Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V09_4/V9_450.ZIP/V9_450

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 17KB

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/gYRse8i00UkZE:rk4R>;
          Mon, 22 May 89 00:20:25 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 22 May 89 00:20:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #450

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 450

Today's Topics:
         Re: Private funding of space science
              Re: spaceplane propulsion
                Re: sci.astro
         Re: Long Duration Exposure Facility
              Space food sticks
              Re: ultimate ASAT weapon??
             Re: _Analog_ article
   Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs (was Re: asteroid almost hits earth)
            Re: Sun Exploding (?)
            Re: asteroid almost hits earth
           RE: citizens in space -- risk silliness
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: mordor!rutgers!pnet01.cts.com![e-mail]
Date: Thu, 18 May 89 02:52:26 PDT
From: mordor!rutgers!pnet01.cts.com![e-mail] (Jim Bowery)
To: hplabs!hpcea!hp-sdd!crash![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Private funding of space science

Dr. Dereference (John L. McKernan) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> mordor!rutgers!pnet01.cts.com![e-mail] writes:
>>The government is the best source of support for research NOT development
>
>In order to do a lot of R&D hardware needs to be developed ...
Dereferencing "R&D" we have:
"In order to do a lot of research and development, hardware needs to be
developed ..."

Aside from being circular, this illustrates the very muddled thinking
about research vs development that I was pointing out.  Try saying
"research" when you mean research and "development" when you mean
development.  The phrase "R&D", is a source of confusion.

>                                             ....While the governemnt
>certainly should not do the development itself, it still needs to fund the
>development of hardware for R&D that will not be done privately.  As for
>government involvment in operations, the best people to operate the hardware
>built for R&D are usually the scientists doing the R&D, who are usually
>government employees (ie JPL).

The government needs to fund AND ENGAGE IN many kinds of development and
operations that cannot or should not be done privately.  In my original
message these exceptions are covered in the proposed extension of the Hatch
Act which would prohibit political action by civil servants, contractors
and nonentitlement welfare recipients.

PS: By the way, JPL is not under civil service.  JPL scientists are not
 "usually government employees"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Bowery    Phone: [phone]
PO Box 1981                  Join the Mark Hopkins Society!
La Jolla, CA 92038   (A member of the Mark Hopkins family of organizations.)

UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!jim
ARPA: crash!pnet01![e-mail]
INET: [e-mail]

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

Date: 18 May 89 14:16:32 GMT
From: mcdchg!illusion![e-mail]  (Marcus Hall)
Subject: Re: spaceplane propulsion

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>>...(Don't the Russkies use kerosene in liquid rocket motors?)
>
>Yes, as does the US (Atlas and Delta, not to mention older hardware like
>the Saturns).

Shouldn't this read:  "Atlas and Delta, not to mention NEWER hardware like
the Saturns"?

Some of the Atlas boosters recently launched (and I guess most of the Titan IIs
currently being re-furbished for launcher use) were older than the Saturn
program.

There are still new boosters being designed using the RL-10.  OK, so we've
thrown away the F-1 production, but we've also thrown away J-4 production.  It
seems that the J-4 would have been very attractive for use in smaller boosters.
The S-IV stage (from the Saturn I) used 6 RL-10 engines.  Its counterpart for
the Saturn IB, the S-IVB, used a single J-4.  The Centaur (upper stage for
Atlas, as well as other potential uses) has 2 RL-10 engines.

marcus hall

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

Date: 18 May 89 23:49:37 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Eugene Miya)
Subject: Re: sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Wyatt) writes:
>I had to comment on the following exchange. I find Ed's response to be
>uninformative (and even snide) despite being mostly factually correct.

I think we are all getting a little tired of the circular topics,
the cross posting, etc.  I know that there are times I get pretty fed
up.  The different interfaces don't help either.  If I had to read
space or astro on a mail system, forget it.  There's no way, and
I know people who read this on IBM and VMS systems (and God knows what
else) without news software.

We have to do something about this.  I mean both Bill and Ed are among the
more respected posters to astro.  I've all but given up on sci.space
(but cron helps here, and others read for me).  We are entering the 6th
(by my count) discussion on personal optics (binocs this time, not
telescopes).  I've given up on volunteers from the human race, there are
few who have the time.  I have way too much with comp.graphics projects
and real work [if you only knew how many times I get ask this about myself,
or Henry, or others...]  I think we only need the kin to a grad or
undergrad student volunteer (we can teach him or her about cron).  We
just have to assemble the information.

I mean look at you two. Two of the net's finest.

Is this a gross generalization or what?

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, [e-mail]
  resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
  "You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?"
  "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology."
  {ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!eugene
                  Live free or die.

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

Date:         Thu, 18 May 89 21:27:56 EDT
From: Lee Brotzman <[e-mail]>
Subject:      Re: Long Duration Exposure Facility



mnetor!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (sealion) writes:
>>With the current backlog in payloads for the shuttle system, are
>>there plans to recover the Long Duration Exposure Facility?
>
>Yes.  NASA is terrified of the public-relations impact of another Skylab,
>and considers it quite urgent that LDEF not be allowed to reenter.

If NASA is so "terrified" of allowing a light-weight, sure-to-burn, satellite
like LDEF to reenter, then why is the Solar Maximum Mission (SMM) being allowed
to reenter?  Although public relations may be part of it, I think that the
main reason to get LDEF is simply that it is useful to do so.  The materials
that were placed on it are pretty much useless now since they have had a
*really* long exposure (maybe not).  That doesn't mean the thing shouldn't be
brought back, looked over and possibly loaded up and re-launched.

I know you dislike NASA, Henry, but that's no reason to assign evil or petty
motivations to every operation.


-- Lee Brotzman (FIGI-L Moderator)
-- BITNET:   ZMLEB@SCFVM                 SPAN:  CHAMP::BROTZMAN
-- Internet: [e-mail]   GEnie: L.BROTZMAN
-- The government and my company don't know what I'm saying...
-- Let's keep it that way.
-- Isn't Cold Fusion how Eskimos are made?

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

Date: 19 May 89 02:29:01 GMT
From: vax5![e-mail]
Subject: Space food sticks

Well, I've been reading this group for more than two years (for many
more reasons than this), but I never saw this question go by -- perhaps
I wasn't looking closely enough.

IS there a recipe out there for 'space food sticks'?

I know NASA doesn't have one (because I wrote to them!).  Being young
and naive way back then, in the latter part of the 1960's (now I'm older,
at least) when these were sold in stores, I was under the impression that
Pillsbury (?) developed them under NASA contract, in which case the
formulation would be in the public domain.

Barring that, did someone save an empty box for lo these many years, and
does it say anything about being developed for NASA, and could you send
me the list of ingredients?  Seems to me a PlayDoh Fun Factory could do
the job of extruding, if you had the mix at just the right temperature
range...

P.S You have my permission to laugh, if you wish, but I'm quite serious.

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

Date: 19 May 89 03:20:28 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: ultimate ASAT weapon??

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Who remembers 8USER.PAR?) writes:
>The proposal involved some un-named (at least here) bad guys sending a lunar
>probe to collect samples.  At some future date, it could return home and
>enter a counter-orbit.  From somewhere above Clarke orbit, it would start
>dumping it's payload of gravel and sand, and rapidly descend, scattering
>some (in this article) 2 tons of goodies for everything in orbit to hit.
>At high delta v!

Yup, somebody in the US discovered this possibility -- entering a retrograde
orbit via a lunar flyby and using it to wreak havoc -- some years ago and
quite a fuss was made over it.  Especially since there was some evidence,
looking at research topics in orbital mechanics and such, that the Soviets
might have been aware of the idea earlier.

>    polar orbits will "get it" sooner or later, but should have a longer
>    life span

Getting a complete shrapnel disk around Earth, enough to get low orbits
and polar orbits, would probably take prohibitive payload masses.  Just
wiping out Clarke orbit, on the other hand, is dead easy, since it is
*one* well-defined orbit.  With a lot of militarily valuable stuff in
it too.

It may not be a coincidence that the US's next-generation strategic-forces
comsat system, Milstar, will not use Clarke orbit.  (Or so I recall --
it's going to be in still higher orbits, well dispersed.)

>    whomever does this has decided to live without satellites

Not necessary.  Just make the payload ice cubes instead of gravel, so it
won't hang around.
--
Subversion, n:  a superset     |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
of a subset.    --J.J. Horning | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 17 May 89 05:34:38 GMT
From: dalsqnt!usl!usl-pc![e-mail]  (Green Eric Lee)
Subject: Re: _Analog_ article

In message <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter Scott) says:
>There's an interesting article on the economics of space settlement in the
>May _Analog_.

There's a *naive* article on the economics of space settlement in the
May _Analog_. (yes, I read it. Yes, I couldn't keep from chuckling
over how pie-eyed these folks are about the prospects of going
space-walkin').

If any company today announced that it would invest ten billion
dollars over the next ten years to build a space manufacturing
facility, the corporate raiders would own it the next day -- to the
stockholder's relief. Building a new 5 billion dollar airliner is much
less risky -- you know you're going to sell SOME of them, eventually,
even if it takes more years than you'd like to recoup your investment.

--
|    // Eric Lee Green              P.O. Box 92191, Lafayette, LA 70509     |
|   //    {uunet!dalsqnt,killer}!usl!elg     [phone]                  |
| \X/              >> In Hell you need 4Mb to Multitask <<                  |

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

Date: 19 May 89 03:18:20 GMT
From: bbn.com![e-mail]  (Nichael Cramer)
Subject: Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs (was Re: asteroid almost hits earth)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (saouter yannick) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ethan Tecumseh Vishniac) writes:
>> It is also true that this is not the most dramatic mass extinction in the
>> fossil record.
>
>Such collisions occurs about every 50 000 000 years and I've heard that others
>species have disappeared as suddenly as the dinosaurs did, so earlier
>collisions might be the cause for that, too.
>
>Does anyone knows others example of strange disappearance ?

I don't remember the numbers (in species/yr) offhand, but I've read
arguements (e.g. by S J Gould) that claim that we are *now* in the midst of
the one of greatest (if not in fact _the_ greatest) of mass extinctions of
all time.

If I recall right, the numbers work out to ~1 species/100,000 increase in
human population.

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

Date: 19 May 89 03:30:56 GMT
From: sun-barr!texsun!pollux!ti-csl!m2![e-mail]  (John Gateley)
Subject: Re: Sun Exploding (?)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken Arromdee (600.429)) writes:
<Someone else writes:
<>[The sun can't explode].  Asimov makes a similar mistake in _The Gods
<>Themselves._)

<In _The Gods Themselves_, Asimov postulates the leakage of physical laws
<from another universe into ours.  If you're allowed to change the laws
<of physics, it's not wrong to say the sun can be made to blow up.

Perhaps the original poster was thinking about "The currents of space".
In this book, a sun is going to blow up, and it is probably similar
to our sun.

John
[e-mail]

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

Date: 18 May 89 21:29:00 GMT
From: m.cs.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Re: asteroid almost hits earth


/* Written  9:06 am  May 17, 1989 by [e-mail] in m.cs.uiuc.edu:sci.space */
>this occurs corresponds roughly to the K-T boundary.  They estimate the meteor
>to have been about 6 miles across which would produce the equivilent of
>10,000 times all the world's nuclear explosives.

>    ---{john hayes}  Old Dominion University; Norfolk, Virginia USA
/* End of text from m.cs.uiuc.edu:sci.space */

Would this not create the greatest of all earthquakes? I have read
peoples comments on meteor hits in the past, but have not seen any
reference to this aspect of it. You could be on the opposite side
of the planet from the hit, and when the shock wave traveled the
distance through the planet, the ground below you would suddenly
jump many feet up and down. Monster waves would also occur on the
oceans I would think. The entire planet would reverberate. I wonder
how long it would take to settle down.

Al Irwin

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

Date: Fri, 19 May 89 15:30:19 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Who remembers 8USER.PAR?)
Subject: RE: citizens in space -- risk silliness

Risk management is very much a part of "big business" in this country.
I just took a 1 day "class" in Risk Management - The Guaranteed Success.

Basically, Americans have become so complacent that we, as a whole, are
unwilling to take even slight risks.  Why else are CDs so popular, even
though I make twice as much with mutual funds and 100% returns on junk bonds?
Because the later involve some measure of risk.

In the case of the Challenger, the crew knew there was some measure of risk,
and choose to take it.  Because they did not know all the risks does not
negate the fact that they knew there were risks.  The families needed to
know that there were risks to be taken.  The lawsuits were, IMHO, improperly
aimed.  By concealing the flaws, M-T and NASA were quilty not of killing
anyone, but of preventing them from making a rational, informed decision.

This country was built on risk takers (my ancestors came over in the first
Jamestown boat), but now we are just a bunch of potatoes.  I know Shakespear
had the right idea.

Oh yeah, ordinary civilians have no right being in space, but when does
an "ordinary" civilian become astronaut material?  I'm a VAX/VMS internals
jock, but I am comfortable in an organic lab.  Do I have "the right
 stuff"?   :-)  (I'm from Texas, do I have "the Wright stuff" to get on?)
Dillon Pyron                         | The opinions are mine, the facts
TI/DSEG Lewisville Computer Services | probably belong to the company.
[e-mail]              |
[phone]                        | We try, we learn, sometimes we die.
                                     | We sit on our butts, learn nothing,
                                     | and we still die.

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #450
*******************