Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V13_5/V13_549.TXT

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

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/0cAAZAS00WBwE23U4J>;
          Wed, 15 May 91 01:38:21 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 15 May 91 01:38:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #549

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 13 : Issue 549

Today's Topics:
      Re: 14 Astronauts have died for space exploration?
           Re: Advancing Launch Technology
        International Civil Space Agency93 USF
               Re: Saturn V and the ALS
            Sat Tracking foSource
              Re: Honking at cyclists...
               Re: Saturn V and the ALS
               Re: Saturn V and the ALS
         Re: Laser launchers (really tethers)
         NASA Headline News for 05/13/91 (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: 14 May 91 02:00:37 GMT
From: agate!ucsee.Berkeley.EDU![e-mail]  (Mike Morrison)
Subject: Re: 14 Astronauts have died for space exploration?

In article <Added.sc=[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bob Rehak Ext. 3-9437, AIS Central Services  -  Swen Parson 146) writes:
>14 astronauts?  Last time I counted there were only 10.
>Apollo I: Grissom, White, and Chaffee.
>STS-61L Challenger: Scobee, Smith, Resnik, Onizuka, McNair,
>                    Jarvis, and McAuliffe.
>
>A couple have did flight testing aircraft that was not related to
>space exploration and a couple have did in car accidents...I think.

The May 13 Newsweek has an article on the memorial.  They say that
the fourteen are the three Apollo I astronauts, the seven Challenger
astrounauts and Charles A. Bassett II, Theodore C. Freeman, Elliot M. See Jr.,
and Clifton C. Williams Jr. who all died in airplane crashes.

Mike
--
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

Date: 14 May 91 03:52:50 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!rex!rouge![e-mail]  (Fraering Philip)
Subject: Re: Advancing Launch Technology

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

>Note that I don't even believe that an HLV has to
>be cheaper per pound to orbit than smaller launchers. I believe that
>there will be payloads that will require heavy lift because it will
>be cheaper to launch them assembled than to do assembly in space.

1. Assembly in space may be a lot cheaper and easier than you think.
Since the Russians can do it with their rather less developed automation,
shouldn't it be easier with the more developed technology here?

2. Currently it looks like it is the small booster which can take
business away from the larger one in spite of a cost per pound
imbalance in favor of the larger booster. My example, again, is
Pegasus...

--
Phil Fraering || Usenet (?):[e-mail] || YellNet: 318/365-5418
''It hardly mattered now; it was, in fact, a fine and enviable
madness, this delusion that all questions have answers, and nothing is
beyond the reach of a strong left arm.`` - Larry Niven and Jerry
Pournelle, _The Mote in God's Eye_

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

Date: 14 May 91 02:43:52 GMT
From: vax5.cit.cornell.edu![e-mail]
Subject: International Civil Space Agency93 USF

*******************************************************************
*                 UNITED SPACE FEDERATION, INC.                   *
*                UPDATE #4 For the 13th of May, 1991              *
*******************************************************************

  We have had many requests for our agenda.  For those who will be
interested in our agenda, please send a self addressed envolope to
the following address:   UNITED SPACE FEDERATION, INC.
                          International Headquarters
                                 P.O. Box 4722
                         Ithaca, New York   14852-4722
                        In the United States of America

  The Next Update will give a basic outline of our planned agenda
for those of you who are regular subscibers to Sci. SPACE.

Also, a Mr. William Hey recently made a reply in Sci. Space regarding
one of our updates.  He is from Newcastle University in England. He
asks some good questions, but one question in particular needs to be
addressed so as not to present any confussion on the matter.

    Mr. William writes: " into removing enviroment contaminating
industrial processes to points beyound Earths eco-system "
RE:  You mean export our toxic waste ect. and dump it somewhere else
obtrusive?

    This reply is somewhat off the mark! Industrial processes does
not mean, or is remotely similar too, toxic waste ect.  This simply
means that in the future power generation plants and other types of
industrial processes can be moved into space and the products or
energy produced by these activities can then be either transported
or transmitted back to Earth for use.  I do not think sending toxic
waste into space is ethical or pratical as Mr. Williams has already
quite correctly pointed out in his responce.

   I would like to thank the many poeple who have replied to our
postings.  The USF will keep you informed as to our future
activities.

                        Thank you for your time and support,Gospeed!

                                         Sincerely,
                                         Rick R. Dobson
                                         Executive Director
                                         United Space Federation.Inc.

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

Date: 13 May 91 21:22:02 GMT
From: orca!bambam![e-mail]  (Bob Pendleton)
Subject: Re: Saturn V and the ALS

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (/dev/null) writes:

> I know Pegasus was a government sponsored program,

Then you know wrong. Pegasus development was 100% paid for by private
funds. They did cut the government a pretty good deal on the first
launch, but hey, they wanted to sell a launch on an untested booster.

> --
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | Society of Philosophers, Luminaries,           | Brent L. Irvine       |
> | and Other Professional Thinking People.....   | Only my own ramblings |
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

--
              Bob Pendleton, speaking only for myself.
   [e-mail] or decwrl!esunix!bpendlet or hellgate!esunix!bpendlet

                         Tools, not rules.

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

Date: 13 May 91 16:56:38 GMT
From: wwc1.UUCP![e-mail]  (Gregory D. Vence)
Subject: Sat Tracking foSource

Could I have a name and location for some sattilite tracking source code
preferably in c.
    Thanx,
        Greg.

+---------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
I Greg Vence -- KH2EA/7 (Yeah, Guam is home)  I Amiga gets the job done. I
I [e-mail]              I                          I
+---------------------------------------------+--------------------------+

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

Date: 13 May 91 19:59:44 GMT
From: newton.cs.jhu.edu![e-mail]  (Paul Callahan)
Subject: Re: Honking at cyclists...

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James Davis Nicoll) writes:
>    Ignoring C, what do you do when you've 'eaten' the universe?
>It only takes millenia of growth at our current rate to convert the
>universe into human flesh, and while I think there's a good case our
>birth rate will drop, if our industrial growth continues at the current
>rate, we'll 'eat' the Universe industrially in a few millenia.

This is ridiculous (unless you allow FTL travel).  At a certain point,
you have to replace the exponential growth approximation with an N^3 growth
bound (picture a sphere of humanity propagating like an explosion at the speed
of light).

Clearly, in a few millenia, we'll have barely made a dent in the galaxy,
let alone the universe.  On the other hand, right now, we're making quite
a large dent in the Earth's biosphere.  It's important not to squander
all the wealth of this planet before determining how to obtain it elsewhere.
Once we figure out how to exploit the vast resources of space, then maybe
it will be sensible to argue about using them up too fast.  At this point,
however, we don't know how, and it would be nice to learn as soon as possible,
while the option is still available.

--
Paul Callahan
[e-mail]

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

Date: 13 May 91 16:24:58 GMT
From: news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Saturn V and the ALS

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("Allen W. Sherzer") writes:
>That's hard to understand. If NASA had learned anything they would have
>said to themselves: "Holy shit, this sucker is expensive. We better not
>buy any more and put the savings into cheaper approaches". Instead of being
>upset at the Augustine recommendation that no more be build they would
>have been glad they where pulled from the fire without needing to admit
>a mistake.

I have to side with NASA on this one, I'm afraid.  How long will it take
to get "cheaper approaches" into production?  What are the odds that all
the orbiters will survive until then?  Until systems are in place to
replace *all* the functionality of the shuttle orbiters -- that includes
manned flight, not just unmanned cargo lifting -- it is important to keep
the shuttle fleet functioning.  And that means maintaining the supply of
orbiters.  (See the OTA or NRC reports for a detailed explanation of why
this follows.)  A decision to halt orbiter production is a decision to
begin the phasing-out of the shuttle... before any viable replacement
is available.  NASA made this mistake before.  Although their motives
probably aren't the same as mine, I agree with their desire not to repeat
the error.
--
And the bean-counter replied,           | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
"beans are more important".             |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 10 May 91 22:39:08 GMT
From: orca!bambam![e-mail]  (Bob Pendleton)
Subject: Re: Saturn V and the ALS

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

> >There is some big general somewhere, along with a few little generals,
> >a bunch of colonels, majors, captains, ... Whose next promotion
> >depends on ALS being exactly what they say it will be. The Air Force
> >works on an "up or out" system...

> Ha ha ha.  It also works on a "ticket puncher" system.  The people who
> get things started will be long gone to some other job before the excrement
> hits the revolving blades.

Ah come on Henry, cut me some slack! I will admit that this is no
guarantee. But at the high levels they stick around longer than at the
low levels. Also, if they think they will have to ride on it they will
do a better job than if they just shoot it.

> Unless ALS is being run in a very non-standard
> way (like the Navy's long-range missiles), no senior USAF personnel are
> committed to stay with it from start to finish.  When the time comes to
> fix the blame, there will be nobody home.

It would be nice if the Navy were involved instead of the Air Force.
Having to launch from the ship you are on DOES make you more concerned
about quality. The Air Force can accept a certain number of missiles
that blow up in their holes. No Air Force People will be lost in that
kind of a failure. Then Navy can't accept any failures. If the folks
in the boomers thought the missiles might blow up they might not
launch. And their the goes the free world :-)


> >The U.S Air Force are the people who brought you the Atlas and Titan
> >boosters, the Minute Man I, II, and III, and the Peacekeeper missiles.
>
> Those people are long retired, for the most part; except for the very last,
> those programs were 20+ years ago.

No quite, Henry. Several of those are a lot older than twenty years
old. I know people who are much younger than retirement age who worked
on Peacekeeper. Folks much younger than 40 even. They were trained by
people who worked on on Polaris and the Minuteman I.

> Some of them also had some small problems
> with budgets, schedules, performance, and reliability...

Yeah, but in the long run they have shown themselves to be pretty
reliable.

> --
> And the bean-counter replied,           | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
> "beans are more important".             |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

--
              Bob Pendleton, speaking only for myself.
   [e-mail] or decwrl!esunix!bpendlet or hellgate!esunix!bpendlet

                         Tools, not rules.

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

Date: 13 May 91 14:51:48 GMT
From: wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]  (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Laser launchers (really tethers)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>
>>A one square inch kelvar tether to geosync orbit would weigh 45.2 million
>>pounds. I don't have the handbook here at the terminal, but kelvar doesn't
>>approach 45 million pounds per square inch tensile strength by orders of
>>magnitude. It couldn't support itself, much less a usable payload.
>>
>
>Please don't confuse "tethers" with "beanstalks": the latter is a
>special case of the former and is generally considered to be centuries
>(or at least several decades) away from practicality, while tethered
>satellite technology is ready to fly next year (assuming the shuttle
>schedule holds).  There are many applications of tethers in the 1-km
>to 1000-km range that provide much promise for momentum scavenging/
>transfer/banking and electrodynamic energy storage applications, which
>could be practical in the next decade or two.  For these kinds of
>tether lengths, Kevlar is quite adequate, and stuff like Spectra is
>great for "disposable" tethers.  I do have to admit to some doubts
>about being able to drastically reduce launch costs with such systems,
>due to their operational and dynamic complexity.  I imagine that
>scheduling for a "rolling skyhook" system would be a nightmare, and
>prox ops would be... uh... "dramatic".

Yep, I knew that Mike. I was assuming from the context of previous
postings that Nick was referring to beanstalks since we were talking
about the cost to orbit and most of that cost is in the lowest levels
of flight where dynamic tethers seem impractical due to atmospheric
drag.

Gary

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

Date: 13 May 91 20:00:07 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 05/13/91 (Forwarded)


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

  Monday, May 13, 1991    Audio Service: 202 / 755-1788

This is NASA Headline News for Monday, May 13, 1991 . . .

The Columbia STS-40 flight readiness review is currently being held at
the Kennedy Space Center.  The review will conclude tomorrow.
Columbia, with the Spacelab Life Sciences habitable module installed
inside its payload bay, is sitting on launch pad 39-B and undergoing
final closeout preparations.  Ordnance was installed on the vehicle this
weekend.  Mission flight director and astronaut press briefings will be
held tomorrow, May 14.  On Wednesday, May 15, the mission scientists
and program managers will hold the life sciences press briefing.  Both
the Tuesday and Wednesday briefing series will be covered live on
NASA Select TV.

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

The Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS) arrived at the
Kennedy Space Center turning basin this morning.  It was barged
down the coast from the General Electric Company's Astro-Space
Division assembly facilities in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, near the
Delaware River.  From the turning basin, the spacecraft will be moved
to the payload hazardous servicing facility later today and remain
there about two months.  UARS is presently scheduled for deployment
aboard Discovery's planned September STS-48 flight.

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

Launch of the NOAA-D spacecraft is tentatively set for 11:52 am EDT,
tomorrow, May 14, aboard an Atlas-E launch vehicle from Vandenberg
Air Force Base.  The NOAA-D carries five primary instruments,
including the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer, and is a
cooperative program between NASA, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, the United Kingdom, Canada and
France.  NOAA-D will be placed into a 522-mile orbit inclined 98.7
degrees to the equator.  The spacecraft, a General Electric TIROS-N
class satellite, will provide day and night environmental data to all of
the cooperating partners.  Prelaunch preparations and launch of
NOAA-D will be carried live on NASA Select TV.

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

Jet Propulsion Laboratory flight controllers report that the Galileo
spacecraft is in a stable, quiescent cruise state, transmitting at 1200
bits per second through the low-gain antenna.  The high-gain antenna
is still partially deployed.  Galileo is now about 46.5 million miles from
Earth moving at a heliocentric velocity of about 55,600 miles per hour.
The flight control team also reports that both "A" and "B" side
computer strings are now back on line, restoring full redundancy.

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

NASA will hold its second annual Symposium on Industrial
Involvement and Success in Commercial Space tomorrow, May 14, at
the Hotel Washington in downtown Washington.  The all-day, one-day
conference is sponsored by the Office of Commercial Programs and
provides an overview of the agency's commercial space activities.



Here's the broadcast schedule for Public Affairs events on NASA
Select TV.  Note that all events and times may change without notice,
and that all times listed are Eastern.

Monday, 5/13/91
    3:00 pm    30th Anniversary celebration event of the Freedom 7 flight,
          taped on 5/3/91.

Tuesday, 5/14/91
    10:00 am    Begin coverage for NOAA-D launch, from Vandenberg
          Air Force Base.  Launch is set for 11:52 am EDT. LIVE

    2:30 pm    STS-40 mission overview press briefing with lead flight
          director Al Pennington, from Johnson Space Center. LIVE

    3:30 pm    STS-40 astronaut crew press briefing, from JSC.  LIVE

Wednesday, 5/15/91
    10:00 am    STS-40 mission science and life science experiment
      press briefings, from Johnson and Kennedy Space Centers. LIVE

    1:15 pm    Magellan-at-Venus final status report, from Jet Propulsion
          Laboratory.  Magellan will have completed one full mapping
          cycle of the planet. LIVE

This report is filed daily at noon, Monday through Friday.  It is a service of
NASA's Office of Public Affairs.  The contact is Charles Redmond, 202/453-
8425 or CREDMOND on NASAmail.  NASA Select TV is carried on GE
Satcom F2R, transponder 13, C-Band, 72 degrees West Longitude,
transponder frequency is 3960 megaHertz, audio is offset 6.8 MHz,
polarization is vertical.

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #549
*******************