Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V12_5/V12_544.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-06-28 | 16KB

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/4bECCHa00VcJQ9R05q>;
          Wed, 14 Nov 1990 01:26:28 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 1990 01:25:57 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #544

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 12 : Issue 544

Today's Topics:
            Space Station mission
             Re: LLNL Astronaut Delivery
            Spectacular event over Europe
           Hubble Space Telescope Update - 11/03/90
         Re: Payload Status for 11/08/90 (Forwarded)
Re: LLNL Astronaut Delivery (was Re: You Can't Expect a Space Station)
          [l/m 7/5] Reminders for Old Farts
              Magellan Update - 11/09/90
             Re: orbiting bodies

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]

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 9 Nov 90 22:30:30 GMT
From: gandalf.cs.cmu.edu![e-mail]  (Donald Lindsay)
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Subject: Space Station mission
References: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Radley) writes:
>It looks more like Freedom and LLNL could be COMPLIMENTARY, since
>they appear to have different missions.  The question is, which
>mission(s) is/are the right ones.

Speaking as a scientist, I think that we will get a lot more science if:
- a station is actually lofted. Freedom is looking doomed.
- continuous, permanent manned presence in space is THE PRIMARY goal.
  Congress can postpone the next wonder toy, but they can't call the
  crews home. Besides, what _I_ want researched, is how to live off-
  Earth. Now, there's a mission.

>You get cheap empty shells, it costs plenty to fit them out with
>state of the art scientific equipment. LLNL may be lighter and
>cheaper  than using metal modules a' la Freedom, but most of
>Freedom's weight and cost is in the science and support equipment,
>the module structure is small fraction of the total.

I think you have just destroyed your argument that LLNL will wind
up as expensive as Freedom. LLNL won't loft the science equipment.
This is smart: the alternative is no space station, and then there
_really_ won't be any science done.

--
Don        D.C.Lindsay

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 9 Nov 90 18:25:25 GMT
From: thorin!homer![e-mail]  (Jonathan Leech)
Organization: University Of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Subject: Re: LLNL Astronaut Delivery
References: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Radley) writes:
>+Freedom FEL comes up there will be TWENTY flights ahead of you. Is
>+Freedom going to tell those people to take a hike?
>-
>It is similar to a planetary mission with fixed launch windows,
>Ulysses and  Galileo got up on schedule, and other flights worked
>around them.

    I expect Fred will be as 'on schedule' as Galileo - first planned
for launch in 1982, slipped to the end of the decade due almost
entirely to shuttle-related problems including lack of suitable
shuttle-qualified upper stages and 3 years of downtime.
--
    Jon Leech ([e-mail])    __@/
    ``Scientific progress goes "Boink"?'' - Hobbes

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 9 Nov 90 12:10:04 GMT
From: mcsun!cernvax!chx400!ugun2b!ugobs![e-mail]
Organization: University of Geneva, Switzerland
Subject: Spectacular event over Europe
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

A spectacular event occurred on Nov. 5, around 18h UT (19h local time) over a
large part of western Europe.  Something similar to a big meteorite or
satellite atmospheric reentry has been observed by thousands of people, going
from western France, Switzerland, northern Italy, and south Germany, well over
1000 km.  Most of the people have seen a series of yellow, red 'stars' running
parallel, a luminous tail, and do not have heard any bang.  The reported time
to cross the sky varies wildy, from minutes to a few seconds.  The estimated
luminosity is comparable to the full moon.  Most of the air traffic radars
do not have detected anything, indicating a high altitude (~100km).

Could someone with connection to NASA, NORAD tells if the satellite hypothesis
can be rejected ?  Such a large orbiting object should have been tracked.

I ask this to the net, because we get hundred of phone calls for more
precise information, by anguished people and journalists.

    Daniel Pfenniger, Geneva Observatory (University of Geneva)

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 9 Nov 90 23:33:49 GMT
From: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA.
Subject: Hubble Space Telescope Update - 11/03/90
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]


                            HST STATUS REPORT
                             November 3, 1990

     GODDARD HIGH RESOLUTION SPECTROMETER (GHRS): All phases of a fine
alignment test went well.  Analysis showed that all edges of both the large (2
arc second square) science aperture and the small (1/4 arc second square)
science aperture were scanned as planned.  That means that the star was placed
in the center of the aperture, then moved in and out of the aperture in
different directions (edges). These tests are done to facilitate future
movements of the telescope to line up a particular star in the aperture.  This
test marked the first time a star was placed in the small science aperture.

     HIGH SPEED PHOTOMETER (HSP): Focus and aperture map test with the
ultraviolet detector was performed successfully.

     FAINT OBJECT SPECTROGRAPH (FOC): Obtained three good spectra on Seyfert
Galaxy NGC 1068.

     WIDE FIELD/PLANETARY CAMERA (WF/PC): Completed ultraviolet flood guiding
test in which the flood mirror successfully was commanded into the flood
position.  Sixteen exposures of the Sun were taken. This is in preparation for
a later activity in which ultraviolet light will be aimed at the instrument's
charged coupled devices (CCDs), which need ultraviolet light.

     ASTROMETRY: A test of the parameters of binaries (a system of two stars
that revolve around their common center of gravity) was "overwhelmingly
successful."  Five good scans out of five fine locks were obtained.  From these
observations, a much better orbit can be derived on a binary star.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 9 Nov 90 14:07:09 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!qucis![e-mail]  (Richard Akerman)
Organization: Physics Department, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Can.
Subject: Re: Payload Status for 11/08/90 (Forwarded)
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter E. Yee) writes:
>
>    Daily Status/KSC Payload Management and Operations 11-08-90
>
>    - STS-35 ASTRO-1/BBXRT (at Pad-B)
>
>    Engineering evaluation of the AST experiment which was
>    contacted by a finger platform yesterday continues.  BBXRT
>    liquid argon servicing will be performed today.
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I find many of the acronyms in the Payload Status report indecipherable but
this in particular has been puzzling me.  I see frequent mentions of "argon
servicing for the Astro-1".  What exactly is the purpose of this servicing?
Does the payload need some sort of inert environment?

Richard Akerman
Incompetent Physics Grad. Student
Astronomy/Astrophysics Group

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 10 Nov 90 02:31:14 GMT
From: usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!brolga!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!iceman![e-mail]  (M Parigi)
Organization: JCUNQ, Townsville, Qld, Australia
Subject: Re: LLNL Astronaut Delivery (was Re: You Can't Expect a Space Station)
References: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Radley) writes:
> >  If you don't believe me, ask the Australian Cape York Space Agency
> >what is giving them their biggest headache.....they want to get a US
> >company to operate Soviet Zenit launch vehicles, and the US State
> >Dept is saying - "forget it !"
>
> References Please.
This is now been reduced to the second biggest headache! The aboriginals
(native Australians) who live in the general vicinity of the Cape York
Site are giving them the biggest headache. They think they own the whole
of Australia (their ancestors actually did) and they aren't going to move
from their wilderness paradise living off social security payments for
anyone (especially for "highly desructive developments"). The greenies
around here have given their cause a great deal of credibility. They
are opposing all developments here. Hopefully, public opinion will sway
against them. With our economy going into recession, this is just the sort
of high-tech development that we need more of.

Disclaimer:- a lot of people in my university disagree with me.

Marco Parigi, James Cook University of North Queensland

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 9 Nov 90 12:00:29 GMT
From: julius.cs.uiuc.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!mustang!data.nas.nasa.gov!amelia![e-mail]  (Eugene N. Miya)
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Subject: [l/m 7/5] Reminders for Old Farts
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

Hints for old users (subtle reminders) You'll know these.

Minimize cross references, [Do you REALLY NEED to?]
Edit "Subject:" lines especially if you are taking a tangent.
Send mail instead, avoid posting follow ups. [1 mail message worth 100 posts.]
Internet mail readers: send requests to add/drop to SPACE-REQUEST not SPACE.
Read all available articles before posting a follow-up. [Check all references.]
Cut down attributed articles.  Summarize!
Put a return address in the body (signature) of your message (mail or
article), state institution, etc. don't assume mail works.
Use absolute dates.  Post in a timely way.  Don't post what everyone will
get on TV anyway.
Some editors and window systems do character count line wrapping:
please keep lines under 80 characters for those using ASCII terms (use <CR>).

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 10 Nov 90 05:35:40 GMT
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA.
Subject: Magellan Update - 11/09/90
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]


                          MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT
                             November 9, 1990

     The Magellan spacecraft is performing nominally.  The daily STARCALS
(star calibrations) and twice daily DESATS (desaturations) continue to
go well.   Yesterday, track 4 of the Tape Recorder A was successfully played
back, and track 1 of the Tape Recorder B was positioned for playback today.
It contains the results of the STARCALS performed during Superior Conjunction.

     Several of the command uplinks were rejected due to sun effects, but
mapping restart remains on schedule.  The decision for GO on the mapping
restart will be made today, and execution of the sequence will be made
on orbit 787 at 4:07 AM (PST) tomorrow on November 10.

     The radar sensor remains in standby mode.  Eleven new standard image
swaths were produced, but one of these products is being held for a quality
check.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 9 Nov 90 19:57:32 GMT
From: puppsr5![e-mail]  (Marty Ryba)
Organization: Dept. of Physics, Princeton U.
Subject: Re: orbiting bodies
References: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ingo Cyliax) writes:
|> So is it common for moons to have the same axial rotational period
|> as the orbital period, so that only one side is visibilty from the
|> planet. If it is, what are the reasons for that ?

Well, a rather technical reference is Alexander, M. E. 1973, "Astrophysics and
Space Science," v. 23, p. 459.  He numerically models close binary systems
and specifically the Earth-Moon system computing the time scales for
synchronization of rotation and circularization of the orbit by tidal forces.

A short and more readable paper is Press, Wiita and Smarr, 1975, "Ap. J.
(Letters)," v. 202, p. L135.  They concentrate on how to get strong viscosities
in close binaries (stars), but give more readable formulae for tidal locking
timescales.  Eventually the Earth's rotation will be slowed to match the
moon's.  Tides dissipate rotational energy.  Anyone with a rough number for
the earth's mean viscosity???
--
Marty Ryba                      | slave physics grad student
Princeton University            | They don't care if I exist,
Pulsars   Unlimited             | let alone what my opinions are!
[e-mail]      | Asbestos gloves always on when reading mail

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

End of SPACE Digest V12 #544
*******************