Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_3/V15NO330.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 34KB

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 05:00:00
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #330
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Wed, 21 Oct 92       Volume 15 : Issue 330

Today's Topics:
                             DCX Status?
         Federation gives a decent explantion to you (5 msgs)
Goldin announces changes in NASA organization to focus and strengthen programs and management [Release 92-172] (Forwarded)
                         High School project
                         Nuclear Power / FAQ
                            Oct 9 Fireball
                           Perot & Freedom
              Perot and Freedom and That Bob Martino Guy
           Weather satellites & preventing property damage

    Welcome to the Space Digest!!  Please send your messages to
    "[e-mail]", and (un)subscription requests of the form
    "Subscribe Space <your name>" to one of these addresses: listserv@uga
    (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle
    (THENET), or [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 20 Oct 92 14:16:14 GMT
From: "Michael K. Heney" <[e-mail]>
Subject: DCX Status?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

                   [ Lots of EXCELLENT DCX info - Thanks]

>...  loss of power at low altitude.  To make a safe horizontal landing,
>especially in less-than-ideal weather conditions, you *must* have enough
>power to abandon a bad landing approach and try again.  Shuttle-style
>gliding landings are dangerous, and airline crews go to great lengths
>to avoid them; the Shuttle program, with the nation's best test pilots
>doing the flying and no effort spared to help them, has already had
>one near-crash in its first fifty flights.  Routine access to space
>requires powered landings.


Hmmm - I'm not familar with this story.  *Which* shuttle mission
has a near crash?  Details?  Enquiring minds, and all that.
--
Mike Heney                |   Senior Systems Analyst and     |  Reach for the
[e-mail]   |  Space Activist / Entrepreneur   |  Stars, eh?
Kensington, MD (near DC)  |     * Will Work for Money *      |

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 14:38:30 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Federation gives a decent explantion to you
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.skeptic

From Bill Gawne ([e-mail])

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] writes:
> Lady Rhavyn [e-mail], questions, ideas comments ?

[Much text deleted.  My comments are limited to technical issues
of semiconductor physics.]
[Good basic discription of a diode laser made from a GaAs, AlGaAs
heterostructure.]

> The two layers on either side of it are 10 times as thick and contain
> 30 times the atoms of aluminum for every 70 atoms of gallium.

Not true.  Perhaps the author meant 30 atoms of Al to every 70 of Ga.
AlGaAs is a "tenerary" compound semicondutor.  Aluminum and Gallium are
both period III elements with 3 electrons in their valence shells, and
Arsenic is a period V element with 5 valence shell atoms.  These atoms
naturally bond together into 8 electron closed shell configurations.
As the author mentions later these are known as III-V compounds.

The proper way to discribe a tenerary compound is Al(1-x)Ga(x)As, where
x is the mole fraction of Gallium, and the mole fraction of Arsenic is
normalized to 1.  The material the author attempts to describe is AlGaAs
with x=0.7.

[Remaining, fairly good explanation of solid state physics of hetero-
junction diode laser devices deleted.]

> In the second stage
> the use of super conducting material and quasicrystal....

Now the posting becomes *very* speculative.  A detailed coverage of
high temperature superconducting materials is marred by glossing over
the extreme difficulty of matching layers of HTS with III-V hetero-
structures.  My feeling is that the authors either ignored such surface
effects as excitons or they are not even aware of them.

After many pages mixing overly detailed presentation of high Tc
superconducting materials, the quantum Hall effect, the Meisner effect,
and allusions to Molecular Beam Epitaxy (without ever naming the process)
the authors get to their statement of "what we need to have this great
space drive capability."

>         1.)   A semi-conductor Processing/manufacturing lab.

Yes, but not an ordinary one.  The MBE equipment you need is nothing at
all like typical industrial Silicon processing equipment.

>         2.)   A set of matched, electro-para-magnetic bottles.

Lovely.  I missed the explanation of how these were to be had.  Perhaps
we could beg them from Oak Ridge National Labs if they give up on the
Tokomak?  (That's a fusion reactor project using magnetic containment.)
Were the authors planning to use the superconducting magnets they mention
to produce these "bottles"?

>         3.)   Ultra sonic containment and oscillation equipment.
>         4.)   Heating and cooling elements with a +/- 1700 range

Both of these are currently available, although I'm not clear from the
text about the need for 3.  They might accomplish their goal with inert
gas overpressure.  The extremes given in 4 are a bit much for MBE (unless
they're giving temperatures in Farenheit?  Yep!  They say so later on),
but the equipment is available.

>         5.)   computer/robotics equipment.

Given the applications they go on to describe, the equipment they'll need
is available.

My general feel after reading this is that somebody got carried away in
a euphoria of brainstorming.  The basic idea is worthy of further research
and I'd recommend the authors pursue the possibilities with solid state
physicists and electrical engineers.  They seem to already have access to
talent in these areas.

I'd be pleasantly surprized if the drive suggested in this posting ever
could be built.  I feel that the design is fundamentally doomed due to
boundary layer mismatches and surface effects.  I would caution the space
enthusiasts that while the equipment the authors claim they need to fabricate
this drive is generally available, the process of growing and processing
the device itself will be *very* difficult.

Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 13:55:14 GMT
From: Forrest Aldrich <morwyn!forrie>
Subject: Federation gives a decent explantion to you
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.skeptic,alt.alien.visitors

From article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] has written:
+--------------------
|In article<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
| |> For all of you who have been waiting for a decent explanation of the
| |> drive/laser system, from the Federation, Here you are:
| |> Lady Rhavyn [e-mail], questions, ideas comments ?
| |> 1   Federation Science Academy;
| |>      Engineering Research Text
|
| Perhaps I missed something.  Just what the heck is this all about?
| Who is "The Federation"?  What is "the drive/laser system" and what
| is it for?
+--------------------

    I'm not sure they are even clear what it is about... information about
    it is posted here erratically.

    They also don't respond to specific requests for information... I've sent
    this "Lady Rhavyn" _several_ such requests via electronic mail, and they
    have gone unanswered.  I wish they'd stop cluttering the net with this
    garbage unless they are willing to be serious about any of it.

    The Federation "Guidelines" were remarkably similar in content to that
    of the Star Trek similarity... hmmm... copyright infringement? ;)

--
       -----------          Forrest Aldrich          -----------
       -------     morwyn![e-mail]      -------
       ----                             ----
       --         VISION GRAPHICS --    Dover, NH - USA           --
       ------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Monday, 19 Oct 1992 21:23:48 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Federation gives a decent explantion to you
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.skeptic,alt.alien.visitors

Geez. I'm glad I majored in physics...NOT!

Just a short comment, folkz-
This posting looks rather technical;
and does not appear to be a lunatic rant;
EXCEPT for the fact that whatever
dweebs from "Federation Land" who wrote
this thing FORGOT TO INCLUDE PARAGRAPHS!

That in and of itself frightens me more than
alien visitors wanting to suck my glands.

BTW, is this stuff relevant to our newsgroup?...

Bah! I think I'll go watch HBO.

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

Date: 20 Oct 92 17:41:17 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Federation gives a decent explantion to you
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.skeptic,alt.alien.visitors

>In article<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>> For all of you who have been waiting for a decent explanation of the
>> drive/laser system, from the Federation, Here you are:
>>[...deleted...]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] wrote:
> Who is "The Federation"?  What is "the drive/laser system" and what
> is it for?

The Federation is a small group of space enthusiasts in Alaska.  They
have an idea of using this laser as a spacecraft propulsion mechanism.
We discussed the matter on the phone and via e-mail.  They are sincere
amateurs, if a bit inexperienced in spacecraft design.  (For example,
they didn't realize that even a 100% efficient, zero-mass laser can't
lift itself and its electrical power source off the ground -- given
current technology power systems.)  They are frustrated with the slow
progress in propulsion system technology, and the want to do something
about it.

Their laser (if it works) would seem more suited to terrestrial
applications.  Buried deep in their technical description is the idea
that this is a poly-chromatic, nuclear-fusion-pumped laser.  I can
think of several uses for an efficient, high-powered spread-spectrum
laser -- some of which don't even kill people.  But they want to
further their causes in space exploration.

Don't discourage them too much.  They mean well, and they're trying.

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      [e-mail]  [phone]

     "Even considering the improvements possible... the gas
      turbine could hardly be considered a feasible application to
      airplanes because of the difficulty of complying with the
      stringent weight requirements."
    -- US National Academy of Sciences, 1940

     "It may not be possible to build a vehicle with single-stage-
      to-orbit capability in the mid 1990s."
        -- US National Academy of Sciences, 1990

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

Date: 20 Oct 92 20:03:49 GMT
From: Nick Janow <[e-mail]>
Subject: Federation gives a decent explantion to you
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hmmmm, sounds like it's based on faulty linear extrapolation of small-scale
effects to a larger scale, ignoring the non-linearity of the phenomenon.
It's like noting that a tiny ant can carry 1000x (or whatever the figure is)
its own weight, and postulating horse-sized ants that can carry buildings.

A semiconductor laser can produce a high intensity photon beam when pulsed
with 20 amps...using nanosecond pulses with a very low duty cycle.  Raising
the duty cycle or increasing the current doesn't increase the average output;
it vaporizes the tiny chip.  :)

Likewise, a semiconductor laser 250 micrometers long might emit several watts
of light, but lengthening that to 50 cm (oops: _51_ cm [a magic number?])
won't necessarily make it 2000x higher; the scale-up is unlikely to be
linear.


ps.  Is the Federation still planning to build a space cruiser and go on a
"five year mission" around the solar system?  :)

--

[e-mail]

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

Date: 20 Oct 92 17:14:31 GMT
From: "Richard A. Schumacher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Goldin announces changes in NASA organization to focus and strengthen programs and management [Release 92-172] (Forwarded)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter Yee) quotes Daniel Goldin:


>    "The past 6 months, I've reached deep into NASA to listen to
>the hopes and dreams of employees.  I've listened to concerns
>expressed by America's leaders outside the agency," Goldin said.

>    "If there is universal agreement on one point it's that NASA
>cannot afford to fail..."

Hasn't this been the single most damaging attitude within and about NASA?
An organization that "cannot afford to fail" is one that will not take
risks, and will overspend wildly on the few projects it does undertake
in a vain attempt to reduce the risk to zero. In other words, expect more
Shuttles, HSTs, Galileos, Freds, etc. This is very disappointing, as Goldin
at first appeared to be a new broom and a breath of fresh air in a
fossilising bureaucracy.




, that it must be the preeminent technological
>leader of the world," Goldin said.  "NASA must reach for the stars and
>bring back to America dual-use technology to improve life on Earth."

>    To achieve its goals, Goldin announced the following structural
>and managerial changes at NASA:

>SPACE STATION FREEDOM

>    Strengthening the focus of management of Space Station
>Freedom (SSF) is of the highest priority for NASA.  In a Sept. 17, 1992
>speech, Goldin said he was "taking steps to ensure NASA's top talent
>is working on this program."

>    **    Marty Kress will become Deputy Program Manager for
>Policy and Management, responsible for strengthening cooperation
>with the space station user community, international partners and the
>private sector.  Marty's previous position was Assistant Administrator
>for Legislative Affairs.

>    "Marty Kress is one of NASA's best and brightest rising young
>`stars,' who has successfully helped me steer the agency through
>difficult budget deliberations on Capitol Hill," Goldin said.  "His talent
>is now needed for even greater challenges, to pull together,
>coordinate and integrate the scientific and commercial communities
>so they take full advantage of the opportunities aboard Space Station
>Freedom."

>    Marty Kress' appointment will allow Dick Kohrs, Space Station
>Associate Administrator, to focus his skills on the day-to-day
>development and construction of SSF.

>    **    Mary Kerwin, Director Liaison Division, will become Acting
>Assistant Administrator for Legislative Affairs.

>    **    Tom Campbell, formerly NASA Comptroller, will become
>the Chief Financial Officer for SSF to help ensure SSF keeps within its
>budget estimates.

>    "Tom Campbell is recognized as the strongest financial officer at
>the agency," Goldin said.  "He's NASA's top talent, who will be
>responsible for keeping a watchful eye on the budget and schedule."

>    **    Gary Allison, who was Deputy Comptroller, will become
>Acting Comptroller.

>SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

>    NASA, which is recognized for its great scientific achievements,
>must strengthen its outreach to the science community to improve
>the integration and coordination of research.

>    **    Len Fisk will be promoted to the new position of Chief
>Scientist for NASA.  Len's previous position was Associate
>Administrator for Space Science and Applications.

>    "Len is one of NASA's most brilliant and outstanding scientists,"
>Goldin said.  "His formidable challenge will be to aggressively work
>with the scientific and engineering community, particularly academia,
>to fully involve them in our research goals."

>    "He will be responsible for forging a strong bond with the
>directors of research and development in corporate America to ensure
>NASA is getting the very best technology in all our science missions,"
>Goldin said.

>    "Len, because of his outstanding communication abilities, will
>also be instrumental in explaining to the public the importance of
>NASA's research to improve life on Earth and to inspire humanity with
>wonderful scientific achievements," Goldin said.

>EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE
>
>    The Office of Science and Space Applications will be divided into
>two parts to bring focus to the programs.
>
>    **    Shelby Tilford will become Acting Associate Administrator
>of Mission to Planet Earth.  He previously was Director of Earth
>Sciences.

>    "Mission to Planet Earth is more than a duty, it's a moral
>commitment to future generations," Goldin said.  "We must
>understand our environment -- separating natural from human causes
>and effects -- so policy makers can make decisions on hard data, not
>suppositions."

>    **    Wes Huntress, previously Director of Solar System
>Exploration, will become Acting Associate Administrator of Planetary
>Science and Astrophysics.

>    "We must build and launch many more spacecraft that are
>smaller, faster and cheaper," Goldin said.  "By studying our solar
>system and the universe, we will be able to better understand Earth's
>environment and its future and see if life has developed on other
>planets and understand how the planets formed."

>AERONAUTICS

>    Goldin announced in a recent speech that NASA needs a better
>balance of programs between subsonics, National Aero/Space Plane
>hypersonics and high speed civil transport.  In addition, NASA needs
>to develop a strategic plan to ensure we have the proper facilities to
>keep America's aerospace industry the world's leader.  The Office of
>Aerospace and Space Technology will be divided to provide focus as
>specified below.

>    **    Pete Petersen will become Special Assistant to the
>Administrator to develop a comprehensive and integrated long-term
>plan that identifies the critical facilities for aeronautics and space.  He
>was Associate Administrator for Aeronautics And Space Technology.

>    "As the Augustine Report points out, NASA's infrastructure is
>critical to meeting its mission goals," Goldin said.

>    "NASA must develop an integrated facilities plan, in
>coordination with other government agencies and private industry, to
>construct world class facilities for aeronautics and space."

>    "We must avoid duplication in government and industry to
>achieve maximum results and stretch taxpayer's dollars," Goldin said.

>    **    Cecil Rosen, who was Director for Aeronautics, will
>become Acting Associate Administrator for the Office of Aeronautics.

>    **    Gregory Reck will become Acting Associate Administrator
>for the new office of Advanced Concepts And Technology.

>    **    Courtney Stadd will become Acting Deputy Associate
>Administrator for the new office of Advanced Concepts And Technology.

>    "NASA needs to attract and work with America's greatest
>researchers and entrepreneurs in academia and industry," Goldin said.
>"This office will push America's technological frontiers.  It will be the
>catalyst for innovation and commercialization of technology and for
>transferring technology to create jobs, opportunity and creatively
>commercialize space."

>    As part of the restructuring, the Office of Commercial Programs
>will become part of this new division.

>    **    Jack Mannix, who was Assistant Administrator for the
>Office of Commercial Programs, will become Associate General Counsel
>for Intellectual Property.

>RUSSIAN PROGRAMS

>    **    Sam Keller, Associate Administrator for Russian Programs
>will be on Special Assignment.

>    "Because of Sam Keller's talent and hard work, NASA has been
>able to sign far-reaching contracts with Russia in record speed,"
>Goldin said.  "He now will be moving on to new and exciting
>challenges."

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 15:21 CDT
From: David Sexton <[e-mail]>
Subject: High School project

information about mars.

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

Date: 20 Oct 92 13:44:00 GMT
From: IGOR <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nuclear Power / FAQ
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Paul Dietz) writes...
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (IGOR) writes:
>
>>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (IGOR) writes:
>
>> Perhaps you could throw up somewhere else sir, because It is my belief
>> that the Sp100, the topaz or the nerva project are nuclear power
>> related projects. If you are not convinced of that why don't you come
>> beginning of january in albuquerque at the space nuclear power
>> symposium, you might learn things.  As for the RTG's how can one
>> compare decaying materials to fission controlled technology.....
>
>
>How can I compare RTGs to fission?  Well, perhaps it is because
>the original poster was asking about how nuclear power was
>used in spacecraft.  Right now, nuclear fission is *not* used
>in spacecraft.

so we come down to a rethorical question of the same thread as 'is this
guy an astronaut even though he has retired'. I understand that you are therefore
putting those futuristic projects such as fusion reactors and other dreams
into the same categories as the projects I mentionned above. People have
already been bending metal.
Then again, I do NOT know if any of those projects has ever flown especially
on the russian side nor even on the american side ( classified project).



  RTGs are.  If he had asked about how nuclear
>power could be used in spacecraft, or will be used in spacecraft,
>well, then a discussion of fission would be appropriate.
>
>
> > Why so many people feel threatened when one does not give their
> > answers as the good one?
>
>Glad you asked.  In your case, it was because you gave a baby-talk
>cutsy lecture in nuclear physics that was substantially in error.
>Aside from ignoring RTGs, the bit about "controlling the neutron
>population being the main problem" is just ridiculous.  Control of

Sir This is right a concern in nuclear power plant ( that is being able to
quantify what we call reactivity ....) so I would imagine that it is a concern
for space application.... recently somebody from sandia was explaining what
some problems were with the topaz ( in the case of an immersion accident)
, you may contact
them and tell them no to worry I am sure that they will be interested in your
point of view.


>space reactors, at least the electric-power-producing variety like
>SP-100 or Topaz, is the least of their problems.  The real problem is
>materials that can stand up to the necessary temperatures (which have
>to be high to drive thermoelectric generators or rockets), and do so
>reliably for long enough times.

I agree for the thermal stresses thing.
Then again saying that letting the population grow exponentially
does garantuee the bomb scenario ( everyhting depends on the growth rate),
 some feedback effects are generally
expected to bring this growth down. So much for the babytalkcusty lecture...
Next time try to read slowly the text before throwing up mister-i-know-
everything. End of discussion on this subject since you are obviously not of
good faith.



Igor
Nuclear Engineering Department
Texas A&M University

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 15:28:51 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Oct 9 Fireball
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

A couple of quick comments about the fireball discussions.
The Prairie Network of cameras was operated in the USA (Not Canada)
and has been closed for more than 10 years. It's sole recovery was that
of the Lost City Meteorite which was found in the middle of a road
about a week after being photographed by the cameras. It was operated from
the early 1960's into the mid-late 70's.
In Canada a seperate fireball camera network existed under the auspices
of the NRC. It operated from 1970 or 1971 until closing in 1985. It was
called the Meteorite Observation and Recovery Project (MORP). It's
sole photographed recovery was that of the Innisfree meteorite in 1977.
There are *no* fireball camera networks operational in North America at the moment.
In Europe there is a network of cameras in Germany and Czechoslovakia termed
the European Network (EN) which is still operational and has been running for
about 20 years I believe.
Green color in fireballs can have several causes which have been discussed.
While Green is rather rare in normal brightness meteors (say fainter than
Venus) occuring perhaps in 1-2 percent of the population there seems to be
a higher percentage of green colored bright meteors. Green in meteors can
be caused by the 5577 forbidden oxygen (so called auroral green line) and
was first detected in (I think) 1961 by Halliday. My understanding is that
this is usually associated with fast meteors (such as the Perseids). The
fireball in question was not going this fast; the green may have been caused
by Magnesium or a host of other emission lines from ions emitted by
the ablating meteoric parent body. An excellent thermal model of fireball
emission and developement has been designed by J. Borovica at the Ondrejov
observatory in Czechoslovakia. He has matched his model with the spectra
from several fireballs photographed in the EN and gets detailed
elemental abundances, temperature and line intensity profiles as a
function of height from his model. For those interested his paper will appear
in the proceedings of the Symposium "Meteoroids and Their Parent Bodies",
held in July, 1992 (to be published in about 6 months).
   The question of the surface temperature of a meteorite after impacting
the ground has been a source of controversy for some time (see Cosmic
Debris by Burnes). Reports have varied from ice layers at the surface of
a fallen meteorite to meteorites so hot as to set hay on fire (not verified).
It would seem that as most meteorites are associated with fireballs with
steep entry angles (hence less material ablated and more liklihood of
something surviving) and hence spend little time actually being heated the
standard thinking regarding the inability of the object to heat to the core
and hence ability to dissipate any residual surface heat in its several minutes
of dark flight through the few tens  of kilometres of atmosphere before impact
is valid. But in rare cases where the initial parent body is very large and
the angle of entry is very shallow, heating may last up to 30 seconds which
is apparently sufficient to cause substantial core heating and hence the
meteorite may still be hot when it impacts. The impact itself causes little
additional heating (except in the case of very large bodies) as the stone
has reached terminal velocity long before it hits the ground.
   One request: would anyone with information on the source(s) of the
original videotapes from the Oct 9 fireball send this information to me
via email.  Since the event was captured on tape from several stations it
is in principle possible to derive a pre-atmospheric orbit for the body and
since the associated meteorite has been recovered (and hopefully analyzed
immediately for radionuclides for cosmic ray studies!!) it can yield as
much information as if we had sent a very expensive probe to  sample some
part of the solar system! This also could mean that
the Oct 9 fireball belongs to a very exclusive club indeed: only 3 other
meteorites have photographically determined orbits.
   Please send any information regarding a) the current whereabouts of the
recovered meteorite and b) the source of the video tape(s) to:
   [e-mail]
   Thanks!


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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 16:06:11 GMT
From: Bob Martino <[e-mail]>
Subject: Perot & Freedom
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (_Floo
r_) writes:

>So I watched Perot's little solutions special this Friday evening.
>And whilst he showed his charts, there was one about spending cuts.
>One of his proposed cuts included "specific expenses." In the fine
>print beside this slice of pie, it said...."Space Station"...
>

So Perot has my vote.
The quoted cost figure for Fred is OUTRAGEOUS, and I don't even
believe it.  The actual cost would probably be 2x or 3x, after
the typical government pork production on it.  I want humans in
space as much as anyone, but the poloticos have ruined what
might have once been a good thing.
What would *YOU* do with **HUNDREDS** of **BILLIONS** of dollars?
That would buy SCORES of Apollo missions to the moon, a dozen
skylabs, and a fleet of probes to each and every planet in the
solar system, with a couple of dozen for asteroids, comets, and
hypothetical big comets/small planets that might be lurking
around the far end of the solar system.

Less is more.  Think small.  Think cheap.  Death to Fred
Sorry.  I rant a bit.

_________________________________________________________________________
                                    | "...for since the creation of the
      - that Bob Martino guy -      |  world His invisible attributes,
 [e-mail] |  His eternal power and divine
                                    |  nature, have been clearly seen,
   God invented science.  so there. |  being understood through what
       ^^^^^^^^                     |  has been made        -Romans 1:20
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 "That's the whole problem with science.  You've got a bunch of
  empiricists trying to describe things of unimaginable wonder."
                                                  -Calvin

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 13:42:57 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering)
Subject: Perot and Freedom and That Bob Martino Guy

>So Perot has my vote.
>The quoted cost figure for Fred is OUTRAGEOUS, and I don't even
>believe it.  The actual cost would probably be 2x or 3x, after
>the typical government pork production on it.  I want humans in
>space as much as anyone, but the poloticos have ruined what
>might have once been a good thing.

You might want to let Perot know this, if you're in his
volunteer organization. He might very well think our only
choices are Freedom or nothing. Let him know about the
Third Extreme (or whatever the good catchy phrase of the
day is).

>What would *YOU* do with **HUNDREDS** of **BILLIONS** of dollars?
>That would buy SCORES of Apollo missions to the moon, a dozen
...

Actually, today you would probably want to do something like
Zubrin's Moon or Mars Direct schemes...

>skylabs, and a fleet of probes to each and every planet in the
>solar system, with a couple of dozen for asteroids, comets, and
>hypothetical big comets/small planets that might be lurking
>around the far end of the solar system.

>Less is more.  Think small.  Think cheap.  Death to Fred
>Sorry.  I rant a bit.

Hey, I enjoyed it.

>________________________________________________________________________
>                                    | "...for since the creation of the
>      - that Bob Martino guy -      |  world His invisible attributes,
> [e-mail] |  His eternal power and divine
>                                    |  nature, have been clearly seen,
>   God invented science.  so there. |  being understood through what
>       ^^^^^^^^                     |  has been made        -Romans 1:20
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "That's the whole problem with science.  You've got a bunch of
>  empiricists trying to describe things of unimaginable wonder."
>                                                  -Calvin

Personally, I think it should have been called the Horrendous
Space Kablooie too.

--
Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
---------------------
Disclaimer: Some reasonably forseeable events may exceed this
message's capability to protect from severe injury, death, widespread
disaster, astronomically significant volumes of space approaching a
state of markedly increaced entropy, or taxes.

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

Date: 20 Oct 92 16:17:41 GMT
From: Dave Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Weather satellites & preventing property damage
Newsgroups: sci.space

Robert P Dale ([e-mail]) wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes:
> > I think hurricanes are the only major natural
> >disaster we can predict reliably enough that people take it seriously and far
> >enough in advance to do much good.
>
> I dunno... Major tornadic outbreaks are well forecast and publicized
> usually, although the warnings aren't always heeded (Wichita/Andover 1991.)
>
Tornadoes are much smaller and more capricious than hurricanes.  They
cut a narrow but devastating swath across the land.  We can forecast
likelihood but not occurrence, based on weather conditions.  Even when a
tornado does form it may jump over locations in its path.  And sometimes
we get it wrong, as in the surprise tornado in Tampa Fl. not long ago.


--
||)) There is no truth to the rumor that:)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))|
||)) Lotus are suing Apple for copying the look and feel of their lawsuits )|
||))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))|
||Dave Jones ([e-mail]) | Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY   |

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 330
------------------------------