Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V10_1/V10_109.ZIP/V10_109

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 18KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from beak.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/kZ:j9Yq00VcJA7m04u>;
          Thu,  5 Oct 89 02:19:18 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu,  5 Oct 89 02:18:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #109

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 109

Today's Topics:
    Dates announced for the expansion of USSR's Mir space station
       Re: YAHSS (Yet Another Henry Spencer Signature)
           Re: Space Station Strangles NASP
        Re: X-30, Space Station Strangles NASP
   Second group of astronaut hopefuls to arrive at JSC (Forwarded)
           Re: Space Station Strangles NASP
         Re: What to do with the $30 billion
               Re: Flame On!!!
             Re: Concorde, NASP, shuttles
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 89 00:09:57 EDT
From: Glenn Chapman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dates announced for the expansion of USSR's Mir space station

    The expansion of the Soviet's Mir space station will begin on Oct. 16
when the so called D module is launched. It will be 12.4 meters (40.6 ft) long
by 4.35 m (14.3 ft) in diameter, about the same size as the core section of
Mir itself. This will make the combined station Mir/Kvant/D about
31 meters (103 ft.) long with a total base mass of about 53 Tonnes (each
expansion module weighs about 20 tonnes, the same as the Mir core itself).
Actual mass will be higher as the Mir/Kvant section has had much experimental
material added to them in the 18 Progress tankers that have docked
with the station, delivering about 41 Tonnes of supplies/fuel/water/air.  The
D model will add another 53.2 square meters (570 sq. ft) of solar
panels to the station's 76 sq. m (820 sq. ft) and the 22 sq. m (237
sq. ft.) add by Soyuz TM-2 crew in June 1987. Total station power
is  about 13 KW now and this could add up to 6.9 KW giving a total
of about 20 KW (the question of how much shadowing affects these numbers
has not been answered). In addition the crew will erect another solar
panel, this one on the Kvant module docked to the rear of the station.
The D module will contain a shower, a MKF-6GA multispectral camera
(film type) and a stabilization platform with black & while, color
TV cameras plus several spectrometers. The MKF system is similar to
that in both the previous generation Salyut 6/7 stations. The front
end of Module D contains the new large airlock with the "Space Chair."  The
Chair will be employed initially with a 60 meter (197 ft.)  tether
(which the cosmonauts do not like). The second expansion section, the Module T
(Technology) will be launched on Jan. 30 '90 and is slightly shorter (11.9 m
- 39 ft.). Both sections will take about 6 days to dock with Mir, rather than
the 2 days for the Progress/Soyuz systems. The modules are now said
to be transferred to the side ports relatively quickly after docking.
Transfer by means of a robot arm on the module which hooks into a
socket on the ball, then leavers the section over in about 96 minutes.
The current schedule for the activities calls for the following:
Sept    Change out of Mir computer memory
Oct 16  Module D launch/Progress M1 undocked
Oct 23  Module D docks on ball port axis
Oct 25  Soyuz TM-8 moved to ball axis port
Oct 27  Progress M2 tanker launched
Nov     Shift female docking port in ball
Dec     2 EVA's to test space chair
Jan 28  Soyuz TM-8 shifted to rear port
Jan 30  Module T docks to ball port axis
Feb 11  Soyuz TM-9 arrives
Feb 19  Soyuz TM-8 leaves
     At later dates space walks will move the solar panels from Module
T and shift them to the Kvant section. The Module O (Observer), to
be added in 1990/91 will use the port that Module T will be docked
to and Module T will be move to another port. The female docking port
(needed by all Soyuz/Progress) must be manually moved to allow for
docking in different ports.  (AW&ST Sept 11, 25, & Radio Moscow)
One interesting sidelight in recent broadcasts was some statements
on what cosmonauts get paid. Typical ground pay is 300-400 rubles
per month about 50% more than the average pay if I remember correctly
(the official rate puts the ruble about $0.75, though on the black
market it is much less). For a mission they get a bonus of 2000-15,000
rubles, though the higher number is for a 1 year flight (ie. 5-6 years
regular pay for a year on Mir - not bad). Speaking of money, the pictures
of the launch show a giant advertisement on the side of the booster
for an Italian insurance company. I wonder if they offered to insure
the cosmonauts themselves as part of that. Studies of Valdimir Titov
and Moussa Manarov (Soyuz TM-4/Mir Dec. '87 for 1 year) have showed
them to have recovered well from their long flight, much better than
their earlier extended missions, and consistent with Yuri Romanenko's
326 day mission (Soyuz TM-2/Mir Feb. '87). Indeed the key appears
to be regular exercise programs. (Radio Moscow, AW&ST Sept 11, 18,
25)
    It now appears that the launch rate for the Energiya booster has been
scaled back to about one mission per year. Part of this is due to
the reduction in the expectation for shuttle launches. The 1990 flight
will test the parachute recovery system for the strapon first stage.
However, they are actively seaking International launch cargo for
the booster, which could change that rate. (AW&ST Sept. 11)
On Sept. 27 the Russians allowed western newsmen to visit Plesetsk,
the northern cosmodrome where mostly military missions are launched.
Over 1000 vehicles have been flown from there. The observers were
allowed to see two launches, one a meteorological satellite. The commander
of the site revealed that there had been two launch accidents there;
one in 1980 killed 50 people while in 1975 nine men died. (BBC World  News
Sept. 27)  Two interesting unmanned flights were launched from Plesetsk
this month. On Sept. 6 a Resource F earth observation satellite was
launched and recovered about Sept. 22.  It carried a the West German
Cosima-2 materials processing package doing commercial experiments
for European and Japanese companies. On Sept. 15 the much delayed
Biosatellite was launched, the seventh in this series since 1975 of
this international cooperative program. Launch delays meant several
of the initial specimens had to be replaced before takeoff. It is
scheduled for recovery on Sept. 29. (AW&ST Sept. 11, 25, Radio Moscow
Sept. 15, 22)
    This month will see the beginning of Mir's expansion.  It will also
be the greatest test of its design.  Can the station hold up to
expansion sections hung onto the ball section at right angle to the
station core?  If it can this will probably influence the design of
Soviet stations for the next few decades.

                                                  Glenn Chapman
                                                  MIT Lincoln Lab

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

Date: 30 Sep 89 02:41:28 GMT
From: ogccse!blake!milton!maven![e-mail]  (Games Wizard)
Subject: Re: YAHSS (Yet Another Henry Spencer Signature)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter Scott) writes:
> jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer) writes:
>
> Hmm... has anyone tried pitching the commercial space program to Donald Trump?
> I was just in Manhattan and visited Trump Tower.  It's obvious the guy isn't
> afraid to spend money...  ah, I can see it now... the *real* "Trump Shuttle"...
>
> Peter Scott ([e-mail])

I really like this idea.  I REALLY like this idea.
This man and Ted Turner, and possibly Merv Griffin, and several others
of this calibre ( but mostly Trump ) have a lot of what it might take
to do a job of this nature.

There are several things that spring to mind.

WHY would Donald trump be interested in space?
can he make money off of a space station, or by building his own shuttle
( the limo to TRUMP station )

Would he be ALLOWED to do such a thing if he were inclined?
are there not proprietary parts of the shuttle that he would not be
allowed access to?  Would the government stop him from building a
launch facility?  Remember that he wants a 1 mile high facility in N.Y.
and they wont let him build that!!! (yet)

If anybody has any ideas that might interest these men, and specifically
thier money in joining the space cause, I would love to hear them.
I would love even more to present an program to one of them, and let
capitalistic greed have a whack at space for a while.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trendy footer by:
            John Stevens-Schlick
            Internet?: [e-mail]
            7720 35'th Ave S.W. Seattle, Wa. 98126
            (206) 935 - 4384
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My boss dosen't know what I do.

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

Date: 29 Sep 89 16:42:55 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Space Station Strangles NASP

Do remember, when making optimistic claims about the superiority of NASP
over the shuttle, that:

1. NASP in general and the X-30 in particular are moderately-high-risk
    experimental programs, not something that one can depend on.
    The X-30's payload to orbit, if it gets there, will be two pilots
    and a toothbrush apiece.  Operational systems based on this
    technology *are* a 21st-century notion.

2. Most of the costs for current launch systems are on the ground; the
    cost of the fuel and expended hardware itself is relatively minor.
    NASP technology does not inherently give major cost reductions.

3. All the claims about routine airline-like operations being made for
    NASP technology were also made for shuttle technology.

This having been said, I strongly support the X-30; the proposed slips
in schedule are dumb ideas.  The biggest problem with this program is
that there's only one such project.  There are several other ideas for
cutting launch costs by radical departures from existing systems that
deserve serious exploratory-level funding, and aren't getting it.  At
this level of untried-but-promising technology, putting all your eggs
in one basket is stupid.
--
"Where is D.D. Harriman now,   |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
when we really *need* him?"    | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 29 Sep 89 20:36:38 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Eugene Miya)
Subject: Re: X-30, Space Station Strangles NASP

Yeah, I think Henry and I agree on this one.  We need more X-30
type programs.  And its not clear what kinds of directions are needed.
We sort of got side tracked from the X-15/X-20 lines of doing things.

Some years back I was looking at X-15 flight paths.  These weren't trivial
tests, they had to fly all the way to Utah to launch and get to EAFB.
Imagine what troubles would have been.

The X-30 will require immensly area to test in.  Saw a proposed test course
for it in a meeting.  You have to keep to US airspace.  I do not think
its just a matter of having ground facilities, or different vehicles.
There's a lot of research required for sustained hypersonic flight.
We don't have nearly enough knowledge as we would like, and then only
on the low end.  So many questions so little time.

Another gross generalization from

--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: 29 Sep 89 16:38:21 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Second group of astronaut hopefuls to arrive at JSC (Forwarded)

Sarah Keegan
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                 September 29, 1989

Jeffrey Carr
Johnson Space Center, Houston


RELEASE:  89-153

SECOND GROUP OF ASTRONAUT HOPEFULS TO ARRIVE AT JSC


     The second of an expected five groups of astronaut
applicants will arrive at the Johnson Space Center, Houston, for
orientation, medical evaluations and interviews on Monday,
October 2.  Each group consists of about 20 individuals who have
a chance to be one of 15 to 20 selected as astronaut candidates
in January.

     The group consists of USAF Capt. Mark E. Almquist,
Lancaster, Calif; Kenneth Cockrell, NASA Johnson Space Center;
USAF Maj. Eileen M. Collins, Edwards AFB, Calif; Javier de Luis,
Ph.D., Cambridge, Mass.; Dean B. Eppler, Ph.D., Las Vegas; USAF
Maj. Lance C. Grace, Holloman AFB, NM; USAF Capt. William G.
Gregory, Edwards AFB, Calif.; John M. Grunsfeld, Ph.D., Pasadena,
Calif.; Butler P. Hine III, Ph.D., Cupertino, Calif.; Benjamin D.
Levine, M.D., Dallas; Thomas P. Moore, M.D., Ph.D., Minneapolis,
Minn.; David A. Noever, Ph.D., Huntsville, Ala.; USAF Capt. Mark
L. Polansky, Niceville, Fla.; USAF Capt. Mark W. Stephenson,
Newburgh, NY; William C. Stone, Ph.D., Derwood, Md.; USN LCdr.
Sharon K. Wallace, Bonita, Calif.; USMC Maj. Terrence W. Wilcutt
Patuxent River, Md.; USAF Maj. Robert J. Wood, Niceville, Fla.;
Albert Yen, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.; and
USMC Capt. Peter E. Yount, Lexington Park, Md.

     Applicants receiving interviews were chosen from nearly 2500
total applications received prior to the June 30 deadline.  Those
received after the deadline are eligible for consideration for
the next selection in 1992.  The number of candidates selected
every 2 years will vary based on flight rate, program
requirements and attrition.

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

Date: 29 Sep 89 17:47:51 GMT
From: thorin!alanine![e-mail]  (Jonathan Leech)
Subject: Re: Space Station Strangles NASP

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Larry Smith) writes:
>Also... the NASP/X-30
>technology development effort to date, has been funded at the 50% level
>by the 5  U.S. aerospace firms that are taking part, and a vehicle is not
>even being built!

    Gee, maybe they should just take over development completely if
they think it's such a great idea.  I doubt the DC-3 got 50% subsidies
from the Feds.
--
    Jon Leech ([e-mail])    __@/
    "Why do you suppose we only feel compelled to chase the ones who run away?"
    "Immaturity."
    _Dangerous Liasons_

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

Date: 29 Sep 89 19:30:59 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: What to do with the $30 billion

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (SCHREIBER, O. A.) writes:
>What is the story about the meteorites findings in Antartica? ...

Well, meteorites fall on Antarctica as they do anywhere else.  Unsurprisingly,
most of the ones that fall there end up imbedded in ice.  Ice flows, slowly.
Most of it eventually ends up melting into the ocean, which is not very
useful.  However, there are a few areas in Antarctica which are "sinks"
for ice, where flowing ice runs up against rock, is pushed upward, and gets
steadily eroded by wind.  Anything tough imbedded in that ice ends up sitting
on the surface.  The result is that meteorites collect on the surface there.
Not only that, but Antarctica's near-total lack of liquid water and life
means that they are in very nearly their original condition.  This provides
a very convenient way to collect large numbers of well-preserved meteorites.
--
"Where is D.D. Harriman now,   |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
when we really *need* him?"    | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 29 Sep 89 16:16:25 GMT
From: visdc![e-mail]  (John E Van Deusen III)
Subject: Re: Flame On!!!

In article <28SEP89.11863199.0057.MUSIC@SDSUMUS> [e-mail]
(Andy Edeburn) writes:
>
> ... the Soviets, ... right now, they're kicking our a__ in the newly
> reborn space-race.
>
> Andy Edeburn  {CC62@SDSUMUS}
> InterNet: [e-mail]

Right now, the Soviets are standing in line for bread, meat, and other
basic necessities.  If the contract for a Mars mission was to cost
30 billion dollars, how much would you realistically expect the Soviets
to kick in?  The Soviets can't go to Mars.  For what reason should we
give them a free ride?

It's too bad really.  Just the losses attributable to fraud in the FHA
could have paid for half our share.
--
John E Van Deusen III, PO Box 9283, Boise, ID  83707, [phone]

uunet!visdc!jiii

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

Date: 30 Sep 89 12:50:30 GMT
From: uceng![e-mail]  (daniel mocsny)
Subject: Re: Concorde, NASP, shuttles

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (SCHREIBER, O. A.) writes:

[ it doesn't do a ]
> businessman any good to save a few hours of flight from
> LA to Tokyo if he spends two hours in urban traffic at either
> end anyway just to go in and out of the airport.

For the business(wo)man to have to travel at all is archaic and
ridiculous, when (s)he is transacting only information. The time has
come for us to abandon our obsolete 1950's-vintage thinking. Only
incremental gains are possible from throwing more energy at the
business travel problem.

For the cost of developing an aero/space plane, we could instead
build communication devices that would bring us closer to the
ulimate goal of saturating the human sensory bandwidth.

Dan Mocsny
[e-mail]

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

End of SPACE Digest V10 #109
*******************