Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v08/v8_245.txt

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 10KB

From ota Mon Jun  6 03:07:30 1988
Received: by angband.s1.gov id AA06672; Mon, 6 Jun 88 03:07:18 PDT
    id AA06672; Mon, 6 Jun 88 03:07:18 PDT
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 88 03:07:18 PDT
From: Ted Anderson <ota>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: SPACE Digest V8 #245

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 8 : Issue 245

Today's Topics:
                 Titan-4 SRBs
           Re: Management (was Is it CBS or NASA?)
               solar power sats
          Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST
           Re: "What if" on Shuttle External Tanks
             Re: FINAL FRONTIER Magazine
              On using half the brain(s)
          Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST
               Re: SPACE Digest V8 #221
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 9 May 88 15:59:14 GMT
From: oodis01!uplherc!esunix![e-mail]  (Bob Pendleton)
Subject: Titan-4 SRBs


Titan 4 SRBs will be manufactured by CSD and Hercules Aeorspace.
Hercules will provide high perfomance composite case boosters
used for large payloads an polar orbit launches

        Bob P.

Bob Pendleton @ Evans & Sutherland
UUCP Address:  {decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4,allegra}!decwrl!esunix!bpendlet
Alternate:     {ihnp4,seismo}!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!esunix!bpendlet
        I am solely responsible for what I say.
--
Bob Pendleton @ Evans & Sutherland
UUCP Address:  {decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4,allegra}!decwrl!esunix!bpendlet
Alternate:     {ihnp4,seismo}!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!esunix!bpendlet
        I am solely responsible for what I say.

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

Date: 11 May 88 17:47:09 GMT
From: pioneer![e-mail]  (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: Re: Management (was Is it CBS or NASA?)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James Van Artsdalen) writes:
>I actually worry more about the new generation of management than the old.
>This group has grown up for most of their NASA careers in the bureaucracy.
>They may never shake that mindset.

Actually, I do too.  This is one reason why I have decided not to climb
up management ladders.

Let me give you a good example of this.  In computing (this is not an ax
to grind, I suspect this is also a problem in American industry as well,
it is merely an observation): boxes were dropped onto the scene, say 20-30
years ago.  Most of the engineering managers of that time had no idea how to
program, plus they had a mission oriented, get the job done by any means
attitude.  It was then young engineers who "became computer literate."
At best they had Fortran with card decks.

Now the youngin's are older.  They fought computer 'battles.' And they
know how to manage their computer resources.  Right?  But we the
computer industry have pulled the rug out from under them.  We changed
the nature of computing more with personal computers, operating systems,
etc.

Computing isn't the only field.  I suspect good parallel could be found
in chemistry, biology, etc.  And again, I stress that NASA probably
isn't alone.  After all, who will be the next set of dead wood in 30
years? ;-)

Another gross generalization from

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, [e-mail]
    resident cynic            soon to be aurora.arc.nasa.gov
at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
  "Mailers?! HA!", "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology."
  {uunet,hplabs,hao,ihnp4,decwrl,allegra,tektronix}!ames!aurora!eugene
  "Send mail, avoid follow-ups.  If enough, I'll summarize."

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

Date:         Thu, 12 May 88 15:10:12 EDT
From: Kenneth Ng <[e-mail]>
Subject:      solar power sats


>Date: 20 Apr 88 07:56:49 GMT
>From: linus!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
>Subject: Re: Solar Sat Power Stations & greenhouses
>Not necessarily.  The obvious place to put large-scale terrestrial solar
>power facilities is in deserts, normally high-albedo places that reflect
>or re-radiate most incoming energy right back out into space.  Remember
>too that conversion of light to electricity is quite inefficient.  As I
>recall, solar power satellites actually add less energy to the biosphere
>than desert-based terrestrial solar power, because they put the very
>inefficient conversion to electricity outside the atmosphere.
>--
>"Noalias must go.  This is           |  Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
>non-negotiable."  --DMR              | {ihnp4,decvax,uunet!mnetor}!utzoo!henry
>

If we put solar power stations in the desert you'll hear from
environmentalists saying that your destroying the delicate rich
environment of the desert.  And if you put then in space they'll
say that you are adding an unnatural burden onto the earth's
delicate biosphere.  And if you point out that the added change
is insignificant, they'll say "The facts are irrelevant, your
tampering with mother nature."
--
Kenneth Ng: [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: 12 May 88 13:47:23 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Ralph J. Marshall)
Subject: Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST

I'm willing to look really stupid... Why don't they install explosive-powered
ejection seats on the shuttle.  I don't know enough about the technology,
but there has to be some way for the pilot to get out of a SR-71 that
should be close to useful, and require little effort on the part of the
human.  What's the story ?

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

Date: 12 May 88 14:45:41 GMT
From: ncspm![e-mail]  (Jay C. Smith)
Subject: Re: "What if" on Shuttle External Tanks

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI) writes:
[stuff about what if NASA had left the tanks in orbit -- where would
they be after our long hiatus?]
>This ignores the possibility that the Soviets would have salvaged them
>and used them -- is there any salvage law applicable to space yet?

I've forgotten... why didn't the Soviets salvage Skylab?  I would think
that concern over discovering technological "secrets" from an old
space station would have been overridden by safety concerns for those
under the falling debris.



--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay C. Smith                    uucp:     ...!mcnc!ncsuvx!ncspm!jay
Domain:    [e-mail]      internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 88 09:02:49 PST
From: Peter Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FINAL FRONTIER Magazine
X-Vms-Mail-To: EXOS%"[e-mail]"

I second the compliments for FINAL FRONTIER.  Most of all, it is
*readable* -- unlike other space mags, where my eyes get tired after
wading through unbroken pages of uniformly dense print.

Peter Scott (pjs%grouch@jpl:mil.jpl.nasa.gov)

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

Date: 13 May 88 11:47:56 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Helen R. Polak )
Subject: On using half the brain(s)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (54317-T.EBERSOLE) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jonathan McDowell) writes:
>> In fact, the next few missions have all male crews. They have just named a couple of
>> women to later crews, starting about the fifth mission. So it looks very much like
>> an attitude of 'oh dear, we can't risk our dear delicate women on risky missions..'

>Those of you who must read these at 40 characters/line will have to
>write your own flames, as this one is not all-inclusive.
    Is he kidding? 40wpl?
>     few well-known industry advisers (W. Edwards Deming, Peter Drucker)
>     claim that Japan will start to experience a decline because they
>     don't use at least half of their creative, hard-working potential by
>     excluding women from having a voice in work decisions. The same
>Tim  conclusion undoubtedly will apply to NASA if those attitudes persist.

On the other hand, look where we got to today, suppressing most of the
creative potential of women world wide (Hypatia's Heritage, notwithstanding),
Perhaps this is why nations rise, and fall, with such regularity..
I'd hate to see space missions have the same pattern; women whould be included.n
The only way to stay on top is to have the yin and yang working for you,
not just the yin, not just the yang, I speculate.

Helen /\  Mann spricht Deutsch.  Wo Mann Deutsch spricht is a different question.

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

Date: 13 May 88 16:38:00 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST


>I'm willing to look really stupid... Why don't they install explosive-powered
>ejection seats on the shuttle.  I don't know enough about the technology,
>but there has to be some way for the pilot to get out of a SR-71 that
>should be close to useful, and require little effort on the part of the
>human.  What's the story ?
    I think that in the SR-71, that the entire cockpit ejects (I could be
wrong however).  The problem with ejection seats on the Shuttle is that
one would need at least 7 or so, since it would be bad form to allow just the
flight crew to eject.  (Not to mention that no military pilot would be likely
to punch out if it meant sentencing the rest of the crew to death.)  That
many ejection seats would greatly hamper the amount of crew space available,
especially since there is no real way to move them out of the way.  It would
also necessitate the wearing of suits during the entire launch and landing
phases, since one is unlikely to survive an ejection much above 50,000
feet without oxygen, and somewhat higher without a pressure suit.
Another problem is that survivability of a supersonic ejection is very low.

ami silberman

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

Date: Sun, 15 May 1988 13:45-EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V8 #221

> Anyone who has ever visited the top of an Hawaiian volcano should
> think twice about the damage that would be done by installing a launch
> site in such a unique environment.  A hike below the rim of Haleakala
> on Maui is a truely amazing trip--the closest thing to a walk on
> another planet that any of us are likely to experience.

Particularly if no one lets us build a spaceport:

    A) near a city because it's to dangerous in a highly developed
       area.
    B) away from a city because it damages the undeveloped
       environment.

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

End of SPACE Digest V8 #245
*******************