Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V13_2/V13_213.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/wbnTPIa00WBwA8u04M>;
          Fri,  1 Mar 91 01:38:12 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <8bnTPDq00WBw08sE5=@andrew.cmu.edu>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri,  1 Mar 91 01:38:08 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #213

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 13 : Issue 213

Today's Topics:
            Re: Japanese Space Effort, II
              Voyager Update - 02/27/91
          Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D
             Re: Terraforming, sun shield
         NASA Headline News for 02/26/91 (Forwarded)

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: 25 Feb 91 04:58:13 GMT
From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!crg5![e-mail]  (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: Japanese Space Effort, II

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Blase) writes:

>  Those projects targeted by the SAC for basic and applied research with
>  federal funds through the year 2000 include:
>
>  *An orbital servicing vehicle....
>  *An orbital transfer vehicle or space tug....
>  *Development of advanced space technologies such as magneto-plasma-dynamic
>   thrusters for use in deep space missions....
>  *Space factory concepts in which Japan would establish commercially viable
>   materials processing plants in space."

These are reasonably practical, and could conceivably be commercialized.
MPD thrusters (for upper stages) would be an especially large blow against
Western aerospace concerns.  The state of this technology in the U.S.
as of three years ago was _one_ grad student at JPL working on it (I got
to see a demonstration of one of the first working models -- quite an
experience). Hopefully we have done something more since.

MPD is another of the important technologies NASA and space fandom are
ignoring, because it doesn't fit in with the chemical rocket/space
station mindset.  Incidentally, its biggest application would be as
an upper stage to GEO (possibly as an electric/chemical hybrid, the
concept Orbital Sciences Corp. and Rocket Research Company are working
on without NASA's blessing), and deep space missions would be an added
benefit.

In fact, these technologies have very little do with "space stations",
and nothing to do with manned Lunar or Mars bases.


> "Some of the more futuristic Japanese station, lunar base and launch
>  vehicle studies are funded by the National Space Development Agency
>  (NASDA)....Some examples are:
>
>  *Autonomous Japanese space station....

"Automomous" -- that's certainly not the traditional Western conception
of a "space station".    Sounds more like the Fairchild concept which
NASA killed in the early 80's for automated microgravity research and
production.


>  *Japanese lunar base....

Also autonomous I assume, since they have no manned capability,
nor the need for it.


>  *Unusual launch concepts - Taisei Corp., a major Japanese construction
>   company, has a concept that would involve building a launching structure
>   [that would use] a 'linear motor car system' powered by superconducting
>   magnets [to provide initial launch propulsion for a spaceplane orbiter].

Here is another important technology, electromagnetic launch, that
NASA is ignoring.  Incidentally, the largest application for EML would
be launching microsatellites, not spaceplanes.

The Japanese program sounds awfully darn close to the program Paul
Dietz and I have been promoting -- the development of space automation
(factories, tugs, etc.) and non-chemical propulsion (MPD, EML, etc.).
It does look like Japan has its head on straight regarding technology,
strategy, and the most economical scale for pursuing space activitites.
They have shrugged off the obsessions with "manned" projects and
mis-scaled technology, and come up with a lean, aggressive program for
developing the technology needed for space industry and eventually
colonization.

Furthermore, and something we really should learn from (if we can't
learn from our own companies like OSC), NASDA's main strategy is to
develop and deploy technology incrementally and quickly -- their motto
is "quick is beautiful".   When you have a quick space program
it is easy to switch goals from the Moon to the asteroids or wherever
else turns out to be the best place to go, based on further exploration.
Fantasizing about Moon bases then becomes harmless, since it does not
create an entrenched bureaucracy and unneeded technological infrastructure.

With a NASDA budget roughly 1/10 of NASA's, it sounds like they are more
efficient.  Japan's low budget keeps their programs limited, but it also
keeps them lean and mean -- it forces them develop technology more suited to
commercial applications.

Hai, motto Nippongo o benkyoo-shitai desu!


>   Another big Japanese engineering company, Hazama-Gumi, Ltd., has done an
>   engineering study of a different concept - an 'underground rocket
>   launcher.'
>
>   Hazama proposes to use compressed air to blow a Japanese manned
>   spaceplane and its booster out of a mile-deep silo at Mach 1."

Dani Eder and Space Research Associates (in Seattle) studies some
concepts like these.  Don't tell the Japanese :-), but it makes more
sense to put the tube in the ocean.  Again NASA has ignored this kind of
technology in favor of Yet Another Big Chemical Rocket.


>They are taking this stuff seriously folks, and they intend to make a profit
>out of it!

Their studies do seem to be pointing in a much more efficient and
fruitful direction.

Thanks, Paul, for a very informative posting!

--
Nick Szabo            [e-mail]
"What are the _facts_, and to how many decimal places?"  -- RAH

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

Date: 27 Feb 91 19:25:03 GMT
From: swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Voyager Update - 02/27/91


                         VOYAGER STATUS REPORT
                           February 27, 1991

                              Voyager 1

     The Voyager 1 spacecraft collected routine UVS (Ultraviolet Spectrometer)
data on source NGC 6752.  One frame of PWS (Plasma Wave) data was recorded on
February 19.  Round trip light time is 12 hours, 13 minutes.

     On February 18, gyroscopes B & C were turned on for scheduled
conditioning.  Both gyros were turned on and initialized, and the gyro fault
test was enabled.  On February 14 & 20, TLC (Tracking Loop Capacitor) tests
were completed and were nominal.

     On February 20, a dummy CC command was transmitted to the spacecraft to
reset the Command Loss Timer; the command was received by the spacecraft.


                              Voyager 2

     The Voyager 2 spacecraft collected routine UVS data on sources ABELL 85
and FAIRALL 9.  On February 19, One frame of high-rate PWS data was recorded on
the DTR (Digital Tape Recorder).  Round trip light time is 9 hours, 35 minutes.

     On February 19, a dummy CC command was transmitted to the spacecraft to
reset the Command Loss Timer; the command was received by the spacecraft.
The gyro test mini-sequence was also transmitted to the spacecraft on that day;
the CCS (Computer Command Subsystem) checksum was per predicts.

     An AACS (Attitude and Articulation Control Subsystem) MRO (Memory Read
Out) executed out of the mini-sequence on February 21; the readout was per
predict.  Also on February 21, the B and C gyros were turned on, initialized,
and the gyro fault test was enabled.  The enable was in the same manner as
on January 10 when the gyro swap occurred; no gyro swap occurred this time.

     The PLS (Plasma), MAG (Magnetometer), CRS (Cosmic Ray), and LECP (Low
Energy Charged Particles) instruments are measuring and recording the
heliospheric medium and continue looking for possible signs of the interaction
between the solar wind and the interstellar medium.  On February 19, the PLS
instrument recorded an average solar wind speed of 359 kilometers/second, and
measured a particle density of about 0.011 per cc.  The Magnetometer instrument
on Voyager 2 is reading 0.7 gamma for the magnetic field strength and on
Voyager 1 a field strength of an average of around 1.3 gamma, both before
background subtraction.  The CRS and the LECP instruments continue to measure
energetic electrons and nucleons.


                CONSUMABLE STATUS AS OF 02/27/91

     P R O P E L L A N T    S T A T U S           P O W E R

               Consumption
                 One Week  Propellant Remaining Output Margin
     Spacecraft     (Gm)             (Kg)        Watts  Watts
      Voyager 1       7          36.2 + 2.0       366   39
      Voyager 2       7          39.1 + 2.0       370   47

      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|      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: 27 Feb 91 20:15:02 GMT
From: sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nick Szabo) writes:
>>... 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.
>
>>If not Marshall, who?
>
>Los Alamos, Sandia, AMROC, OSC, Rocket Research Company, etc. are all
>experimenting with new launch and propulsion technologies...

Well, yes and no.  Amroc et al suffer from not really having the money
to build experimental prototypes; they are betting the company on their
nifty new idea working the first time.  George Koopman's original vision
of Amroc was destroyed by a single pad fire, and the company's long-term
survival must be considered doubtful.  OSC/Hercules seem to have bet
successfully on a winged first stage (the only thing that was really novel
about Pegasus's technology), but so far it's the only success story in
that crowd.  These technologies would progress further and faster if there
was research done by people who weren't betting the farm on success.

Los Alamos and Sandia are doing it in small ways, but they don't really
have any background in launchers.  This cuts both ways, of course; they
may be better places to do radical new technology.  But they're not
equipped to do serious work on improving the older stuff.

Even the big government launcher contractors strongly support the idea
of NASA getting back into propulsion-technology research.

> 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.

There is nothing wrong with improving chemical rockets, and indeed it
badly needs doing.  Agreed that more diverse ideas also need attention,
but the idea that you can't possibly lower costs with chemical rockets
is nonsense.

The real key is to keep Marshall, or whoever, pointed firmly at doing
technology research rather than trying to build one operational system.
*That* was the big mistake last time.  Note that NASA is, by the looks
of things, about to repeat it.
--
"But this *is* the simplified version   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for the general public."     -S. Harris |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 27 Feb 91 20:49:31 GMT
From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Terraforming, sun shield

In article <[e-mail]> [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?
--
"But this *is* the simplified version   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for the general public."     -S. Harris |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 18:55:01 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 02/26/91 (Forwarded)


             Headline News
Internal Communications Branch (P-2) NASA Headquarters

  Tuesday, February 26, 1991    Audio Service: 202 / 755-1788

This is NASA Headline News for Tuesday, February 26, 1991

Preparations to ready Discovery for a early March launch
continue.  Activity today on Launch Pad 39-A involves preparations for
ordnance installation.  The first elements of that ordnance will be
installed tonight.  The pad will be closed to non-essential personnel during
the installation process.  Discovery's three main engines yesterday
successfully underwent their flight readiness test.  Air Force and NASA
technicians are engaged in a payload end-to-end test today.  On Thursday,
technicians will install space suits into Discovery's air lock, and on Friday,
the external tank will be purged.

The Office of Space Flight management council will meet today.
Among the presentations will be a current analysis of the cracked hinge
clevis on Discovery's fuel-line belly doors.  The issue will also be addressed
at the STS-39 Flight Readiness Review, scheduled for Thursday and
Friday.

                   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Public Broadcasting Service will be showing the first episode
in a three-part series on the Soviet space program tonight.  Locally,
Channels 26 and 22 will air the program at 8:00 pm.  The PBS show is
part of the Nova series and is entitled "Russian Right Stuff."  The
program continues tomorrow and concludes on Thursday.  It was produced
for PBS by WGBH, Boston, and contains significant amounts of Soviet
space program footage never before aired.  The program takes three
different perspectives for the three episodes.  Tonight's focus is the
manned aspect of the Soviet program.  Wednesday's show features Soviet
attempts to get to the moon, and is entitled "The Dark Side of the Moon."
Thursday's concluding episode follows a Soviet crew as they train for a
stay on the Mir space station.

                   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Royal Astronomical Society, London, has announced finding a
group of quasars which could be one of the largest features so far seen
in the universe.  The find is reported in the March 15 issue of the
Society's Monthly Notices, and cites work done by Dr. Roger Clowes, Royal
Observatory, Edinburgh, and Dr. Luis Campusano, University of Chile,
Santiago.  The astronomers report the results of extensive surveys taken
at both the United Kingdom Schmidt Telescope, Australia, and the Cerro
Tololo, Chile, Southern Hemisphere Observatory.  These results, using
computerized telescope images which where then analyzed by a special
search algorithm, show an elongated group of at least 10 of quasars at a
distance of nearly 6.5 billion light years.  There may be three more
quasars belonging to the group, whose dimensions are 650 million light
years long by 100 million light years wide.



Here's the broadcast schedule for Public Affairs events on NASA Select
TV.  All times are Eastern.  NASA Select TV is carried on GE Satcom
F2R, transponder 13, C-Band, 72 degrees W Long., Audio 6.8, Frequency
3960 MHz.**indicates a live program.

Tuesday, 2/26/91
    12:00 pm    Liftoff to Learning program, "Space Basics."

    12:20 pm    Starfinder program, "How Big Is the Universe?"

    12:35 pm    Seeds Revisited, space tomato seeds program.

     2:00 pm    Black History Month program.

Wednesday, 2/27/91
     1:15 pm    Magellan-at-Venus report, live from the Jet Propulsion
                        Laboratory.


All events and times may change without notice.  This report is filed daily,
Monday through Friday, at 12:00 pm, EST.  It is a service of NASA
Headquarters Office of Public Affairs.  Contact:  CREDMOND on
NASAmail or at 202/453-8425.

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #213
*******************