Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_4/V15NO420.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 22KB

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 05:12:20
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #420
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Fri, 13 Nov 92       Volume 15 : Issue 420

Today's Topics:
                         Feynmann's legacy...
                  Japanese X-ray satellite: Astro_D
                     Lunar "colony" reality check
                         Obscure Help  Needed
                       Repost: Space Compendium
   SPACE FOOD. How Food Processors Manufacture Space Food for NASA
                             Town Meeting
                    Water and Moon Rocks? (2 msgs)

    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: Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:53:33 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Feynmann's legacy...

-From: [e-mail] ("Phil G. Fraering")
-Subject: Re: Feynmann's legacy...
-Date: 12 Nov 92 01:01:57 GMT

->In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (I am a terminator.) writes:
->...Hopefully, those in NASA with a less vested
->interest in piloting spacecraft are seriously considering heavy lift vehicles,
->if only to prevent another Challenger from catching the American public unaware.

-Bad luck. Al Gore's campaign speeches on the topic indicated that
-NASA is going to continue to invest in the Shuttle well into the
-21st century;

But Goldin, the Congress, Bush, Quayle, and the Augustine Commission also
support that policy. It makes sense to keep the existing manned launcher
until a better one is "on line".

-Gore also talked about the need to scale back the
-efforts to develop new launchers.

The impression I got from reading the speeches is that they reflect his
opinions going into the job - it's not a matter of "read my lips" and a
promise not to change. I thought most of the criticisms are valid - NLS
requires a big customer like SDI to be really practical, NASP isn't intended
to lead to a "working" spacecraft anytime soon (anyway, there's increasing
interest in pursuing airbreathing craft in a less ambitious step in the
traditional style of the "X" aircraft), and the question of whether Delta
Clipper will be practical is still somewhat speculative. What needs to be
added is a set of well-written technical presentations on the positive
aspects of these approaches, and on the importance of pursuing multiple
designs. (At the least, I feel that construction of DC-X should continue,
and NASP and NLS should be continued at least as technology development
programs.)

I would assume that at least some of the people who strongly favor these
programs are writing letters to Clinton/Gore '92, rather than just sitting
around moaning. :-) While I would not presume to tell people what they
can write, I expect that well thought-out technical arguments would be
likely to carry the greatest weight, and proposing cuts in other programs to
pay for it in the same letter would most likely be counterproductive.

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: 13 Nov 92 04:02:56 GMT
From: "Michael V. Kent" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Japanese X-ray satellite: Astro_D
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Robert W Murphree) writes:
>
>The US hasn't launched any free-flyers in the X-ray since
>HEAO or Eistein 10 years ago, have they? A few detectors on
>other people's satellites of course, but nothing big since
>Einstein.

The German-American Rosat was launched in June 1990, the Broad Band X-Ray
Telescope flew with the Astro payload on the Shuttle during STS-35 in
December 1990, and the Diffuse X-Ray Spectrometer is scheduled to fly
on the upcoming STS-54 mission to deploy a TDRS satellite in January 1993.


I'm not sure the Shuttle fits your definition of free-flying or not, but some
missions have been launched recently.

Mike

--
Michael Kent                                   [e-mail]
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!

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

Date: 13 Nov 1992 03:16:40 GMT
From: Bryan Butler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Lunar "colony" reality check
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Greg Hennessy) writes:
>Henry Spencer writes:
>#Even so, nobody would have been rash enough to *predict* ice there.
>#Recent radar-mapping work shows strong echos from Mercury's poles which are
>#very difficult to explain as anything but ice deposits.
>
>The late Axel Firsoff has predicted ice on the caps of Mercury.
>

do you have a reference for this?  people did consider the trapping
of volatiles in shaded regions of Mercury (see e.g. Kumar, and
Gibson), and ice was even suggested in permanently shaded regions
(see Thomas), but i think the point was that nobody really _strongly
predicted_ detectable amounts of ice at the poles of Mercury.

Gibson, E. K., Jr., Phys. of Earth and Plan. Int., 15, 303-312, 1977
Kumar, S., Icarus, 28, 579-591, 1976
Thomas, G. E., Science, 183, 1197-1198, 1974


>However, Firsoff was known to have some "non-mainstream" ideas also.
>
>--
>-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
> USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
> Internet:      [e-mail]
> UUCP:        ...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w

    -bryan
     [e-mail]
      or [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 00:41:31 CST
From: "Steve J. Quest" <iowegia!quest>
Subject: Obscure Help  Needed
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (James Davis Nicoll) writes:

>
>
>
>     An embarrassing request: my  HP died and I discover I cannot
> remember how to  do logs with a slide-rule,  nor  can I find my sr-related
> texts. Clearly, I am  senile. Anyone out  there recall how  the damn  things
> work?
>
>                             James Nicoll
>
>


James,

        Do you have a log chart from the back of a college math
text?  I could fax one to you if you need it..........sq

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

Date: 12 Nov 92 11:44:11 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Repost: Space Compendium
Newsgroups: junk,sci.misc,sci.space,misc.kids,k12.ed.science,sci.aeronautics

TO:     Education Liasons, School Librarians, ITV Coordinators
FR:     PBS Elementary/Secondary Service
RE:     Space Compendium
DT:     November 11, 1992

INVESTIGATE AND CELEBRATE SPACE EXPLORATION!

The "1992 International Space Year" Compendium has been jointly
produced by PBS E/SS and the Student Space Foundation with
support from the National Science Teachers Association's
Space, Science & Technology Division to assist educators in
grades K-12 in their planning and celebration for the 1992
International Year of Space.  It is also designed to help
educators and students investigate and celebrate space
exploration for many years to come.  This comprehensive
compendium lists hundreds of classroom resources, including
videos, books, research reports, posters, computer software,
space societies, teacher training workshops, music, and more!
Parents may also find this useful in supporting budding
scientists/astronomers.  135 pgs.  To order copies of the
compendium, send a $10.00 check to: PBS E/SS; Space Compendium; Att: Tom;
1320 Braddock Place; Alexandria, VA 22314-1698.  SORRY,
NO PURCHASE ORDERS ACCEPTED.

END

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

Date: 12 Nov 92 23:13:28 GMT
From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Subject: SPACE FOOD. How Food Processors Manufacture Space Food for NASA
Newsgroups: sci.space,rec.food.cooking,alt.food,misc.misc

Here is a press release from the National Food Processors Association.

HARVEST FOR THE HEAVENS
A Different Way of Thinking

Call it space food...or cuisine for the Cosmos.  Whatever name you
use, space travelers are serving up a new dimension to that old
adage--"dining under the stars."

Work is now underway at research labs in private companies and by
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to create
new lines of space fare, not only for Earth-circling crews, but for
future expeditions bound for the Moon and the distant planet Mars.

For many people, the thought of food taken into space still
conjures up a mental image of an astronaut hunched over a
toothpaste-like tube, sucking on something ground control swears is
tuna salad.  "I guess NASA did a great job of public relations back
in the Apollo days," explains Charles Bourland, food scientist for
NASA's Man-Systems Division at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center
in Houston, Texas.

"Our astronauts started eating from a spoon back 15 to 20 years
ago.  They've had utensils and have been eating from open food
containers for a long time," Bourland says.  The first astronauts,
however, did have to endure unappetizing bite-sized, gelatin-coated
cubes, semi-liquids stuffed in aluminum tubes, and freeze-dried
powders.

[subhead]  The Right Process for the Right Stuff

When a Space Shuttle streaks upward into Florida skies from its
Kennedy Space Center launch pad, onboard are more than a hundred
different food items.  Cereals, scrambled eggs, spaghetti, and
strawberries are included, each having gone through a dehydration
process.  When the foods are ready to be eaten, they are later
rehydrated, using water.  Twenty varieties of drinks, including tea
and coffee, are also dehydrated for use in space.

The standard Shuttle menu supplies each crew member with three
balanced meals, providing 2,800 kilocalories each day.  Diets are
designed to supply each astronaut with all the Recommended Dietary
Allowances (RDA) of vitamins and minerals necessary to work and
live in the microgravity world of space.  Selected foods contain
ample amounts of potassium, calcium, and nitrogen to counter the
loss of these minerals when the human body is exposed to
microgravity.

"All of the foods have to be shelf-stabilized," NASA's Bourland
says, "requiring no refrigeration, special treatment, or handling.
And the food has to be good for at least a year."  Food used
onboard the Shuttle is processed to reduce the probability of
pathogenic and food-spoilage bacteria, yeasts, and molds being
present.

Shuttle foods take on several different forms: natural,
thermostabilized, irradiated, intermediate moisture process, and
freeze dried.  Food packaging can take the forms of off-the-shelf
thermostabilized cans, flexible pouches, or semirigid containers.
A chow line on the Shuttle means waiting your turn in front of an
all-in-one food-preparation galley.  This galley comes complete
with a pantry, hot-and-cold water dispensers, an oven that heats up
to 82 degrees C, and food serving trays.  Meal preparation for a
crew of seven is accomplished in about 30 minutes.
        A typical dinner for a high-flying Shuttle astronaut might
consist of a shrimp cocktail, steak, broccoli, rice, and a fruit
cocktail, topped off with chocolate pudding and a grape drink.

[subhead]  Food Industry on Earth Drives Space Food Developments

NASA is now relying heavily on commercially available food
products.  Among the foods purchased by NASA from nearly 60 outside
vendors are:  roasted salted almonds; kona coffee; chicken, ham,
tuna, and turkey salad spreads from Carnation Company (an NFPA
member); butter crackers; dried beef; and banana, tapioca, and
chocolate puddings from Del Monte Foods Company (an NFPA member).

According to food scientist Bourland, NASA has been basically
living off the food industry for several years.  "At one time, NASA
was in the forefront doing research and development in food
processing, particularly in freeze-drying technologies," he says.

"In the last 15 years now, we have been depending upon industry,
and the food industry itself, to provide the leading edge of the
research.  We just take what they have and adapt it to space food
systems," Bourland added.

[subhead]  Biotechnology and Space Harvesting: To Mars and Beyond

Clearly, the trek to Mars and back would demand much in the way of
food technology.  That mission could require astronauts to spend
upwards of 500 to 600 days away from Earth.

Some scientists see use of biotechnology for the flight.  For
example, instead of growing a tomato from a seed, perhaps it will
be more convenient to grow it from a tomato cell.  While this
technology is currently not available, perhaps by the time humans
strike out for Mars, genetic engineering would permit such a food
production concept.

Thomas Parks, President of Food and Agrosystems, Inc., a food
processing equipment manufacturer and consulting group in
Sunnyvale, has also taken up the challenge of space food
production.  His company is studying food processing techniques for
future space harvesting.  The research can be applied to types of
crops useful for a sprawling Moon outpost.  Wheat, potatoes, and
other plants are under study, as is use of an algae pool to break
down plants to yield oxygen.

Explains Parks: "In my own mind, I can't help but feel that our
work in controlling waste and pollutants in recycling systems for
space will help society here on Earth.  Pollution on our planet
goes up the stack, down the drain, or out the backdoor.  In a space
station, you can't do that.  It's a different way of thinking."


Leonard David is a space consultant and writer living in
Washington, D.C.


[photos]

[caption for photo of Dr. Matthys]

Dr. Allen Matthys, now Director of Technical Regulatory Affairs at
the National Food Processors Association, is shown here testing
space food applications at Texas A & M University, c. 1964.


[sidebar]

Nothing Like a Chow Down After Liftoff

[Italics]:  There's only one way to learn what it's like to eat
while spinning around the globe at 17,000 miles per hour.  Ask
people who have been there.  NFPA's Editorial Manager, Michelle
Spring, spoke to former astronaut Bill Pogue about high-velocity
dining.
                      -------------------------
[subhead]  Bill Pogue

Prior to rocketing the first humans into space, nobody knew if a
person could eat in orbit.  Is gravity needed to help digest food?
Would an astronaut choke trying to swallow food?  These questions
became moot when Soviet cosmonauts and American astronauts
routinely ventured spaceward beginning in the 1960s.  Bill Pogue
was one of those early pioneering astronauts, staying aloft from
late 1973 into early 1974 for 84 days, still the U.S. record.  He
orbited Earth in America's first experimental space station,
Skylab.  Currently, Pogue is a consultant to NASA and is working
with the Boeing Aerospace Company.

As for the problems of eating in space, Pogue comments:  "Well, you
ingest a lot of air...but swallowing is no problem in zero-G.  I
have felt, though, that the metabolic process is somehow different.
I was hungrier in space and needed to eat more frequently.  After
about three hours without food, you experience 'space crud'--a
general malaise that affects performance.  It's like coming down
with a cold, only it goes away after you eat," Pogue says.

The foods of astronauts are supplemented with different nutrients,
noted Pogue, and for good reason.  "NASA nutritionists are very
careful to keep the proper mineral balance in our diets.  You tend
to lose sodium, potassium, and calcium in zero-G.  The calcium loss
cannot be compensated for with supplements, though.  The calcium,
or bone mass, loss is related to not being erect for long periods
of time.  Scientists have found the same kind of bone mass loss in
hospital patients confined to a bed for long periods of time."

For many of the astronauts, it appears that the taste buds are
affected by space travel.  Pogue agrees.  "There have been a number
of tests for this in Skylab.  Basically, things taste blander in
space.  We craved spicy and strong flavors--horseradish, Tabasco
sauce, mustard, garlic, pepper."

Looking out into the future, the veteran astronaut anticipates
problems in regards to multi-national crews and the foods to which
they are accustomed.

"As we move toward a true international cooperation in space,"
Pogue explains, "and as astronauts from all nations eat together in
space stations, we are going to face a problem.  There are clear
differences in dietary balances among different cultures.
Different countries maintain a different balance of proteins,
carbohydrates, and fats, for instance.  It will be quite a
challenge to come up with an international menu that will
accomodate each country's tastes, habits, and dietary needs," Pogue
concludes.

[END OF SIDEBAR]
[Use posed photo of Bill Pogue]

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 01:19:40 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Town Meeting

-From: [e-mail] (Gerald Cecil)
-Subject: NASA Town Meeting in Rayleigh -- Was: NASA is too big.
-Date: 11 Nov 92 22:35:33 GMT
-Organization: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

-Based on the 1st NASA Town Meeting in Rayleigh on Monday that I attended,
-some in NASA are still denying reality.  The lone astronaut chairing the panel
-took issue with the question I posed to Goldin regarding shuttle reliability.
-...Later, after Goldin left, the astronaut stridently stated
-that (I paraphrase): ``I want to clear
-up some misconceptions regarding the Shuttle. The Shuttle is the most reliable
-space vehicle that's every flown.  We have a reliablity of .987, etc etc etc.''
-OK, so use his number, raised to the 45th power (= approx # of shuttle flights
-until SSF is assembled) to get a 45% probability of losing an orbiter.  Feynman
-must be spinning in his grave.  Hopefully, those in NASA with a less vested
-interest in piloting spacecraft are seriously considering heavy lift vehicles,
-if only to prevent another Challenger from catching the American public unaware.

Those numbers sound reasonably consistent with the estimates NASA has made
previously (and also stated during Congressional hearings). Yes, space
flight is not a 100% safe activity. If you want to live a long time, it's
not a good idea to go up on *every* Shuttle flight - note that few if any
astonauts go on more than 4-5 missions.

NASA did order the parts to build a replacement orbiter in case one is needed -
(if one replacement is available, what is the probability of getting through
SSF assembly with four orbiters intact?). Furthermore, if an orbiter were to
be lost in the next few years, the assembly lines would still be sufficiently
intact to make another set of parts. (It might be better in that case to
take Rockwell up on its offer to build updated orbiters at a substantially
reduced price.)

There has been talk of building a fifth orbiter now as an on-line backup.
The consensus appears to be that with the projected remaining lifetime of
the Shuttle program, the probabilities don't justify the added expense.

Also note that one of the major goals of the SSF redesign has been to
minimize the number of flights actually needed for assembly.

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 05:10:49 GMT
From: Bruce Dunn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Water and Moon Rocks?
Newsgroups: sci.space

> Charles Pooley writes:
>
> .....they cheated.  The idea was to use hydrogen form the earth, to
> chemically reduce the mix of various oxides in the regolith somewhat.
> The product of this is, of course, water vapor.  Hydrogen is almost
> nonexistant on the moon (unless it turns out that subsurface H2O does
> exist in polar area).


        Not necessarily cheated - it depends on what you are after.  If the
aim is to get the oxygen from the rocks, then the hydrogen is catalytic and
reused.  The recipe goes:

1) Pass hydrogen through hot regolith, and collect the resulting water.

2) Keep the regolith hot, and pull a good vacuum on it with a pump to recover
any adsorbed hydrogen - hope that you have not lost any via permanent
reaction with the regolith

3) Throw away the depleted regolith (or use for other processes)

4) Use electrolysis to split the product water, giving oxygen for breathing,
propulsion or whatever, and hydrogen to use for processing another batch of
regolith.


--
Bruce Dunn    Vancouver, Canada   [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 01:30:07 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Water and moon rocks?

-From: [e-mail] (Bruce Hendler)
-Subject: Water and Moon Rocks?
-Date: 11 Nov 92 23:20:17 GMT
-Organization: HP - Systems Technology Division

-The other evening I was watching a PBS special about the moon.  I briefly
-caught a portion of the program about some scientists creating water
-from moon rocks brought back by one of the Apollo missions. It was being
-done by introducing hydrogen into the rock.  They showed this working...
-you could see water dripping from the moon rock.  Could someone please
-explain this in more detail.  Like I said, I only caught a glimpse of it and it
-totally amazed me.

Since the hydrogen has to be imported (water, LH2, metal hydride, plastic,
etc.), this is basically a method of extracting oxygen from the lunar
material (though the water would be useful too). You produce water from
moon rock and hydrogen, elecrolyze the water, save the oxygen, then react
the hydrogen with more moon rock to make more water, and the process
repeats.

I believe there are also oxygen extraction methods that do not require the
use of hydrogen.

Much of the research going on now is performed using *simulated* lunar
material, made up of the appropriate mix of Earth rocks. For instance,
EPCOT now has demonstrations with plants growing in simulated lunar soil
and simulated Mars soil.

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 420
------------------------------