (John Woods)
Subject: Re: Plutonium in space (was Risk of NOT launching Galileo)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Nick Watkins) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
> >Uh, if you're talking about the bird that was in Challenger's payload bay
> >on January 28 1986, somebody has misinformed you.  It wasn't nuclear
> >powered and it wasn't military.  It was the second Tracking and Data Relay
> >Satellite, an entirely unclassified solar-array-powered NASA comsat.
> TDRSS' military role in relaying Lacrosse data is well known. TDRSS

Piffle.  So the DOD buys a couple of Lincoln Town Cars for ferrying
self-important bureaucrats around in -- suddenly the Lincoln Town Car
is a MILITARY VEHICLE.  The DOD probably buys GE light bulbs -- which
means there are INSTRUMENTS OF DEATH SHOWERING RADIATION ON ME at this very
moment.

Excuse the intemperance, but the Luddites trying to stop Galileo ("again":-)
have used up all my patience for the next decade.
--
John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA 508-626-1101
...!decvax!frog!john, [e-mail], ...!mit-eddie!jfw, [e-mail]

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

Date: 16 Oct 89 20:28:51 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 10/16/89 (Forwarded)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Monday, Oct. 16, 1989                        Audio:  202/755-1788
-----------------------------------------------------------------

This is NASA Headline News for Monday, October 16th......

The countdown resumed this morning for launch of the space
shuttle Atlantis and its cargo...the Galileo probe to Jupiter.
Over the weekend technicians completed the replacement and
testing of a new main engine controller on Atlantis...and launch
is now scheduled for a 26-minute period beginning at 12:57 P.M.,
Eastern time Tuesday.

Anti-nuclear activists who oppose the launch because of Galileo's
nuclear power supply, have appealed a federal judge's refusal
last week to halt the mission.  A spokesman for one of three
groups opposing the launch, said the Justice Department filed
documents on the appeal Saturday and that the activists plan to
file additional papers with the U.S. District Court of Appeals in
Washington today.  The spokesman said, quote, "We have had no
indication as to when to expect a hearing and a verdict.  Without
a temporary restraining order they can proceed.  They don't need
a go ahead.  We need a restraining order."  End quote.

NASA Administrator Richard Truly this morning announced two key
appointments which will become effective following the successful
completion of the upcoming STS-34 mission.  Arnold Aldrich,
currently Director of the National Space Transportation System,
will become Associate Administrator for the Office of Aeronautics
and Space Technology.  And Captain Robert Crippen, currently
Deputy Director of NSTS, will become Director of the Space
Shuttle program.  In his new postion, Aldrich will be responsible
for the direction of NASA's aeronautics and space technology
programs as well as for the institutional management of NASA's
Ames, Langley and Lewis Research Centers.  Crippen will have full
responsibility for the operation and conduct of the space shuttle
program and will report directly to Dr. William Lenoir, Acting
Associate Administrator for Space Flight.





                        *************











-----------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the broadcast schedule for public affairs events on NASA
Select television.  All times are Eastern.

Tuesday, Oct. 17.....

     7:30 A.M.       STS-34 launch day coverage begins.  The
                     launch window is open for 26 minutes
                     beginning at 12:57 P.M.

All events and times are subject to change without notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
These reports are filed daily, Monday through Friday, at 12 noon,
Eastern time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A service of the Internal Communications Branch (LPC), NASA
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

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

Date: 12 Oct 89 13:14:48 GMT
From: sei![e-mail]  (Robert Firth)
Subject: toxic substances


  "Plutonium 238 is the most toxic substance known in the universe"

On the contrary.  The most toxic substance in the known universe
is stupidity.  One nanogram, suitably deployed (as, for instance,
in the brain of an environmentalist lawyer), can bring to a halt
the entire progress of human civilisation, to the immense detriment
of ourselves and of billions yet unborn.

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

Date: 12 Oct 89 15:29:46 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: TDRS vs military

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nick Watkins) writes:
>>... It was the second Tracking and Data Relay
>>Satellite, an entirely unclassified solar-array-powered NASA comsat.
>
>TDRSS' military role in relaying Lacrosse data is well known...

As far as I know, the TDRS birds are like the shuttle itself:  they are
sometimes used for classified missions, but there is nothing secret about
the hardware itself.

> I find it hard to believe that DoD planners like solar cells.
>Does anybody know if Milstar will carry them or RTG's? ...

The problem with RTGs is that it is hard to get large power outputs out
of them.  Comsats would really like kilowatts, not hundreds of watts.
As far as I know, DoD has no specific plans for RTG comsats at present.
There *is* work in progress on hardened solar arrays.

>TDRSS has large solar arrays and is in an invulnerable (at present)
>orbit so I see no reason why it should have been nuclear powered.

Well, before concluding that it's invulnerable, look at some of the work
that's been done on using a lunar flyby to get substantial payloads into
a retrograde orbit.  A few tons of ice cubes in retrograde Clarke orbit
will clean out all the comsats, early-warning satellites, etc. etc., and
then go away.  (One hears that when those lunar trajectories were discovered
in the West, somebody noticed that there had been Soviet research interest
in them for years...)
--
A bit of tolerance is worth a  |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
megabyte of flaming.           | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 12 Oct 89 15:20:03 GMT
From: hp-pcd!hpcvlx![e-mail]  (Greg Goebel)
Subject: Re: Re: Will NASA Contaminate Jupiter?


>> The government
>> enjoys federal immunity and in most such cases is "safe" from prosecution.
>
> Give me a break.  The judge ruled in favor of Galileo because the NASA
> experts knew what they were talking about and the Christic Luddites
> didn't.

Right; I wasn't inclined to dismiss the Christics out-of-hand -- if
there weren't folks like that around the powers-that-be might get complacent;
and if there was a safety concern, it needed to be publicly aired -- but the
final debate ended up like:

NASA:       There are 48 pounds of plutonium oxide in the RTGs.  Each RTG is
            designed to withstand re-entry, and has been tested to withstand
            an explosion ten times greater than that which it would have
            experienced in the Challenger cargo bay.  The fuel elements are
            coated with iridium to resist salt-water corrosion, and are formed
            of plutonium oxide, not raw plutonium, since the oxide form is
            biologically inert (though admittedly still radioactive).

            There is no alternative to the use of these devices on this type of
            mission since solar cells are not effective at the distances of the
            outer planets, and there are no batteries with the endurance or
            power density that could do the job.  RTGs have been used on past
            outer-planet probes with no problems.

            There is a level of risk involved; but that is true of every
            jumbo jet that lifts off the runway, or of thousands of other
            common activities that are accepted as normal.

Christics:  We say it's unsafe because plutonium is radioactive and we don't
            believe NASA.

Okay, you be the judge.

* NASA, by the way, has shown remarkable public tact in handling the Christics,
carefully maintaining their rights as citizens to make their objections
known and being quick to make detailed public responses to their allegations.

This seems the best way to handle such a situation, since "ad hominem" on
the Christics would have made NASA look bureacratic and childish -- and if
the concerns of the Christics were exaggerated, NASA should be -- and was --
able to provide persuasive answers to show the extent of their exaggeration.
--
    +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
    | Greg Goebel                                                         |
    | Hewlett-Packard CWO / 1000 NE Circle Boulevard / Corvallis OR 97330 |
    | [phone]                                                      |
    | INTERNET: gvg@hp-pcd                                                |
    | HP DESK:  GREG GOEBEL / HP3900 / 20                                 |
    +---------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: 14 Oct 89 13:58:41 GMT
From: rochester![e-mail]  (Paul Dietz)
Subject: Re: "The Plan"

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jonathan Leech) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nick Szabo) writes:
>>...BTW, there is nothing on the Moon that justifies spending even $15 billion,
>>much less $150 billion...
>
>    I'm impressed. I didn't know Nick would post anti-Moon articles
>which didn't mention the infamous "ore-forming processes".
>--
>    Jon Leech ([e-mail])    __@/
>    ``Nuclear fusion, the promise of limitless energy from sea water
>    or something, has been just around the corner ever since World War
>    II and is still just around the corner.'' - David Goodstein

Funny that Jon should include this bit in his signature...

There is one potentially valuable resource that is present on the Moon
that may not be present on the near earth asteroids.  This is the
element helium-3.  Implanted into the lunar regolith by the solar
wind, and present in some ilmenite samples at concentrations of up to
100 ppb, helium-3 has many advantages as a fusion reactor fuel.
Studies have found that extracting He-3 from lunar regolith and
transporting it back to earth, even with chemical rockets, will cost
about .07 MeV/atom, vs.  18.3 MeV/atom released upon fusion with
deuterium.  Of course, a large amount of machinery would be required
on the lunar surface, and the size of the mines would be enormous
if fusion were to supply a significant fraction of US energy demand.

NEAs have spent less time near the sun than the moon.  Also,
they should not be covered with powdery regolith, since they have
insufficient surface gravity to retain ejecta from impacts.

Earth has almost no natural He-3; the atoms that hit the earth from
the solar wind go into the atmosphere and are lost to space again soon
afterwards.  The same is true of Mars or Venus.

Ultimately, we could extract helium-3 from the outer planets.
Perhaps some of the element has escaped from those planets, perhaps
as ions, and, after some time in their magnetospheres, has
implanted itself into the colder moons.  Then there is always
mining the gas giants' atmospheres themselves.

It would be a bit absurd to spend $100 B on a moonbase while spending
$300M/year on fusion, though.

    Paul F. Dietz
    [e-mail]

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

Date: 14 Oct 89 22:23:52 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: A small voice, a small plan

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David P. Schneider) writes:
>        I've had wild pictures of plugging the Spacelab module into
>        an  ET,  then  filling  the  tank  with water for shielding
>        (cosmic rays). But what  could  be  done  realistically  to
>        shield Spacelab to a reasonable level?

Also, why would one bother?  Cosmic-ray shielding is a serious issue if
you are planning to spend a lifetime in space, especially outside Earth's
magnetosphere, but is not worth worrying about for a year or two in low
orbit.

>        Question:  could the current shuttle be adapted to  a  hor-
>        izontal  launch  system, or is better lift required than is
>        available?

Considerably better.  The shuttle can more or less lift its own weight,
but it hasn't a prayer of carrying a useful amount of fuel.  To build a
horizontal-takeoff system, you'd need to build a winged first stage to
carry a shuttle orbiter and a (smaller?) external tank.
--
A bit of tolerance is worth a  |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
megabyte of flaming.           | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

End of SPACE Digest V10 #157
*******************