Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V11_5/V11_568.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 14KB

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/MaVOGze00VcJ8dg04V>;
          Mon, 25 Jun 1990 01:44:32 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 1990 01:44:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #568

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 11 : Issue 568

Today's Topics:
              Sounds Of Earth recording
               Re: 10 psi overpressure
                AMROC
               Re: 10 psi overpressure
              Model Rockets to the Moon
      Re: Handicaped in Space (was: NASA Headline News)
       NASA Lunar/Mars program funding to be terminated
            Re: Public Perception Of Space
            Re: claiming the Moon
           Re: NSS protests Chinese launch pricing
               Re: 10 psi overpressure
               Re: 10 psi overpressure

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  [e-mail].  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription notices,
  should be sent to [e-mail], or, if urgent, to
             [e-mail]

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

Date: 25 Jun 90 02:02:31 GMT
From: uoft02.utoledo.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Sounds Of Earth recording



Many of you netters may recall the Sounds Of Earth recording aboard
the Voyager spacecraft.  It was, to my knowledge, never released publicly.
I do have a very poor recording that is about to fail.  Does anyone
know of a way to get a copy of this (even if temporarily to make a
copy).  I would be very appreciative.

Robert Dempsey
Ritter Observatory

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

Date: 20 Jun 90 21:45:08 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (David Anderman)
Subject: Re: 10 psi overpressure

My recollection of the Rogers commission report is that the shuttle
complex disintegrated because: an SRB basically "came loose" because of
flame shooting out of the side (by an O-ring), which smashed into the
ET, which then disintegrated. The Challenger was then exposed to massive
pressure as it lost its attitude and literally fell apart. The flame at
the bottom of the ET was *not* a factor in the accident, and is seen in
many shuttle flights.


--- Opus-CBCS 1.12
 * Origin: Universal Electronics, Inc. (1:103/302.0)
--
uucp:     David Anderman
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date: 24 Jun 90 21:09:47 GMT
From: thorin!grover![e-mail]  (David Becker)
Subject: AMROC

What is AMROC up to these days?  Last I heard they were patching up
their rocket from the first launch attempt.

When will they attempt another launch?

--
David Becker        Gotta love a machine that hangs on
[e-mail]        your every word.

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

Date: 21 Jun 90 05:08:32 GMT
From: usc!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (Mark Perew)
Subject: Re: 10 psi overpressure

I'm not an expert on this (as evidenced by previous questions and
gaffs on my part) but I have been reading the commission report
recently and have Volume II in my lap.  Appendix L "NASA Accident
Analysis Team Report" has some pertinent information about the
struts and ET and explosion.

Quotes are from page L-6 and L-16.

===========================

3.7  "Flashes"

Several "flashes" were noted in the SSME plumes ... [they] are quite
common and were visible on other flights.  Since they were not peculiar
to STS 51-L, they were removed form the events timeline.

3.9  Plume

The plume continued to grow in size and at 60.238 seconds was evidently
impinging the ET due to the observed plume deflection.

3.10  LH2 Tank Breach

The sudden change in the plume at 64.660 seconds was the first
indication that th ET [LH2] tank had been breached.

3.11 Right Aft SRB Strut Release

At 72.201 seconds, the lower attaching strut between the right SRB
and the ET ... released.  Loss of this structural attachment, most
likely caused by the strut pulling away from the hot gas-weakened
hydrogen tank permitted the right SRB to rotate counterclockwise
around the aft upper strut and the forward attachment at the intertank.

3.13  Compressive Buckling ET Intertank - "Vapors" Emitting from Intertank

At 73.124 seconds, a circumferential white pattern was observed ... on
the +Z side of the ET aft dome.  A SUDDEN LARGE FORWARD THRUST RESULTED
FROM THIS HYDROGEN EXPLOSION [emphasis mine] which concentrated loads on
the intertank ...   Either this ... or the ... right SRB rotation,
... caused the intertank to fail.  This in turn caused the LOX feedline
and tank to ... fail at 73.137 seconds.  THIS LED DIRECTLY TO TOTAL
VEHICLE STRUCTURAL BREAKUP.  [emphasis mine]

=======================

There are comments elsewhere (which I can't find at this hour) that
there were secondary explosions of the RCS system as evidenced by the
red tint in the cloud caused by the "cyrogenic burn" of the released
LH2 and LOX.

There are also comments elsewhere pertaining to aerdynamic loads
caused by the failure of the ET.

Thus there was an explosion and aerodynamic forces at play that
caused the orbiter to break up.  I can't find any figures at the
moment that show what the overpressure was during the various stages
of break up.

Hope this helps clear up some confusion.


--- Opus-CBCS 1.12
 * Origin: Universal Electronics, Inc. (1:103/302.0)
--
uucp:     Mark Perew
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date:    Sun, 24 Jun 1990 12:46:45 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Model Rockets to the Moon
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"[e-mail]"

I will do you one better.  For the first three people to contact me with
complete verification of a completed moon rocket, I will donate a 500 mW
telemetry package (1 PCM channel + ID) of extremely low bandwidth on a
VHF frequency.

Disclaimer: I work for Lockheed corporation at a NASA site, but any equipment
donated is done as a private citizen and not as an employee of either
organization.  All equipment is privately owned, and not corporate or
government property.  Sorry I can't steal any space-qualified stuff from
work, but this is modified-UHF TV tuner all the way.
--scott

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

Date: 24 Jun 90 14:37:12 GMT
From: mips!pacbell.com!pacbell!sactoh0!unify!csusac!csuchico.edu![e-mail]  (Ralph Reid)
Subject: Re: Handicaped in Space (was: NASA Headline News)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Robiner) writes:
> . . .
>Has NASA or anyone else ever thought of using amputees or other naturally
>handicaped persons with no legs as astronauts for extended stays in space.
>
>It seems to me they'd be the ideal choice for the job.  While other
>astronauts are handicaped in space *with* legs, persons without these appendages
>who are normally handicaped on Earth would be free and easily mobile in space.
>Furthermore, their overall weight would be somewhat less, reducing launch
>payloads, and they wouldn't require any specialized exercise equiment
>which also adds cost, development time, more launch weight, space on the ship,
>and time out of the work schedule.
>
>Also, I'm sure there are plenty of air force and navy veterns who
>are already flight trained and maybe even some as test pilots, a NASA
>favorite.
> . . .


I believe that in the late 50's or early 60's NASA did consider blind
astronauts, because these astronauts would not require lights.  Some
persons with some types of disabilities would have some advantages in
0 G, although exercise of some sort would still be required.  In some
of the early long term Soviet missions, cosmonauts did not stick to
the exercise program, and had trouble re-adapting to working in
earth's natural gravity.  Even the food these cosmonauts ate seemed
to feel heavy in their stomaches, and walking was (of course) very
difficult for some time after re-entry.  I read about these and other
experiences in a book which was written by one of the APPOLO 7
astronauts, but that was several years ago, and I do not remember the
title.  I have not heard what experiences SKYLAB astronauts may have
had.

--
Ralph.
ARS: N6BNO
Compuserve: 72250,3521
email: [e-mail]

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

Date: 13 Jun 90 05:55:04 GMT
From: netcom!teda!ditka!mcdchg!laidbak!obdient!vpnet![e-mail]  (*Greg*)
Subject: NASA Lunar/Mars program funding to be terminated

Mr. Wilson:

I would like to know what is the outcome of NASA's Lunar/Mars program.

It's a bit to late on my end to give support now.  But, maybe if more people
would still write to these sorces for the Space Program as a whole?

- Greg

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

Date: 21 Jun 90 19:23:48 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (David Anderman)
Subject: Re: Public Perception Of Space

I agree with you almost 100% -  the government should get out of most
areas of space development. The question is: who isDOz/et out of most
- Ql{going to put the bell on the cat?
Secondly, how can we reconcile your ideas on this with
the NSS position of full funding for NASA all the time?


--- Opus-CBCS 1.12
 * Origin: Universal Electronics, Inc. (1:103/302.0)
--
uucp:     David Anderman
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date: 24 Jun 90 21:28:35 GMT
From: agate!sag4.ssl.berkeley.edu![e-mail]  (George C. Kaplan)
Subject: Re: claiming the Moon

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>A very long time ago in the 1950s, somebody advertised in the science
>>fiction magazines of the day, that people could buy 1 inch square sec-
>>tions of the moon for $1.00...
>I've heard of this.  Those claims had zero legal status even at the time,
>and the Outer Space Treaty of the early 60s rendered them completely null
>and void, I believe.

Lunar real estate prices had dropped considerably by the early 1970's.
There was a character in Berkeley, CA who dressed up in a silver lame
cape and sold certificates for land on the moon at $1.00 per *acre*.
They were clearly novelty items.  The guy was just capitalizing on the
popularity of the Apollo missions taking place at the time; he made no
claims that his certificates had any legal standing.  I think I may
even have bought a couple as gifts.

George C. Kaplan                Internet:  [e-mail]
Center for EUV Astrophysics                [e-mail]
University of California        UUCP:  ...!ucbvax!sunspot.ssl!gckaplan
Berkeley, CA  94720             [phone]

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

Date: 20 Jun 90 22:03:41 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (David Anderman)
Subject: Re: NSS protests Chinese launch pricing

Hmmmm....NSS is protesting that the Chinese launch payloads too cheaply.
Since the key factor in space development is the (present) high cost of
getting into low Earth orbit, it isn't too surprising that NSS
headquarters is worried that the Chinese are charging too little to get
to LEO.


--- Opus-CBCS 1.12
 * Origin: Universal Electronics, Inc. (1:103/302.0)
--
uucp:     David Anderman
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date: 20 Jun 90 22:06:11 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (David Anderman)
Subject: Re: 10 psi overpressure

I seem to recall that the Challenger (and the whole shuttle complex) did
*not* explode; there was no "explosion" at all. Let's hope someone with
more expertise than myself about the accident can explain this.


--- Opus-CBCS 1.12
 * Origin: Universal Electronics, Inc. (1:103/302.0)
--
uucp:     David Anderman
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date: 21 Jun 90 22:35:50 GMT
From: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (Mark Perew)
Subject: Re: 10 psi overpressure

Yes, I saw (and have seen) Henry Spencer's comments on this.  It
was not my intent to imply that they accident was caused by an
explosion.  The accident (hardly an appropriate term, btw) was a
complex series of events that started when both the primary and
secondary O-rings in the right hand SRB failed to pressurize and
seal.  This had downstram effects of allowing flame to propagate
along the joint, burning a hole in the SRB case.  This flame was
deflected onto the ET at about the point where the aft SRB strut
was attached.  When the LH2 tank of the ET gave way the SRB
pivoted striking and puncturing the LOX tank.   It is also very
possible that the SRB struct the right wing of the orbiter.

Upstream of the O-ring failure were the problems with "joint
rotation", over pressurization during leak checks (up to 200 psi),
ice in the joint, and low joint temperatures causing the O-ring
to not properly respond to the joint rotation.

Over and above all of this was the attitude of NASA management
that accepted more and more O-ring damage as "allowable" and
eventually as "acceptable" when the O-rings were never designed
to sustain *ANY* damage.

BTW, we can continute this discussion locally and save net bandpass
if you like.


--- Opus-CBCS 1.12
 * Origin: Universal Electronics, Inc. (1:103/302.0)
--
uucp:     Mark Perew
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

End of SPACE Digest V11 #568
*******************