Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_5/V16NO557.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 33KB

Date: Thu, 13 May 93 05:00:19
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #557
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Thu, 13 May 93       Volume 16 : Issue 557

Today's Topics:
                 DC-X and publicity... is there any ?
                           EOS Info Needed!
               G. Gordon Liddy mentions T-Shirt at NASA
                      Galileo Update - 05/06/93
         HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days (2 msgs)
                              IP-36 ESM
                LDEF "growths" seen on shuttle mission
                            Life on Earth
             Math?? (Was US govt & Technolgy Investment
                   Pat and the Big Dan  eye to eye.
                    Soyuz and Shuttle Comparisons
                         Vandalizing the Sky
             Yoo hoo, White Sands? (was Re: DC-X Status?)

    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: Tue, 11 May 93 20:04:19 GMT
From: Robert Ivan <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X and publicity... is there any ?
Newsgroups: sci.space

  Its seems a bit scarry to me that such a project which for the first
time in years promisses some hope in changing the current trend in
massively overpriced boosting capability, lacks much publicity.  Ive
been reading sci.space for months now and I only fiqured out what
this project was about 3 months ago.  Most of the time  I skipped
all referances to this subject because I had no clue what it was about.
When I finally fiqured it out My mind almost went Nova. I didnt beleive
that it was true. WOW.    And since I normally now whats generally
going on with these kind of things..... what happened.  I have not seen
any thing in the news media besides the odd magazine article covering
this matter.  Ussually with these kind of projects lots of publicity
can go a long way, esspecially when goeverment funding is necessary
and congressmen get to vote.


Just my few cents worth.
ROB

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 18:35:45 GMT
From: "John F. Lawrence" <[e-mail]>
Subject: EOS Info Needed!
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hi there.

I need some basic information on the EOS (Earth Observing System).  Like project
goals, history, and milestones.  And anything else that you gurus would consider
important or unique about the EOS.

Thanks,

John Lawrence

Geek Address:
[e-mail]

========================================================
Do, or do not!  There is no try.
                       -Yoda
========================================================

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 19:20:22 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: G. Gordon Liddy mentions T-Shirt at NASA
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space

Mark Hittinger ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Today's Liddy commentary mentions engineers at NASA wearing a T-shirt
: that states

: "WILL BUILD SPACE STATION FOR FOOD"


: can somebody on the inside of this send me e-mail about where I could
: get one of these excellent collector's items?

Dunno, but your local T-Shirt shop oughta be able to whip one up.  I
first saw this slogan taped to an outside window of JSC's building 2.

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

     "...Development of the space station is as inevitable as
      the rising of the sun." -- Wernher von Braun

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 19:45:47 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Galileo Update - 05/06/93
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Ron Baalke)
>Subject: Galileo Update - 05/06/93
>Date: 6 May 1993 18:21 UT
>Keywords: Galileo, JPL
>Forwarded from Neal Ausman, Galileo Mission Director
>
>                                  GALILEO
>                       MISSION DIRECTOR STATUS REPORT
>                                POST-LAUNCH
>                           April 30 - May 6, 1993
>
>SPACECRAFT
>
>1.  On April 30, a cruise science Memory Readout (MRO) was performed for the
>Magnetometer (MAG) instrument.  Analysis indicates the data was received
>properly.
>
>2.  On April 30, a command threshold test and a Radio Frequency Subsystem
>Tracking Loop Capacitor (RFSTLC) test were performed over DSS-63 (Madrid
>70 meter antenna).  Data analysis is in progress.  These tests are periodically
>performed to provide detailed information relative to the telecom command
>hardware integrity.
>
>3.  On May 3, a NO-OP command was sent to reset the command loss timer to 264
>hours, its planned value for this mission phase.
>
>4.  On May 3, cruise science Memory Readouts (MROs) were performed for the
>Magnetometer (MAG) and Dust Detector (DDS) instruments.  Preliminary analysis
>indicates the data was received properly.
>
>5.  On May 3, an Ultra-Stable Oscillator (USO) test was performed to verify
>the health status of the USO and to collect gravitational red shift experiment
>data; long term trend analysis is continuing.
>
>6.  On May 4, a periodic RPM (Retro-Propulsion Module) 10-Newton thruster
>flushing maintenance activity was performed; all 12 thrusters were flushed
>during the activity.  Thruster performance throughout the activity was nominal.
>
>7.  On May 4, the spacecraft under stored sequence control performed about a
>six-degree unbalanced SITURN for the purpose of attitude maintenance.  The Z
>thrusters were used during the activity.
>
>8.  On May 4, a cruise science Memory Readout (MRO) was performed for the
>Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrometer (EUV) instrument.  Analysis indicates the
>data was received properly.
>
>9.  The AC/DC bus imbalance measurements have not exhibited significant change
>(greater than 25 DN) throughout this period.  The AC measurement reads 18 DN
>(4.1 volts).  The DC measurement reads 144 DN (16.9 volts).  These measurements
>are consistent with the model developed by the AC/DC special anomaly team.
>
>10. The Spacecraft status as of May 6, 1993, is as follows:
>
>       a)  System Power Margin -  73 watts
>       b)  Spin Configuration - Dual-Spin
>       c)  Spin Rate/Sensor - 3.15rpm/Star Scanner
>       d)  Spacecraft Attitude is approximately 20 degrees
>           off-sun (lagging) and 6 degrees off-earth (leading)
>       e)  Downlink telemetry rate/antenna- 40bps(coded)/LGA-1
>       f)  General Thermal Control - all temperatures within
>           acceptable range
>       g)  RPM Tank Pressures - all within acceptable range
>       h)  Orbiter Science- Instruments powered on are the PWS,
>           EUV, UVS, EPD, MAG, HIC, and DDS
>       i)  Probe/RRH - powered off, temperatures within
>           acceptable range
>       j)  CMD Loss Timer Setting - 264 hours
>           Time To Initiation - 184 hours
>
>
>GDS (Ground Data Systems):
>
>1.  Two Galileo GDS tests of MGDS V18.0 CMD took place May 1, 1993, with
>DSS-61 (Madrid 34 meter antenna) and May 3, 1993, with CTA-21 (Compatibility
>Test Area lab at JPL).  The test with DSS-15 (Goldstone 34 meter antenna) was
>canceled due to configuration problems on the MOSO test string.  The second
>test with CTA-21 was unsuccessful due to GCF (Ground Communications
>Facility) or CTA-21 problems causing command files to have checksum errors
>upon transmission to the CPA (Command Processor Assembly).  Resolution of the
>CTA-21 test problem is expected during the Friday, May 7 retest with CTA-21.
>The next GDS tests for V18.0 CMD will be May 7, 1993 with DSS-42 (Canberra
>34 meter antenna) and CTA-21.
>
>
>TRAJECTORY
>
>     As of noon Thursday, May 6, 1993, the Galileo Spacecraft trajectory
>status was as follows:
>
>    Distance from Earth         206,494,200 km (1.38 AU)
>    Distance from Sun           305,613,600 km (2.04 AU)
>    Heliocentric Speed          87,100 kour
>    Distance from Jupiter       511,783,400 km
>    Round Trip Light Time       23 minutes, 4 seconds
>
>
>SPECIAL TOPIC
>
>1.  As of May 6, 1993, a total of 70260 real-time commands have been
>transmitted to Galileo since Launch.  Of these, 65151 were initiated in the
>sequence design process and 5109 initiated in the real-time command process.
>In the past week, one real time command was transmitted and was initiated in
>the sequence design process.  Major command activities included a command to
>reset the command loss timer.
>     ___    _____     ___
>    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
>    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
> ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Once a year, go someplace
>/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you've never been before.
>|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |
>

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 19:08:07 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro

In article <1se2o5$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Pat) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
> |I have finally been informed this morning that a reboost IS a low
> |priority option on the servicing mission, pending time and fuel
>
> William,  what you are discovering is that the communication
> methods in NASA are not real efficient.  now imagine.  a bit of
> information like that, that is important to your Job, does not
> get to you until you read about it out here.  Now think of
> something big, like SPace Station Fred.  How much imformation
> that should be going to the right people isnt.
>

No, to be fair, many of us here knew about it.  I knew awhile back
and I don't really need to know.  I did not post because several people
have been recently scolded for posting ANYTHING.  Unfortuantely, Bill
just happened to be in a void for some reason.


____________________________________________________________________________
Robert C Dempsey                                      [phone]
STScI-PODPS                                           3700 San Martin Dr.
                                                      Baltimore, MD 21218

I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have
been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and
then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst
the great oceans of truth lay all undiscovered before me. - Isaac Newton
____________________________________________________________________________

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 19:32:59 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro

In <1se2h9$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>|In <1s60eg$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>|
>|>>
>|>maybe they could create an inflatable spatter shield,  to
>|>divert  reaction byproducts  far away from the HST.
>|
>|Maybe they should just do it the way that works and quit trying to
>|make the 'Pat Plan' work?
>|

>Gee fred.  Do you Hate everyone or just everyone who has
>the gall to disagree with you?

Gee, Pat, have you stopped beating women, or have you just restricted
yourself to women you've had at least two dates with?

[Since you seem to have a penchant for that kind of stupid question.]

>As i last checked, NASA is doing it there way.

Which I'm sure you will be criticizing as 'wrong' until the day you
die (or it works, at which point you'll claim it was your idea all
along).

>My name is not Goldin,  and I am not the command pilot of the
>discovery.

Two tiny favors from the universe for which some of us are eternally
grateful.

>What i am doing is engaging
>in a little intellectual speculation, for which i lack enough
>data to do the full analysis.

No, what you're engaging in isn't "intellectual speculation", or you
wouldn't be flaming people for pointing out flaws in your plan.  What
you're engaging in is, unfortunately, typical -- you have an idea you
like and are going to defend it to the death, attacking anyone who
points out that it is a *bad* idea (or maybe you reserve that for me
-- in which case you probably need to get a real hobby).

>I thought it might be a good idea
>to look into other ideas,  but i forgot.  fred McCall hates
>new ideas.  I am so sorry fred.

Yes, you are sorry, Pat, but we understand.  What's truly sorry is
your foisting off on me attitudes that are apparently more your own,
judging by your screams about only using standard off the shelf
technology for SSF.

>Oh and by the way.  According to someone i spoke to at lockheed,
>the Condensed volatile material fraction from hydrazine is small
>enough that it doesn't affect their optical packages.  considering
>they built HST,  and build most spysats, i'd take that to indicate
>it's not a real big problem.

Well, you've since seen someone else contradict this for you, too.
Would you like to attack *everyone* who has told you this is a bad
idea, or is it personal?

>|>it may be insovable,  it may not be a problem.  it needs proper
>|>engineering analysis.
>|
>|I'm not convinced you know what that phrase means; you just mouth it
>|every time you want something different than what is being done.
>|

>Oh well, i guess we could get a PE to sign off on the design.;-]

You can have the Pope sign off on it if you like; that won't make it
any better idea than it is now.

>and as for the proper engineering analysis.  I imagine that was done
>when teh SMT was first proposed.  The thing i was proposing
>was to use a BUs 1 spacecraft as a cheap SMT.  wether it could
>fit the problem specs,  is a question that is still awaiting
>the declassification of data.

>Fred.  Do you think a SMT is not do-able?

I think it's not doable *for the mission you wanted it for*.  Now, if
you'd care to try to extract at least one of your feet from your mouth
and discuss it as a general idea rather than as what we ought to
'cobble together' to reboost HST rather than using the Shuttle (and I
hope you can 'cobble' fast, what with all new tankage, all new
engines, etc -- otherwise you'll get a great view of Australian
Outback with that $1G instrument) I'd be more than happy to see that.
That is *not* however, what you've been proposing to this point.

>|>>I'm curious.  What would be your reaction if they took your advice,
>|>>had some whiz kids cobble together something, slapped it on the butt
>|>>of the HST, and it screwed up?  I suspect you'd be the first person
>|>It depends, on what you mean by screwed up?   if it didn't work at all.
>|>well, back to the drawing boards.
>|Except, of course, that you've now wasted a flight plus all that
>|development money when you have a perfectly good way to do the reboost
>|in hand already.
>|

>Depends again on how much it screwed up.  if it just didn't work,  you junk it
>and  see how much contingency fuel you can use on a re-boost.
>Considering the re-boost is not needed until 1997,  it is do-able.
>i spoke with some people who said a re-boost is not needed at this time
>but that they would like to do it now,  rather then wait until the
>second servicing mission.

>so if the re-boost fails,  you kick it to the second servicing
>mission,  which is needed for more instrument changeouts.
>if the first servicing mission though fails because of a lack
>of EVA's to finish the job, it means 3 more years of degraded
>science return.

In other words, you want to assume benign failure modes.  I don't know
that I'd consider that either a good idea *or* 'sound engineering
practice'.

>|>if it pushed it into a higher
>|>but wrong orbit,   i suppose that would be tolerable.
>|
>|I'd say that's rather a function of just where it put it, wouldn't
>|you?
>|

>I was supposing.  given that right now it's in a 300 miles circular
>orbit,  that seems  the best.  adding inclination wouldn't
>hurt it,  nor should adding some eccentricity to the orbit.
>you'd just need to improve the software for pointing.

Ah, 'just improve the software'.  There's a nice easy solution.  NOT!

>but there could be some real bad high orbits,  mostly  where it
>is beyond shuttle srevice access,  shortly after some critical
>part fails.

>but i doubt an SMT vehicle would carry enough fuel to  put
>the HST out of range.

>|>Now if it pushed it into earth's atmosphere,  then that would be
>|>a bigger problem.
>|
>|Not necessarily.  You've ignored a lot of possibilities.  What it if
>|tumbles and is thus useless?  What if your 'cobbled together' rig
>|contaminates the instruments and ruins them?  What if the motor blows
>|up?  So much for that "proper engineering analysis" you're so fond of.
>|

>somehow, i think the HST could de-tumble after awhile.  the magnetotorquers
>are fairly strong.  the key question is how long the batteries
>are good for while not in full sun.  there are heaters that need to
>keep the instruments warm.  that is a possible contingency problem there.

>if you use cryo fuels,  you shouldn't have contaminiation.  and  hydrazine
>shouldn't be a big problem either.  fred, you seem to worry
>a lot about contamination.  you aren't drinking distilled water and
>vodka are you?  I wouldn't want you tolose your Purity Of Essence.

Ah, more flame bait from Pat.  You've gotta love him.  Pat, I worry
about contamination because it is something that can screw up the
instrument.  And the whole purpose of the thing is the instrument.
Your rather blase lack of concern for what might happen to the
instrument if your 'cobbled together' solution fails sounds rather
like someone who would say, "The operation was a success -- but the
patient died."

Someone else already pointed out that hydrazine is indeed a problem,
which is what I assumed you would be using.

>And given the Bus1,  has a several year track record,  it should
>be as safe as the STS.

Sure it should -- after you get done equipping it with larger tanks,
different engines, a 'spatter shield' of some yet to be determined
design, and explosive disconnects it'll still be the same old Bus1.
Won't it?

>|>now if it de-orbited and the HST hit your house, while you were sleeping
>|>in the living room,  well, I guess we put that on the list of
>|>major engineering blunders and get to working on a replacement HST.
>|
>|Flame bait, Pat?  Feel free to take your cat and shove it.
>|
>You mean,  take my cat, and shove him.

No, I meant it.

>Get a clue fred.  it was a joke.  if you can't take a joke,
>get off of usenet.

I take as 'jokes' things that come from people that don't flame anyone
who disagrees with them.  I don't take flame-bait from Pat as jokes.
Perhaps *you* should get off Usenet?  I think I have right of prior
use over you.

>|>And besides,  these "cobbled together" projects  have a reasonably good
>|>record.  voyager,  magellan, skylab, ASTM were all cobbled together.
>|
>|Ah, yes.  One big difference, Small One.  Those were all to do
>|something we didn't otherwise have capability to do, and if those are
>|your idea of 'cobbled together' I would say that perhaps we should
>|just build a laser launcher and throw gold tola bars at HST until we
>|bounce it into the right orbit.  Damned expensive 'cobbles' you have
>|there.


>I think you had better explain yourself.  I didn't understand
>anything you said here.  Too much Vodka and distilled water ;-)

Look at the pricetags on Voyager, Magellan, Skylab, etc.  Now consider
paying that price for something to perform a mission we can already do
(along with your cavalier attitude toward any possibility of failure).

>Voyager wasa real cut down,  from either the Grand TOur spacecraft
>or even the concept vehicles for carrying orbiters to the planets.

And it cost ... ?

>magellan was cobbled together from spares in the JPL  garage, compared
>to the Venus ORbiting Radar.  One dish, not two.  much less weight to
>orbit.

And it cost ... ?

>Skylab was  put together with spares  from apollo,  and is damn cheap
>compared to Fred, your namesake.

And it cost ... ?

>ASTM  was a quick and dirty, fast mission and id on't recall
>gigabucks being spent on the adapter.

And it cost ... ?

>and as for a space manuevering tug,  it would be  doing something
>we don't have the capacity to do.  tow masses around in orbit
>where a shuttle can't go.

But you seem to need people on-scene anyway, Pat, since you're talking
about using things like explosive bolts as connecters.  And you
weren't talking about 'towing', either.  If you want to 'tow'
hardware, it kind of has to either be designed for 'towing' or you're
going to have major problems hooking up, disconnecting, adjusting for
differing center of mass of what you're dragging around, etc.

Stop flaming and start critically thinking, Pat.

--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 19:51:03 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: IP-36 ESM
Newsgroups: sci.space

: Phil asks:

: >Has anyone else _YET_ been reminded of the Bugs Bunny cartoon where
: >Marvin the Martian is going to blow up the earth because "it spoils
: >my view of Venus?"

Tommy Mac ([e-mail]) wrote:
: You a referring, of course, to the Illudium Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator.
: I believe NASA, at one point, took some credit for it's development...:-)

Of course!  It was one of the many spin-offs of the Apollo program.
The device has potential as a propulsion system, but we couldn't
get the containment to work quite right.  And those dehydrated Martians
cause us no end of trouble in the WETF.

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

     "We at NASA develop cutting-edge technology for our aeronautics and
      space programs.  We view technology transfer as a way of life.
      It's one of our top priorities." -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator

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

Date: 11 May 1993 20:17:05 GMT
From: "Peter J. Scott" <[e-mail]>
Subject: LDEF "growths" seen on shuttle mission
Newsgroups: sci.space

This group was all-aflutter a while back over some reported
microscropic ear-like "growths" found on some Long Duration
Exposure Facility samples.  Now the LDEF newsletter Vol IV #1
(a hard copy periodical available from P.O. Box 10518,
Silver Spring, MD  20914 at some unknown cost) says:

"The Limited Duration Candidate Exposure (LDCE 1, 2, and 3) experiments
were flown on STS-46 in July 1992, by the Center on Materials for
Space Structures at Case Western Reserve University.  356 samples
were exposed to ram atomic oxygen for 42 hours at an altitude of
124 nautical miles.  Evidence of surface growth previously reported
by MSFC for LDEF was also found on LDCE.  The SEM micrographs show
the evolution of the 'ear-shaped' features from birth to adulthood.

"The conditions under which these growth features were found brings
into question the role of plasma in their formation.  The LDCE samples
were located in a GAS can in the bay of the Shuttle, and the geometry
associated with their exposure also suggests that plasma effects may not
have been a contributing factor."

That's all they have to say about it, aside from reproducing four
of the micrographs.

--
This is news.  This is your       |    Peter Scott, NASA/JPL/Caltech
brain on news.  Any questions?    |    ([e-mail])

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

Date: 11 May 1993 14:13:23 -0400
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Life on Earth
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James Davis Nicoll) writes:
>    Evolution isn't  a directed process and doesn't proceed towards
>a specific goal.


IT is directed,  but not at one particular endpoint.

The direction is to out compete  all other life forms
in your niche,  and all other entities for resources, for reproduction.

pat

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 93 15:44:56 EET
From: [e-mail] (F.Baube[tm])
Subject: Math?? (Was US govt & Technolgy Investment

From: ellis of lemuria <[e-mail]>
>
> what new has math "told" us recently?

It's a multi-lifetime endeavor ..

It is bound to have quiet, boring times ..

If you're wondering why in Hell ANYONE would want to toil
away an entire career and garner perhaps a footnote in the
24th century, check out the book "A Mathematician's Apology".

--
* Fred Baube (tm)         *  In times of intellectual ferment,
* [e-mail]       * advantage to him with the intellect
* #include <disclaimer.h> * most fermented !
* How is Frank Zappa doing ?
* May '68, Paris: It's Retrospective Time !!

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 19:22:51 GMT
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pat and the Big Dan  eye to eye.
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:

>> ps  the McDac guys all  cornered me at the bar later and
>> wanted to know who paid me to ask the question.  they thought

>Is there money available for this sort of thing?

Yep. The job title is: lobbiest.

Not only can you make money but you can earn six figures+ if your good.

   Allen

--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Lady Astor:   "Sir, if you were my husband I would poison your coffee!"   |
| W. Churchill: "Madam, if you were my wife, I would drink it."             |
+----------------------36 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX-----------------------+

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 19:33:06 GMT
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Soyuz and Shuttle Comparisons
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1sn90m$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken Hayashida) writes:

>My point in this debate was my belief that the shuttle has demonstrated
>superior payload capability to any other system.

If you where the one paying the bills you wouldn't think so.

Even measured in terms of payload alone, it is nowhere near Saturn.

>I had said that it
>had delivered the most mass to orbit.

As a rough guess I would say that in 10 years Shuttle has delivered
to LEO about as much as Saturn V did in 4 years.

   Allen

--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Lady Astor:   "Sir, if you were my husband I would poison your coffee!"   |
| W. Churchill: "Madam, if you were my wife, I would drink it."             |
+----------------------36 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX-----------------------+

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 20:14:27 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Vandalizing the Sky
Newsgroups: sci.space

David M. Palmer ([e-mail]) wrote:
: If [space billboards keep] going up, then it is NOT short term.  If there
: are thousands of these things up there, then it's permanent.
: I do not want to be continuously assaulted by the sight
: of giant floating tampons (Here's Kuntex after 12 hours,
: and here's the competition.  See how much fresher
: and less disgusting Kuntex makes you feel!!!)

: I still think that counter-measures would be a good amateur
: rocketry project, even though it could not be done by American
: citizens.  Send contributions to Henry Spencer :-).
: Nature groups would be a good source of funding.  The rocket
: launch would make good footage on the nightly news:
:     Audabon Society Gives Trashsat the Bird.

This is good.  This spreads the technology to launch payloads into LEO,
albeit for a belligerant purpose.  Of course, I would have to add
defensive measures to my next billboard, such as collision detection
and avoidance systems, hardening, or simply redundant birds.  All of
which is good, since it increases our ability to deal with a hostile
-- make that a doubly hostile -- space environment.

: I think that putting a few kilograms of actual product in a suborbital
: trajectory would be a good way to advertise sand.  (AS SEEN IN SPACE!!!,
: the miracle material which adds body to concrete and turns an ordinary
: box into a preschool play center and litterbox.)  If the sand is
: just sitting there in space at low velocity, and a trashsat
: crashes into it at 5 miles per second, I think that National Sand and Grit
: Inc. has good cause for a hefty lawsuit.  I volunteer for jury duty.

Not bad, but your sand may well hit a non-combatant.  You'd better
come up with a better targetting scheme.

But the French could put your sand to use by tracing a green, white and
red "flag" across the sky and singing "Marsailles."  And the Americans
counter with equatorial bands of intertwining red, white and blue for
July 4.  Die-hard Soviets sneak in a container of sand which causes a
red glow over the Ukrain for a week in October.  Green Peace wants to
paint the sky green over Washington, DC, just before the 1996 election,
but NORAD objects -- who knows what could be in THAT sand?  They have
to settle for NYC.  Irish Chicagoans use the same "green" sand for St.
Patrick's day.  To stir up support, the Irish Republican Army turns
London bloody for a fortnight, and the Scots counter by painting Dublin
orange.

Apple comes out with a new computer and attempts to patent the color
yellow.  IBM turns Si Valley blue.  Silicon Graphics uses a patented
new "sand rasterizer" and paints the SGI logo across the midwest.

Gee, Dave, thanks for the sand idea.  That's a lot cheaper than even
simple billboards.  It just calls for a little more ingenuity.

: --
:         David M. Palmer        [e-mail]
:                     [e-mail]

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

     "Developing new technology is what drives this country forward.
      It raises our standard of living by creating the new industries
      and new jobs of tomorrow.  I believe America today is crying out
      for organizations like NASA to step up to the challenge of
      developing cutting-edge, dual-use technology that can both keep
      America pushing outward into space and put Americans back to
      work." -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator

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

Date: Tue, 11 May 1993 19:25:58 GMT
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Yoo hoo, White Sands? (was Re: DC-X Status?)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:

>>> What is the current status of the DC-X program?  Wasn't there supposed to be
>>> a static test firing recently/real soon now?

>> It was supposed to be a week ago....no word back from the dessert yet......

>Come, now, surely the Net can do better than this!

Well I have been rather busy for the past few weeks but here goes:

There where static firings of the engines but that was before integration
with the airframe (spaceframe?). The tanks where filled for the first
time last week and a firing of all four engines is scheduled for this
weekend.

Remember, if you support this effort, call the people listed in my
previous post and tell them! It won't happen without our support.

  Allen

--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Lady Astor:   "Sir, if you were my husband I would poison your coffee!"   |
| W. Churchill: "Madam, if you were my wife, I would drink it."             |
+----------------------36 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX-----------------------+

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 557
------------------------------