Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V10_3/V10_315.ZIP/V10_315

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

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/usr11/tm2b/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/QZTU9T200VcJ8Csk4U>;
          Thu,  7 Dec 89 01:25:35 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu,  7 Dec 89 01:25:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #315

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 315

Today's Topics:
        Re: Manned vs Unmanned Mission to Mars
             Hearings on HR2674 (4 of 6)
          Galileo Update 12/6/89 (Forwarded)
           Payload Status for 12/06/89 (Forwarded)
                Desubscribing
              Re: SPACE Digest V10 #314
         Re: The International Space Habitat Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 6 Dec 89 12:36:01 PST
From: mordor!lll-tis!ames!scubed!pnet01.cts.com![e-mail] (Jim Bowery)
To: ames!lll-tis!mordor!angband![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Manned vs Unmanned Mission to Mars

Henry Spencer writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Neff) writes:
>>An unmanned sample return / rover mission seems like a very workable
baseline
>>that gives scientists dizzying amounts of data without waiting out another
>>fifteen years of NASA plodding and contractor shell games...
>
>Except that it will take almost as much plodding and contracting to mount
>a sample-return/rover mission, probably.  Sigh... there was a time when
>such things got done in years, not decades.

The only reason we aren't flying probes the way we were in the 60's
(fire off a few to different places, find out something, quickly send others
 to answer questions raised by earlier ones) is because NASA assasinated
our space transportation capabilities with the Shuttle Program.

There is no overriding reason to build massive, one-of-a-kind,
multi-billion dollar, do-everything-in-one-shot-for-everyone-forever
probes which then sit on the ground for a decade or so getting various
subsystems modified while it is waiting for a slot on a government-run
"space transportation system."

Increase the availability of space transportation and everything else
comes out in the wash.

As Paul Harvey would say:  "It's true!"
---
Typical RESEARCH grant ($ = 1million):
$
Typical DEVELOPMENT contract:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

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

Date: 6 Dec 89 19:42:01 GMT
From: pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!sharkey!itivax!vax3![e-mail]  (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Hearings on HR2674 (4 of 6)

Below is testimony fron the hearings on HR2674. The next step is
to pressure Congressperson Nelson of Florida to send the bill to
'mark up' so it can get to the floor.

This information comes from Tihamer Toth-Fjel of the Ann Arbor Space
Society and Catherine Rawlings of Congressperson Packard's office.

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

REMARKS OF STEPHANIE LEE-MILLER
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION
U.  S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE SCIENCE & APPLICATIONS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NOVEMBER 9, 1989

* * *

INTRODUCTION


I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN BY THANKING YOU, MR.  CHAIRMAN, FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE SUBCOMMITTEE TODAY.


I AM PLEASED TO REPORT, MR.  CHAIRMAN, THAT THE OFFICE OF COMMERCIAL
SPACE TRANSPORTATION (OCST) HAS MADE MUCH PROGRESS IN THE MONTHS SINCE
I APPEARED BEFORE THIS SUBCOMMITTEE LAST APRIL.  SINCE THEN, THE FIRST
DOT-LICENSED U.S. COMMERCIAL ORBITAL LAUNCH HAS TAKEN PLACE IN YOUR
HOME STATE. THERE, ON AUGUST 27, A MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DELTA ROCKET
CARRYING A SATELLITE OWNED BY THE BRITISH SATELLITE BROADCASTING
COMPANY LIFTED OFF FROM CAPE CANAVERAL. IT WAS A BEAUTIFUL LAUNCH,
PERFECTLY EXECUTED.

IN ADDITION, OCST RECENTLY ISSUED ITS THIRD QUARTERLY MANIFEST FOR
1989.  THE MANIFEST SHOWS THAT THE NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL LAUNCH
CONTRACTS HAS GROWN TO 33, AND THIS FIGURE IS EXPECTED TO INCREASE
SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE COMING MONTHS. WE HAVE ISSUED SEVEN LAUNCH
LICENSES AND INSURANCE ORDERS FOR SEVEN LAUNCHES. AND WE AT OCST ARE
LOOKING FORWARD TO SPACE SERVICES INC. OF AMERICA'S SECOND LICENSED
SUBORBITAL LAUNCH NEXT WEEK.

IN ADDITION, I HAVE ESTABLISHED AN EDUCATION INITIATIVE, A PROGRAM TO
REACH OUT TO EDUCATORS AND STUBENTS TO STIMULATE THEIR INTEREST IN
SPACE-RELATED CAREERS.  LAST MONTH OCST HOSTED A CONFERENCE, A MEETING
OF LEADERS FROM ACROSS THE NATION, TO NETWORK AND SOLICIT INPUT FOR AN
SPACE EDUCATION ACTION PLAN.

WHILE I AM VERY PLEASED BY THE SHORT-TERM PROGRESS OF THIS NEW
INDUSTRY, MR.  CHAIRMAN, I WOULD URGE THE COMMITTEE, OTHER GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES AND PRIVATE LAUNCH COMPANIES TO BEGIN FOCUSING ON THE PLACE OF
A U. S. COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY IN OUR SPACE PROGRAM OVERALL AND THE
THINGS WE AS A NATION MUST DO TO FACILITATE THE INDUSTRY'S LONG-TERM
SUCCESS AND ITS COMPETITIVENESS IN THE GROWING WORLD COMMERCIAL LAUNCH
MARKET.

IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS SINCE I BECAME DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF
COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION (OCST), I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO
MEET ONE-ON-ONE WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE U.S. COMMERCIAL LAUNCH
INDUSTRY AND TO HEAR THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS AND THEIR EFFECT ON A COMPANY'S ABILITY TO
PRODUCE COST-EFFECTIVE, COMPETITIVELY-PRICED LAUNCH VEHICLES.

THIS ISSUE WAS ALSO RAISED AGAIN WHEN I MET WITH CONGRESSMAN PACKARD
LAST SUMMER TO DISCUSS COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES. AT THAT
TIME, THE CONGRESSMAN INFORMED ME THAT HE WOULD BE DRAFTING LEGISLATION
TO ADDRESS FEDERAL PROCUREMENT PRACTICES AFFECTING SPACE
TRANSPORTATION.  AND WHILE I AM NOT IN A POSITION TO PRESENT AN
OFFICIAL ADMINISTRATION VIEW ON HIS BILL, H.R. 2674 (SPACE
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES ACT OF 1989), SEVERAL FEATURES OF THE BILL
ADDRESS IMPORTANT CONCERNS OF THE U. S. COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY.

ALSO, IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, DOT' S COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION
ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS BEEN STUDYING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT PRACTICES AND COMMERCIAL LAUNCH COSTS. ITS STUDY
RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE DECREASING THE LENGTH OF THE PROCUREMENT
PROCESS, REDUCING THE PAPERWORK INVOLVED, AND LIMITING THE SCOPE OF
GOVERNMENT LAUNCH PROGRAM REVIEW.

INCIDENTALLY, DOT IS NOT THE FIRST GOVERNMENT AGENCY TO EXPLORE THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT PRACTICES AND COST. FOR
EXAMPLE, IN THE AREA OF GOVERNMENT SPECIFICATIONS, THE HIGH COST OF
PRODUCTION HAS BEEN SHARPLY CRITICIZED IN THE 1986 PACKARD COMMISSION
REPORT ON DEFENSE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, ENTITLED A QUEST FOR
EXCELLENCE:

NO MATTER HOW DOD IMPROVES ITS ORGANIZATION OR PROCEDURES, DEFENSE
ACQUISITION SYSTEM IS UNLIKELY TO MANUFACTURE PRODUCTS AS CHEAPLY AS
THE COMMERCIAL MARKETPLACE. PRODUCTS DEVELOPED UNIQUELY FOR MILITARY
USE AND TO MILITARY SPECIFICATIONS GENERALLY COST SUBSTANTIALLY MORE
THAN THEIR COMMERCIAL COUNTERPARTS."

RATHER THAN RELYING ON EXCESSIVE MILITARY SPECIFICATIONS, DOD SHOULD
MAKE GREATER USE OF COMPONENTS, SYSTEMS, AND SERVICES h9AILABLE
"OFF-THE-SHELF.  " IT SHOULD DEVELOP NEW OR CUSTOM- MADE ITEMS ONLY
WHEN IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT THOSE READILY AVAILABLE ARE CLEARLY
INADEQUATE TO MEET MILITARY REQUIREMENTS. "

THESE VIEWS WERE ALSO CITED IN SECRETARY CHENEY'S RECENT DEFENSE
MANAGEMENT REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT.

AS WE ANALYZE THE FEDERAL ROLE IN PROMOTING COMMERCIAL SPACE
TRANSPORTATION, WE SHOULD BE MINDFUL OF SOME OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS
AND CONSIDER THEIR APPLICA8ILITY TO LAUNCH SERVICE PROCUREMENTS. LET ME
TAXE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EMPHASIZE THAT OCST'S NUMBER ONE PRIORITY, AS
DEFINED IN THE COMMERCIAL SPACE LAUNCH ACT, IS PROTECTING THE SAFETY OF
THE PUBLIC -- THAT IS, REGULATING THE COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY TO
ENSURE THAT ITS ACTIVITIES ARE CONDUCTED SAFELY.  THIS MANDATE SHARES
OCST'S VIEW OF ANY PROPOSALS, FROM PRIVATE INDUSTRY OR CONGRESS, FOR
CHANGING CURRENT REGULATIONS OR POLICIES PERTAINING TO GOVERNMENT
PROCUREMENT OF COMMERCIAL LAUNCH SERVICES. THERE IS CERTAINLY ROOM FOR
IMPROVING THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE GOVERNMENT DOES BUSINESS WITH
PRIVATE LAUNCH FIRMS, BUT SAFETY MUST ALWAYS COME FIRST.

A MAJOR ASPECT OF OCST'S MANDATE AS OUTLINED IN THE COMMERCIAL SPACE
LAUNCH ACT IS TO HELP FACILITATE THE GROWTH OF THE U. S. COMMERCIAL
LAUNCH INDUSTRY.  AS PART OF ITS ROLE IN PROMOTING A STRONG,
COMPETITIVE U.S.  COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY, OCST RECENTLY INITIATED A
STUDY OF GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT PRACTICES AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE
COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY. OCST IS COORDINATING REVIEW OF THE STUDY
WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES, AND ITS FINDINGS WILL
BE ISSUED NEXT YEAR.  THE STUDY WILL SEEK TO ANSWER A NUMBER OF
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS, INCLUDING:

1. IS THERE A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE GOVERNMRNT'S METHODS OF
PROCURING LAUNCH SERVICES AND THE ABILILITY OF THE U.S. COMERCIAL SPACE
TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRY TO COMPETE?

2. DOES THE GOVERNMENT ADD EXTRA LAUNCH SERVICES COSTS THROUGH ITS
PROCUREMENT PROCESS?

3. CAN THE GOVERNMENT ChRRY OUT LADNCH OPERATIONS WITH LESS DETAILED
OVERSIGHT WHILE STILL MAINTAINING SAFETY STANDARDS AND RISK CONTROL?

WE IN GOVERNMENT NEED TO TAKE A CRITICAL LOOK AT WHAT PERCENTAGE OF
GOVERNMENT LAUNCH COSTS RESULT FROM ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD THAT IS NOT
CRITICAL TO QUALITY OR SAFETY AND CONSIDER HOW ADMINISTRATIVE
REDUCTIONS COULD BE MADE.

MR.  CHAIRMAN, SINCE THE COMMERCIAL SPACE LAUNCH ACT OF 1984 WAS PASSED
BY CONGRESS MORE THAN FIVE YEARS AGO, A WHOLE NEW INDUSTRY HAS BEEN
CREATED.  THE LARGE COMPANIES AND SMALLER ENTREPRENEURS WHO HAVE
RESPONDED TO THE CALL FOR A U. S. COMMERCIAL LAUNCH INDUSTRY HAVE
INVESTED MORE THAN HALF A BILLION DOLLARS OF THEIR RESOURCES INTO THE
U.S.  ECONOMY AND HAVE EXPRESSED THEIR WILLINGNESS TO BECOME AGGRESSIVE
PLAYERS IN THE WORLD COMMERCIAL LAUNCH MARKET.

IT'S UP TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO ENSURE THAT OUR
POLICIES DO NOT HINDER THE SHORT-TERM DEVELOPMENT AND THE LONG-TERM
SUCCESS OF THIS VITAL NEW INDUSTRY.  GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT PRACTICES
ARE A MAJOR ASPECT OF FEDERAL POLICIES AFFECTING THE U.S.  COMMERCIAL
LAUNCH INDUSTRY.  WE SHOULD SHAPE THEM TO BE AS HELPFUL TO THE GROWTH
OF INDUSTRY AS POSSIBLE, OF COURSE, KEEPING IN MIND OUR FIRST PRIORITY
TO ENSURE PUBLIC SAFETY.

THANK YOU AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR TODAY.  I
WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU OR YOUR COLLEAGUES HAVE.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Allen W. Sherzer                    |  Is the local cluster the result   |
|  [e-mail]                        |  of gerrymandering?                |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 6 Dec 89 23:17:45 GMT
From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!forsight!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Galileo Update 12/6/89 (Forwarded)


                   GALILEO MISSION STATUS
                      December 6, 1989


          The Galileo spacecraft is 9.25 million miles (50
light-seconds) from Earth today.  It has gone 71 million
miles along its curving road to Venus in the 49 days since
launch, and has 114 million miles and 65 days to go until
Venus encounter and almost 2-1/2 billion miles, 6 years and 2
days to Jupiter.  Things are going well.

          Since last Saturday, the third Earth-Venus cruise
sequence of commands has been in effect.  The principal
activities at this time involve characterizing (exercising,
checking out and understanding) spacecraft functions and
equipment to be used in Venus scientific observations in
February 1990.  Last month's characterization focused on
elements used in the November 9-11 trajectory change
maneuver -- propulsion, attitude control, communications.
This month's adds such things as articulation control,
particularly the scan actuators.  Galileo's scientific
instruments will be checked out separately December 27-30.

          The spacecraft is still in what is termed dual-spin
mode, with the main part of the orbiter rotating at about 3
rpm and the lower portion of the craft fixed in relation to
space.  Temperatures are within acceptable limits, though
several are still cooler than predicted.  Automatic
maneuvers are performed as needed every day or so to keep the
spacecraft oriented in relation to the Sun.



 Ron Baalke                       |    [e-mail]
 Jet Propulsion Lab  M/S 301-355  |    [e-mail]
 4800 Oak Grove Dr.               |
 Pasadena, CA 91109               |

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

Date: 6 Dec 89 21:52:10 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Payload Status for 12/06/89 (Forwarded)

Daily Status/KSC Payload Management and Operations 12-06-89


- STS-31R HST (at VPF) -

The GST-8 test continues with no problems reported by LMSC.
All facility environmental readings remain nominal.  ECS support
and monitoring continues.

- STS-32R SYNCOM (at Pad A) -

SYNCOM ordnance and closeout activities were completed yesterday.
SYNCOM battery charging was performed yesterday and will continue
on a daily basis.  Payload bay doors were closed and PCR was
secured late on second shift last night.

- STS-35 ASTRO-1/BBXRT (at O&C) -

HUT vacuum pump reconnection and checkout was complete yesterday.
All experiment cruciform cable connections were completed.  WUPPE
GSE cable connections to test panel were completed.  During OSP
troubleshooting an open was discovered to be at a recessed pin on
the RAU Z.  Power up for OSP retest was completed.  OSP star
trackers are working.  An over current condition occurred and is
under engineering evaluation.

- STS-40 SLS-1 (at O&C) -

Rack rotations were performed on racks 8 and 11.  Scheduled for
today are rack rotations on racks 6 and 12.  Rack 4 and 10 side
structure mods continue.  Pyrell foam replacement continues.

- STS-42 IML (at O&C) -

No activity.

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

Date:     Wed, 6 Dec 89 13:27 MDT
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Desubscribing

Hi there, I really like your spacenet articles, but right now I just don't
have enough time to read everyone everyday and it's just taking up too
much of my disk space and wasting paper.  Can you take me off of your
mailing list?  Again, nothing wrong with the articles, just too busy!

Jeff Kirkley

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

Date: Wed, 6 Dec 89 20:30 CST
From: "Brian P. McCarty (N9IWP)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V10 #314

(re:summer employment)
Are these positions only summer, or are there permamnent type positions.
I am graduating with a BSEE with an emphisis in computers. I'm
a ham so I have some communications knowledge. I have about
a 2.8 GPA (spend too much time on bitnet). Is it worth my bother
to apply?

Brian McCarty
bitnet: UCSBPM@UWPLATT
internet [e-mail] soon to be [e-mail]

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

Date: 6 Dec 89 19:10:39 GMT
From: attcan!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Kieran A. Carroll)
Subject: Re: The International Space Habitat Program

[e-mail] (Jim Bowery) writes:
>
> >>>In my judgement, the >main< reason for exploring space is because we intend
> >>>that people live and work there, someday soon.
> >>Right, and since "WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY," we should stop piddling
> >>around with science and just "DO IT."
> >Despite the sarcastic intention of the remainder of JB's posting,
> >this is one statement that I can agree with.
>
> OK, Kieran, since "WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY" for people to live, work and
> play in space NOW (with objectives other than gathering scientific
> knowlege) how about if you go around and convince all those private
> investors who must be just chomping at the bit to make big bucks in space
> that they should plow their hard earned capital into your moon/mars
> development plan...

Well, Jim, there's a difference between having the capability to make something
work (a solar power satellite system, say), and making a venture profitable
(although we're all rabid socialists up here in the Great White North, they
do still teach us words like "profit" in school :-). And even in cases where
a healthy profit potential is fairly certain to exist (solar power satellites,
say), private investors still tend to shy away until other conditions have been
met. For example, private investors like to see the profit rolling in pretty
well right away -- 2 years is a long time to wait for a ROI, these days, let
alone 20 or 40 years. Just because investors aren't queueing up to put their
money into a venture doesn't mean that the venture isn't viable.

> ...did you think that money is no object as long as The Government engages
> in enough Long Range Planning?

If they're >good< plans :-) Seriously, if governments don't do long range
planning, then who will? Private investors? It is to laugh...

> Has the Canadian government become so angry at the US that they have decided
> to assist the most destructive forces within US society by funding "think
> tanks" in Canadian universities to come up with sophistry in support of
> those forces?

No, I only destabilize the US economy on my lunch hour :-)

Anyway, what's your point, Jim? (Do you have a point, Jim?) Are you arguing
that there should be >no< government space funding? Or that just >space
science< should be funded? If the latter, what do you include in your definition
of space science? Is it just taking photographs of outer planets (the one
activity that unmanned probes are clearly better at than manned ones, for now)?
Or does it include investigations into microgravity materials science? How
about funding of a proof-of-principle solar power satellite demonstration?
How about funding advanced launcher-propulsion development? In short, do you
have some rationale for deciding which types of government research you lash
out at? If so, then >explaining< it would contribute a lot more to the
discussion, than would posting endless insulting replies.
--

     Kieran A. Carroll @ U of Toronto Aerospace Institute
     uunet!attcan!utzoo!kcarroll [e-mail]

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

End of SPACE Digest V10 #315
*******************