Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_5/V15NO510.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 12KB

Date: Sat,  5 Dec 92 18:12:36
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #510
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Sat,  5 Dec 92       Volume 15 : Issue 510

Today's Topics:
                         DC costs and markets
                         NSSDC Data on CD-ROM
    Rush Limbaugh says problems with HST are a DoD hoax! (3 msgs)
                STS-48 and "SDI": Oberg vs. Hoagland
                US weather satellite question (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: Sat, 5 Dec 1992 17:58:53 GMT
From: Bruce Dunn <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC costs and markets
Newsgroups: sci.space

Regarding the DC series Henry Spencer writes:

>
> Add it all up and we're looking at maybe $100k per flight, dominated by
> maintenance manpower.  A hundred test flights is no problem; a thousand
> would be affordable in an airliner-like development budget.


And from another posting regarding Shuttle reliability after Challenger:

> I know what my private consulting statistician :-) (she lives with me)
> would
> say:  "not enough data points".  The post-Challenger upgrades undoubtedly
> have improved the situation some:  there are situations which would
> formerly
> have been unsurvivable that the system can now cope with.  But we are far
> from having any useful estimate of overall reliability.  The shuttle just
> has not flown enough times.

     An advantage of the DC approach to launching payloads which has not
received much attention to date is that it potentially can fly often enough
to generate some really believable data on failure rates.  A couple of
hundred flights without a failure whould indicate that the reliability of the
DC is likely to be better than that of expendible launchers.  This would then
be a strong selling point for the DC in attempting to attract commercial
customers from their traditional launch systems.

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

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

Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1992 14:22:49 GMT
From: "Peter G. Ford" <[e-mail]>
Subject: NSSDC Data on CD-ROM
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ryan Korniloff) writes:
>Black and white!? Well, I understand that Voyager's cameras took 3 pictures
>to make a complete color image - in a green, then red, then blue (was it
>yellow??) filter. Then, on the ground, the images were processed to make
>the color image. Can this be done with IMDISP or any other image
>displaying software? I was really excited with the prospect of purchasing
>CD-ROMs of the images. Now I'm not so sure it would be worth it for me.
>Is it the same for Magellan? And what about the Mars Observer in the
>future? Are those images going to be in B/W?

The major reason for copying raw Voyager and Magellan data to CD-ROM
has been to preserve them for scientific study. Since there are many
possible ways to present the data, NASA has decided to concentrate on
archiving the raw images first. Ron Baalke will be able to tell you
whether IMDISP can combine Voyager frames. I suspect that it can, but
some distortion will result when the target has moved in the frame from
one filter to another.

Magellan images represent radar backscatter efficiency--they have
nothing whatever in common with what we perceive as color. Any use of
color in images published by the Magellan project serves some other
scientific or aesthetic purpose. The altimetry and radiometry global
image disk (volume MG_3001) contains a variety of software and color
palettes for viewing all Magellan images on MS-DOS, MacOS, and UNIX/X11
systems, but the colors will be subjective.

Immediately a raw planetary image is "enhanced", reasonable people will
differ on the validity of the techniques used--just read the recent
flames on the use of false color, exaggerated topography, etc. in this
newsgroup.  In those cases, images that were generated for legitimate
scientific purposes, and whose exaggerations were fully understood by
their intended audiences, were released to the public. Many of these
are available from NASA sponsored archives such as the National Space
Science Data Center, the JPL Public Information Office, and on-line
archives such as "ames.arc.nasa.gov". The CD-ROMs are different--they
are as absolutely accurate as we can make them--but "some assembly is
required".

Peter Ford
Magellan Project and
NASA Planetary Data System

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

Date: 4 Dec 92 18:15:33 GMT
From: Spiros Triantafyllopoulos <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rush Limbaugh says problems with HST are a DoD hoax!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John F. Woods) writes:
>[e-mail] (Ryan Korniloff) writes:
>>The popular American radio personality Rush Limbaugh stated today that the
>>problems with HSTs mirror are a Department of Defense hoax.
>
>This has to be the funniest article I have read on USENET in years.

But not the funniest thing Rush has said over the last couple of years.

I usually listen to him on Saturdays (best of...) while mowing my lawn
or doing housework...  He's pretty funny if not taken seriously, but I
have a feeling that I'm a minority among his listeners.

For the most part he's an egotistic jerk. But just like on Usenet,
many times, egotistic jerks provide the biggest entertainment of all.

Spiros
--
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos                    [e-mail]
Software Technology, Delco Electronics       [phone]
GM Hughes Electronics, Kokomo, IN 46904      [A Different Kind of Disclaimer]

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

Date: 5 Dec 92 15:56:36 GMT
From: Matthew Kaiser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rush Limbaugh says problems with HST are a DoD hoax!
Newsgroups: sci.space

didn't anyone hear about the Aurora plane the AirForce has?

Aviation Week and Space Technology say it could
be a Sanger like space plane

matthew
[e-mail]

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

Date: 5 Dec 92 18:01:37 GMT
From: "Richard A. Schumacher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rush Limbaugh says problems with HST are a DoD hoax!
Newsgroups: sci.space

To be fair, one of the first things anyone wants to do with a
new radio source is to look for an optical counterpart. But
who knows whether Limbaugh understands the difference between
optical and radio? The rumor is still ridiculous.

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

Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1992 12:41:34 GMT
From: Alec Habig <[e-mail]>
Subject: STS-48 and "SDI": Oberg vs. Hoagland
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,sci.astro,sci.space,alt.alien.visitors

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>James Oberg will _of course_ have an explanation.  He is a member of
>>PSICOP and works with Philip Klass, THE well-known skeptic "nothing-
>>is-real" other famous member of PSICOP.  I've been seeing more and
>>more things from Oberg lately, and I *never* see this connection
>>mentioned, only his NASA ties.
>
>THANKYOU, BARB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>I love it when Oberg is on the TV or radio, and he says:
>
>"So the UFO people say that the government has known about UFO's for
>over 40 years, and has managed to keep a secret all this time. Now
>how likely do you think that is?"
>
>It's not what he says, but HOW he says it that registered "FALSE" in
>my intuitive lie detector...
>
>I trust more of what "Uncle Mitty" has to say, since he most likely
>stole it from sources that know what they are talking about.

I dunno... I read the article in question, and Oberg seemed to do a careful job
of analyzing the situation and coming up with very reasonable explanations for
what was a very hyped up topic.  If there are points to his discussion that you
have problems with, well, talk about those points - dimissing the whole thing
because you don't really like the guy seems pretty weak.

    Alec

PS - If being known as a guy who is good at explaining weird things without
resorting to weird explanations is somehow a bad thing, then this is a bit of
bad reputation I'd like to have!  The guys at PSICOP have been known to go
overboard sometimes, but in general their analysis is worth listening to.

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

Date: 4 Dec 92 17:08:38 GMT
From: Spiros Triantafyllopoulos <[e-mail]>
Subject: US weather satellite question
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hi folks,

I have a relatively simple question... A year or two back I remember
that the US was down to its last weather satelite and that there was
no modern replacement in sight. Is that an accurate statement?

Having a long commute over potentially screwed up roads I watch the
weather channel religiously during winter driving season. Their forecasts
seem to be getting worse and worse, at least in the area where I am
(Indianapolis, IN). Could the lack of funding and/or satelites be
affecting this or it's simply that still after all these years weather
is hard to predict?

I have noticed that the forecast quality seems to have worsened considerably
in the last two years; Having heard the thing about the sat's made
me wonder if there's any relationship.

Any details on the sattelites used in weather forecasting will be
appreciated.

Thanks,

Spiros
--
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos                    [e-mail]

Software Technology, Delco Electronics       [phone]
GM Hughes Electronics, Kokomo, IN 46904      [A Different Kind of Disclaimer]

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

Date: Sat, 5 Dec 92 12:02:25 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: US weather satellite question

-From: [e-mail] (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos)
-Subject: US weather satellite question
-Date: 4 Dec 92 17:08:38 GMT
-Organization: Delco Electronics Corp.

-I have a relatively simple question... A year or two back I remember
-that the US was down to its last weather satelite and that there was
-no modern replacement in sight. Is that an accurate statement?

-Having a long commute over potentially screwed up roads I watch the
-weather channel religiously during winter driving season. Their forecasts
-seem to be getting worse and worse, at least in the area where I am
-(Indianapolis, IN). Could the lack of funding and/or satelites be
-affecting this or it's simply that still after all these years weather
-is hard to predict?

-Spiros Triantafyllopoulos                    [e-mail]
-Software Technology, Delco Electronics       [phone]
-GM Hughes Electronics, Kokomo, IN 46904      [A Different Kind of Disclaimer]

The main reason is that a technical difficulty has shown up in the new
generation of weather satellites. I believe the problem is that the
primary mirror is prone to warping in the sunlight. I don't know what the
schedule for fixing the satellites is. (The problem was discovered before
launch.)

The US loaned a weather satellite to Europe some years ago (by shifting its
position to cover Europe), and Europe is returning the favor by loaning one
of theirs to the US.

I believe that with the current configuration, the west coast and the Pacific
Ocean are not getting adequate coverage, and since the weather in these
regions generally moves east over the rest of the country, that could effect
all US weather predictions. As you mention, accurate weather prediction is
still extremely difficult, particularly for snow.

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 510
------------------------------