Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V10_1/V10_193.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 15KB

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/sZIH6::00VcJA7Mk5v>;
          Fri,  3 Nov 89 01:34:51 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri,  3 Nov 89 01:33:29 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #193

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 193

Today's Topics:
             Re: Galileo Schedule
     Final CALL FOR VOTES for the creation of "rec.models.rocket"
           Powersat options II: Magnetism?
         NASA Headline News for 10/30/89 (Forwarded)
         Re: Payload Status for 10/30/89 (Forwarded)
              Re: The Anti-RTG movement
 Re: Manned Jupiter Mission (was Re: Condensed CANOPUS - August 1989)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 30 Oct 89 17:13:39 GMT
From: microsoft![e-mail]  (David Levine)
Subject: Re: Galileo Schedule

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (George Kyriazis) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rod Stephens) writes:
>>>What is "Venus Data Playback?" Why is it so long after the Venus flyby?
>>
>>to go straight Earth->Jupiter, and wasn't built to go in closer to the Sun.)
>My question is:  How much memory does Galileo have?  If it plays back
>the pictures from Venus after it gets rid of its influence, it must
>be some time, and assuming that it takes several pictures, where does
>it store all this information?

Galileo has a video tape recorder for storing images.  The tape then gets
played back later.  I was very surprised to discover this fact because
I don't normally think of such beasts as being very reliable (think of
the varying temperature conditions during the flight).  However, Galileo's
"VCR" is a truly industrial strength contraption.

David Levine
======================================
== Why would my boss read sci.space anyway?
======================================

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

Date: 29 Oct 89 19:43:02 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (R. M. Jungclas)
Subject: Final CALL FOR VOTES for the creation of "rec.models.rocket"



Many thanks to those who have submitted votes so far. Individiual
acknowlegdements have been sent for all valid votes.


                        CALL FOR VOTES

                     For the creation of
               rec.models.rocket (unmoderated).


 This is the second and final call for votes for the creation of
 "rec.models.rocket" newsgroup.  This newsgroup will discuss
 the issues for MODEL ROCKETS and HIGH POWER ROCKETS as
 described in the proposal below.

 The voting period will be from midnight October 16th (24:00 CDT)
 until midnight November 15th (24:00 EST).  ONLY VOTES THAT ARRIVE
 ON THE VOTE-TAKER'S MACHINE DURING THIS INTERVAL WILL BE
 COUNTED.

 To vote send email to "att!ihlpb!rjungcla" or
 "[e-mail]", explicitly indicating your VOTE in
 the subject line.  I will attempt to individually
 acknowledge all votes and will post a "mass acknowledgement"
 after tallying the final vote.

 Remember ONLY votes MAILED to me will count and that votes
 MUST be explicit.


                  rec.models.rocket PROPOSAL

 It is proposed that a newsgroup "rec.models.rocket" be
 created for the discussion of any aspect relating to model
 rockets OR high power rockets. The purpose of the this
 newsgroup would be for exchange of information to anyone
 wanting TO BUILD, FLY OR USE model rockets or high power
 rockets. It is envisioned that most of the discussions
 within this newsgroup would be of a technical or legal
 nature unique to these "hobbies."

 The remainder of this proposal is broken into three parts:
 MODEL ROCKETRY, HIGH POWER ROCKETRY and AMATEUR ROCKETRY.

 MODEL ROCKETRY:  The term "model rocket" is defined based on
 non-metallic structural components, weight, propellant and
 total impulse restrictions, electrical ignition, recovery
 devices and FACTORY-MADE, solid propellant engines. This
 form of rocketry use the well-known "Safety Code" which
 permits their LEGAL use in all the states although some
 forms of these rockets currently require FAA notification.
 (The FAA is the only regulatory yet to approved the new
 safety code that went into effect on January 1st, 1987.) The
 National Association of Rocketry (NAR) is  national
 "consumer" organization or this hobby in the United States.
 Model rocketry is also available in Canada, Great Britain,
 the Soviet Union and other countries.

 Model rockets have been around for 31 years. Many of you may
 be aware of Estes and MRC model rockets currently available
 in most hobby and toy stores or of manufacturers that are
 now out of business:  Centuri, Cox, MPC, etc..

 HIGH POWER ROCKETRY:  The term "High Power rocket" refers to
 any rocket using model rocket technology (as described
 above) except without the weight, propellant and total
 impulse restrictions of model rocketry.  High power rockets
 have been around for 10 years, but only popular within the
 past few years. All forms of high power rocketry require
 FAA notification and waivers.  This is something the the
 high power enthusiast would like to change. Tripoli is the
 national association for high power rockets.

 Manufacturers of High Power kits/engines include Lots of
 Crafts/Precision, North Coast Rocketry, U.S. Rockets,
 AeroTech and Vulcan.

 The first commercial launch vehicle launched from Cape
 Canaveral was the LOFT-1. This was a "high power rocket" as
 defined above. In addition, off-the-shelf video recorders
 and custom built video cameras/transmitters have been
 successfully flown. One such flight resulted in a video
 transmission that was broadcast on live television.
 Significant payloads are realizable to the average person.

 AMATEUR ROCKETRY The term "amateur rocketry" refers to all
 other non-professional rocket activities.  Included in the
 last class, are "basement bombers," any attempts to make
 homemade engines, and anything using metallic structural
 parts. These activities are ILLEGAL without the proper
 formalities. Although this newsgroup WILL NOT ADVOCATE
 "amateur rocketry," technical discussion on these activities
 will be permitted.  For example, discussion on how engines
 are made would be permitted, but COOKBOOK procedures for
 making them would not.

R. Michael Jungclas                    UUCP:      att!ihlpb!rjungcla
AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville, IL.       Internet:  [e-mail]

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

Date: 30 Oct 89 19:23:31 GMT
From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu![e-mail]  (Eric C. Garrison)
Subject: Powersat options II: Magnetism?


I am posting this for a friend, who is a little odd at times.  Please direct
all arguments and flames to [e-mail], NOT [e-mail] .  I have no connection or understanding of his "Ideas".



I haven't followed the powersat argument very well, but I did notice a bit of
concern over the use of powersats as weapons of mass destruction.  Maybe they
can, maybe they can't; I don't know enough to say.  However, beaming a couple
megawatts of power into the atmosphere, no matter what the intensity, will
alter the whole planets ecology.  Microwaves would do a lot of damage to the
weather, at least on a local level, and there is always the fear of someone
pointing the thing at my house, either by accident or by design.

What I propose, and have worked on very little (I am still collecting relevent
material) is to use collected power in orbit to pulse a magnetic field at a low
(50-120Hz) frequency.  Superconductors, and even regular conductors, will
develop a current while inside a changing magnetic field.  This current will
not be very strong, but there are ways to boost current.  ElectroMagnetic Pulse
(EMP) will be low, because EMP requires a large change in magnetic field
intensity before in can do much damage.  Also, the magnetic field is not
degraded much for travelling in an atmosphere, unlike microwaves or lasers.
Since magnetic fields degrade over distance, it might even be chaeper to
use microwave technology to "beam" power to an LEO field-producing station
(well, several actually), and then to earth recievers.  The microwave station
would be at an L4, L5, or stationary orbit.


             D R A W B A C K S ! (you thought I forgot, didn't you)

This idea is not without drawbacks.  It, too, will muck up the ecosystem (can
you imagine birds trying to fly into orbit for the winter?).  Ships and
airplanes will have to discontinue the use of mechanical (I'm an engineer, not
a spell-checker!) compasses for navigation, unless the want to compute the
effect of the powersat on thier heading.  As an EMP weapon, it's prebuilt, and
easy to reprogram.  If you're going to have a microwave station in orbit, why
not just use it (because microwaves degrade in the atmosphere).  The microwave
part could be used as a weapon(hey, why don't we see if we can build this under
SDI funding.  The microwaves are only really good in space and the upper
atmosphere, anyway).  etc. . .


Mail any other drawbacks/complaints to me at [e-mail] , and
I'll see if there is a way to work around them.

Disclaimer: the DMV considers me harmless, so why shouldn't Purdue

"I create what is possibly the greatest antiservalence device in the Federation
and all he can say is 'Avon's gadget works!'.  Somehow it lacks style."
                  -Kerr Avon

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

Date: 30 Oct 89 19:10:46 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 10/30/89 (Forwarded)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Monday, Oct. 30, 1989                        Audio:  202/755-1788
-----------------------------------------------------------------

This is NASA Headline News for Monday, October 30th......



The NASA budget has been sent to the President.  The budget,
which is part of the HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriations
Bill, was approved by the Senate by an 84-6 vote last Friday.
Aerospace Daily quotes a Senate staffer as saying the bill could
be signed as early as next week.


The crew of Discovery wraps up its Countdown Demonstration Test
today at the Kennedy Space Center.  The practise is in
preparation for the next shuttle flight scheduled for late
November.  The Discovery flight will be a Department of Defense
mission and is classified.


The launch of the Cosmic Background Explorer satellite has been
delayed to no earlier than November 19.  It was previously
scheduled for launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. on
November 9.  The change was brought about by discovery of a leak
in the Delta launch vehicle's second stage fuel tank shutoff
valve and the fact that the McDonnell Douglas Delta support team
was required at the Cape for a recent DoD launch.


NASA presented its aircraft TakeOff Performance Monitoring System
to industry and government aviation representatives  at Langley
Research Center last week. The system is designed to help pilots
make "go-no go" takeoff decisions by summarizing valuable
safety-related information in a simply understood visual display.


And here's a NASA Select viewing notice.  NASA Administrator
Richard Truly last Thursday addressed the National Press Club and
discussed the "current status of the U.S. space program".  His
presentation and question and answer session will be re-telecast
Tuesday, October 31, on NASA Select TV at 11:00 A.M. and 1:00
P.M., Eastern time.




                  *              *               *






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


Tuesday, October 31......

      11:00 A.M./1:00 P.M.   Delayed telecast of NASA
                             Administrator Truly's address to the
                             National Press Club.  One hour
                             duration.


Wednesday, Nov. 1......

     2:00 P.M.        STS-34 post flight news conference from
                      Houston.


2:30 P.M.(approx)     Immediately following the news conference,
                      the quarterly "Aeronautics & Space Report"
                      will be transmitted.

Thursday, Nov. 2......

    11:30 A.M.        NASA Update will be transmitted.


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: 30 Oct 89 20:09:05 GMT
From: bfmny0![e-mail]  (Tom Neff)
Subject: Re: Payload Status for 10/30/89 (Forwarded)

)- STS-35 ASTRO-1/BBXRT (at O&C) -
)
)After removal of a microswitch, a 0.156 inch diameter video probe
)was used to aid in the search for the missing washer.  The washer
)was located in the PGSA-1 motor area, removed, and the
)microswitch reinstalled.

Support personnel are teleconferencing at 1700 EST today to discuss
options for removal of the ham sandwich.

:-)

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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 89 21:05:07 PST
From: Peter Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: The Anti-RTG movement
X-Vms-Mail-To: EXOS%"[e-mail]"

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

Date: 30 Oct 89 16:33:18 GMT
From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu![e-mail]  (Mark Gellis)
Subject: Re: Manned Jupiter Mission (was Re: Condensed CANOPUS - August 1989)

Regarding long term manned missions in space...

I've heard talk of using magnetic fields to deflect cosmic rays, particles,
etc.  This would supposedly lower the mass of the hull necessary to protect
the crew of a spacecraft from radiation.  Is this true?  Workable?  What is
involved in setting up such a "radiation shield"?

In addition, because I am interested in space colonization, I was wondering
what kind of shielding would be necessary (assuming magnetic fields, etc.
won't work as well as people would like) to protect people from the long
term background radiation of space.  I heard something around two meters of
asteroid/lunar rock should be enough to stop pretty much everything; I was
wondering if this was true.

One final question.  If magnetic fields for radiation shielding will work,
how much power would it require.  Also (okay, I know this is two questions),
can it operate if the object is moving relatively fast, like a spacecraft
moving from one location in a solar system to another?

Thanks in advance.

     Mark Gellis
     f3w%mentor.cc.purdue.edu

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

End of SPACE Digest V10 #193
*******************