Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V10_4/V10_403.ZIP/V10_403

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/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/8ZehMNW00VcJQ3I05I>;
          Wed, 10 Jan 90 01:28:42 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 90 01:28:13 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #403

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 403

Today's Topics:
          NASA Prediction Bulletins:  Space Shuttle
          Soviet Mir Crew update: Space Walk Jan 8th
           Payload Status for 01/08/90 (Forwarded)
            Re: Nuclear Reactors in Space
               DUMBO vs NERVA?
        Ariane, Spot, Microsat launch delayed
      NASA and Japan sign GEOTAIL agreement (Forwarded)
            Re: Nuclear Reactors in Space
       Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 9 Jan 90 23:06:21 GMT
From: ncis.tis.llnl.gov!blackbird![e-mail]  (TS Kelso)
Subject: NASA Prediction Bulletins:  Space Shuttle


The most current orbital elements from the NASA Prediction Bulletins are
carried on the Celestial RCP/M, [phone], and are updated several times
weekly.  Documentation and tracking software are also available on this
system.  As a service to the satellite user community, the most current
elements for the current shuttle mission are provided below.  The Celestial
RCP/M may be accessed 24 hours/day at 300, 1200, or 2400 baud using 8 data
bits, 1 stop bit, no parity.

STS 32
1 20409U 90002  A 90  9.70320456 -.00080196  00000-0 -35592-3 0    29
2 20409  28.5036 139.8918 0048305  45.5590 314.7076 15.81699374    21
--
Dr TS Kelso                           Asst Professor of Space Operations
[e-mail]          Air Force Institute of Technology

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

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 90 17:26:34 EST
From: Glenn Chapman <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Soviet Mir Crew update: Space Walk Jan 8th

     On board the Mir space station on Dec. 25th Alexander Viktorenko and
Alexander Serebrov activated the Protein crystal growth experiments for
Payload Systems, which will continue for the 56 days. This commercial
experiment was brought up on the Progress M-2 cargo capsule on Dec. 22. In
the west Protein crystal growth experimental results have been announced
from work done on the Sept. 1988 shuttle flight. Comparing growths done on
the ground by the best equipment with that done in orbit showed in many
cases the zero G samples were had less defects, and were larger. The
importance of such crystal growth lies in the ability to determine the
structure of unusual proteins, which are required by pharmaceutical
companies to better produce the compounds. (New Scientist Dec 18, Science
Dec., Radio Moscow Dec. 24, and Payload Systems press release)
     On New Year's Eve they had a day of celebration complete with a
plastic fir tree, canned sturgeon, fruit sticks, black current juice, and
fresh lemons (but not the traditional champagne: that is prohibited in
orbit). Both crew and mission control, along with the crew's family,
exchanged greeting at the stroke of midnight. On Jan. 6th the crew finished
one set of extremely pure crystal growth experiments which took 150 hours
to run. They also began preparations for their first space walk, which was
announced for Jan. 8th. (Our mailer was down for this posting which was to
go out on Friday, but a quick update: the space walk will begin at 20:24
Moscow Time, about 12:24 EST) This will probably test out the new airlock
on the Kvant 2 module. Viktorenko and Serebrov have now been up there for
123 days. (Radio Moscow Dec. 25, Jan. 1-6, TASS press Jan 1)
     More details have been released about the next module addition to Mir.
Called the Technology module (possibly Kvant 3) it will be launched in
March or April of this year, for the use of the Soyuz TM-9 crew that will
arrive in February. Massing 19.5 tonnes, its length is 12 meters (39 ft.)
and adds 20 Kilowatts of power to Mir. If correct the stated power addition
is the same as all of the present supplies of Mir, Kvant 2 and the space
mounted tower erected in June '87 and would require almost twice the solar
panel area of Mir's initial 76 sq. meters (817 sq. ft.). In addition the
front end of the module contains a ball shaped multiple docking port
similar to that on Mir itself. This will be used to dock their shuttle
Buran to Mir in the early 1990's. The main experimental equipment on board
will be large furnaces for semiconductor processing (almost pilot line
production levels are planned), a KFA-1000 camera system for earth
observations, a greenhouse and large 100 liter (3.5 cu. ft.). The high
power capacity is required to run all the processing equipment. (AW&ST Jan
1)
Extensive agreements for cooperation in space medicine and biology were
arranged in December between the US and USSR. These cover the creation of
compatible data bases for the manned medical information (Soviet long term
data is being traded for US short term mission results). There has been a
problem in comparing biological experimental results of the two programs
for years, and the aim of this is to eliminate the difficulties. Bone
density measurements have been one area of conflict and uniform methods
will be created there. Also NASA will supply heart monitoring equipment to
be used on an upcoming Mir mission. (AW&ST Jan 1)  Sojuzkarta has a
contract with the British firm Sigma to market earth observation pictures
from the Soviet film return style satellites. The important selling point
of these photos is their 5 meter (16 ft.) resolution, compared with the 10
meter capability of the French Spot, and 30 meter resolution of the current
Landsat. (New Scientist Dec. 16)
     So the Russians have begun using Mir for commercial processing
purposes.  Now they must see if the Kvant 2 air lock is up to specs.

                                             Glenn Chapman
                                             MIT Lincoln Lab

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

Date: 8 Jan 90 23:22:25 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Payload Status for 01/08/90 (Forwarded)

Daily Status/KSC Payload Management and Operations 01-08-90


- STS-31R HST (at VPF) -

Aft shroud cleaning/inspection continues.  MUE validation was
worked over weekend and will continue today in preparation for
the HST cite test on Thursday.

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

Battery conditioning was completed yesterday in preparation
of todays scheduled launch.  Experiments have been installed
and checked out.

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

Cite testing continued over the weekend and will pick up
again this morning.  Broken backshell has been repaired.
The fuse area was evaluated and the bad fuse on the SPDB
was removed and replaced.  During Saturday's testing the same
fuse blew again.  Today will work troubleshooting steps to
evaluate the fuse.

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

MVAK familiarization and training was completed on Saturday.
Structural mods on rack 3, 7, 9, 11 and 12 continue.  Pyrell
foam replacement continues.

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

Rack 7, 9 and 11 structural mods continue.


- STS-45 ATLAS-1 (at O&C) -

On pallet 1 250 plug & inserts were installed.

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

Date: 8 Jan 90 17:00:18 GMT
From: tramp![e-mail]  (SERRE GLENN)
Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors in Space

First, a question: Henry (if I may be so familiar), why would one want to
produce Pu-238 instead of Pu-239 in a breeder reactor?  I thought the whole
idea was to use the Pu-239 that is easy to generate from U-238 to power the
reactor (this is in reference to reactors on the moon).

Now, a couple of facts (I think):

The original thrust :-) of this thread was using nuclear power for propulsion
systems, so here are a few items:

1) Fuel for these proposed systems.  A recent poster mentioned that nuclear
and electo-arc rockets wanted hydrazine as a propellent.  What he probably
meant was that they want hydrogen, because of its low molecular/atomic weight.
The extra energy you might get from breaking down the hydrazine isn't worth
the effort when you have all that nuclear energy.

2) Nuclear power vs. solar concentrator systems for propulsion.  The solar
powered system referred to here probably involves focussing solar radiation
on a small heating tube where the the propellent is heated to high temperatures
(BTW, you can get 2-3 thousand degrees out of this system) and sent through a
a nozzle.  This produces high ISP (efficiency), but low thrust.  It also
requires a large mirror.  Therein lie two problems.  a) The low thrust means
that interplanetary missions would be REALLY long.b)The LARGE mirrors that would
be required for operation near Mars (because of the reduced solar radiation)
would add lots of mass (there might also be some problems with control of the
mirror.). Operation in the outer parts of the solar system would be out of
the question.
   Nuclear powered systems have the advantages of high thrust with moderate ISP
(which would allow for more reasonable mission times) and the capability to
operate anywhere in space with the same performance characteristics.  Also,
the high power-to-weight ratios possible with nuclear reactors makes them
ideal for electrical propulsion schemes.

Sorry for the pontification, but I had to get it off my chest.  Flames by
e-mail.

--Glenn Serre
[e-mail]

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

Date: 9 Jan 90 00:11:30 GMT
From: snorkelwacker!mintaka!oliveb!pyramid!weitek!sci![e-mail]  (Dave Rickel)
Subject: DUMBO vs NERVA?


I seem to remember that someone sometime last year was going to post a
comparison of the DUMBO and NERVA programs.  I don't remember seeing it; if
i missed it, could someone send it to me?  Thanks.


david rickel
decwrl!sci!daver

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

Date: 8 Jan 90 17:44:18 GMT
From: idacrd![e-mail]  (Robert McGwier)
Subject: Ariane, Spot, Microsat launch delayed

Due to a faulty tape recorder, the launch of the Spot-2, Microsat, UOSAT
payloads on the Ariane 40 configuration (the first 40, no strap ons) has
been delayed until at least January 26 at 0135 UTC.  I will post new
orbital elements on CI$ and AMSAT BBS's.  The tape recorder was not
on the small sats of course, it was on the multi-million dollar
SPOT-2 earth imaging, earth resources satellite.  This quite serious
delay is pushing the already delayed launch schedule for ARIANE further
into the future.

Bob McGwier
N4HY

--
____________________________________________________________________________
    My opinions are my own no matter    |    Robert W. McGwier, N4HY
    who I work for! ;-)            |    CCR, AMSAT, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 8 Jan 90 18:39:46 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA and Japan sign GEOTAIL agreement (Forwarded)

Debra J. Rahn
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                    January 8, 1990


RELEASE:  90-4

NASA AND JAPAN SIGN GEOTAIL AGREEMENT

     NASA and Japan have completed an agreement for the launch
of Japan's GEOTAIL spacecraft on a Delta II launch vehicle,
from the Kennedy Space Center, Fla., in July l992.  Richard H.
Truly, NASA Administrator, and Professor Jun Nishimura, Director-
General of Japan's Institute of Space and Astronautical Science
(ISAS), signed the agreement on behalf of the U.S. and Japanese
agencies implementing this cooperative activity.

    The GEOTAIL spacecraft is a bilateral cooperative mission
between NASA and ISAS which will investigate the stored energy
in the geomagnetic tail of the Earth.  GEOTAIL will use a double
lunar-swingby orbit to take measurements in the region from 8 to
220 Earth radii (Re).

     These data will be compared with other NASA missions in the
Global Geospace Science (GGS) Program.  GGS will investigate
cause and effect relationships in the global flow of energy in
the Earth's magnetosphere.  Following the geomagnetic tail
investigation, GEOTAIL will move to an 8 by 32 Re orbit to
conduct studies in the equatorial magnetosphere.

     NASA will contract for the launch services for Geotail.
NASA recently competitively awarded the McDonnell Douglas Corp. a
contract to provide medium performance class launch services for
a series of its missions on their commercial Delta II launch
vehicle.  Geotail will be the first mission in the series of
launch services.

     ISAS will provide some of the science instruments in
addition to the spacecraft.  NASA also will provide science
instruments and tracking via the Deep Space Network.  The science
data from GEOTAIL will be shared among all the participants in
the GGS program.

    GEOTAIL is the largest NASA/Japan international cooperative
space science mission to date.

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

Date: 8 Jan 90 18:52:43 GMT
From: ecsvax.uncecs.edu![e-mail]  (D Gary Grady)
Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors in Space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tim Maroney) writes:
>Those interested in the subject should be sure to read the November 20
>editorial in "The Nation" documenting the fact that NASA's own studies
>have shown that concentrated solar array technology would have worked
>as well as nuclear reactor technology, as well as the followup in the
>letters column in the current (January 8/15) issue.

The problems with getting solar panels to work at Jupiter -- a solar
constant less than 4 percent that in Earth orbit and an extremely
hostile environment  -- are potentially solvable but have not yet been
solved, despite NASA's continuing work on improved solar power for
spacecraft.  I urge you to seek more technically reliable sources than
The Nation and to take political polemics with a grain of salt.  More
specifically:

Grossman and Long, authors of the material you quote, are out to push a
conspiracy theory and are disinclined to let facts get in their way.
When JPL's John Casani raised important technical points in his letter
(published in the January 8/15 issue), the best response they could
manage was, "He obviously wishes to perpetuate the plutonium con."

>However, projections in 1981 were that it could
>have been developed within two or three years from that date.

Even Grossman and Long managed to get this right.  Reread your source.
That report was in 1986 (not 81) and projected that it MIGHT be
possible to get CSA power working for Galileo in two or three years,
given "unlimited funding" (!!!).  The 1981 report said that "the severe
environmental constraints and the embryonic state of CSA development
indicate that a CSA will not displace the RTG on the Galileo mission."

Another important point, which Grossman and Long deal with by ignoring,
is that a concentrated solar array would probably have weighed more than
an RTG source and hence might well have made the mission a practical
impossibility.  (The 1981 study saying it could work -- given that the
CSA technology could be perfected -- assumed a launch using a Centaur,
something NASA now refuses to fly in the Shuttle.)

>But then the military wouldn't have any excuse to go testing
>RTG's in space, and this vital component of SDI technology would
>languish.

Radioisotope thermoelectric generators appeared before anybody had
heard of SDI.  They have powered every spacecraft the U.S. has sent
beyond the orbit of Mars and quite a few others besides, not to mention
plenty of stations on Earth.  Saying that NASA is testing RTGs for
military purposes is like saying that NASA employees come to work in
cars so the military can study motorized personnel transport.

Moreover, RTGs are not useful for the power levels required by SDI; for
that you need a nuclear reactor.  And, in case you're unaware of it, RTG
research is essentially irrelevant to nuclear reactors in space.

>Nuclear power in space is done for military reasons, not technical
>reasons.

Flatly not true.  RTGs are safe.  Not perfectly safe, but safer than
allowing airplanes to fly or power companies to distribute electricity
to your home.

Disclaimer:  I have no relation with the U.S. government or any NASA
contractor, and my only connection with The Nation is as a subscriber.
--
D Gary Grady
[phone]
USENET:  ...!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary
BITNET:  [e-mail]

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

Date: 8 Jan 90 18:16:43 GMT
From: jfcl.dec.com!imokay.dec.com![e-mail]  (Doug Borsom)
Subject: Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles

In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (John Hogg) writes:

>No treaty in existence bans space-based
>reactors, and the Soviets are the only ones operating them at present.

I thought that one of the objections to several of the SDI proposals
was that they would require orbiting nuclear reactors to power them
and such stuff was prohibited by the ABM treaty (which, of course, the
US never ratified, but which we pretty much observe).  Perhaps
the ABM treaty applied only to nuclear reactors used in conjunction
with weapons systems.

Anyone have better information or a better memory on this?

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

End of SPACE Digest V10 #403
*******************