Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V13_1/V13_166.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-06-28 | 17KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from hogtown.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/kbjWoCy00WBw08iU4A>;
          Sun, 17 Feb 91 02:13:19 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 91 02:13:11 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #166

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 13 : Issue 166

Today's Topics:
               Re: Controversy
    Re: SPACE Digest V13 #102 (What's the Moon good for?)
                 Launch costs
          Re: Space Industry Business Plans
        Re: Spy satellite coverage of the Gulf
               * SpaceNews  18-Feb-91 *

Administrivia:

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

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

Date: 15 Feb 91 07:23:39 GMT
From: midway!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!sharkey!umich!dgsi![e-mail]  (Greg Cronau)
Subject: Re: Controversy

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Martin Brown) writes:
>On the issue of how they produced live TV transmission of Armstrong taking
>the first step on the moon:
>
>> I'm thinking of the black and white, very low-fidelity, real-time video
>> that was broadcast from the LEM as Armstrong descended the ladder for the
>> first time.  It was shot from a B/W tv camera in an equipment bay on the
>> side of the LEM.  [e-mail]
>
>As I understand it, this camera's main aim was to give a visual indication
>of how far into the lunar surface the LEM's feet had sunk. The ability of
>the lunar surface to support the LEM (or human beings) was unknown at the
>time. It turned out that the LEM feet didn't sink into the dust as much as
>expected hence the jump of a couple of feet from the bottom of the ladder
>onto the lunar surface.

Sorry, I don't agree. That camera wasn't even *deployed* until after the
LEM was already down. In fact, the equipment bay that housed that camera
was not deployed until the astronauts were suited up and ready to go out.
That camera's main purpose was to record the Astronaut's first step onto
the lunar surface. I believe you are right about the LEM not sinking as far
as they thought, that was why the last step was so high, but they *did*
have a pretty good idea of whether the lunar surface could support the LEM.
Do you remember surveyor? One of it's main purposes was to make sure the
lunar surface wasn't like a sea of liquid graphite, as some theorys of that
time though it might be.

[e-mail]

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

Date: 15 Feb 91 15:55:16 GMT
From: eru!hagbard!sunic!lth.se![e-mail]  (Magnus Olsson)
Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #102 (What's the Moon good for?)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Considering the fact that one widely-accepted theory of the origin of
>"life" on Earth had it starting in tidal pools of the primeval oceans,
>not having a moon would imply none of us being on this network reading
>all of this!!

This is something you hear at regular intervals. However, even if the
moon wasn't there, we'd still get substantial tides from the sun's
attraction.

Magnus Olsson                   | \e+      /_
Dept. of Theoretical Physics    |  \  Z   / q
University of Lund, Sweden      |   >----<
Internet: [e-mail]     |  /      \===== g
Bitnet: THEPMO@SELDC52          | /e-      \q

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

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 91 22:18:11 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender
    and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement.
Subject: Launch costs


>From: [e-mail] ("Allen W. Sherzer")
>Subject: Re: SPS, Shuttle, Gaia
>Date: 15 Feb 91 20:33:57 GMT

>In article <[e-mail]> John Roberts writes:
>>Some of the big US launchers are probably *slightly* cheaper per
>>pound/kilogram than the Shuttle, but the small launchers tend to be *more*
>>expensive.

>I beg to differ. As it is currently used the Shuttle is about the MOST
>expensive way to put a pound into orbit.
>Consider the following table:
>Vehicle                   Cost/flight          Cost/pound payload
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>Shuttle [1]                 $428M                $8,570
>(7 flights/year)
>Shuttle [2]                 $375M                $7,500
>(8 flights/year)
>Titan III [3]               $125M                $3,906
>Delta [4]                    $38M                $3,800
>Pegasus [5]                  $10M               $10,000

>The expendables are about half the cost of the Shuttle. If Pegasus
>reduces it's cost by 25% (which should happen fast as they traverse
>the learning curve) it will be competative with the Shuttle.

A factor of 2 to 1 *is* a slight difference compared to a factor of 25 to 1,
which is what Tommy Mac had recalled from the Newsweek article. That's what
I was trying to get across. Two to one is not a whole lot greater than the
"blur" or "noise" caused by differences in accounting/bookkeeping.(*)

Pegasus is also considered somewhat of a breakthrough product in the small
launcher market. According to someone else's reference to a NYT article,
prices in that market have tended to be in the range of $20000/lb. I presume
at least some of the others are still in business - Pegasus still has fairly
limited production capability. (Have they launched a second one yet?)

While I am not sure I agree completely with the exact numbers, I would not
want to contest your claim that some ELVs are cheaper than the Shuttle - and
I agree that for some of the newest models, the difference can be substantial.
After all, cost and susceptibility to schedule slips are the two chief
problems of the Shuttle. However, I believe ELVs could do much better yet -
$1000/lb should be achievable, and *possibly* $250-500. So it's not that
the Shuttle isn't expensive, but that the other ones aren't cheap. :-)

(*) - Some reasons why the numbers probably should not be considered exact:

>[1] This is from the NASA 91 Appropriation bill. They allocate ~$4
>    billion for Shuttle Operations and Production. I assume that $1B
>    is for 'production' (a very conservative estimate) and the rest is
>    operations. The current manifest has 7 flights for this year.

>[2] From the NASA 92 proposed budget. Costs are about the same but we
>    have one more flight scheduled. Note that if flights slip then
>    it adds to cost. Each flight which slipps past the end of the year
>    adds ~50M to cost of all the other flights.

Aside from what exactly should be considered part of launch cost, it should
be noted that money appropriated for a certain operation is not necessarily
all spent, and that the rate of expenditure is not constant. NASA spends money
at a much greater rate before and during a Shuttle launch than at other times.
Last summer when Columbia and Atlantis were grounded by hydrogen leaks,
William Lenoir remarked that the delay was saving quite a bit from *that*
year's budget. Presumably a scrubbed launch costs more than leaving the
Shuttle sitting there for the same period, so the budget presumably includes
a cushion for a certain number of scrubs. The cost of a tanking test
approaches the cost of an actual launch.

>[4] Avation Week Feb. 19,1990

That's a Delta 2. The reference seems slightly questionable, since it reflects
a price paid on a single purchase (which incidentally was tied in with three
other much higher-priced purchases), rather than a stated price for future
purchases from the company. It was also stated that this particular purchase
represented a saving of $13-17 million over previous purchases. It was
not stated how much of the rest of the $313 million project was spent
for payload servicing and interface, which NASA *may* include as part of its
Shuttle operations costs.

>[5] Wild Ass Guess. From memory a Pegasus costs $10M and lifts 1000
>    pounds.

The maximum orbital payload is listed as 400kg or 900 pounds. DARPA paid
only $6.5 million for the first launch, but they may have paid well in
advance, which financially counts as paying more. I believe the commercial
price is expected to be in the range of $8-10 million. This ignores possible
savings to OSC from use of the B-52 at subsidized prices for government
launches.

Another item to consider for Pegasus - remember that the Shuttle also charged
very low prices for the early launches. It will take a considerable number
of launches to determine what the launches *really* cost. One can *hope*
that the price will go down.

And a general observation - with any of these launchers, if the actual
payload mass is less than the maximum payload, actual cost/pound presubably
goes up.

>  Allen
      John Roberts
      [e-mail]

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

Date: 16 Feb 91 22:06:04 GMT
From: borg!vivaldi![e-mail]  (Jonathan Leech)
Subject: Re: Space Industry Business Plans

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nick Szabo) writes:
>_High Frontier_ IMHO is one of the most valuable, thought-provoking
>books ever written.  It is a damned good physicist's speculation,
>but not a serious engineering R&D or business plan.  Note that the
>business O'Neill actually went into (navigation satellites) is much more
>contemporary and appropriate in scale.

    Also note that Geostar was founded with the intention of its
success eventually supporting space industrialization via a fraction
owned by the Space Studies Institute, and that in the interim SSI has
been doing the very R&D you point out is lacking from _The High
Frontier_, to the limit of its funding (something that can be partly
addressed by sci.space readers giving them money, hint hint).

    I just finished by first 5-year pledge to SSI and received a small
token of appreciation - a keyring containing lunar simulant material
(1.1 GY old basalt) of a type used in lunar material processing
research.
--
    Jon Leech ([e-mail])    __@/
    ``My goal is simple. It is complete understanding of the universe,
      why it is as it is and why it exists at all.''
    - Stephen Hawking

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

Date: 7 Feb 91 20:34:31 GMT
From: att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]  (Doug McDonald)
Subject: Re: Spy satellite coverage of the Gulf


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Liam Gumley) writes:
>
>Visible sensors obviously only work during the daytime.

No so. Have you ever noticed that you can see things at night? Modern
electronic sensors can do even better. Moonlight gives enough light
for anything. Starlight is sufficient for many purposes.


Doug McDonald

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

Date: 16 Feb 91 16:25:57 GMT
From: ka2qhd![e-mail]  (John Magliacane)
Subject: * SpaceNews  18-Feb-91 *


SB SPACE @ ALLBBS < KD2BD $SPC0218
* SpaceNews  18-Feb-91 *

Bulletin ID: $SPC0218


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

                       MONDAY FEBRUARY 18, 1991

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



* U2MIR-1 NEWS *
================
UW3AX says the packet equipment now on Mir consists of a PacComm
Handi Packet unit and ICOM IC-228A 2 meter FM transceiver together with a
laptop computer.  Veteran Cosmonaut Musa Manarov, UV3AM, familiarized
himself with the equipment at the Cosmonaut training facility at Star City
near Moscow prior to his launch to orbit late last year.  Both PacComm and
ICOM America have donated several equipment sets to facilitate the Mir
packet activity.

Although the IC-228A can run as much as 25 watts RF output power, UW3AX
suggests Musa will probably keep the power levels below maximum.  ICOM
America marketing manager Evelyn Garrison, WS7A, met UW3AX in Seattle at
the Good Will Games last summer and endorsed the Mir packet donation.

The PacComm Handi Packet TNC on Mir has a built-in Personal Message System
that has been using the address U2MIR-1.  According to PacComm president
Gwyn Reedy, W1BEL, the software on the flight unit is off-the-shelf. Some
new software with features tailored for the space environment may be sent
to Mir soon.  Meanwhile, some configuration changes to the existing unit
such as allowing for up to 10 simultaneous connects will be made by U2MIR
command shortly.  Other changes to increase QSO/QSL-ability will also be
phased in says Gwyn.

[Info via WA2LQQ and ANS]


* KEPLERIAN DATA FORMAT *
=========================
The following outlines the "NASA Two-Line" Keplerian data format.
Data for each satellite consists of three lines in the following format:

AAAAAAAAAAA
1 NNNNNU NNNNNAAA NNNNN.NNNNNNNN +.NNNNNNNN +NNNNN-N +NNNNN-N N NNNNN
2 NNNNN NNN.NNNN NNN.NNNN NNNNNNN NNN.NNNN NNN.NNNN NN.NNNNNNNNNNNNNN

Line 1 is a eleven-character name.

Lines 2 and 3 are the standard Two-Line Orbital Element Set Format identical
to that used by NASA and NORAD.  The format description is:

Line 2
Column     Description
 01-01     Line Number of Element Data
 03-07     Satellite Number
 10-11     International Designator (Last two digits of launch year)
 12-14     International Designator (Launch number of the year)
 15-17     International Designator (Piece of launch)
 19-20     Epoch Year (Last two digits of year)
 21-32     Epoch (Julian Day and fractional portion of the day)
 34-43     First Time Derivative of the Mean Motion
        or Ballistic Coefficient (Depending on ephemeris type)
 45-52     Second Time Derivative of Mean Motion (decimal point assumed;
           blank if N/A)
 54-61     BSTAR drag term if GP4 general perturbation theory was used.
           Otherwise, radiation pressure coefficient.  (Decimal point assumed)
 63-63     Ephemeris type
 65-68     Element number
 69-69     Check Sum (Modulo 10)
           (Letters, blanks, periods = 0; minus sign = 1; plus sign = 2)

Line 3
Column     Description
 01-01     Line Number of Element Data
 03-07     Satellite Number
 09-16     Inclination [Degrees]
 18-25     Right Ascension of the Ascending Node [Degrees]
 27-33     Eccentricity (decimal point assumed)
 35-42     Argument of Perigee [Degrees]
 44-51     Mean Anomaly [Degrees]
 53-63     Mean Motion [Revs per day]
 64-68     Revolution number at epoch [Revs]
 69-69     Check Sum (Modulo 10)

All other columns are blank or fixed.

Example:

Mir
1 16609U          91 36.87776287 0.00038608           39705-3 0  2481
2 16609  51.6077 232.9299 0024950 205.6681 154.3223 15.64092124284608

Note that the International Designator fields are usually blank, as issued in
the NASA Prediction Bulletins.


* DECAY NOTICE *
================
1982 033A (Salyut-7) object 13138 decayed in the Earth's atmosphere on
February 7, 1991 along with 1985 086A (Cosmos 1686).  Reports indicate
the the remains of these objects fell in the Andes mountains of South
America.


* OSCAR-21 NEWS *
=================
The AMSAT-U Orbita RM-1 and AMSAT-DL RUDAK-II transponders, now OSCAR-21
in orbit since 1200 29 January with GEOS, had the TLM placed on briefly
today 1 February. All parameters looked good, an I, V, W(P), and T were
all nominal.

The TLM will come on again at 0600 on 4 February, when OSCAR-21 will then
undergo environmental testing for some two weeks before being handed over
to the general amateur community for use.  Check 145.822 MHz initially, and
RUDAK from RK3KP who will be QRV on 14.280 MHz SSB over the testing period.

73, Pat, G3IOR @ GB7VLS


* ASTRO BBS *
=============
Jean, KR4V, runs a telephone BBS carrying information pertaining to amateur
astronomy and telescope making.  The BBS is available at: 804/743-0559.


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

KB2GFJ : Jackie Blakeslee, Binghamton, New York, USA
KB2GHX : Bobby Blakeslee, Binghamton, New York, USA
N2IHQ  : Bob Blakeslee, Binghamton, New York, USA

...and e-mail messages:

KB2EKU, N2IHQ, WA2ZSD, WB2JAB, ZL2BSJ, N3ISI, KR4V, N4PLD, WB5QNR,
OE6NLD, KC8UD


73, de John, KD2BD

/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

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #166
*******************