Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V13_7/V13_770.ZIP/V13_770

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-03 | 17KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from hogtown.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/McQNLWu00WBw48hk5p>;
          Wed,  3 Jul 91 05:16:19 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed,  3 Jul 91 05:16:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #770

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 13 : Issue 770

Today's Topics:
              Ulysses Update - 06/13/91
             Re: Access to Space
              Re: Fred's Operatic Death
             Re: Hermes (was Re: (none))
                   The USF
             Re: Access to Space
              Magellan Update - 06/12/91

Administrivia:

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

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 20 Jun 91 05:31:30 GMT
From: agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Subject: Ulysses Update - 06/13/91
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

Crossposted by: Ron Baalke from NASAMAIL P board
(All NASAMAIL board P items are O.K. for unlimited distribution per JPL PIO,
unless the postings indicate otherwise)

Posted: Wed, Jun 12, 1991   7:47 PM EDT              Msg: KJJB-2953-6655
From:   DAINSWORTH
To:     P, PAO.LOOP,
        (C:USA,ADMD:TELEMAIL,PRMD:GSFC,O:GSFCMAIL,UN:L)
CC:     GYANOW
Subj:   Ulysses Mission Status 6-13-91

                     ULYSSES MISSION STATUS
                          June 13, 1991

     Routine spacecraft operations and data collection continued
to be the primary activities as the Ulysses spacecraft headed for
an early February 1992 rendezvous with Jupiter.

     The spacecraft is performing normally and mission operations
are being carried out on a routine basis.  Earth-pointing
maneuvers are performed approximately every other day with three
planned during the next reporting period for June 12, 14 and 17.
Tracking passes have been increased from eight to 10 hours to
permit the spacecraft's real-time link to operate at a bit rate
of 1,024 bits per second when the on-board tape recorder is being
played back.

     A major solar flare of X-ray particles from the sun's outer
atmosphere occurred June 6 at 6:08 p.m. PDT.  Some of Ulysses'
science experiments specially designed to make measurements of
these energetic charged ions and electrons -- such as the Solar
Flare X-Ray and Cosmic Gamma-Ray Burst Experiment -- were
expected to acquire new data on the direction of the solar flare
as it spreads outward from the sun.  Scientists will spend
several weeks analyzing the data before issuing their results.

     Today Ulysses is approximately 591 million kilometers (367
million miles) from Earth, traveling at a heliocentric velocity
of approximately 72,000 kilometers per hour (44,500 miles per
hour).  The spacecraft will cross the Jovian magnetosphere on
February 3, 1992, and pass by the planet on Saturday, February 8.
Closest approach occurs at 4 a.m. PDT.

                             #####
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 301-355        | "Imagination is more
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | important than knowledge"
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | Albert Einstein

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 19 Jun 91 12:55:03 GMT
From: hela![e-mail]  (Allen W. Sherzer)
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Subject: Re: Access to Space
References: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:

>>Communication satellites are NOT self sustaining...

>From the perspective of the companies launching the satellites, the (IMHO
>the appropriate point of view) the satellites are indeed 'self-sustaining'
>(is this another term for profitable?)

No, self-sustaining is not the same thing as profitable. Suppose Boeing
decided to halt all product design. That would make them a lot more
profitable (they save the billions they spend to design new aircraft) but
they would no longer be self-sustaining.

>since they produce more revenue over their lifetimes than it
>costs them to build and launch.

This may or may not be true. At this time nobody who buys a launch
pays the entire cost of that launch. No matter who launches your
satellite there are huge costs associated with building the infrastructure
and launcher not paid by satellite users.

This was good at one time since it allowed a launch industry to exist where
there wouldn't be one. On the other hand they way we do it today does not
lead to self-sustaining industry. To make it self-sustaining we need to
get the government OUT of the launcher development buisness and force
them to care about costs. Better incentives (like the Kelly Act) would also
speed things along nicely.

>Now, if you take into account all the 'hidden' costs behind the launching
>of the satellite, are you saying that the comsats would no longer be
>worth launching?

I am saying that if things operated back then they way Nick wants them to
operate today (no government infrastructure investment) then there would
be no commercial satellite industry.

  Allen
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Allen W. Sherzer |   DETROIT: Where the weak are killed and eaten.         |
|   [e-mail]   |                                                         |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 19 Jun 91 20:00:12 GMT
From: sun-barr!cronkite!newstop!jethro!exodus!concertina.Eng.Sun.COM![e-mail]  (Eolid enthusiast)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
Subject: Re: Fred's Operatic Death
References: <[e-mail]>, <SHAFER.91J, <1991Jun19.
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>un181157 <[e-mail]>
>Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
>Lines: 8
>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mary Shafer) writes:
>>Nick has informed me that "Public employees slandering [him] on the
>>net are cruising for a bruising."
>
>Ah yes.  If you can't refute them, intimidate them.

I wasn't aware that recounting the public activity of someone, even on the net,
was slander.

If it is, and Nick doesn't want to be slandered, maybe he should moderate his
output.  A form of self-censorship (the only really useful type, probably), if
you will.

Too reasonable a solution, probably.



--
------------
  The only drawback with morning is that it comes
    at such an inconvenient time of day.
------------

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 20 Jun 91 00:33:50 GMT
From: hub.ucsb.edu!ucsbuxa![e-mail]  (Charles Frank Radley)
Subject: Re: Hermes (was Re: (none))
References: <Added.kcLRLrG00Ui3A=[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]



The Hermes program is an active program within ESA.
It is still somewhere in the Phase A/B process I believe,
and according to Space News the cost to completion is now
projected about 30 % more than the original estimate.
The program has major problems acording to Space News.
Cancellation is a real possibility, and full development
has not been authorized.
  If full development for Hermes is authorized then
the Ariane-5 launch vehicle will have to be completely redesigned because
Hermes is way overweight.   This would be a major setback to Ariane, but
it seems the Hermes folks have dug their heels in.
  This situation seems to have been lingering for over a year,
it was that long ago that I started hearing about major
weight problems.
   How long this limbo will conitue remains to be seen....

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 19 Jun 91 14:17:48 GMT
From: <[e-mail]>[e-mail]
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Subject: The USF
References: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

Disclaimer: (Yes, at the top):  I am not associated with the USF in any
way, nor do I necessarily support its activities.  But ...

People have been asking many questions regarding the USF's membership,
recognition by various governments, postal address, etc.  I clearly got
the impression from the USF postings that this was a small organization
trying to sound big, probably started rather recently, and that its
"international membership" was probably largely the result of email and
netnews postings (as it seemed rather coincidental that all of the
foreign members had email addresses.)

I don't believe anything that the USF ever posted ever implied that it
was going to be passing laws regulating space activities, much less
enforcing them.  One of its stated goals is to HAVE an international
space agency (ISA) by 1993, not to BE the international space agency by
1993.  Clearly foreign governments would never submit legislative
authority to some private organization like the USF - they might,
however, collectively form some sort of international agency to regulate
space activities.

I personally think that this would be a bad idea.  I think that treaties
between countries agreeing upon certain limitations and voluntary
international cooperation on expensive and complex projects are
sufficient for the development of space.  However, debate along these
lines (or more appropriately on talk.politics.space or its psuedonym
once established) would be more appropriate, constructive, and mature
than postings such as "Nyah, nyah, you don't really have many members at
all, do you?" or "The Ithaca postmaster doesn't even know you!"

I don't think the USF poses any "danger" to any of us, as a recent
poster suggested.  Perhaps its frequent posts are an annoyance, and I
hope that once a mailing list of interested parties is developed, Mr.
USF director will limit USF postings to infrequent recruitment pitches.
In the mean time, he would be well-advised to end his rudeness (perhaps
his rude "I don't have time for the likes of you" response was a rather
poor attempt to make himself sound like the director of a big, busy
organization or something) and to actually respond to inquiries.
However, I don't see anything inherently wrong with being a small
organization trying to sound big in order to get big.  Small businesses
use the tactic all the time.

Just my $.02

Conrad

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 19 Jun 91 22:40:36 GMT
From: qualcom.qualcomm.com!qualcom.qualcomm.com![e-mail]  (Klein Gilhousen)
Organization: Qualcomm Inc., San Diego, CA
Subject: Re: Access to Space
References: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>>>Communications satellites are a service.  The service sector of the
>>>economy does not create signifigant real wealth,
>
>If you couldn't talk to Europe instantaneously, would the demand for
>computers in Europe be less?  No, there would just be two companies
>instead of one, or several companies.  All advanced communications allows
>Sequent to do is expand the scope of its operations.  It does not actually
>create wealth.
>
>Manufacturing indeed creates wealth, as it adds value to something.  What
>does a comsat add value to?  Airplanes don't create wealth, either, they
>just provide a service.
>would create wealth.  Communications satellites don't create wealth.  Do you
>see what I am getting at?

The point is the communications and communications satellites are part
of our infrastructure.  Just like planes, boats and other neat stuff.
It would be hard to create (or use) much wealth without it.

My company happens to make a system called the OmniTRACS which provides
two-way mobile message service and position reporting via satellites.
We sell this system primarily to the trucking industry.  Even though it
may seem a little be expensive at $4000 a copy, the trucking companies
that have it say that it pays for itself in 10-11 months of use in
improved efficiency.  It even creates "wealth" for the drivers who make
more money because they spend less time driving without a load to pull.
One of the companies that has our system reported in an article in the NY
Times that the last two years of operation during which time they had
our system, their profits were up very substantially over the previous
several years.  This in the face of fuel price problems, bad economy,
etc.  It "created wealth" for the owners of this company.

Klein Gilhousen, WT6G
Qualcomm, Inc.
Amazing non-Disclaimer: In this case, on this subject I DO speak for my
employer.

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Date: 20 Jun 91 04:50:54 GMT
From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!caen!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Subject: Magellan Update - 06/12/91
Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

Crossposted by: Ron Baalke from NASAMAIL P board
(All NASAMAIL board P items are O.K. for unlimited distribution per JPL PIO,
unless the postings indicate otherwise)
(first posted by Anthony J. Spear)

Posted: Wed, Jun 12, 1991   6:00 PM EDT              Msg: UJJB-2953-6511
From:   JPLPIO
To:     p, pao.loop
CC:     (c:usa,admd:telemail,prmd:gsfc,o:gsfcmail,un:jruff),
        gyanow
Subj:   Magellan status report 6/12/91


                     MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT
                          June 12, 1991

     The Magellan spacecraft and its radar system are performing
normally. All star calibrations and momentum wheel desaturations
were successful except for one star reject.

     The weekly command sequence was sent to the spacecraft
Tuesday and begins execution today. It continues the two 55-
minute hide periods for thermal control and mapping of the area
from 45 degrees south latitude to the south pole.

     The present mapping mode will continue through the current
sequence. Next week controllers will shift again to left-looking
radar mapping and 32-minute periods hiding behind the high-gain
antenna. Magellan will then begin to fill in the superior
conjunction gap, the area not mapped in the first cycle when
Earth and Venus were on opposite sides of the sun.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 301-355        | "Imagination is more
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | important than knowledge"
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | Albert Einstein

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #770
*******************