Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V11_2/V11_278.ZIP/V11_278

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 16KB

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/oa=0BNO00VcJ8:dE4Q>;
          Wed, 18 Apr 90 02:04:10 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <oa=[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 90 02:03:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #278

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 11 : Issue 278

Today's Topics:
             Winch Launch as first stage.
          Re: Pegasus launch from Valkyrie  (or ...
              Re: Arecibo (sp?) message
           Payload Status for 04/16/90 (Forwarded)
        Re: For All Mankind - Great Movie!!!!!
     Large Format CCDs for astronomy (was Re: release of images)
              Re: space tomatoes
          Re: Pegasus launch from Valkyrie  (or ...
         Re: Apollo 13, STS-1, Vostok 1 anniversaries
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 17 Apr 90 21:03:56 GMT
From: sam.cs.cmu.edu![e-mail]  (Vincent Cate)
Subject: Winch Launch as first stage.


Actually, a Pegasus on a 10 mile long kevlar cable behind a big plane
could just be winched in at very high speeds.  You get up to altitude,
let the Pegasus out the back of your C-5A, then turn on the winch.
A winch should be able to get the rocket to 2,000 MPH.  One needs
to be careful so that the rocket does not come into the back of
the plane at 2,000 MPH.  If the rocket lets go a mile out and
has been aiming up a bit it should be possible to miss the plane
(could be exciting for the pilot of the plane on the first launch).
Seems like this might nearly cut in half the cost to polar orbit
for the Pegasus.

Anyone see any problems with this?  It does not give any extra
altitude, only speed so I kind of like the whip idea better, but
this seems simpler.  It really does not need to be a C-5A since
the Pegasus could just be attached outside the plane to begin
with (747 would be fine).

What would limit the speed that such a system could accelerate
a Pegasus to?

Anyone ever hear of anybody who has made winches that pulled things
at over 300 MPH?

   -- Vince

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

Date: 18 Apr 90 00:09:12 GMT
From: sam.cs.cmu.edu![e-mail]  (Vincent Cate)
Subject: Re: Pegasus launch from Valkyrie  (or ...


Fraering Philip:
>The carrier airplane isn't the problem in terms of high launch cost.
>The Pegasus rocket itself might be.

Rockets are expensive, planes are really cheap to operate by comparison.
If there were a faster plane that could be used even if it were much
more expensive it would increase the payload to orbit so much that it
would be worth using.  Remember, and increase of 300 lbs worth of payload
at $10,000/lb is worth $3,000,000.  There are no planes that cost that
much per flight.

>A fully or partially reusable vehicle using RL-10 engines, similar to
>Third Millenium Inc.'s _original_ design for the Space Van, and with
>multiple stages, would probrably have a lower price.

Sounds interesting.  Can you tell us more about this?

>So, in summary: please stop bugging Mary Shafer about which of the
>experimental aircraft in her stable at Dryden will improve the
>performance of a launcher that uses 325 Isp fuel when (although with
>a little more difficulty) 450 Isp fuel (Hydrogen/Oxygen) could be used
>instead. Think about it.
>
>Remember: The cost of developing Pegasus from point zero: $40 million.
>Cost of refurbishing B-70 Valkyrie: probrably lots more.

Part of the reason the Pegasus cost only $40 million to develop was that
they used the simpler fuel.

I did not really mean to suggest that we use the Valkyrie.  I just knew
that 25 years ago we had a fast big plane and wondered if we had one
today.  I see that we do not.  Oh well.

Developing a plane to do this could save lots of money independent of
what type of rocket the plane actually launches.  It should be able
to add millions to the value of the launch no matter what Isp the
fuel in the rocket is.

So, even if a redesigned Pegasus size rocket could have a lower
operating cost (as you imply - which lower Isp alone does not
guarantee) it might still be the case that it was better to spend
money on developing a fast plane than a cheaper rocket.

But, it looks like the fast plane would have to be built from
scratch which would cost lots of money.  So, on to towing a Pegasus
with a 10 mile kevlar wire!!!!

   -- Vince

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

Date: 18 Apr 90 03:44:33 GMT
From: clyde.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!qucdn![e-mail]  (Arnold G. Gill)
Subject: Re: Arecibo (sp?) message


     You also should add that the message was sent exactly once - no repeats.
If you missed the first few bits of code, forget about deciphering the entire
message (or any part for that matter).  I think that they sent it to that
particular globular cluster (M25 ??) just so that the message would reach a
large number (conservatively 1 million) of stars that are of solar type.
Stars larger than the sun would have evolved away from the Main Sequence by
this length of time.  This makes a lot more sense than pointing it at a single
local star and hoping for a response.

     Also, remember that Arecibo is a transit telescope.  It doesn't move, and
it's ability to move away from the zenith is limited.  Perhaps someone out
there could give us an idea of just how much off axis Arecibo can see.
-------
 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|  Arnold Gill                        |                                     |
|  Queen's University at Kingston     |     If I hadn't wanted it heard,    |
|  BITNET   : gilla@qucdn             |       I wouldn't have said it.      |
|  X-400    : [e-mail]  |                                     |
|  INTERNET : [e-mail]  |                                     |
 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

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

Date: 16 Apr 90 19:58:38 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Payload Status for 04/16/90 (Forwarded)


    Daily Status/KSC Payload Management and Operations 04-16-90.


    - STS-31R HST (at pad-B) -

    On Saturday the HST batteries were removed and transported
    to the VAB where battery charging operations will continue
    all week.


    - STS-35 ASTRO-1 (at OPF) -

    The LAIR kit demonstration test was performed Friday at pad
    A.  Support for orbiter rollover to the VAB will be provided
    today.


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

    Rack and floor installation into the module and preps for
    experiment train interface test were active Friday and
    Saturday and will continue today.  Aft end cone installation
    was completed Friday.


    - STS-42 IML-1 (at O&C) -

    On Friday module pyrell foam replacement along with racks 4,
    7, and 11 staging operations were performed.  Pyrell foam
    replacement will continue today along with racks 3, 4, 7, 8,
    9, and 11 staging.


    - STS-45 (Atlas-1)-

    The pallet train was transferred to the south rails Friday.
    Connector brackets and hardpoints will be installed today.


    - STS-55 SL-D2 (at O&C) -

    Rack 12 staging was performed Friday.


    - HST M&R (at O&C) -

    ORUC power network verification was performed Friday.

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

Date: 31 Mar 90 15:02:23 GMT
From: mitel!sce!cognos!geovision![e-mail]  (Paul Tomblin)
Subject: Re: For All Mankind - Great Movie!!!!!

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andy Clews) writes:
>From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Doug Josephson):
>> I just saw a GREAT movie called 'For All Mankind' [...]
>> Most of the film has never been seen before by the public.
>
>Strange. A film of this name, matching the scenes mentioned in Doug's
>posting, was shown on BBC television in July 1989 to mark the 20th
>anniversary of Apollo 11. Could the British public have been given a
>sneak preview, or is *this* FAM an expanded version?

You're forgetting that to American networks, "the public" only includes
Americans.  Living in Toronto, I used to watch movies on local (Canadian)
stations, and then see adverts for the "World Premiere" of the same movie on
a US network.

Take advertising claims of exclusivity with a kilogram of salt.

BTW, anybody local know if we're getting any of the other shuttle IMAX
movies at the Museum of Civilization?  (I already saw "The Dream is Alive"
at the Cinesphere)


--
Paul Tomblin nrcaer!cognos!geovision!pt or uunet!geovision!pt
Life: Loath it or ignore it, you can't like it.  (Marvin)
(My employer may not agree with my opinions, especially my .signature)

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

Date: 17 Apr 90 18:38:14 GMT
From: agate!darkstar!helios![e-mail]  (Steve Allen)
Subject: Large Format CCDs for astronomy (was Re: release of images)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael Woodhams) writes:
>I've heard of a CCD camera with 4 CCDs, each 4096 pixels square taking
>16 bits per pixel. That's 128 Mb per image. I think they intend to do
>on-line data analysis to avoid having to store so much data. Please
>reguard this posting as rumour - I take no responsibility for it's
>accuracy. If there is demand, I  will  try to substantiate this report.
>
>Michael Woodhams.

Last week the staff of the CCD Development Laboratory at UCO/Lick Observatory
took the first astronomical image with a 4096x4096 7.5um pixels 16bits/pixel
CCD.  It was done by rolling the test rig outside the building, and pointing
up with a 50mm camera lens.  This grabbed several images of a roughly 30degree
region around the North Galactic Pole (which was conveniently placed--up).

When converted to real*4 numbers for field flattening, this requires 64MB,
which is too big for many machines to munch easily.

The 4096x4096 chips are initially fabricated 4 to a wafer, so they may
eventually be used without dicing or diced and re-butted against each other.

Just one of these is 3cmx3cm of silicon...photographic plates, watch out!

Steve Allen
Disclaimer:  I would never speak officially for any part of the UC.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Apr 90 18:30:31 EDT
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender
    and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement.
Subject: Re: space tomatoes


>Date: 16 Apr 90 18:44:00 GMT
>From: deimos.cis.ksu.edu!uafhp![e-mail]  (Brian L. McCormick)
>Subject: Re: Teenage Mutant Ninja Tomatoes

>One thing that struck me about this incident was when NASA officials
>said that they wouldn't have any problem with eating a tomato from one
>of these plants.  Excuse my paranoia, but I don't think I would.  It
>strikes me that the fruit of most members of the genus Solanum (of which
>the tomato is a member) contains a poison, solanin.  I would be worried
>that a relatively minor mutation had occured that would render the fruit
>poisonous.  Does anyone know what the actual likelihood of such a mutation
>is?  Am I justified?
>Brian McCormick
>[e-mail]

(And they laughed at my "Triffid Tomato" posting of March 4 :-)

Don't worry - the tomato is already poisonous. It contains alkaloid toxins
which would be harmful in large doses. Green tomatoes supposedly have a
higher concentration, to keep animals from eating them before the seeds are
ripe.

Many other foods naturally contain trace amounts of toxins - apples apparently
contain methyl alcohol, all the rose family (peaches, pears, apples, apricots,
cherries, almonds) have compounds which break down in the body to release
hydrogen cyanide, spinach and beets have oxalic acid, and so on. Some animals
can eat certain foods that are poisonous to people, and vice versa. The
relevant factors are the response of the body to the specific dosage of toxin
involved, and the possibility of long-term or cumulative effects. Some foods are
also fine to eat occasionally, but not frequently or in large quantities.

As a noted television personality would say, if you've been blithely eating
everything put in front of you until now, there's no reason to have a cow
over the issue of space tomatoes. A good rule of thumb when trying any
unfamiliar food is to smell it and taste it before swallowing any. An
unpleasant taste is nature's way of saying "Don't eat it, dummy!" (There are
tasteless natural poisons, but these are comparativly rare.)

News item: corn smut, a fungus which is one of the most disgusting-looking
substances in the known universe, may become the next yuppie food craze
(not that I'd try it for anything).
                                   John Roberts
                                   [e-mail]

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

Date: 18 Apr 90 03:34:25 GMT
From: sam.cs.cmu.edu![e-mail]  (Vincent Cate)
Subject: Re: Pegasus launch from Valkyrie  (or ...


Fraering Philip:
>So, in summary: please stop bugging Mary Shafer about which of the
>experimental aircraft in her stable at Dryden will improve the
>performance of a launcher that uses 325 Isp fuel when (although with
>a little more difficulty) 450 Isp fuel (Hydrogen/Oxygen) could be used
>instead. Think about it.
>
>Remember: The cost of developing Pegasus from point zero: $40 million.
>Cost of refurbishing B-70 Valkyrie: probrably lots more.

Refurbishing the one and only B-70 is out of the question and bringing
back planes in general seems like an expensive way to go.  If there are
no current experimental planes that would be good for such things maybe
the USAF or NASA should think about making one, but it would cost a
fair chunck of change.

How about the concord?

Seems like it goes at 1,200 MPH or so and at something nice like 70,000 feet.
This should be a big improvement over the 600 MPH and 40,000 feet of a
B-52.  Should increase the payload to orbit by 150 lbs or more and so be
worth around $1,500,000 per flight.  I doubt Orbital Sciences Corp could
rent a concord for this purpose.  Anyone know how much the concord sells for?
How many flights per year would we need to justify the payments on a
concord?

   -- Vince


PS   What about the kevlar towline stuff?

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

Date: 17 Apr 90 02:50:52 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!quiche!calvin![e-mail]  (Mark SOKOLOWSKI)
Subject: Re: Apollo 13, STS-1, Vostok 1 anniversaries

>anniversaries observed at this time of year.  April 13, 1990 will be the
>twentieth anniversary of the explosion which crippled the Apollo 13
>service module, which would have stranded astronauts Lovell, Swigert,
>and Haise in space had it not been for their resourcefulness and that
>of the ground support crew.  It was the last time BC (before Challenger)

The three guys burned alive in a 2,000 degrees C inferno were White, the
first american to have walked in space, Shaffee, a rookie, and Grissom, a
Gemini astronaut. The way they died was stupid, with one of the three (he
was hard to identify at autopsy and I don't remember the name) trying to
open the access tunnel up to the last second and doing about 1/3 of all
the needed procedures to accomplish this task...

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

End of SPACE Digest V11 #278
*******************