Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V13_2/V13_212.TXT

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

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/UbnTE6G00WBwQ8n05t>;
          Fri,  1 Mar 91 01:26:15 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri,  1 Mar 91 01:26:07 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #212

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 13 : Issue 212

Today's Topics:
    Joust 1 commercial launch set for March 29 (Forwarded)
              Ulysses Update - 02/26/91
    JSC establishes Freedom Operations Project Office (Forwarded)
          Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D
    Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D (Really about MSFC)
         Re: Whither Lunar Observer in FY92?
               Re: Terraforming
        Why bother? (was Re: Terraforming, sun shield)

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: 26 Feb 91 21:42:41 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Joust 1 commercial launch set for March 29 (Forwarded)

Barbara Selby
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                                February 26, 1991
(Phone:  [phone])

Rick Mould
University of Alabama-Huntsville
(Phone:  [phone])

George Purvis
Orbital Science Corp., Space Data Div., Chandler, Ariz.
(Phone:  [phone])


RELEASE:  91-33

JOUST 1 COMMERCIAL LAUNCH SET FOR MARCH 29

    The launch of Joust 1, a commercial suborbital rocket carrying
10 materials and biotechnology experiments, has been scheduled for 8:30
a.m. EST on March 29 from Launch Complex 20 at the Cape Canaveral Air
Force Station, Fla.

    The Joust 1 mission is sponsored by the University of Alabama
in Huntsville's Consortium for Materials Development in Space (UAH
CMDS), a NASA Center for Commercial Development of Space.  Orbital
Sciences Corp., Space Data Division, Chandler, Ariz., under a contract
with UAH CMDS, will provide the rocket and launch services.

    Space Data will use its Prospector launch vehicle to lift the
payload approximately 400 miles into space.  The one-stage rocket will
provide about 13 minutes of microgravity for the experiments.
Following reentry, the payload will splash down in the Atlantic Ocean
about 200 miles downrange where it will be recovered by ship and
returned to Cape Canaveral.

    The Joust 1 flight will involve participation from four other
NASA commercial development centers.  The CCDS payload participants
include:

    * UAH CMDS -- Three materials science and processing experiments;

    * Advanced Materials Center, Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus,
    Ohio -- Three materials processing experiments;

    * Center for Cell Research, Penn. State University, State College -- one
    biotechnology experiment;

    * Bioserve Space Technologies, University of Colorado, Boulder -- one
    biotechnology experiment; and

    * The Center for Commercial Development of Space Power and Advanced
    Electronics, Auburn University, -- power distribution and control units.

    Additionally, two industrial members of UAH CMDS will have experiments
as part of the payload:

    * Thiokol Corp., Logan, Utah -- a materials science experiment with
    thin films; and

    * Instrumentation Technology Associates, Inc., (ITA) Exton, Pa. --
    Materials Dispersion Apparatus which will hold experiments in
    biomedical, manufacturing processes and fluid science fields.

    Teledyne-Brown Engineering, Huntsville, Ala., will provide payload
    integration.

    The Joust launch is funded in part by a grant from NASA's Office
of Commercial Programs.  Total cost for the launch, payload and launch
services is about $3 million.

    This will be the fourth commercial launch sponsored by the UAH CMDS.
The previous launches -- all part of the consortium's Consort launch
series -- were conducted at White Sands Missile Range, N.M.  - end -

    EDITORS NOTE:  A preflight press briefing will be conducted the day
before launch at NASA's Kennedy Space Center News Center, followed by a
photo opportunity at Launch Complex 20.  News media planning to cover
the Joust 1 flight should direct their request for accreditation to:

     Lisa Fowler, PA-PIB                       Phone: [phone]
     John F. Kennedy Space Center,             FAX:  [phone]
     Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899

    Letters of accreditation should be written on the letterhead of
the requesting organization, be signed by a management official and
list the name, function and Social Security number of the individual(s)
for whom press credentials are requested.

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 22:58:41 GMT
From: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Ulysses Update - 02/26/91


                            ULYSSES STATUS REPORT
                              February 26, 1991

     As of 9 AM (PST), Februray 25, 1991, the following data was taken on
the Ulysses spacecraft:

     Distance from Earth               139,731,169 miles  (224,875,519 km)
     Distance from Jupiter             294,177,243 miles  (473,432,381 km)
     Velocity relative to the Sun           59,610 mph         (95,933 kph)
     Velocity relative to the Earth         79,974 mph        (128,706 kph)

     Tape recorder operations based on recovering data acquired during the 16
hours out of view periods are continuing on a routine scheduled basis.
Experiment reconfigurations have been carried out as required.  An average of
98.6% data recovery was achieved during the past week.

     A STO (Radio and Plasma Waves) instrument load consisting of 120 commands,
was performed on February 21 without any problems.  An Earth pointing maneuver
was also performed.  This did not cause any lasting spacecraft nutation despite
the fact that it was carried out during the period where the forcing function
was predicted to be at its highest for 1991.

     A close watch is being kept for the possible return of nutation although
it is believed that the forcing function is now decreasing.  Procedures are
available to control it should it occur.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|      Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |      Jet Propulsion Lab | Is it mind over matter,
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |___   M/S 301-355        | or matter over mind?
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /|  Pasadena, CA 91109 | Never mind.
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                      | It doesn't matter.

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 23:21:46 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: JSC establishes Freedom Operations Project Office (Forwarded)

Mark Hess
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                            February 26, 1991
(Phone:  [phone])

Jeffrey Carr
Johnson Space Center, Houston
(Phone:  [phone])


RELEASE:  91-35

JSC ESTABLISHES FREEDOM OPERATIONS PROJECT OFFICE


    The Johnson Space Center, Houston, has established a project office
for the development and implementation of Space Station Freedom (SSF)
flight operations.

    The Space Station Mission Operation Project Office resides within
the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD), which has overall
responsibility for the development and conduct of flight planning,
training and operations for the Space Shuttle and SSF programs.

    MOD Director Eugene Kranz described the new organization, saying,
"It's intended to provide for more direct interaction between MOD and
the work packages, institutions and international elements in
developing and defining operating concepts, requirements and
responsibilities.  The change also will enhance our support of these
organizations in the design of space systems and the development of
operations facilities".

    The new office will be headed by Charles R. Lewis who will report
directly to Robert W. Moorehead, Deputy Director for Program and
Operations, SSF Program Office, on all aspects of planning, training
and management of SSF flight operations.

    After graduating from New Mexico State University with a B.S.
in Electrical Engineering, Lewis worked for a year at the Goddard Space
Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.,  on radio frequency systems before
joining the NASA Space Task Group at the Langley Research Center,
Hampton, Va., in 1962.  Lewis moved to Houston with the task group in
1962 after establishment of the Manned Spacecraft Center, now the
Lyndon B.  Johnson Space Center.

    Since 1962, Lewis has held several highly responsible positions at
JSC in mission operations.  He served during the Mercury and Gemini
programs as remote site Spacecraft Communicator.  He served as
Assistant Flight Director during Apollo and as Flight Director for
Apollo 17, all Skylab flights, the Apollo Soyuz Test Project and
Shuttle missions 1, 2, 4 and 9.  In 1984, Lewis was named Chief of
Flight Operations Integration and then as the MOD Chief of Space
Station Operations Integration in 1985.

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 23:16:07 GMT
From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!crg5![e-mail]  (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>...This will
>not change unless we have *somebody* doing such work *without* it being
>tied to specific missions.  Specific missions rarely want new technology:
>they don't want to endanger their mission by being the first to depend
>on something new.  We need the space-technology equivalent of the X-planes,
>pioneering new technology on a modest scale without trying to make it
>show a profit in the first prototype.

This is an _excellent idea_ -- a set of "X-launchers" and "X-stages"
purely for technology research, not intended for operations.  Like the
X-planes, they would be smaller-scale versions of the real thing,
designed for testing a diverse set of technologies.  One interesting
configuration might be "X-electric", a nuclear-electric upper stage
using Topaz-2 to test several different kinds of electric and
electric/chemical hybrid engines.  A smaller version might be solar
powered.


>If not Marshall, who?

Los Alamos, Sandia, AMROC, OSC, Rocket Research Company, etc. are all
experimenting with new launch and propulsion technologies.  If Marshall
is willing to seriously work on a more diverse set of ideas -- at least two
or three among EML, gas-gun, scramjet, laser, electric, nuclear -- I'll
support Marshall.  If they simply focus on the technology of chemical
rockets (or worse _one kind_ of chemical rocket) it will likely lower
launch costs about as much as the Shuttle did.


--
Nick Szabo            [e-mail]
Forward in all directions!

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

Date: Wed, 27 Feb 91 14:08:36 EST
From: "Alan B. Owens" <[e-mail]>
To: "Space UseNet" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D (Really about MSFC)

Reference: <[e-mail]>

Actually, Goddard has a Space and Earth Sciences Directorate that has a
Laboratory for Astronomy and Solar Physics. The Solar Max mission was run from
Goddard.

Alan B. Owens                           Building 182, Room 3M106
Staff Programmer                        800 N. Frederick Avenue
IBM Corporation                         Gaithersburg, Md 20879-3395
[e-mail]            301-240-7191

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

Date: 27 Feb 91 21:50:52 GMT
From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Whither Lunar Observer in FY92?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Willie Smith) writes:
>>>... The big trick would be getting the probe back to into
>>>Earth orbit so the shuttle can pict it up...
>>That is indeed the big trick.
>
>No, it's easy, you just collect it on a return trip from one of the
>regularly scheduled supply runs to the lunar base, right?

Assuming you've got a lunar base with regular supply runs.  That definitely
isn't going to happen in time for Lunar Observer, since LO will be one of
the first parts of a renewed lunar-exploration program.
--
"But this *is* the simplified version   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for the general public."     -S. Harris |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Wed, 27 Feb 91 20:47:39 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender
    and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement.
Subject: Re: Terraforming


>From: [e-mail] (Heidi Hammel)
>Subject: Re: Terraforming, sun shield
>Date: 27 Feb 91 21:40:32 GMT
>Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

>[e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>> [e-mail] (David Fuller) writes:
>> >  I find the concept that humans find "uninhabited" planets fertile ground
>> >  for cultivation repulsive, ignorant and a propulsion of the status quo.
>> Do you feel similarly about the dreadful despoiling of the Hawaiian Islands
>> by all those icky plants and animals?  (The original "unspoiled" state of
>> those islands was bare, sterile volcanic rock.)
>> If not, why is it proper for plants and animals to cultivate barren
>> wastelands and not for humans to do likewise?

>I guess my answer to your question, Henry, is that those plants and animals
>are cultivating the barren wastelands into a viable ecosystem, with checks
>and balances.  Humanity so far has only demonstrated a marked ability to
>*destroy* stable ecosystems, returning them to barren wastelands.

Remember there is almost certainly no life on Venus or the moon, and it is
extremely likely that there is none on Mars. So there isn't any ecosystem
to wreck.

>Humanity (in particular Western civilization)

As opposed to Iraq?

>hasn't yet learned to live on the Earth without destroying
>it; it hardly seems appropriate to move on to the next planet.

>------   Heidi B. Hammel      ([e-mail])     MIT 54-316
>--       Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences

One could similarly argue that soldiers should not marry, because their
profession has been oriented toward killing people, so they have no
business generating new life, or that young people should not give money to
their parents, because they have previously been only a financial burden. :-)

I think I know what you're getting at - we shouldn't try to colonize any
off-earth site without considerable study and preparation. But I think
that goes without saying. :-)
     John Roberts
     [e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 09:50:16 GMT
From: mcsun!ukc!harrier.ukc.ac.uk![e-mail]  (S.S.Sturrock)
Subject: Why bother? (was Re: Terraforming, sun shield)

Nice idea this terraforming, why can't we make lots of new worlds for people
to live on, then we don't have to worry about contraception, or the population
problem, excellent plan guys.  We make a mega mess of this world, get all
green and caring but still we don't consider the one all important green issue,
our propensity to overpopulate.  OK, so it's a tangential argument but what the
hell, I'm a tangential sort of chap :-)

Toodle pip.

Shane Sturrock, Biol Lab.  Canterbury, Kent, Great Britain.

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #212
*******************