Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V12_5/V12_586.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-06-28 | 20KB

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/gbHAdFK00VcJ83Ik5j>;
          Fri, 23 Nov 1990 02:05:54 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 1990 02:05:15 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #586

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 12 : Issue 586

Today's Topics:
            space news from Sept 17 AW&ST
        Re: Reliability and Insurance (3 of 3)
              Magellan Update - 11/20/90
                Uses for LLNL
             Pioneer 10 Update - 11/16/90
            Re: STS 38 Observation Reports
              HST/Saturn article
             Re: The Space Plane
        Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red?
          Re: Spectacular event over Europe

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: 20 Nov 90 06:04:53 GMT
From: wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: space news from Sept 17 AW&ST

Augustine commission will probably examine the question of whether the
shuttle -- now seen as still an R&D vehicle -- is really suited to being
the supply ship for an operational space station.

Pratt&Whitney (the part of United Technologies involved in Cape York) says
its success at Cape York will depend on how flexible the Bush administration
is about what constitutes "fair" pricing, and in particular on adequate
recognition of the need for introductory discounts to get things rolling,
the legitimately low costs of Zenit production, and the cost benefits of
modern launch processing.  P&W has approval for an export license covering
its role in the next phase of the project -- planning and financial studies --
and negotiations between the Cape York Space Agency and the USSR (delayed
to permit P&W to participate) for Zenit purchases are underway.  The license
approval from the State Dept required restrictions on technology transfer,
a commitment from the Soviets that Soviet launchers will be offered only
at Cape York for ten years, and access to the details of P&W dealings with
CYSA (the meaning of that last provision is still being negotiated [!]).
CYSA would like P&W to invest in Cape York, but P&W has refused.

The "Outreach Program" to look at innovative ideas for Moon/Mars is looking
at ideas which avoid use of the space station.  Ex-astronaut Tom Stafford,
head of the study group, says "...when I went to the Moon and back on
Apollo 10, I did not have to stop at a space station".  There is wide
sentiment that space-station involvement could be a drag on early stages
of a return to the Moon, although Earth-orbit studies of the physiological
issues would eventually be important.

The AIAA, one of the major sources of input for Outreach, finds that a
return to the Moon could be done by 1999 for short stays, with a more
permanent outpost started by 2002.

NASA will make another try to get Columbia up on Sept 18 [another hydrogen
leak scuppered it], after convincing the USAF to give Astro priority over
the secret Titan IV mission slated for that day.  (This suggests that the
Titan mission is not considered crucial to the Gulf crisis, since the USAF
could have bumped the shuttle in that case.)  The earlier leaks are now
thought to be the result of a valve seal that was damaged when it was
replaced in April as part of a check for plumbing contamination.

NASA has decided to change its criteria for hydrogen leaks, based on
indications that the external leak sensors are unreliable in the
rather variable winds around the pads.  The sensors will not be ignored,
but their outputs will be treated with more caution, and TV cameras
have been added to give visual confirmation (via condensation streamers)
of possible leaks.

The Freon leak aboard Discovery is now considered minor enough to permit
Ulysses to go on schedule.  The cooling system is losing about 1% of its
fluid per day, and for a four-day mission NASA feels confident that
just topping it up before launch will suffice.

Pictures of the aftermath of the Titan SRB accident at Edwards.  USAF says
it will not affect current launch schedules.  An SRB segment fell about
20m, slid down a hillside, ignited and burned for some time.  Tentative
cause is overbalancing of the crane being used to lift the segment; the
crane also fell, and the boom and cable appear to have been intact at
impact.  One man was killed, hit by the crane.  The segment was a test
article, being moved as part of procedures checkout for testing of the
new Hercules SRBs for the Titan.  The first firing of the Hercules SRB
is still scheduled for that test stand later this year, although this
may slip if the accident has caused too much damage.  There should be
no delay otherwise; the accident is not considered to be related to the
rocket hardware.

Florida legislature approves funding to bring the Cape San Blas sounding-
rocket site on the Gulf of Mexico back to operational status.  The Florida
Spaceport Authority is also interested in renovating an old pad at the
Cape as a commercial orbital-launch site.  It plans to fund six small
sounding-rocket launches from Cape San Blas, with the payload space made
available to university researchers, as a way to get things rolling there.
First launch is tentatively set for late this year.

Magellan is back in full communication with Earth after its conniption
fit earlier, and mapping is set to start Sept 15.

NASA Langley shows a segment of an elevon made entirely from carbon-carbon
composite, suitable for "hot section" use in hypersonic aircraft.  This is
a research project not aimed at any specific vehicle, although the technology
has relevance to NASP among others.  They chose an elevon because it is a
transition case between secondary structure and primary structure, and it
involves various interesting fabrication problems.  This is the first large
carbon-carbon structural component built anywhere (at least, the first not
classified!).
--
"I don't *want* to be normal!"         | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
"Not to worry."                        |  [e-mail]   utzoo!henry

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

Date: 19 Nov 90 16:03:20 GMT
From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu![e-mail]  (Perry G Ramsey)
Subject: Re: Reliability and Insurance (3 of 3)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Russ Cage) writes:
> >>... the OPF bottleneck is reduced by merely eliminating the redundant
> >>system checks to ensure the first checkout was correct.)
> >
> >Considering how complex Shuttle is, this sounds like a really
> >*bad* idea from where I stand.  The reliability achieved by
> >the Shuttle software group is due to their checkout procedures.
>
> The question is, how much *extra* reliability is bought by all those extra
> checks?  Wales is suggesting that it approaches zero; I am inclined to agree.
> --
> "I don't *want* to be normal!"         | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology

At first, all that checking probably does buy you close to zero added
reliability.  After everyone gets used to the system, it probably makes
things worse.  The guy doing the job is less inclined to bust
his buns making sure it's right, because, after all, there are three
quality control checkers who will inspect the work after he's finished.
On top of that, he doesn't have time to make sure the hardware is right --
he has too much paperwork to do!

Three QC inspectors signed off that the work platform had been removed from
the orbiter.  You remember, the one they found when it went "KLUNK" as the
orbiter was being mated to the ET.  It would have only taken one person
to take that thing out.  The fact that four didn't is at least one data
point against the notion that more bodies are always better than fewer.

Paperwork and independent checking are essential to making complicated
machinery work, but everyone has forgotten that their only value is
as an aid in ensuring that the work is done right.  They are not a
substitute for it.
--
Perry G. Ramsey           Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
[e-mail]   Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN USA
[e-mail]
 Why waste time learning when ignorance is instantaneous?  -- Hobbes

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

Date: 20 Nov 90 21:51:52 GMT
From: csus.edu!wuarchive!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Magellan Update - 11/20/90


                       MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT
                         November 20, 1990

     The Magellan spacecraft is performing nominally in mapping mode, and has
just completed its 376th mapping orbit.  The two DESATS (desaturations of the
reaction wheels) and 7 STARCALS (star calibrations) of the past 24 hours were
successful, with all attitude updates less than 0.02 degrees.

     Today, a backfill of AACS (Attitude and Articulation Control Subsystem)
memory B will be sent to the spacecraft and played back to test for corrupted
memory cells.  Tonight, mapping sequence M0325 and its associated parameter
files will be uploaded.

     The radar system is performing nominally.  Three orbits of data using
the new data management strategy which avoids tracks A2 and A4, have been
analyzed and appear to be the the most error-free to date.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

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

Date: 20 Nov 90 16:45:04 GMT
From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!src.honeywell.com!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!kksys!orbit!pnet51![e-mail]  (S Schaper)
Subject: Uses for LLNL

Hmm, if it is that cheap, why not a major corp, like Bendix, put their
corporate
HQ up in space outside of tax jurisdiction, a variation of the old =buy
an island' concept.

1/2 :-)

**************************************************************************
Zeitgeist Busters!
UUCP: {amdahl!bungia, uunet!rosevax, chinet, killer}!orbit!pnet51!schaper
ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51![e-mail]
INET: [e-mail]

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

Date: 21 Nov 90 00:54:42 GMT
From: snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Pioneer 10 Update - 11/16/90


                      PIONEER 10 STATUS REPORT
                         November 16, 1990

     A precession maneuver, scheduled for December 16 has been
cancelled.  Due to the increase in angular acceleration of the
spacecraft and limited tracking, the roll phase analysis has been
unsuccessful in producing a reliable data base for predicting the
roll phase.  These data, obtained during two-way tracking, are
required for planning the maneuver.  As a result,
the Earth Look Angle (ELA) will increase to a maximum of 1.1
degrees during February and March, 1991, and then drift back down
to below 1.0 degrees.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

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

Date: 19 Nov 90 17:11:12 GMT
From: rex!rouge![e-mail]  (Fraering Philip)
Subject: Re: STS 38 Observation Reports

Could it be that the reddish color comes from the fact that the
shuttle is being illuminated by sunlight which has passed through the
atmosphere, i.e. during 'orbital sunset?'

Phil

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

Date: 21 Nov 90 21:34:14 GMT
From: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: HST/Saturn article

The Philadelphia Inquirer (AP)  11/21/90
By Harry F. Rosenthal

Photos of Saturn show huge storm

"The Hubble Space Telescope has returned pictures of a
remarkable event on Saturn, a storm that has grown from an
Earth-sized white dot to a girdle around the planet with
ammonia clouds billowing 150 miles high."

The story quotes Cal-Tech planetary scientist Andrew
Ingersoll, "It just might me the largest atmospheric
structure right now in the solar system, outside of the sun."

The storm was discovered by amateur astronomers in
September when it was three times the diameter of Earth
according to the article.

The Hubble telescope, though hampered by a faulty mirror,
was directed a Saturn Nov. 9 and 11 and last weekend as the
storm enlarged to ring the planet with swirls and loops in a
band 6,000 miles wide, the report states.

 NASA Headquarter's Director of Astrophysics Charles
Pellerin said that a film would be made of the 400 pictures
take so far to depict the evolution of the "storm of the
century."

The article continues, saying that though astronomers do not
know the cause of the storm, Ingersoll discounted the
possibility that a comet or other celestial object struck the
planet to cause the disturbance."It has to be some sort of
internal intermittent thing on Saturn, like Saturn burped.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   Jet Propulsion Lab | [e-mail]
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  M/S 301-355        |
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/   Pasadena, CA 91109 |

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

Date: 20 Nov 90 02:15:13 GMT
From: rochester!sol![e-mail]  (Brian Yamauchi)
Subject: Re: The Space Plane

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

   the military is not
   very big on hypersonics either (at least, not unclassified ones:  there
   is speculation that a good bit of the X-30 work may be a duplication of
   "black" programs which already have flying hardware).

Are you talking about Aurora (a rumored Mach 5 (?) reconnaissance
aircraft), or about something different?

   If the X-30 works
   really well, a successor might be a useful Earth-to-orbit transport, but
   that is 15-20 years away, minimum, at the current pace.

According to Aviation Week, if Congress approves building the X-30 in
1993, the first flight would be in 1997, and the first
single-stage-to-orbit test would be in 1999.

So, I suppose the relevant questions are:

(1) Will the X-30 keep to its schedule?

(2) After a successful orbital flight, how long will it take to
develop a passenger or cargo carrying version?

(3) Will the resulting passenger/cargo vehicle be commercially viable,
or will it be another shuttle (technologically successful, but too
maintenance intensive to be economical).
--
_______________________________________________________________________________

Brian Yamauchi                University of Rochester
[e-mail]        Computer Science Department
_______________________________________________________________________________

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

Date: 20 Nov 90 18:48:26 GMT
From: agate!stew.ssl.berkeley.edu![e-mail]  (Eric J. Korpela)
Subject: Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Logajan) writes:
>> [e-mail] (Ted Molczan) writes:
># Pardon my ignorance, but isn't it possible that the red color is due
># to the same thing that occasionally gives red sunrises and sunsets?

>No.  The red color at sunrise and sunset is caused by the atmosphere.
>There's no atmosphere where the shuttle is; unless you are observing
>the shuttle at a very flat angle to the horizon, you aren't going
>to see red.

I disagree.  You seem to be missing the point that it is sunlight that
is illuminating the shuttle.  As the shuttle nears the shadow, the path
length through the atmosphere of the illuminating sunlight becomes long.
The blue light is scattered out before it even reaches the shuttle.
This could be responsible for the change in color as the shuttle nears
the shadow.

    /\                      [e-mail]      Internet
   /__\  rioch              BKYAST::KORPELA    42215::KORPELA     DecNet
  /    \   of Chaos         korpela%bkyast@ucbjade                Bitnet
 (_____________________     <aka Eric Korpela>

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

Date: 19 Nov 90 08:40:44 GMT
From: mcsun!cernvax!chx400!ugun2b!ugun2a![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Spectacular event over Europe

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Daniel Fischer) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>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 [...]
>>Could someone with connection to NASA, NORAD tells if the satellite hypothesis
>>can be rejected ?  Such a large orbiting object should have been tracked.[...]
>
> It *was* a reentry: NORAD has distributed the news that the event was caused by
> the reentry & burnup of the upper stage of the rocket that carried the Soviet
> comsat GORIZONT 21 into orbit on 3 October. Experienced observers on the ground
> had guessed that fact already from the long duration of the phenomenon, 2 to 3
> minutes: even a really big meteor (like the one from 1972 or the recent Euro-
> meteor from Sept.1986) crosses the sky in a few seconds.
>
>   [Sources: communication with D.Heinlein, Europ. Net for Meteor Cameras + AP]

I don't think that one can safely distinguished between the two options from
the apparent velocity differences alone.  It is true that a couple of second
event rules out a normal satellite, but a longer one doesn't rule out a
meteorite.

First, a meteor has a relative velocity with the earth typically of the order
of 3-4 times larger than a satellite (30 km/s versus 8 km/s), while the timings
from people varied between minutes and ~10 seconds.  Even at 70 km/s, a meteor
needs not a few seconds, but more than about 20 seconds to cross the sky, at
100-150 km altitudes in nearly circular trajectory, as implied by the locations
of observers over an arc of at least 1300 km.

Second, in the evening a meteor has to overtake the Earth on its orbit, which
selects out the meteors in the solar system moving faster than 30km/s in the
direct sense; the resulting relative velocity can be as low as one wants.  It
is thus not unreasonable to expect slow (~10 km/s) meteors at 19h.  In the
morning it would have been the opposite.

Third, a journalist told us that the Munich group of experienced observers
(leaded by Heinlein) had first proposed the meteorite option and sent this news
to AFP (Agence France Press).  So experienced observers can be mislead.

A last reason in favor of the meteor option was that no warning had been given
to the press, which was usual in the past for big space junk (Skylab etc.), and
also that the answer did take quite a while (more than a week) to reach the
media.

In retrospect, the strongest argument in favor of the artificial body was the
nearly west->east circular orbit implied by the observations, the most frequent
sense of circulation of artificial satellites.

    Daniel Pfenniger, Geneva Observatory

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

End of SPACE Digest V12 #586
*******************