Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_3/V16NO321.TXT

Text File | 1993-07-13 | 26KB | 687 lines

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 93 05:00:10
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #321
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Wed, 17 Mar 93       Volume 16 : Issue 321

Today's Topics:
                             Galileo HGA
             NASA worships the God of paperwork (2 msgs)
                      plans, and absence thereof
                            Pluto / Charon
              REVIEW article on crystal growth in space
                  SPACE 1993 Conference, March 20/21
                       Without a Plan (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: 15 Mar 93 14:46:06 +1000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Galileo HGA
Newsgroups: sci.space

With the failure of hammering attempts to open Galileo's high gain antenna
following the recent Earth flyby, and the decision to proceed with the mission
using the low gain antenna, does this mean that no further attempts to open the
high gain antenna will be made?

If additional HGA openning attempts are made when are they scheduled and will
they be repeated hammerings or are other strategies envisaged?

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

Date: 16 Mar 1993 09:42 EST
From: "David B. Mckissock" <[e-mail]>
Subject: NASA worships the God of paperwork
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (J. D. McDonald) writes...
>
>Whether the **hardware** works does not matter to NASA or the contractors.
>
>We here on the usenet use a different system: we examine whether the
>hardware works or not. We don't care whether the paperwork
>was doen correctly .. for example, the paperwork for the (last)
>challanger launch was in perfect shape: it was OK to launch in cold weather.
>This was official, agreed to by management. That it was not the
>opinion of the people who knew did not matter.
>

I'm responding, not because I think I can change your mind, but
for the benefit of other readers on sci.space.

First off, I don't understand the logic supporting the position
of "who cares about the shape of the paperwork, I want to know
how the hardware works." The "paperwork" defines the requirements
for the performance of the hardware. The "paperwork" defines the
natural and induced environmental requirements that hardware
must operate under. The "paperwork" records the results of the
verification activities performed to show the hardware meets
the design requiremens, including detailed analyses, data from
tests of the hardware. The "paperwork" contains the detailed
procedures needed to operate and maintain the flight hardware.

I would quickly like to add that I am not a "paperwork" lover and,
like most Engineers, I dislike working on "paperwork". I would
agree that some of the NASA "paperwork" burden is probably
excessive, and could be cut-back without comprimising the
safety or performance of the project. To become a "devil's
advocate" for a moment and cite an example, I become frustrated
when I go to meetings and some ya-hoo says "let's create a new
document to record this-and-that and such-and-so", & I argue
that stuff is already written down in two other places, what
a stupid waste of resources to create a third document to
record these things.

So, yeah, parts of the NASA "paperwork" system can be reformed,
but I don't believe one can ignore the "paperwork" all together.

Finally, I disagree that the paperwork for Challenger was in
perfect shape. In a Systems Engineering seminar I took a few
years back, it was noted that part of the Challenger tradegy
was due to a requirements traceability failure. The Shuttle
Level II requirements document contained a requirement
establishing a wide temperature range on the entire vehicle.
This requirement was incorrectly flowed down to Thiokol,
resulting in the SRB's being designed, qualified, and tested
to a smaller temperature range. The contention is, if the
Shuttle Level II folks had their paperwork in-order, then
this error in requirements flowdown would have been caught.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 15:04:41 GMT
From: "John S. Neff" <[e-mail]>
Subject: NASA worships the God of paperwork
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David B. Mckissock) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (David B. Mckissock)
>Subject: NASA worships the God of paperwork
>Date: 16 Mar 1993 09:42 EST
>
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (J. D. McDonald) writes...
>>
>>Whether the **hardware** works does not matter to NASA or the contractors.
>>
>>We here on the usenet use a different system: we examine whether the
>>hardware works or not. We don't care whether the paperwork
>>was doen correctly .. for example, the paperwork for the (last)
>>challanger launch was in perfect shape: it was OK to launch in cold weather.
>>This was official, agreed to by management. That it was not the
>>opinion of the people who knew did not matter.
>>
>
>I'm responding, not because I think I can change your mind, but
>for the benefit of other readers on sci.space.
>
>First off, I don't understand the logic supporting the position
>of "who cares about the shape of the paperwork, I want to know
>how the hardware works." The "paperwork" defines the requirements
>for the performance of the hardware. The "paperwork" defines the
>natural and induced environmental requirements that hardware
>must operate under. The "paperwork" records the results of the
>verification activities performed to show the hardware meets
>the design requiremens, including detailed analyses, data from
>tests of the hardware. The "paperwork" contains the detailed
>procedures needed to operate and maintain the flight hardware.
>
>I would quickly like to add that I am not a "paperwork" lover and,
>like most Engineers, I dislike working on "paperwork". I would
>agree that some of the NASA "paperwork" burden is probably
>excessive, and could be cut-back without comprimising the
>safety or performance of the project. To become a "devil's
>advocate" for a moment and cite an example, I become frustrated
>when I go to meetings and some ya-hoo says "let's create a new
>document to record this-and-that and such-and-so", & I argue
>that stuff is already written down in two other places, what
>a stupid waste of resources to create a third document to
>record these things.
>
>So, yeah, parts of the NASA "paperwork" system can be reformed,
>but I don't believe one can ignore the "paperwork" all together.
>
>Finally, I disagree that the paperwork for Challenger was in
>perfect shape. In a Systems Engineering seminar I took a few
>years back, it was noted that part of the Challenger tradegy
>was due to a requirements traceability failure. The Shuttle
>Level II requirements document contained a requirement
>establishing a wide temperature range on the entire vehicle.
>This requirement was incorrectly flowed down to Thiokol,
>resulting in the SRB's being designed, qualified, and tested
>to a smaller temperature range. The contention is, if the
>Shuttle Level II folks had their paperwork in-order, then
>this error in requirements flowdown would have been caught.
>
From my viewpoint as an ousider recent shuttle launches seem to be
much soomther operations than those in the past. Perhaps this is the result
of better paperwork, but it is more likely due to the extensive changes
made to all aspects of shuttle operations during the standdown after
the Challenger accident, and the leadership of Admiral Truely.

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

Date: 16 Mar 1993 09:40:48 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: plans, and absence thereof
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary

Nick suggests various things for JPL deleted.....

I think Nick is a *little* off base in suggesting changes for JPL.

JPL  A) Has their plate pretty full doing existing missions.
     B) is oriented to certain mission types, and prospecting
    is a little out of their balliwick..
The basic science needs to be done,  what we need to do is
get basic operating costs in space down by 2 orders of magnitude.
Then the market will do the rest.  Until we stop operating in
this psuedo-market,  no-one will have any interest in cutting costs.

The Delta Clipper looks at being a great chance of reducing launch
costs, now we need to work on other critical bottle-necks.

Plus we need Killer applications.  PC's became a reality, when
visicalc was written.  Mainframes became real when they were
given the job of writing payroll.  Nothing drive IBM like
accounting.

Space has comsats,  but that is being serviced by existing vehicles
and systems,  plus bandwidtyh seems like a limited resource.
plus the FCC and NASA have far too much influence on this market.

What we need to do is develope things that are best done in space and
that will drive the market up there.

pat

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 13:31:15 GMT
From: "John S. Neff" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pluto / Charon
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Tom)
>Subject: Pluto / Charon
>Date: 15 Mar 93 22:18:40 GMT
>>From: [e-mail] (Arthur Chandler)
>
>>There is no agreement among astronomers as to the formal definition of a
>>planet. In particular Pluto is called a minor planet by some astronomers
>>and a major planet by others.
>
>>If Pluto is a binary satellite it would be the only known example in the
>>solar system.
>
>I thought that, due to the ambiguities of the definitions invovled,
>Earth-moon could be called a binary planet/satellite, as well.
>
>-Tommy Mac
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Tom McWilliams | 517-355-2178 (work) \\     Inhale to the Chief!
>[e-mail]  | 336-9591 (hm)\\  Zonker Harris in 1996!
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have seen the earth/moon system called a double planet or binary planet.
I have never seen it called a binary satellite.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 13:34:51 GMT
From: "John S. Neff" <[e-mail]>
Subject: REVIEW article on crystal growth in space
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>From: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: REVIEW article on crystal growth in space
>Date: 15 Mar 1993 22:10 CST
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (CLAUDIO OLIVEIRA EGALON) writes...
>>I am having a hard time to find a REVIEW article on crystal growth in
>>microgravity. I have contacted a guy here at NASA that works on that and he told
>>me that there are none. There anyone in the NET knkows of any review article on
>>that???
>>
>You might call the Public Affairs Officer at the Marshall Space Flight Center
>in Huntsvill Al. I don't have the number but it is in the book. MSFC has
>been heavily involved in crystal growth experiments for many years.  Also the
>University of Alabama in Huntsville Consortium for Materials Development in
>Space is active in that field. You can call their number as well.
>
>Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville
>
Check with the National Research Council, they did a report on microgravity
research and facilities several years ago, wich had an extensive discussion
of crystal growth in space.

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 13:04:32 GMT
From: Peter White <[e-mail]>
Subject: SPACE 1993 Conference, March 20/21
Newsgroups: can.general,ont.general,tor.general,sci.space,sci.astro

SPACE 1993
Conference

Join Ontario's space community for
a weekend of learning & discovery

MARCH 20 & 21, 1993

The purpose of this conference is to give all those interested in space
a chance to learn about recent advances in the exciting field of space
exploration.  Hosted this year by SEDS-Canada and SEDS-York at York
University, SPACE1993 will also be host to the first SEDS-Canada
National Conference.  All lectures, booths, and displays will be held at
Vari Hall, York University's newest lecture building. Booths and displays
will be provided by the RASC, the Planetary Society, TVOntario, and SPAR.


Admission: $15/2 days & $10/day
Seniors/SEDS: $12/2days & $7/day


Saturday, March 20th

09:45 - 10:00
Opening remarks - Dr. Mike DeRobertis
Faculty Advisor SEDS-York.

10:00 - 11:00
Kieran A.  Carroll.
Canada's Space Program - Past, Present & Future : The CSA new long term
space plan will soon be unveiled.  In order to speculate about its
contents, Canada's past and present activities in space will be shown.
Possible future Canadian space projects will also be discussed.


11:00 - 12:00
M. Parfitt, Director SPAR.
The next generation robot arms for the space station.

12:00 - 12:30
Dr. R. H. Prince, York University.
Materials Exposure in Low Earth Orbit (MELEO) : MELEO was one of
seven experiments flown as part of the CANEX-2 payload of shuttle
mission STS-52 (Oct, 1992). The design of the experiment
will be described and its implications for future shuttle
missions and Space Station Freedom.

12:30 - 1:30 ** Lunch **

1:30 - 3:00
Rick Green, TVO's Prisoner of Gravity.
The public's perception of space and space studies.

3:00 - 3:45
Chris Coggon, Director ASC.
Algonquin Space Campus, Canada's first residential space education
facility. A slide show presentation of the founding year and highlights
of the 1992 inaugural season.

3:45 - 4:30
Paul Swift, Canadian Space Society.
Designing personal software for rocket and space shuttle launching
predictions.

4:30 - 5:30
Christine Marton, SEDS-Canada.
Students educating themselves, the role of SEDS in Canada.


Sunday, March 21st

09:45 - 10:00
Opening remarks - Dr. Mike DeRobertis.
Faculty Advisor, SEDS-York.

10:00 - 11:00
Stan Townsend, Project Manager.
The Parallel Computer Project at ISTS.

11:00 - 12:30
Murry Schneiderman.
Getting to the Moon can be fun and profitable. Learn one approach to
making space a viable business venture.

12:30 - 1:30 ** Lunch **

1:30 - 2:30
Norbert Bartel.
The revitalization of the Algonquin Radio Observatory (ARO).

2:30 - 3:30
Paul Delaney, Director York Observatory.
To View the Skies of Spring : Problems of light pollution and the joys
of observing with and without a telescope. A trip around the spring sky.

3:30 - 4:30
Dr. Cindy Cunningham, SAL/ISTS.
Planetary Imaging with the HST : The uses of the Hubble Space Telescope
for planetary imaging, as well as methods for recovering the original
information from the blurred images.

4:30 - 5:30
Dr. L. W. Morley, PCI.
Observing the Earth From Space : Earth and atmospheric sciences are
undergoing a major revolution due to new methods of sensing the Earth
from space. Examples of advances in atmospheric sciences,
geosciences, oceanography, forestry, and agricultural information
systems will be presented.


SPACE1993 Conference Organizers

SEDS-York: Lori French

SEDS-Canada: H. Peter White

Students for the Exploration and
Development of Space
Societe des etudiants/tes pour l'Exploration
et le Developpement Spatial



SPACE1993

Registration Form


To pre-register for SPACE1993, please fill out the form below, and mail this
form along with your payment (check or money order, payable to ``SEDS-Canada'')
to:


SPACE1993
SAL/ISTS, York University
4850 Keele ST., North York
Ontario, Canada, M3J 3K1


Name:

Address:





Telephone:

SEDS Member: Y  N

If Yes, Chapter:

Chapter Location:

Tickets Required:

Amount Paid:



SPACE1993
Conference

Join Ontario's space community for
a weekend of learning & discovery


SEDS

Info Number: [phone]

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

Date: 16 Mar 1993 09:26:46 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Without a Plan
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space

Wow.  This is a hard one for me.  Defending Szabo.  ack....

But the guy has one critical valuable point to make.
That is a sustainable economy must be the basis of space  activities.

Any non viable system, remains a hobby.

The greeks developed steam and water power 3,000 years ago, but it was
a mere toy, due to the plethora of cheap slave labor.
The vikings were off traveling the seas 70 years ago, but they were
creating viable imperial colonies to sustain their adventures.

Greenland was abandoned, once the weather could no longer
support colonies.  to this day, greenland has never supported
much of a population since then.

Zsabo is kinda wound up on his own ideas,  but economies must be
created.  Comsats were stimulated courtesy of government subsidies
and monopolies,  but  they were able to serve market segments.
Air travel, had subsidized mail rates and government developement
subsidies,  but still, it served market niches.

To date, manned space has not served market niches.

pat

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

Date: 16 Mar 1993 09:46:31 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Without a Plan
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
|In a message of <Mar 07 12:21>, Pat (1:103/208) writes:
| >I am a sport diver.  i don't do it for pay, i do it for fun,
| >just as i used to fly for fun.  I do it because it's affordable, on a
| >upper middle class income.
|
|And how many of today's sport divers grew up watching "Sea Hunt" or "Voyage to
|the Bottom of the Sea"?  You don't think that promoted dreams of "glory" in
|those young impressionable minds?
|

Star Trek Does not Cost 14 Billion dollars per year, even now.
Somehow, i doubt navy training films on UDT methods, or megaphone
newsreels on Navy adventures were as stimulating.

|And, yes, I'm an Openwater I diver.
|


No doubt you have benefited from NAVY research on Dive tables and
Hyperbaric physiology, etc....  but what makes you an
open water diver is you can afford it.

I would love to go to australia,  but i can't afford it.
Skiing is affordable,  skiing in Gstaad, switzerland is not.

I would love to be a sport space flyer,  but not at current rates.
what we need is emphasis on bourgesois(sp?)  access to space.

pat

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 17:15:14 EST
From: [e-mail]

Press Release No.12-93
Paris, 16  March 1993

ESA takes part in Earth observation and space science
experiments on board the Space Shuttle

With the countdown for the forthcoming D-2 mission on the
Space Shuttle still running, ESA and European scientists are
already preparing for ATLAS-2, the Shuttle's next mission.
ESA sees its participation in this second flight of the
"Atmospheric Laboratory for Applications and Science" as a
further step in preparing for utilisation of the Columbus
Attached Laboratory.

The ATLAS-2 mission is focusing on Earth observation and
space science; three out of the seven instruments have been
developed by scientific institutes in Belgium, France and
Germany, with support from ESA. Four experiments have
been provided by NASA and US scientists.

The three European instruments have already shown an
excellent performance during the first Atlas mission in March
1992, when they were tended by payload specialist Dirk
Frimout, a Belgian astronaut and ESA staff member. Although
the main scientific objective of the series of Atlas missions is
to achieve continuity of annual measurements over a period as
long as a decade, the first scientific results from Atlas can
already be considered as a contribution to critical research
topics, in particular the environment. The data from ATLAS-2
will add to this achievement.

Two European instruments, Solcon and Solspec, are
measuring to a very high degree of precision the total
irradiation the Earth receives from the Sun -  the "solar
constant" -and the spectral distribution of this radiation over
a wide range of wavelengths. Knowledge of the solar constant
and the solar radiation spectrum matters not only for a better
understanding of the Sun, but also for improving numerical
models of climate and climate change. SOLCON was
developed under the responsibility of Dr. Dominique
Crommelynck of the Royal Meteorological Institute of
Brussels, Belgium. SOLSPEC was instead developed under the



responsibility of Dr. Gerard Thuillier of the CNRS, Verrieres
le Buisson, France.

One of these instruments will be fully remote-controlled by
scientists from a laboratory in Belgium, via
telecommunications links to the Shuttle, and the data of
another will be transmitted to Belgium in real time to follow
the results obtained. This approach is known as telescience:
using telescience, a scientist can monitor his experiment in
real-time, repeat it with different settings, consult his team,
process data and adapt his measurements when interesting
phenomena show up.

The third European instrument, called MAS (Millimeter Wave
Atmospheric Sounder) will be measuring the absorption
spectra of water vapour and trace gases in the upper
atmosphere. The measurement programme includes most
notably ozone and chlorine monoxide, which plays an
important role in the ozone cycle. MAS was developed under
the responsibility of Dr. Gerd Hartmann of the Max-Planck-
Institute fuer Aeronomy, Lindau, Germany.

The complex space-to-ground communications links and the
tools to control the instruments from the laboratories in
Europe have been designed to be as flexible and user-friendly
as possible.

The series of Atlas missions is enabling ESA to gain valuable
experience for the future utilisation of its Columbus Attached
Laboratory; its science results are at the same time a
contribution to today's advances in space science and
environmental research, complementing a number of dedicated
ESA satellites currently under development, such as SOHO,
ERS-2 and ENVISAT-1.

                       *
                      * *

Note to Editors :
At the invitation of the Belgian  Minister for Science Policy
a press conference will be held on 22 March 1993 at 16.00
hours at the Belgian Royal Meteorological Institute in Brussels
(IRMB). The press conference will be followed by the
inauguration of the Space Remote Operations Centre, from
where the telescience operations for the ATLAS-2 mission
will be carried out.

Apart from the Minister, those participating will include:



      Dirk Frimout, Belgian astronaut and ESA staff member
      Dominique Crommelynck, IRMB, Principal
      Investigator for SOLCON
      Gerard Thuillier, CNRS France, Principal Investigator
      for SOLSPEC

Further information can be obtained from the Belgian Science
Policy Office,
Mrs. M.C. Limbourg or Mr. J. Bernard :
Tel : [phone] - Fax : [phone]



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


          id aa01752; 16 Mar 93 5:05:47 EST
To: [e-mail]
Xref: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu comp.org.eff.talk:15633 alt.privacy:6261 sci.space:58653 sci.astro:33107 news.admin.policy:2410
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,sci.space,sci.astro,news.admin.policy
Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!bogus.sura.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!uunet!psinntp!ukelele!kkrueg
From: Karl Krueger <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: cancel wars accountability
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: comp.org.eff.talk,news.admin.policy
Organization: Genuine Computing Resources, Woodbridge, VA
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 04:43:26 GMT
Lines: 32
Sender: [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Jay Maynard) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob Sartin) writes:
>>Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to [e-mail].
>>*IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to [e-mail] for details.
>>I encourage you to write if you feel the service is being abused.

>As if the situation were symmetrical.

>The coward asked folks to flood Dick Depew's superiors with mail and phone
>calls. Not only is [e-mail] NOT the coward's superior, he's not
>even at the same institution (most likely).

>Anyone who incites flooding of someone's boss deserves the same thing to
>happen to him. The coward, by hiding behind Julf's server, has evaded the
>consequences of his actions.

Hmm.  M. Maynard suggests an "eye for an eye", it seems.  Maybe he is
actually suggesting the flooding of someone else's boss, thus he is asking
for it to be done to him?  This reader does not believe M. Maynard wishes
this...

"Hiding behing Julf's server"?  No... For many, bouncing things off the
anon server is routine protection, just like using PGP is for others.
It's security.  Avoiding the consequences of his actions?  Well, YOU seem
to want some consequences - you want his boss to get flooded!  M. Maynard,
your post is a lession in self-reference and self-contradiction to rival
any Hofstader!

Fascinating.

-Karl

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 321
------------------------------