Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V09_3/V9_306.ZIP/V9_306

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 19KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/kY:7ssy00UkZQHfk5J>;
          Thu, 23 Mar 89 00:18:49 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 89 00:18:35 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #306

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 306

Today's Topics:
     STUDY OF COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY -- *LONG* FILE!
             Re: Moronic TV news coverage
          Re: E'Prime Aerospace Corporation
           History of Air-Launched Rockets
              Re: US/USSR costs
            Soviet APT Satellites
              Simulating Teleoperations
                What? METRIC?
            Re: Simulating Teleoperations
             Re: International Standards
       On teleoperation for 1992 moon base, or whatever
            Re: Simulating Teleoperations
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 19 Mar 89 21:34:59 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Eric William Tilenius)
Subject: STUDY OF COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY -- *LONG* FILE!

The following is a fascinating look at the commerical launch industry.
Due to net constraints, footnotes and graphs have been removed from this
version.  This is a LONG FILE - you may want to print it out before
reading it.  If you'd like a laser printed copy with footnotes and
graphs, send $5 to:  Eric W. Tilenius, 332 Walker Hall, Princeton University,
Princeton, NJ 08544.

THE UNITED STATES COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY: An Economic Study of the
Issues Regarding Privatization.

[ ... ]

I.  ABSTRACT

    The United States private payload launch industry is in flux.
The industry faces changing regulations, growing international and
domestic competition, and uncertain demand. The transitory nature of the
market as it emerges from a government-controlled monopoly and moves
toward a competitive situation is indicative of a market not in long-
term equilibrium.

    This research paper analyzes, from a microeconomic framework,
the issues and economic factors involved in the near-term move of the
market toward long-term equilibrium.  It finds that, after years of
government launch subsidies, the government will need to do more than
just talk about privatization if the industry is to move to equilibrium:
the government must be a purveyor of launch services from the private
sector and it must assure access to infrastructure.

[ ... ]

Eric W. Tilenius     | ColorVenture Software    | [e-mail]
Princeton University | 11 Prospect Drive South  | [e-mail]
332 Walker Hall      | Huntington Sta, NY 11746 | rutgers!pucc.bitnet!ewtileni
Princeton, NJ 08544  | 516-424-2298             | princeton!pucc!ewtileni
609-734-4911         | * Sft. for the CoCo 3 *  | CIS:  70346,16

[ This paper, which runs over 1400 lines, is available in its entirety,
  including a long list of references, by sending a note to
  [e-mail] and requesting the commercial launch
  study.  -Ed]

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

Date: 17 Mar 89 06:35:13 GMT
From: vsi1!wyse!mips!prls!philabs!linus!alliant![e-mail]  (Ric Werme)
Subject: Re: Moronic TV news coverage

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Rodman) writes:

>After watching another shuttle launch and flipping desperately between
>channel 4 and CNN, I very much wish for a channel that would tell
>the commentator to SHUT-UP during the launch.

I just turned down the volume and dialed 900-909-NASA for Dial-A-Shuttle,
a service of the National Space Society (202-543-1995).  I forget how much
it costs, but it beats listening to TV morons.
--

| A pride of lions              | Eric J Werme                |
| A gaggle of geese             | uucp: decvax!linus!alliant  |
| An odd lot of programmers     | Phone: [phone]         |

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

Date: Fri, 17 Mar 89 10:55:01 PST
From: Peter Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: E'Prime Aerospace Corporation

mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]
(Henry Spencer) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]->state.edu (stephen) writes:
>>  Does anybody have any opinions about which of the small launch companies
>>(E'Prime, OSC/Hercules, Space Services, Amroc, etc.) have any chance of
>>commercial success?

>[synopses of above companies]

Anyone know what happened to MMI and their plans for launching their `Space
Van' from a floating platform off Pago Pago?

Peter Scott ([e-mail])

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

Date: 18 Mar 89 01:29:34 GMT
From: uxc!garcon!pequod.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]  (Andrew Higgins)
Subject: History of Air-Launched Rockets

While we're discussing air-launched rockets, I am curious about their origins.
According to _History_of_Rocketry_and_Space_Flight_ (Von Braun and Ordway), in
the 1950's, sounding rockets known as "Rockaire" were launched from jets such
as the F-86D at an altitude of 7 miles.  The rockets soared as high as 30
miles.

More interestingly, in 1958, six Caleb rockets were launched from F-4D
airplanes with the intention of reaching *orbit*.  Apparently, none of the
vehicles successfully orbited, but I would nonetheless be very interested in
the mission configuration, and similarities it might have to the much talked
about Pegasus.  Does anyone know anything more about these tests?
--
Andrew J. Higgins                 | Illini Space Development Society
404 1/2 E. White St apt 3            | a chapter of the National Space Society
Champaign IL  61820                  | at the University of Illinois
phone:  [phone]               | P.O. Box 2255 Station A
e-mail: [e-mail] | Champaign IL  61825
                 ^^^^^^
"When the Waters were dried an' the earth did appear,...The Lord He created
 the Engineer"
 - Rudyard Kipling

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

Date: 17 Mar 89 18:51:45 GMT
From: mnetor!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: US/USSR costs

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Roberts) writes:
>... It is probable that the cost to launch a person into orbit is
>less than that of the US, but by how much? I suspect that the quoted price
>of $10 million for a launch is heavily subsidized.

At optimistic US launch prices ($3000/lb), $10M will put 3300 lbs into
orbit.  I don't know offhand just how much a Soyuz weighs, but a ton and
a half does not sound like too little to be one person's share of a three-
man spacecraft.  Given that the Soviets almost certainly have rather lower
launch costs than the US -- for one thing, they mass-produce most of the
hardware -- I find it hard to see how they can be losing money on it.

>There are at least three
>plausible incentives for maintaining an artificially low rate:
>...
> - Economies of scale: The ability to maintain a high volume of launches
>     and to accelerate the learning curve (and possibly to discourage the
>     competition) can make it economically attractive to sell products or
>     services for less than the actual cost...

I rather doubt that the Soviets are expecting enough of a rush of Western
customers to significantly improve their existing economies of scale.
We're talking about a space program that has a launch every three or four
*days*, remember.

>Similarly, the Energiya is a fine booster, and has enjoyed two demonstration
>launches, but this does not guarantee that it is not fabulously expensive
>to build and launch.

Energia costs are an open question, since it's a new booster using some
new technology.  I would note, however, that (a) cost per pound to orbit
for the Saturn V was not significantly higher than current US launchers,
and (b) Energia is supposedly already committed to production volumes
(first batch of 50) that most Western launcher manufacturers can only
dream about.
--
Welcome to Mars!  Your         |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
passport and visa, comrade?    | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 18 Mar 89 15:23:12 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx![e-mail]  (Frank Abernathy)
Subject: Soviet APT Satellites

On 3-17-89, at 1355 and 2320UTC I copied APT transmissions from Soviet
satellites on 137.300 MHZ.

These were not, by TS Kelso's Kep. bulletins, the normal guys I've copies.

Generally, I can copy Meteor 2-16, 2-17 and 3-2; when they decide to
transmit over north America.

I loaded in the parameters from Kelso's Bulletin #469 for Meteors 2-08, 2-09,
2-10, 2-11, 2-12, 2-13, 2-14, 2-15, 2-16, 2-17, 3-1 and 3-2 as well as COSMOS
1602, 1686, 1766 and 1870.

Then redid the orbital runs, with ORBITS-III, and NONE of these showed up
as valid for my location.  Location is 30.27N, 97.75W at ~250amsl.
(MET 3-1 did show up in the ORBITS info for the 1355 pass, but not the 2320)

So, maybe it was met 3-1 as well as another SAT not mentioned above.

If anyone has any info on which Satellites these were, please let me know.

frank
..!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!frank

Thanks !

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

Date: 19 Mar 89 02:15:49 GMT
From: uxc!garcon!pequod.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]  (Andrew Higgins)
Subject: Simulating Teleoperations

Our local NSS chapter recently examined the problem of simulating the round
trip time delay involved with teleoperations.  We decided to build a
variable time delay into the control unit of a Radio Shack remote
controlled toy truck [I really shouldn't take credit for the idea, since we
were inspired by a SSI display that involved similar modifications to Radio
Shack toy robots].  The results were quite interesting.

By setting the time delay at about 2.5 seconds, you can simulate
a lunar teleoperation.  Control with this much delay is *extremely*
difficult.  Although at first you may think that you can move a bit and
wait to see the result of your command, it is not so easily done.   For
example, one part of our "simulated lunar landscape" was a steep ramp
followed by a sharp left turn.  To make it up the ramp, your truck has to
build up enough kinetic energy and not stop at anytime on the way up.  But
once at the top, your vehicle has to bank sharply, so you must anticipate
when to send the command to turn let.  This is not an easy task.
--
Andrew J. Higgins                 | Illini Space Development Society
404 1/2 E. White St apt 3            | a chapter of the National Space Society
Champaign IL  61820                  | at the University of Illinois
phone:  [phone]               | P.O. Box 2255 Station A
e-mail: [e-mail] | Champaign IL  61825
                 ^^^^^^
"When the Waters were dried an' the earth did appear,...The Lord He created
 the Engineer"
 - Rudyard Kipling

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

X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 89 12:07 EST
From: John Taylor <[e-mail]>
Subject: What? METRIC?

>Date: 11 Mar 89 04:26:58 GMT
>From: vsi1!v7fs1![e-mail]  (Mike Van Pelt)
>Subject: Space station & stone-age units
[...]
>According to that contact, this was decided when Dale Myers, a former
>high official at Rockwell who is now the Deputy Administrator of NASA,
>upon hearing that the space station would use metric parts said
>"What?!, METRIC?! - Why that's UN-AMERICAN!", and decreed that
>stone-age barleycorn & King George's shoe size measurements shall be
>used on the space station.
>Does anyone else have any information on this outrage?

        No info, but I also think this is outrageous. Drop the stupid
"American" (read also as British, but they were smart enough to get rid of
it) system! I don't want some overpaid MBA making decisions like this- no
offense intended to intelligent MBA's, of course.
        Does someone have Dale Meyers' address?

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
John Taylor   -- SUNY at Buffalo    |
                                    |  Internet: [e-mail]
            New York:               |  Bitnet:   v131q5cg@ubvmsc
       "The Vampire State"          |
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

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

Date: 19 Mar 89 22:06:53 GMT
From: uxc!garcon!pequod.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]  (Andrew Higgins)
Subject: Re: Simulating Teleoperations

From: [e-mail] (Lucius Chiaraviglio)

>> By setting the time delay at about 2.5 seconds, you can simulate
>> a lunar teleoperation.  Control with this much delay is *extremely*
>> difficult.  Although at first you may think that you can move a bit and
>> wait to see the result of your command, it is not so easily done.   For
>> example, one part of our "simulated lunar landscape" was a steep ramp
>> followed by a sharp left turn.  To make it up the ramp, your truck has to
>> build up enough kinetic energy and not stop at anytime on the way up.
>
>         Obviously this toy truck was not designed for off-road operation.  A
> vehicle that is properly designed for off-road operation on any planet,
> whether remote-controlled or not, should not have to depend on building up
> kinetic energy to get over an obstacle, since this is quite hazardous when
> working on unknown terrain even when not using remote control.

I concur (but unfortunately, Radio Shack builds their toys to children's
specifications, not space enthusiasts').  There are, however, some operations
(such as drilling or heavy lifting) which are dependent on kinetic energy and
that don't allow you to stop and wait for your machine to catch up.  Imagine
trying to fly a spacecraft over the lunar surface while having to come to a
complete stop every 2.6 seconds.  Clearly the incremental approach (i.e., the
"stop and wait" approach to teleoperations) has limitations.
--
Andrew J. Higgins                 | Illini Space Development Society
404 1/2 E. White St apt 3            | a chapter of the National Space Society
Champaign IL  61820                  | at the University of Illinois
phone:  [phone]               | P.O. Box 2255 Station A
e-mail: [e-mail] | Champaign IL  61825
                 ^^^^^^
"When the Waters were dried an' the earth did appear,...The Lord He created
 the Engineer"
 - Rudyard Kipling

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

Date: 17 Mar 89 15:42:14 GMT
From: cfa!cfa250![e-mail]  (Jonathan McDowell)
Subject: Re: International Standards

From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Steve Willner P-316 x57123):
[ ASTP docking adaptor: used by USSR subsequently?]

I also remember the idea that the adaptor would become standard; but I think it was
more of an assumption made by the US side than anything that was in the
official accords; I cant find a copy of those, dooes anyone have them?
Anyway the system has not been used subsequently, and the current Soyuz/Mir
units are the old probe and drogue type. The Lyappa system to be used to handle
the Mir modules does have a petal-type adaptor, but it is a much smaller
system and is not a ring system of the ASTP type.

- Jonathan McDowell

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

Date:     Sat, 18 Mar 89 16:59 CST
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  On teleoperation for 1992 moon base, or whatever

If Microsoft can create a very true to life flight simulator, why can't
someone create a robot simulator? Just give if a map of the ground, which
wouldn't need to cover a HUGE area or anything, and the basic abilities
(speed, turning radius, shock handling ability, etc) of the robot, and let
it go. Introducing a delay in the loop would be simplicity itself. I'm sure
this would work, at least to test things out. My friends and I have played
enough video games to learn that reaction speed can be aquired, after lots
of "training". I've seen enough flight simulators, (even on the Apple II!)
that are pretty good. They seem to be able to fly and display good resolution,
using tricks, albeit. Given a "normal" computer, like a SUN, VAX, or what-not,
it should be fairly routine to simulate it in real-time, which would of
necessity be slower than the real time for an airplane. Also, aren't there
shuttle simulators out there? That would be a trick. Try flying the shuttle
with a 1/2 second time delay ...

Right?

Scott Hess
Gustavus Adolphus College
St. Peter, Mn.
<[e-mail]>

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

Date: 19 Mar 89 03:12:33 GMT
From: silver![e-mail]  (Lucius Chiaraviglio)
Subject: Re: Simulating Teleoperations

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andrew
Higgins) writes:
|Our local NSS chapter recently examined the problem of simulating the round
|trip time delay involved with teleoperations.  We decided to build a
|variable time delay into the control unit of a Radio Shack remote
|controlled toy truck [. . .]
|
|By setting the time delay at about 2.5 seconds, you can simulate
|a lunar teleoperation.  Control with this much delay is *extremely*
|difficult.  Although at first you may think that you can move a bit and
|wait to see the result of your command, it is not so easily done.   For
|example, one part of our "simulated lunar landscape" was a steep ramp
|followed by a sharp left turn.  To make it up the ramp, your truck has to
|build up enough kinetic energy and not stop at anytime on the way up.  But
|once at the top, your vehicle has to bank sharply, so you must anticipate
|when to send the command to turn let.  This is not an easy task.

    Obviously this toy truck was not designed for off-road operation.  A
vehicle that is properly designed for off-road operation on any planet,
whether remote-controlled or not, should not have to depend on building up
kinetic energy to get over an obstacle, since this is quite hazardous when
working on unknown terrain even when not using remote control.  That is, the
vehicle should have enough starting torque, as any good terrestrial off-road
vehicle should, to start moving up any safely-climbable slope from a
standstill.  This is not too hard to accomplish with today's (or even
considerably older) technology -- use of series-wound DC or variable-frequency
synchronous motors geared down sufficiently would satisfy this requirement.
The brushes or slip-rings will eventually wear out, but at least you won't
have to worry about having a wreck because you had to zoom up a slope whose
upper end you didn't know about.

--
|  Lucius Chiaraviglio   |  ARPA:  [e-mail]
BITNET:  [e-mail] (IUBACS hoses From: fields; INCLUDE RET ADDR)
ARPA-gatewayed BITNET:      [e-mail]
Alt ARPA-gatewayed BITNET:  [e-mail]

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #306
*******************