Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V16_3/V16NO352.ZIP/V16NO352

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 30KB

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 05:13:41
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #352
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Tue, 23 Mar 93       Volume 16 : Issue 352

Today's Topics:
             Alumnium was available in Elizabethan times?
               Applications of Liquid Miror Telescopes
                                 DC-X
                        Earth Stop Rotating!?
                           Hello Goldstone!
                          How to cool Venus
                      Magellan Update - 03/19/93
                      Personal hygiene in space
         Predicting gravity wave quantization & Cosmic Noise
                       Russians  ICBMs -> SLVs
                       Shuttle Launch Schedule?
                    Skysurfing from Orbit (3 msgs)
                 SR-71 Maiden Science Flight (2 msgs)
            SSTO: A Spaceship for the rest of us (2 msgs)
                      temperature of Lunar soil

    Welcome to the Space Digest!!  Please send your messages to
    "[e-mail]", and (un)subscription requests of the form
    "Subscribe Space <your name>" to one of these addresses: listserv@uga
    (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle
    (THENET), or [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:38:16 GMT
From: Gary Coffman <ke4zv!gary>
Subject: Alumnium was available in Elizabethan times?
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.materials

In article <1oje08$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>
>I don't know all the details, but I remember in High School chemistry
>the teacher mentioning that Aluminum wsa one of the Treasures
>in the Tower of London.  Back when it was first isolated, during
>elizabethan times, it was more costly then gold.   Given that most
>clays are alumina oxides,  I can see, some form of long high heat,
>reduction process generating aluminum.  After all Alchemy dates from
>the 13th century.   You'd need some sort of intense heat source,
>and  a strong reducing agent.  I doubt limestone would do it,  but
>any society with steel technology, should be easily able to make
>aluminum in non-production quantities.
>
>pat
>
>PS that date in 1827  for wohler, would be the date it was identified
>as an element.  Lots of stuff was around before it was identified as
>elemental.

Well, why don't we consult a reference book. According to the trusty
World Book, aluminum does not occur free in nature. In 1825 Hans
Christian Oersted, a Danish chemist and physicist, produced the first
metallic aluminum. Oersted prepared aluminum chloride from alumina.
He then heated the aluminum chloride with an alloy of potassium and
mercury, and a small lump of aluminum formed in the alloy. Friedrich
Wohler, a German chemist, produced aluminum in 1827 by heating aluminum
chloride with potassium. Wohler's aluminum was in the form of a grey
powder. In 1845, he produced particles *large enough to be weighed*.
In 1854, Henri Etienne Sainte-Claire Deville, a French chemist, improved
on Wohler's method. Deville used sodium instead of potassium to break
down aluminum chloride. This process produced large enough quantities
of aluminum to be used to form objects of the material. The price of
aluminum was $115 a pound. In 1886 the Hall-Heroult process that is
still used today was developed and the price of aluminum plummeted
with the availability of cheap electrical power.

The Napoleon who had aluminum tableware was Napoleon III, Emperor of
France from 1852 to 1870. Lesser nobles at Napoleon III's table were
forced to make do with gold utensils. The Elizabethan Age was the
reign of Elizabeth I, 1558 to 1603. Aluminum would not be produced
in metallic form large enough to *weigh* until 242 years later.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:21:12 GMT
From: Remi Cabanac <[e-mail]>
Subject: Applications of Liquid Miror Telescopes
Newsgroups: sci.space

Some months ago somebody asks for information about liquid mirror telescopes
(following LMTs).  Here is short update in the field.

Since the first babbling of the LMTs in the mid 80s, the technology has
reached the stage to be applicated in various fields of Science.

Firstly, a team from University of British Columbia under the direction of Paul
Hickson and a team from Universite Laval (Quebec) under the direction of
Ermanno Borra (who is continuing to develop LMTs and is obtaining excellent
results) is planning to do a survey of faint galaxies in forty spectral band
from 400 nm to 1 micron (IR, 1000 nm).
They plan to reach Mv=21 for the galaxies, which would be the deepest survey
of this kind until now!
Of course LMTs can only observe to the zenith but for a survey of this kind
it does not matter the direction you point but more does the diametre of your
mirror (here 2.7 m !).

Secondly, LMTs entail major improves in LIDAR Science.  A LIDAR is a instrument
which measures velocities and densities of the upper atmosphere which are not
accessible to sounding balloons (30-80 km).
The team of R.P. Lowe from the University of Western Ontario has constructed a
LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), with a 2.7 m LMT.  They have now the most
sensitive LIDAR in the world.

Thirdly, NASA is building a 4 m LMT to hunt satellite fragments which could
harm seriously the next generation of satellites through collisions.  But I
don't know much about this LMT.

Fourthly, Robert Content from The University of Arizona at Tucson is building a
6.5  m LMT to test the honeycomb spin-casting mirror of R. Angel. May-be the
best advantage of LMTs is the high quality of their surfaces.
Optical tests on a 1.5 LMT showed a paraboloid surface near lambda/250!
And the last results on a 2.5 m LMT show the Airy pattern (LMTs are therefore
diffraction-limited).

We can see that LMT technology is no longer a weird, unusable technology.
Obviously one the major limits on the use of LMTs is that they can only point
to the zenith.  But even this drawback is disappearing.  Ermanno Borra and his
team is working on off-axis correctors to observe to +/- 7 deg off-axis.  This
implementation could increase the possible exposure from 1 min now (equator),
to more than 60 min, permitting high-res spectroscopy!

To conclude, LMT technology is promised to an wonderful future!

Ref:

Borra, E.F., Content, R., Drinkwater, M.J. and Szapiel, S. 1989, Ap. J. (lett)
346, L41.

Borra, E.F., PASP, 99, 1229-1240, Nov 1987.

Borra, E.F., Girard, L., Private communications.

*******************************************************************************
            VIVE LE QUEBEC LIBRE !!!

Remi Cabanac (Universite Laval, Quebec)
[e-mail]
*******************************************************************************

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

Date: 22 Mar 1993 17:11:06 GMT
From: Andy Cohen <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(John R. Manuel) wrote:
>
> Are there any articles in Aviation Week, or somewhere similar, about DC-X
> that someone can refer me to? I'm curious to see the design of the thing
> and in particular, how it will manage re-entry and still be re-usable.
>

If someone will tell me where I can be allowed....I will gladly upload a
set of GIFs of vugraphs for the basic DC technology pitch........

COME ON! Before the roll out!!!

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

Date: 22 Mar 93 17:54:05 GMT
From: David Lai <[e-mail]>
Subject: Earth Stop Rotating!?
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hi netters

    I'm faced with a strange question.  What will happen to the
climate, magnetic field, plate tectonics, and us if this happened??
Any comments or suggestins?

                                David.

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

Date: 22 Mar 93 19:48:25 GMT
From: Tim Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hello Goldstone!
Newsgroups: sci.space

   The Deep Space Communications Center at Goldstone is attached to the army
reservation at Fort Irwin. When I first went to observe at Goldstone, it was
before desert warfare was popular. Fort Irwin was near empty, and we just drove
right in. You can't do that anymore. However, public tours can be arranged. I
suggest you contact one or more of the following offices at JPL (I don't know
which is most appropriate, and maybe nobody else does either :).

   Public Information Office  [phone]
   Public Services Office     [phone]
   Public Affairs Office      [phone]

   We used to have a "public education" office, but it's not listed anymore.

---
------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Thompson, Earth and Space Sciences Division, JPL.
Assistant Administrator, Division Science Computing Network.
Secretary, Los Angeles Astronomical Society.
Member, BOD, Mount Wilson Observatory Association.

INTERnet/BITnet:    [e-mail]
NSI/DECnet:         jplsc8::tim
SCREAMnet:          YO!! TIM!!
GPSnet:             118:10:22.85 W by 34:11:58.27 N

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

Date: 22 Mar 93 19:10:18 GMT
From: "Alan Monday-WWCS Business Mgt. Group" <[e-mail]>
Subject: How to cool Venus
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Del Cotter) writes:
>
>(Translated from Fogg's referencese, I *think* these are the Dec 84 and
>Nov 85 issues; ICBW)
>
>Fogg's paper is still, IMO, a classic for those interested in doing
>something with our useless sister planet.  It wouldn't be easy, mind.
>Here's how Fogg sees it:
>
>Year
>    0    Project begins; algae injected into Venus atmosphere
>
>    Importation of 1e17 kg of H2O from Iapetus (for algae)
>
>    Mining of H2 in Uranus atmosphere begins (to fix the
>    excess O2 produced by photosynthesis and make oceans)
>
>     Asteroid Psyche moved into Venus orbit
>      Construction of Dyson motor begins
>
>  500    Dyson motor in operation
>
>13200    Venus spun up to 24 hour day by Dyson motor
>    Dyson motor dismantled

Interesting... What is a Dyson motor?  I think I know what a Dyson sphere is.  It is
a  solar energy capture/conversion sphere approx. the size of earth orbit, right?
This must be another Dyson idea.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 18:24:54 GMT
From: Mary Shafer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Magellan Update - 03/19/93
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

On 21 Mar 1993 12:27:16 -0500, [e-mail] (Pat) said:

Pat> can I get some of the surplus gear?

NASA surplussing works like this:

1.  The rest of the center.
2.  Other NASA centers.
3.  All other Federal agencies.
4.  State agencies (includes _state_ universities).
5.  Counties and cities.
6.  Public auction (through GSA).

Offhand, I'd say no, you can't.

If it's worth having, someone else will get it long before it gets to
step 6.  Working, reasonably current computers won't make it beyond
step 3.  My working DECmate II was grabbed in step 2, about two years
ago.

On the other hand, our C-47 Gooney Bird went to step 4, ending up at
Ole Miss.  Of course we surplussed it because it had a nasty habit of
catching the left engine on fire, so how worth having it was is a
real judgment call.
--
Mary Shafer  DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
[e-mail]                    Of course I don't speak for NASA
 "A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all."  Unknown US fighter pilot

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

Date: 22 Mar 93 16:49:54 GMT
From: David Drumheller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Personal hygiene in space
Newsgroups: sci.space

   I've done some extensive reading about the history of the Apollo
Program, and some authors (former astronauts) have described in detail the
handling of human waste in early days of the program.  Now my intent is
not be scatological, but I have three questions:

   (1) What kind of backup systems do the current shuttle crews have for
handling human waste when the toilet fails?  I presume they resort to the
old "shit mit" for fecal matter, and "motorman's friend" for urine.

   (2) Furthermore, what adaptations have been made to conventional
(passive) waste handling tools for female astronauts when wearing space
suits, especially for urination?  In the old days, astronauts used a
device that was similar to a condom, and was attached to a bag strapped to
one of their legs.  If you had to urinate, you literally wet your pants.
(Buzz Aldrin claims that he was the first one to wet his pants on the moon
using this device.)  Clearly, the attachment to urethra would be different
for females.

   (3) Has anyone addressed the problem of menstruation in space?  I
presume conventional tampons and pads are used.  How does zero gravity
affect menses?  Does NASA have any in-flight data on this?

   These are serious questions; I'm genuinely interested.  Response by
posting is OK, but if you feel that the details are best relayed in
private, then please e-mail your response directly to

      [e-mail]

Thank you,

Dave Drumheller


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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 17:11:52 GMT
From: Cameron Randale Bass <[e-mail]>
Subject: Predicting gravity wave quantization & Cosmic Noise
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.physics,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]. (Thomas E. Smith) writes:
>>                                                                  how
>>     does one define or detect a 'wave'?  Apart from the fact that I suspect
>>     propagation speed determines the detection through the doppler
>>     shift, it seems to be crucial in all cases.
>
>To detect a doppler shift in gravitons, you would have to be able to detect
>gravitons in the first place, and we have not been able to so far. That's like
>trying to listen for the doppler shift in a train's whistle as it's approaching
>you when you are deaf anyway.

      The crucial point in my sentence above was unfortunately deleted.
      The beginning was along the lines 'if the wave travelled
      instantaneously'.  The sentiment was something like 'If a wave
      travels at infinite wavespeed, where's the wave?'
      Your ears are going to have a difficult time decomposing that
      oscillation.

      You aren't suggesting that 'gravitons', whatever
      they may be, are propagated instantaneously are you?

>But ignoring that, it sounds like the events you could detect would be
>things like massive objects speeding toward or away from you. But according
>to many articles on the subject, some of the things that would produce
>gravity waves are neutron stars orbiting black holes, or super novae. These
>don't have as much doppler shift as other things such as quasars, which have
>huge red-shifts, or even galaxies as they spin.

      Aren't you confusing E&M doppler effects with GR doppler
      effects?  I guess that things moving away from us would
      doppler shift emitted 'gravitational waves', but this would
      seem to affect only the frequency of the wavepacket.  We seem
      to be looking for the existence of the wavepacket.

      In other words, we seem to be looking for the effect of the wave
      on the doppler shift of the spacecraft, not the doppler shift
      of the wave itself due to the motion of the source.

>If a gravity wave travels between the spacecraft, and the receiver on the
>Earth, it will curve space and increase the distance between us and the
>spacecraft. If they time the pulses from the ground to the spacecraft,
>and back to Earth they should see a slight increase in distance between the
>spacecraft, and the Earth (accounting for the spacecraft's velocity of course).
>And they will have to  accurately account for the time it takes the spacecraft
>to proccess the signal, and send it back. If it takes a constant amount of time
>to do this, then you can just ignore it.

     But time is the rub.  While the wave is playing around with space,
     it's also playing around with time.  It's also coinciding with
     the 'return' signal in various configurations.

                           dale bass

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:45:15 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Russians  ICBMs -> SLVs
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] wrote:
: Are any details on the design of former Soviet ICBMs available now?

No.

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      [e-mail]  [phone]

     "The earth is the cradle of humanity, but mankind will not stay in
     the cradle forever." -- Konstantin Tsiolkvosky

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:43:49 GMT
From: "Paul A. Scowen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Shuttle Launch Schedule?
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hi,

this may be an FAQ, but I need a schedule of Shuttle launches for this year
and was wondering if anyone out there could either tell me where an updated
copy is maintained, or send me the latest version.  Thanks.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul A. Scowen                INTERNET: [e-mail]
Department of Physics & Astronomy          [e-mail]
Arizona State University        Tel:      [phone]
Box 871504                FAX:      [phone]
Tempe, AZ 85287-1504
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:38:29 GMT
From: Keith Mancus <[e-mail]>
Subject: Skysurfing from Orbit
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ken Jenks [NASA]) writes:
> Robert Magee ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : I could use a little data on re-entry for a short story I am laboring on.
> : 3) How deep into the atmosphere must the shuttle descend before the wings
> : generate sufficient lift to provide control?

> "Entry Interface" is at 400,000 feet.

  Ken, doesn't "Entry Interface" (which doesn't indeed occur at 400,000 ft)
refer to the first touch of atmosphere, which causes deceleration to begin
in earnest and heat shield temperatures to rise?  I don't think you get
any aerodynamic *control* via control surfaces until you are significantly
lower.  Correct me if I'm wrong, though.

--
 Keith Mancus    <[e-mail]>                           |
                 N5WVR                                                 |
 "Black powder and alcohol, when your states and cities fall,          |

  when your back's against the wall...." -Leslie Fish                  |

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:27:04 GMT
From: "Ken Jenks [NASA]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Skysurfing from Orbit
Newsgroups: sci.space

Robert Magee ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I could use a little data on re-entry for a short story I am laboring on.

: 1) From low earth orbit, how much thrust would need to be generated
: to slow a 400 pound mass sufficiently to enter the atmosphere?

No thrust is required at all -- if you have enough air drag, or if you
want to wait for a while.  But if you're an impatient astronaut, wanting
to come home on a surf board, about 500 feet per second is the rate we
use on the Shuttle.  (A BIG parachute might give you that drag, but
it's a little hard to control where you come down.)

: 2) What is the optimum angle to enter the atmosphere with the Shuttle?

35-40 degrees.

: 3) How deep into the atmosphere must the shuttle descend before the wings
: generate sufficient lift to provide control?

"Entry Interface" is at 400,000 feet.

: Input is appreciated.  When I figure out how to uucode a case of beer, I'll
: post it. ;^)

No beer required.  I trained -- briefly -- to be the astronaut office's
expert on the Entry phase of Shuttle flight.  I did these from memory,
but my memory's pretty good.

: Thanks
: Bobby Magee
: [e-mail]

Proofreading available on request.  I've done some science fiction
writing, myself.

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      [e-mail]  [phone]

     "NASA turns dreams into realities and makes science fiction
      into fact" -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator

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

Date: 22 Mar 93 17:19:43 GMT
From: Keith Mancus <[e-mail]>
Subject: Skysurfing from Orbit
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Keith Mancus) writes:
>   Ken, doesn't "Entry Interface" (which doesn't indeed occur at 400,000 ft)

  Oops, typo, that should read "which DOES indeed occur at 400,000 ft.

--
| Keith Mancus    <[e-mail]>                           |
|                 N5WVR                                                 |
| "Black powder and alcohol, when your states and cities fall,          |
|  when your back's against the wall...." -Leslie Fish                  |

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 18:29:36 GMT
From: Mary Shafer <[e-mail]>
Subject: SR-71 Maiden Science Flight
Newsgroups: sci.space

On 21 Mar 1993 12:30:03 -0500, [e-mail] (Pat) said:

Pat> Has anyone considered which is more fun to ride along on while
Pat> running science gear?  I'd rather hop in the back seat of the 71
Pat> and run the science gear, as opposed to dangling in a balloon.

The experimenters are NOT riding in the SR-71.  Only rated Dryden
personnel ride in the SR-71s.  Actually there are precisely four
people who are rated; Steve Ishmael and Rogers Smith, the pilots, and
Bob Meyer and Marta Bohn-Meyer, the FTEs.  Each flight uses one pilot
and one FTE (i.e. no two-pilot flights).

--
Mary Shafer  DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
[e-mail]                    Of course I don't speak for NASA
 "A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all."  Unknown US fighter pilot

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

Date: 22 Mar 93 19:09:53 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: SR-71 Maiden Science Flight
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <1oi8mr$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:

>Has anyone considered which is more fun to ride along on while
>running science gear?  I'd rather hop in the back seat of the 71
>and run the science gear, as opposed to dangling in a balloon.

Uh, Pat?  I don't think people go up in the kind of balloon we're
talking about here.  It's all done by remote control.  I also don't
think (but do not know for sure) that the experimenter even goes up
with the gear when it's in an SR-71.  It'll all be run by the regular
aircrew, I expect.

--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:25:59 GMT
From: "Dr. Norman J. LaFave" <[e-mail]>
Subject: SSTO: A Spaceship for the rest of us
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1oih0d$[e-mail]> Dave Akin, [e-mail] writes:
> What bothers me about the SSTO/SSX/DC-X enthusiasts (I
> started to say "groupies", but didn't want to start a flame war
> :-)  ) is that they are largely ignoring the whole point of
> refurbishment. Indeed, many of the tales being told about
> DC-X ("airline-type maintenance", etc.) are the same things
> I heard in the early days of the shuttle program. Don't get me
> wrong, I have a lot of friends at MacDac, and I really hope
> DC-X works like a dream, but I think it's a real mistake to
> go into a program assuming you can improve things by an
> order of magnitude based on an assumption (implicit or
> otherwise) that you're an order of magnitude smarter than

I think you need to go take a tour at KSC to see why your arguement
is not valid.

Let me take you on a virtual trip.... See the Vehicle
Assembly building? That huge structure with massive cranes needed
to build the shuttle stack for launch? Not needed for DC (no stack
to assemble (and no potential assembly accidents) ). See the
"crawler" used to roll the shuttle stack out to the pad (the largest
land transport on earth)? Yes, the one that uses thousands of gallons of
fuel to make the trip out and back. Not needed for DC (can land near
where it launches).
See the large shuttle gantry which must be refurbished every flight?
Not necessary with DC because it is designed to need no gantry (possibly
a roll-back hanger).
 Let's look in the orbiter maintenance buildings....
See the turbopumps being torn down for inspection after every flight?
That is because the main engines red line during launch. Not the case
with the DC design because it never red lines its engines.
See the landing strip for the orbiter? Not necessary
for a vertical landing vehicle like DC (although the landing pad may
need some reinforcement).

Oh, let's not forget the cost of fishing the SRBs out of the drink and
transporting them to a facility for refit....or the fact that we throw
away one external tank per flight...or the fact that thousands of
personnel
ae required for all of the refits, refurbs, inspections, and assemblies
necessary between launches.

The fact is that the DC concept is cheaper BY DESIGN.

To clarify my position: I am a great admirer of the shuttle system.
Given the time period in which it was designed, it is an amazing
piece of hardware. I believe it should be used
until a replacement is available (unlike Allen).
The fact that it didn't achieve some of its goals
should not be held against the engineering, but against the fickle
funding which forced some EXPENSIVE compromises to the original
concept. However, I also believe that the breakthroughs in material
research, computational fluid dynamics, and engine technology over
the past 15 years has given us the opportunity to make the shuttle
obsolete. It has provided us the opportunity to corner the commercial
launch market and to decrease the launch costs for all of NASA's
science missions thus making them more affordable and saving them
from the budget chopping block. NASA should fund DC-Y upon successful
testing of the DC-X prototype.

Norman

Dr. Norman J. LaFave
Senior Engineer
Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company




When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
                               Hunter Thompson

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

Date: 22 Mar 1993 17:08:34 GMT
From: Andy Cohen <[e-mail]>
Subject: SSTO: A Spaceship for the rest of us
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1oih0d$[e-mail]>, Dave Akin <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> What bothers me about the SSTO/SSX/DC-X enthusiasts (I
> started to say "groupies", but didn't want to start a flame war

Smart.  You would have gotten one...

> :-)  ) is that they are largely ignoring the whole point of
> refurbishment. Indeed, many of the tales being told about
> DC-X ("airline-type maintenance", etc.) are the same things
> I heard in the early days of the shuttle program. Don't get me
> wrong, I have a lot of friends at MacDac, and I really hope
> DC-X works like a dream, but I think it's a real mistake to
> go into a program assuming you can improve things by an
> order of magnitude based on an assumption (implicit or
> otherwise) that you're an order of magnitude smarter than
> the guys who did it the last time...

The mission of DC-X is to provide 15 flights....  Now I know first hand
from the guys out in building 44 that this does not include the hover
tests, or the low altitude manuever tests.  Refueling will be in the
field....as far as refurbishing.....  I can't see how they can do the kind
of refurbishing at White Sands as the shuttle requires.... no way....

My point is that there is no refurbishing....just refueling....

An ironic point....  Refurbishing of two SRB compontents takes place about
100 Yds away.  Each SRB gets broken down after use.....

Also, when you consider a Shuttle launch you must take into account all of
the activities at KSC....before the trip to 39A or B...  A lot happens at
the VAB.....There is no VAB for the Delta Clipper....just a bunch of
trucks...

How about it!???  Where can I upload the vugraphs on Delta Clipper???!!!!

The AMES system won't let me!!!!

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 13:58:50 MST
From: "Richard Schroeppel" <[e-mail]>
Subject: temperature of Lunar soil

    Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 04:38:00 GMT
    Subject: Lunar Arctic, pressure, antifreeze (was Re: Lunar ice transport)
    Newsgroups: sci.space

    In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
    >Remember Henry's assertion that the temperature is a constant 255 K
    >underground?  That nice steady thermal environment is mighty
    >attractive.

    Note that that's at a depth of 1m.  Our measurements go down only 2-3m
    (and go down that far at only one site -- it took until Apollo 16 to
    sort out the problems of drilling holes in the regolith, and then John
    Young had to trip over the damn cable, so our only deep data is from
    Apollo 17...), but it looks like the temperature rises at something
    like 1.3K/m.  You might not have to bury the thing all that deeply
    to get above 0C.

That's 1300K/km, right?  Selenothermal power!

Rich Schroeppel  [e-mail]

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 352
------------------------------