Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V12_0/V12_081.ZIP/V12_081

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/AaczXfC00VcJQRX04f>;
          Wed, 18 Jul 1990 01:51:39 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 1990 01:51:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #81

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 12 : Issue 81

Today's Topics:
              Re: Rocket Engines
              Re: buying Soyuzes
           Re: NSS protests Chinese launch pricing
             Re An HST update and comment
              Re: man-rated expendables
             Re: Bush Approves Cape York
         NASA Headline News for 07/10/90 (Forwarded)
                   Re: EOS
        Re^2: Nick Szabo's lobbying on the net
         NASA Lobbying... (Hopefully the last msg...)

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  [e-mail].  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription notices,
  should be sent to [e-mail], or, if urgent, to
             [e-mail]

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

Date: 14 Jul 90 00:27:27 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!turnkey!orchard.la.locus.com!prodnet.la.locus.com![e-mail]  (Todd Johnson)
Subject: Re: Rocket Engines

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
;
;
;        A collegue of mine needs to know the approximate exhaust
;velocity (not thrust) from a typical rocket engine such as the
;SRB's or main engines on the shuttle.  Can anyone out there help
;us?  Thanks!  Please reply to mnmon@CONNCOLL on BITNET or
;thru the space network.

The standard way to get the "exhaust velocity" (which is really
an average exhaust velocity" is to convert from specific impulse.
This is done by multiplying specific impulse by the acceleration
due to gravity, g (32.2 ft/sq. sec for English units, 9.80 m/sec sq. metric).

The Isp (specific impulse) of the shuttle's SSME's is about 455 seconds
which gives an exhaust velocity (average) of 14651 fps (feet per second).

By comparison, the Saturn V's F-1 engines got an Isp of 280.
--
[e-mail]
lcc![e-mail]
{uunet,ucla-se,elroy!turnkey}!lcc!todd

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

Date: 14 Jul 90 18:17:31 GMT
From: oliveb!felix!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (Charles Radley)
Subject: Re: buying Soyuzes

You are mixing apples and oranges.   NASA is not a sales agency until it
started operating the Shuttle, and making money is not its charter.  It
is an R & D organization, and should never have been pushed into being a
state owned airline (Shuttle operator).
Commercial payloads are the rightful responsibility of the commercial
ELV operator, who will be quite happy to quote you a price for launching
a Soyuz or anything else.
Money will certainly "lubricate" those guys !!


--
Charles Radley
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date: 14 Jul 90 12:53:20 GMT
From: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (Charles Radley)
Subject: Re: NSS protests Chinese launch pricing

Right.   The massive skilled labor of the Chinese army is provided free
of charge to the Long March program, how can the west compete with an
unfair subsidy like that ??   Why do we allow such unfairly subsidized
services to be soild in the west ??
US commercial ELV comapnies have to PAY the military (US Air Force) for
use of their launch pads !!!


--
Charles Radley
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date: 15 Jul 90 01:16:46 GMT
From: amdahl!JUTS![e-mail]  (Kim DeVaughn)
Subject: Re An HST update and comment


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Emmerson) writes:
>
> Gunn's comments were very much appreciated and provided something to
> think about -- especially when considered together with the previous
> "NASA-spirit" posting.
>
> Too many bureaucrats/managers?  Too few scientists/engineers?

Precisely.

And on those occasions where "significant problems" have developed with a
program/vehicle, it ha been the scientists/engineers/technical-folks who
have come up with creative solutions and "tricks" that have allowed the
mission to be labeled as "successful" (or even more).  I expect this will
also prove to be the case with the HST, now that these people have (presumably)
been turned loose to figure a way to pull the fat out of the fire.

It is the admin-types/bean-counters/management that are the major cause of
NASA's perceived inability to develop initially successful projects.  They
are the ones that ought to be roasted for making stupid decisions such as
not to "system test" the HST's non-serviceable optics.  Even if such testing
were at a reasonable cost only able to provide "warm fuzzies".  Unfortunately,
they are also the ones least likely actually get their "just rewards".

/kim


[  Any thoughts or opinions which may or may not have been expressed  ]
[  herein are my own.  They are not necessarily those of my employer. ]

--
UUCP:  [e-mail]   -OR-   [e-mail]
  or:  {sun,decwrl,hplabs,pyramid,uunet,oliveb,ames}!amdahl!kim
DDD:   408-746-8462
USPS:  Amdahl Corp.  M/S 249,  1250 E. Arques Av,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086
BIX:   kdevaughn     GEnie:   K.DEVAUGHN     CIS:   76535,25

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

Date: 14 Jul 90 13:18:34 GMT
From: usc!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (Charles Radley)
Subject: Re: man-rated expendables

Pegasus is about five time more expensive per pound of payload than
Delta, Atlas or Ariane.


--
Charles Radley
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date: 14 Jul 90 12:56:03 GMT
From: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!zardoz.cpd.com!dhw68k!ofa123![e-mail]  (Charles Radley)
Subject: Re: Bush Approves Cape York

I have a copy of the Cape York study report, and can answer most of
these.
There are TWO sites under consideration at Cape York, one on the west
side of the peninsula for polar launches, and one on the east side for
equatorial.
The Australian Air Force had previsouly made plans to build a large air
base in the area, and for a while were opposing Cape York  as a turf
battle, but that seems to have fizzled out for now.
climate: it is inside the typhoon zone, but so is Cape Canaveral USA !!
Weather is better at Cape York than Canaveral or Kourou, fewer launches
will be cancelled by bad weather.
There are NO towns in the area, no paved roads either.   No problem,
Australians are used to building these for themselves whenever needed.
There is a railway line branch which runs close to the site.   Nearest
international airport is Cairns (big tourist hub).  Quote "There are
numerous landing strips scattered throughout the Cape (York)".
Nearest major town is Weipa, where the rail line terminates (closes
point to Cape York.   There is a "largely unpaved" road running from
Cairns to Weipa.
Major airport at Weipa (seems to be the local hub).
Convenient peirs exist at Horn Island, and Thursday Island (causeway
could be built to mainland) with deep water channel.
There are two national parks in the area, but this is OK, Kennedy Space
Center is a wild life santuary !!
The report goes on at great length and detail.  It is published by
The Institution of Engineers, Australia, 11 National Circuit, Baron,
A.C.T 2600 Australia,  ISBN 0 85825 382 8
title "Cape York International Spaceport" February 1987.
The plans for an Air Force base nearby by are described as allowing
possible "major economies".


--
Charles Radley
Internet: [e-mail]
BBS:      714 544-0934   2400/1200/300

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

Date: 16 Jul 90 01:34:54 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 07/10/90 (Forwarded)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, July 10, 1990               Audio Service:  202/755-1788
-----------------------------------------------------------------

This is NASA Headline News for Tuesday, July 10........

Engineers at the Kennedy Space Center launch pad 39A are
preparing for the repeat tanking test on the Space Shuttle
Atlantis.  The reconfigurations for the test were completed last
Friday and the next test is scheduled as early as 7:00 A.M. this
Friday.
                            ********

A leak that was detected on the orbiter Columbia hardware during
testing activities this past weekend at the Rockwell laboratory
in Downey, California should assist in isolating the leak found
during the previous tanking procedures.  It appears a Teflon seal
used in a 17-inch diameter pipe in the umbilical line may be a
suspect area.  The detectors that will be placed around this area
on the Space Shuttle Atlantis can observe and possibly pinpoint
the leak at KSC during the next tanking test activities.

                            ********

AVIATION WEEK reports the White House National Space Council's
new Commercial Launch Policy will be ready for review by
President Bush this week.  According to AV/WEEK, the policy will
discuss how Federal Agencies should respond to the private sector
on the commercial launch issue.

                            ********

Israel's second experimental satellite hit a home-run as it re-
entered Earth's atmosphere yesterday and burned up after what
controllers called a highly successful mission, according to a
Reuter wire report.  The Ofek-2 (Horizon-2) Spacecraft, built by
the state-owned Israel Aircraft Industries, was launched just
over three months ago.  It exceeded the original life expectancy
of the mission by 40 days.
                            ********

SPACE FAX DAILY reports Infotechnology Inc. recently signed a
multi-year agreement with GTE Spacenet for satellite services for
the new FNN:PRO "real-time" video financial news and information
network.  FNN:PRO, which will be broadcast via GTE's Skystar
Television, will provide a combination of televised business news
and quotes, as well as high-technology software.  The DAILY says
GTE Spacenet's Skystar Television service, offered from the GSTAR
II Spacecraft, is the first satellite service developed
exclusively for business television users.









--------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the broadcast schedule for Public Affairs events on NASA
Select TV.  All times are Eastern.


Tuesday, July 10......

        1:00 P.M.     A replay of the opening statements and
                      early questions and answers from today's
                      Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology
                      and Space hearing.
                      The status of the Hubble Space Telescope
                      and the Space Shuttle fleet is on the
                      agenda.  NASA's Dr. William Lenoir,
                      Dr. Lennard Fisk and George Rodney
                      will testify before Senator Gore's
                      subcommittee.

        3:00 P.M.     Media briefing on the Hubble
                      Space Telescope.  The Teleconference
                      will be audio only.

        6-8:00 P.M.   NASA Video Productions.


Thursday, July 12.....

        11:30 A.M.    NASA Update will be transmitted.

--------------------------------------------------------------
All events and times may change without notice.  This report is
filed daily, Monday through Friday at 12:00 P.M., EDT.  This is a
service of the Internal Communications Branch, NASA HQ.
Contact:  JSTANHOPE or CREDMOND on NASAmail or at 202/453-8425.
--------------------------------------------------------------
NASA Select TV:  Satcom F2R, Transponder 13, C-Band, 72 Degrees
West Longitude, Audio 6.8, Frequency 3960 MHz.  JSNEWS7-10
---------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 16 Jul 90 06:19:59 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Daniel Alexander Davis)
Subject: Re: EOS

[e-mail] (Liam Gumley) writes:
> I could'nt let this one go past without some comment.
> So here's my two cents worth.
>
> NASA has for the
> 30 years or so taken the lead in fostering initiatives in satellite remote
> sensing of the earth. This has led, among other things, to the operational use
> of weather satellites.  It has involved a high level of interaction between
> NASA and other research institutions.  The trend in the past seems
> to have been
> that NASA sponsors the development of experiemntal platforms (e.g. the early
> ATS, TIROS, Nimbus) and instruments, which are then upgraded to 'operational'
> status (e.g. GOES, GMS, TIROS-N/NOAA).  When you consider that these days it
> takes the best part of 100 million US dollars and 5 to 10 years to develop,
> test, and launch a major earth remote sensing payload, who else is capable
> except NASA ?
>
I do not disagree with you, but I recall the early pioneering lead we
had with Landsat, and how the US funds allocation procedures(congress)
were undependable - so that France leads the remote imaging market.

You may be correct that in weather imaging and other applications of
remote sensing NASA has doen a good job;  I liked Landsat alot, but if
a client cannot depend on the government to keep enough funds flowing
to keep them on the project, that client will go elsewhere, if there
is someplace else to go.

Dan Davis (is), the Repunzel of the Mathematics Department.
Carnegie Mellon student
Disclaimer - don't look at me, I'm also a music major,
I don't have to know what I'm doing.
[e-mail](arpanet).

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

Date: 16 Jul 90 13:09:40 GMT
From: usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!bunyip!uqvax.decnet.uq.oz!janus!zeus![e-mail]  (house ron)
Subject: Re^2: Nick Szabo's lobbying on the net

[e-mail] (Chip Salzenberg) writes:

>All of you NASA employees reading this:  Please don't leave.  Most of
>us appreciate your thoughtful and informative articles.

Having missed the start of this discussion, I hope I am not repeating
the obvious.  I gather the problem concerns postings in favour of NASA
from within NASA.  I enjoy reading the updates, etc on the various
space missions.  I don't see how it would be possible, nice, or ethical
to tell these people "Keep on posting that stuff, but otherwise shut up."

Perhaps the question of postings should be left up to the individual.
(Please, no talk about who owns equipment, etc.  Work it out, at the
price of computers these days, the photo of Granny on your desk probably
uses more of your employer's money in furniture costs than these postings
do in computer money.)  I believe that anything from individuals should
be accepted, but if someone becomes too unruly, educate them with an
appropriate response.  We _should_, though (IMHO) be a bit wary of
postings _on behalf of_ any organisation as opposed to its employees,
where that posting really becomes intense lobbying in the true sense
of the word.  This is because large organisations can swamp all of us
little people if they try.  Imagine if IBM directed its staff to flood
the net.

Regards,

Ron House.   ([e-mail])
(By post: Info Tech, U.C.S.Q. Toowoomba. Australia. 4350)

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

Subject: NASA Lobbying... (Hopefully the last msg...)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 90 12:59:47 MESZ
From: Joseph C Pistritto <[e-mail]>
Mailer: Elm [revision: 64.9]

Hopefully this subject will die a merciful death anytime now...

Until then though, just let me say that this whole brew-ha-ha
about NASA employees using their (NASA's) equipment for posting
net articles is just silly, and even counterproductive!

Like it or not, NASA is the biggest set of people actually doing
anything about space that's likely to be on the net in the near
future..., and it'd be well not to piss them off so that they
retreat into their shells and stop posting.  A major part of the
pleasure of reading this group for me is seeing the 'inside view',
which mainly comes from the NASA folks.

Let's not start censoring people's opinions using nit-picking
arguments because we don't agree with them.  There's entirely too
much of that sort of thing in the civil service already, (I know,
I was a GS-12 once upon a time...), and it already surprises me that
so many people from NASA will submit articles in spite of it.

To Mary Schaefer (sp?) and the other NASA folks who've been sending
in their articles..., keep it up.  We like hearing from you, (really!),
in spite of the net.nit.pickers out here among us!  Don't be
discouraged, keep the good stuff coming!.

The point of the net is to encourage information (as opposed to noise),
flow.  Let's not forget it!.
--
Joseph C. Pistritto ([e-mail], [e-mail])
 Ciba Geigy AG, R1241.1.01, Postfach CH4002, Basel, Switzerland
 Tel: [phone] (work) [phone] (home)   GMT+2hrs!

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

End of SPACE Digest V12 #81
*******************