Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V12_5/V12_592.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-06-28 | 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/wbJU3rC00VcJ060U5I>;
          Fri, 30 Nov 1990 01:49:30 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 1990 01:48:54 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #592

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 12 : Issue 592

Today's Topics:
               * SpaceNews 26-Nov-90 *
        Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red?
           Re: Big bang discovered 1400 years ago ?
          Re: ELV Support to Space Station (1 of 2)
              Re: Photon Engine

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: 23 Nov 90 18:18:30 GMT
From: usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!masscomp!ocpt!tsdiag!ka2qhd![e-mail]  (John Magliacane)
Subject: * SpaceNews 26-Nov-90 *


SB SPACE @ ALLBBS < KD2BD $SPC1126
* SpaceNews  26-Nov-90 *

Bulletin ID: $SPC1126


                              =========
                              SpaceNews
                              =========

                      MONDAY NOVEMBER 26, 1990

SpaceNews originates at KD2BD in Wall Township, New Jersey, United States.
It is published every week and is made available for unlimited distribution.



* RS-14/RUDAK-2 LAUNCH *
========================
AMSAT-DL officials have been informed that the launch of RS-14/RUDAK-2 will
occur on or about November 29, 1990, plus or minus one day.  Also, it is not
expected that the RUDAK-2 transponder will be turned on until three days after
launch.  Radio amateurs should not expect to hear the CW beacon from RUDAK-2
until December 1, 1990.  Efforts are still under way to provide a launch net
on 20M starting about an hour before launch.  UA3CR requests the help of radio
amateurs worldwide to help collect telemetry and send it to him via packet
radio to him once the CW beacon is turned on.  The CW telemetry beacon can
be heard on a downlink frequency of 145.822 or 145.948 MHz SSB.

The CW Morse-Code telemetry frame will consist of the registration call RS14
and 8 four-digit lines in the following format:

     RS14  1A 1B 1C 1D
           2A 2B 2C 2D
           3A 3B 3C 3D
           4A 4B 4C 4D
           5A 5B 5C 5D
           6A 6B 6C 6D
           7A 7B 7C 7D
           8A 8B 8C 8D

The 1A to 7A lines are analog telemetry data.  Line 8A is a calibration
engineering parameter.

The first digits from 1A to 8A are system status data.  Figure 6 means
general operating status and figure 2 means command operating status.

The second digits from 1B to 8B (0 to 7) are line (channel) numbers.

The third and fourth digits from 1C to 8D are analog telemetry values.

RS14 Telemetry Decoding Parameters:

Line #    Parameter                     Formula  Unit

 0        Transponder power output      0.05N    Watts
 1        Transponder PA Temperature    N        Deg. C
 2        +24 V Regulated Bus           N        Volts
 3        +16 V Regulated Bus           N        Volts
 4        + 9 V Regulated Bus           N        Volts
 5        +24 V Regulated Bus           N        Volts
 6        Inside Temperature            N        Deg. C
 7        Service                       N        *


* STS-38 NEWS *
===============
Several independent observers in central Florida and Texas observed Atlantis
and the USA 38 spy satellite payload deployment during mission STS-38 last
week.  Observations seem to indicate that a problem might have occurred with
the satellite and it might have been brought back to Earth by the shuttle.


* TNX QSL! *
============
A special thanks to all those who sent QSLs, cards and letters to SpaceNews:

N0MKJ : Bill Rupp, Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, U.S.A.
WB6LIE: Chuck Belk, Santa Ana, California, U.S.A.


* FEEDBACK WELCOMED *
=====================
Feedback regarding SpaceNews can be directed to the editor (John) via any
of the following paths:

INTERNET : [e-mail]
PACKET   : KD2BD @ NN2Z.NJ.USA.NA
UUCP     : ...!rutgers!ka2qhd!kd2bd

MAIL     : John A. Magliacane, KD2BD
           Department of Electronics Technology
           Advanced Technology Center
           Brookdale Community College
           765 Newman Springs Road
           Lincroft, New Jersey 07738
           U.S.A.


       << If you like what you see, send us your QSL card! >>

/EX
--
John A. Magliacane                 FAX  : [phone]
Electronics Technology Department  AMPR : KD2BD @ NN2Z.NJ.USA.NA
Brookdale Community College        UUCP : ...!rutgers!ka2qhd!kd2bd
Lincroft, NJ  07738  USA           VOICE: [phone] ext 607

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

Date: 19 Nov 90 23:09:34 GMT
From: optilink![e-mail]  (Clayton Cramer)
Subject: Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red?

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Logajan) writes:
> [e-mail] (Ted Molczan) writes:
# #Bill noted that as the object neared the shadow it became red, and
# #made a bright orange flash.
#
# 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?
# --
# - John Logajan @ Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428

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.

--
Clayton E. Cramer {pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!cramer
"Meat is murder!"  "Dairy is rape!" -- Animal Liberation Front
Fine, then antibiotics are genocide!
You must be kidding!  No company would hold opinions like mine!

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

Date: 20 Nov 90 01:25:46 GMT
From: dweasel![e-mail]  (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: Big bang discovered 1400 years ago ?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul L. White) writes:
>
>Your article on the koran and the Big Bang was extremely enlightening.
>Tell me more about the koran, please...especially the enlightening part
>about clitorectomies in the Moslem culture.
>
>Did Cat Stevens really get one?

    Said with LOTS of :-)'s, I presume.

    I think that this supposed anticipation of the Big Bang in the
Koran is pure coincidence. There are a lot of discoveries that the
Koran mentions nothing of, or else we would have heard about them from
the Koran-bangers in GORY detail.

    Does the Koran give the actual SIZE of the observable
Universe?

    Does the Koran mention the hierarchy of structure in the
Universe:

    Gauge fields and elementary fermions (quarks, leptons, neutrinos)
    Nuclei
    Atoms
    Molecules
    (LOTS of other structures)
    Stars and planets bound by gravity
    Star clusters
    Galaxies
    Galaxy clusters
    The Universe as a whole

    Where does the Koran demonstrate the evolution of life -- ALL
life, not just humanity? Where does it discuss taxonomy done by
structural features, the standard technique of modern biology?

    Where does the Koran discuss the chemical elements, as they
are now understood? Earth, water, air, and fire don't count because
they match more closely to phases of matter rather than to the
chemical elements.

    Does the Koran discuss nucleic acids, the molecules that carry
hereditary information?

    Does the Koran discuss Continental Drift?


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster: [e-mail]

Since this nodename is not widely known, you may have to try:

[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 23 Nov 90 23:34:04 -0500
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ELV Support to Space Station (1 of 2)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Cc:


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wales Larrison) writes:
>>>... Sums to about $660 Million per year for a Soyuz-based ACRV.

>> These costs seem reasonable to me.  Now for the interesting part:
>>If we use Soyuz as the main method of transportation, is this
>>cheaper than using the Shuttle?  It seems to me that the answer is
>>yes since we are getting a year's worth of rotation for less than
>>the cost of one Shuttle flight.

>   Allen, I ran some rough numbers, and surprisingly enough I found
>the answer to be the exact opposite.  Here's my calculations.....

Why am I not suprised :-)

Let me point out a few of my disagreements and propose a more
detailed architecture. This architecture will allow for both
crew rotation and logistics supply. It will also support expansion
at a later time.

First let me list a summary of the relevant costs associated with
a Soyuz based transport systme for the station. This will include
full rotation four times a year and 160K pounds per year of logistic
support.

Item                   Cost/year

Titan IV               $908M  (4 at $227M each)
Logistic Module        $120M  (4 at $30M each)
Transfer &
rendezvous system      $ 80M  (4 at $20M each)
Soyuz & man rated
Atlas                 $1575M  (11 at $143.2M each)
Extra crew time:      $ 100M
                      ------
Total:                $2783M


Now first of all, let me point out that this approach wins over
using using the Shuttle and an ACRV. To beat this number, a
Shuttle launch needs to cost under 695M which is just under
the average cost of operations over the last ten years. So
even using Mr. Larrisons numbers this approach is competative.

However, I think we can do quite a bit better with some changes. First,
we will use a HLV for logistics. This will greatly reduce costs.
Secondly, we will use an off the shelf Atlas. To provide the
same 160K pounds of logistics and four crew rotations per year
we get:

ITEM                   COST/YEAR

HLV                    $400M  (2 at $200M each) [1]
Logistic Module        $ 80M  (2 at $40M each) [2]
Transfer &
rendezvous system      $ 40M  (2 at $20M each)
Soyuz & man rated
Atlas                 $1210M  (11 at $110M each) [3]
Extra crew time:      $ 100M  [4]
                      ------
Total:                $1830M

To beat this cost, the Shuttle must be launched for less than
$458M which is about a third less than current costs. Also note
that with a Shuttle based approach you need to add the cost
of NASA's ACRV which itself runs into the billions.

[1] This is the price quoted by MDAC for HL Delta in quanity. It
    does not include development cost but over 30 years it will be
    in the noise level. Besides, Mr. Larrison didn't include Shuttle
    development costs in his assesment and his costs where over ten
    times as high. In addition, this will lift 25% more material
    than the Shuttle or Titan IV alternatives.

[2] I added ten million to the cost of these because they carry twice
    as much. However, I'm sure a way can be found to reuse them in
    some manner. Either use them in orbit or surround them with Shuttle
    tiles, stick a parachute in and drop them into the sea. Either way
    reuse will reduce cost but I assume they are not reused.

[3] Money saved by not man rating the Atlas. Since the operational
    record of the Atlas over the last ten years is far better than
    the operational record of the Shuttle over the same period and
    is on par with estimates of Shuttle safety there seems little
    point. In addition, since Atlas is so much simpler than the
    Shuttle a good arguement can be made that it always will be safer.

[4] As with [2], I suspect ways can be found to do this cheaper. Smaller
    modules can be deorbited and picked up. However, I will keep it
    for now.


Finally, using Soyuz (or any small capsule) offers other advantages
as well. Among them are:

1. This approach is more fault tollerant. Both HLV's considered here
are compatible so if one is grounded the other can be used as well.
With a little trouble, the logistic module can also be designed to
use Titan IV. If the Atlas fails, it may be possible to use Delta
or titan. If all else fails, the Soviets can launch for us.

2. With Soyuz we provide for incrimental growth of the station. With
an eight person ACRV it will be expensive to send up two more people.
Soyuz supports adding smaller amounts of capability in a continual
manner. This is better in the current political environment. You can
also add an extra one without too much trouble which will be nice as a
backup in case one fails.

3. If somebody gets sick there is no need to abandon the station like
there would be with a single ACRV. You send the sick person and one
other down on a Soyuz and the rest can still be protected.

     Allen

--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Allen W. Sherzer| I had a guaranteed military sale with ED-209. Renovation |
|   [e-mail]  | programs, spare parts for 25 years. Who cares if it      |
|                | works or not?  - Dick Jones, VP OCP Security Concepts    |

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

Date: 23 Nov 90 17:23:01 GMT
From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Photon Engine

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (S Schaper) writes:
>The ground based version also has certain interesting military applications.

Actually, no.  A laser launcher would be built for use with cooperative
targets.  Furthermore, it works better at longer wavelengths, if I recall
Jordin's comments correctly, while destruction of uncooperative targets
works better at shorter wavelengths.  The two would probably share quite
a bit of *technology* -- which is why the current laser-launcher project
is assuming that SDI will develop the lasers and high-power optics -- but
the actual launcher hardware would have no military significance.
--
"I'm not sure it's possible            | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
to explain how X works."               |  [e-mail]   utzoo!henry

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

End of SPACE Digest V12 #592
*******************