Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v09_3/v9_387.txt

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 17KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/cYI2Quy00UkZEL504Y>;
          Sat, 22 Apr 89 03:18:18 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 89 03:18:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #387

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 387

Today's Topics:
              Re: NASA tank reuse fiasco
              Fer-de-lance by TE Bearden
         Re: US citizen - ET contact legal penalties
NASA selects contractor to develop Advanced Solid Rocket Motor (Forwarded)
         Re: US citizen - ET contact legal penalties
               Stirling Engines
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 21 Apr 89 14:33:36 GMT
From: janus![e-mail]  (Blake Philip Wood)
Subject: Re: NASA tank reuse fiasco

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Hosgood) writes:
>I used to wonder if it would be possible to redesign the ET so that:
>1) They could be taken to orbit
>2) The end caps could be removed
>3) The internal pressure vessels could be removed.

The current (May 1989) issue of the IEEE's newsletter "The Institute" has
an article about how NASA has decided ot allow the University Corporation
for Atmospheric Research to use the intertank ring to house suborbital
experiments on five upcomming shuttle flights.  It also says that "in later
years,... UCAR and NASA will boost the tanks into orbit, where they will
be modified, outfitted, and made available to 'any responsible party' for
scientific or commercial purposes."

By the way, UCAR is a "30 year old not-for-profit consortium of 58
universities that grant Ph.D.s in atmospheric, oceanic, or related
sciences."



                              Blake P. Wood
                              U.C. Berkeley, EECS
                              Plasmas and Non-Linear Dynamics
                              [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 21 Apr 89 13:40:24 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John Karabaic)
To: "[e-mail]"%aagate.dnet@wpafb-avlab,
        "[e-mail]"%aagate.dnet@wpafb-avlab, [e-mail]
Subject: Fer-de-lance by TE Bearden


***************************************************************************
Advance Note: none of this reflects official US Government or Air Force
Policy, opinions or ongoing programs.
***************************************************************************

My boss, who has a wonderful sense of humor, gave me this somewhat
off-the-wall book to read in my spare time.  The book is called
Fer-de-lance, by TE Bearden, LtCol, USA, Ret., and it is basically a
set of briefing charts, background text for the person giving the
briefing, and set answers to a number of questions.

The premise of the book is that Nikola Tesla discovered a unifying
force way back when which can do some pretty amazing things.  The
physics is not clear (to me, at least), but it has something to do
with the Aharonov-Bohm effect, Theordor Kaluza's unified field theory,
and vacuum potentials.  Of course, Bearden would be a lot more
credible if he stuck to the physics and explained it clearly, but he
claims the Soviets are using it to destroy space shuttles, Titan
Missiles, and cargo planes carrying American troops.

Anybody on either physics or space hear about this before?  The guy
definitely seems looney-tunes, but I took quantum mechanics and
electrodynamics six years ago so I can't judge right away without
investing some time.  Anyone have any references on this guy's work?
Full book info is:  Fer-del-lance, A Briefing on Soviet Scalar
Electromagnetic Weapons, By T E Bearden.  Library of Congress Number
UG 486.5 B42 1986.  Published by Tesla Book Company (which appears to
be Bearden's company), Ventura, CA.  1987.  ISBN 0-914119-03-6.

Respond to me directly and I'll summarize.  Unless you have something
really amusing to share...
        Lt John S. Karabaic ([e-mail])
     WRDC/TXI                    513 255 5800          It's not just a job.
     WPAFB, OH 45433-6543        AV 785 5800            It's an indenture.
                These opinions are mine.
        I cannot confirm or deny whether anyone else holds them.

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

Date: 21 Apr 89 20:58:31 GMT
From: uhccux![e-mail]  (Larry Osborne)
Subject: Re: US citizen - ET contact legal penalties

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Rick Kawala) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (MacLeod) writes:
> > I have received requests for the citation which covers the
> > illegal aspects of man-ET encounters. [plus some more,
    not really relevant here]

then Kawala goes on:

> I called a friend of mine who's a paralegal and asked him to look
> this thing up. He told me that it citation was incomplete, that
> one has to say "Code of Federal Regulations", <subsection>, Title 14,
> Section 1211, where <subsection> can be replaced with things like
> "Coast Guard Regulations" or something. Otherwise, you're faced
> with too many books to look through. It's something like saying
> "It's in the Encyclopedia Brittanica, page number 432" but not
> saying which volume of EB you're referring to. If anyone has any
> more information, I'd love to hear about it.

I asked one of our students who works in the government documents
department of the library and she dug it up in about fifteen minutes.
(When in doubt, ask a librarian.)

She made me a copy, and the reference is on page 115.  At the top
of page 114 is printed "14 CFR Ch. V (1-1-88 Edition), and at the top
of 115 is "National Aeronautics and Space Administration".  I hope
that is enuf for you to find a copy locally.

I know from nothing about governments, documents, regulations, or laws,
but the second section of PART 1211 -- EXTRATERRESTRIAL EXPOSURE (section
1211.101) is headed "Applicabil

All the standard disclaimers (and as many of thhe special ones as
possible) apply.


--
[e-mail] (preferred)      | Larry N Osborne
[e-mail]                           | SLIS, 2550 The Mall
                                                | University of Hawaii at Manoa
or via W.A.S.T.E                                | Honolulu, Hawaii  96822

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

Date: 21 Apr 89 22:04:00 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA selects contractor to develop Advanced Solid Rocket Motor (Forwarded)

Barbara Selby
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

Jerry Berg
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala.


RELEASE:  89-57

NASA SELECTS CONTRACTOR TO DEVELOP ADVANCED SOLID ROCKET MOTOR


     NASA today announced selection of Lockheed Missile Systems
Division, Sunnyvale, Calif., for final negotiations leading to
the award of a contract to design, develop, test and evaluate a
Space Shuttle advanced solid rocket motor (ASRM) and a contract
for construction of facilities for production and testing of the
ASRM hardware.  The effort also will include an option for
production of up to 44 motor sets.  The new motor will replace,
in the mid-1990s, the current Shuttle redesigned solid rocket
motor.

     Lockheed is teamed with Aerojet Space Booster Co.,
Sacramento, Calif., as its principal subcontractor on the ASRM
program, and Rust International, Birmingham, Ala., as its
facility contractor.

     The total cost for the approximately 7-year development
project and facility work is estimated by Lockheed to be in
excess of $1.1 billion dollars.  The precise values of both
contracts will be determined in negotiations between NASA and
Lockheed.

     The ASRM program goal is to enhance Shuttle system
reliability, safety and performance.  It will improve system
safety and reliability through quality and reproducibility
enhancements, which in turn will result from optimum application
of state-of-the-art automation and process control technology.

     The ASRM also is intended to provide the Shuttle with the
capability to lift heavier payloads into orbit, with the design
goal being an increase of at least 12,000 pounds over the current
payload delivery performance.

     The major new facilities to be built for the ASRM project
will be those required for production of motor segments, nozzles
and associated hardware, at a rate of up to 30 motors per year.
The facilities are planned for construction at the Yellow Creek
site in extreme northeastern Mississippi, near the city of
Iuka.  The property is presently in the custody and control of
the Tennessee Valley Authority, pending transfer of ownership to
NASA.

     Additional specialized facilities will be constructed at the
John C. Stennis Space Center near Bay St. Louis, Miss., for
ground testing of the ASRM.  The Stennis Center has long been
NASA's primary testing center for liquid fueled rocket engines
and now will have the unique test stands and apparatus required
for static firing of powerful solid rocket motors.  It also is
planned that a part of the effort will be done utilizing NASA's
existing facilities at the Michoud Assembly Facility near New
Orleans.

     As part of the ASRM procurement, NASA officials requested
and considered private-financing options for construction of the
ASRM facilities, in addition to "up-front" government funding of
the construction.  NASA will negotiate with Lockheed on the basis
of privately-financed construction.  A bill providing for the
Government's assumption of termination liability to contract on
this basis is pending Congressional authorization.

     In addition to the design, development, test and evaluation
work, the primary ASRM contract will require Lockheed to produce
the first 12 operational motors for use in a flight verification
program consisting of six Shuttle missions.  The projected
schedule calls for delivery of the first flight set of motors in
1994.  NASA plans to phase-in the ASRM hardware over
approximately a 3-year period, after which use of the redesigned
solid rocket motor will be discontinued.

     As part of their proposals, ASRM offerors were each required
to submit a production pricing proposal under which NASA, at its
option, may order up to 88 motors beyond the initial 12.  If the
maximum quantity were ordered, it would consist of 40 operational
flight sets (80 motors) and eight production verification motors
for use in ground tests, and is estimated by Lockheed to be near
$1 billion.

     Lockheed was selected after an exhaustive review of the
technical, management and cost proposals received in response to
NASA's August 1988 request for proposals.

     Major Lockheed subcontractors and their places of
performance are:  Aerojet Space Booster Co.; Aerojet Solid
Propulsion Co., Sacramento; Babcock and Wilcox, Barberton, Ohio;
Morton Thiokol Space Operations, Brigham City, Utah; Lockheed
Austin Division, Austin, Texas; and Rust International.

     The Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala., has
management responsibility for the ASRM and will directly manage
performance of the contract.

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

Date: 22 Apr 89 01:29:39 GMT
From: vsi1!v7fs1![e-mail]  (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: US citizen - ET contact legal penalties

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Larry Osborne) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (MacLeod) writes:
> > I have received requests for the citation which covers the
> > illegal aspects of man-ET encounters.
>At the top of page 114 is printed "14 CFR Ch. V (1-1-88 Edition), and
>at the top of 115 is "National Aeronautics and Space Administration".
...
>I know from nothing about governments, documents, regulations, or laws,
>but the second section of PART 1211 -- EXTRATERRESTRIAL EXPOSURE (section
>1211.101) is headed "Applicabil

Some of the message seems to have been cut off.

I wonder what the original date of this law is?  I suspect that it
dates back to the Apollo moon missions, and the "Extraterrestrial
exposure" they're talking about is material of extraterrestrial origin,
i.e., moon rocks.  This is back when they were worried about the
possibility of some disease organism against which we'd have no
defenses.  I remember a reporter or two managing to get themselves
'contaminated', and ending up locked up with the astronauts in
quarantine for the duration.  (I wonder if the reporter did that
deliberately...)  Given the concerns, which in retrospect seem rather
silly, the law would seem reasonable, since otherwise you'd have some
reporter getting contaminated and obtaining a court order to grant him
his Constitutional right to spread Virus X to the world at large.
--
Mike Van Pelt                     "I'm not a biologist, but I play one in
Video Seven                        front of Congressional hearings."
...ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp                        -- Meryl Streep

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

Date: 20 Apr 89 17:26:59 GMT
From: tektronix!sequent!mntgfx![e-mail]  (Mike Butts @ APD x1302)
Subject: Stirling Engines

The subject of Stirling engines has come up in sci.space and alt.fusion.  I found a
very good article in the McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, complete
with diagrams of several forms, graphs of power and efficiency vs. temperature
difference, photos of actual engines, and references.  I'll try to summarize here,
but it's worth looking at the article.

The Stirling Engine converts any form of heat differential into mechanical work.
It has a cold end and a hot end, with a sealed working fluid (hydrogen) which is
put through a pressure/volume/temperature cycle:  Compress it on the cold end,
shift that compressed gas to the hot end, where it expands against the piston,
shift the hot uncompressed gas to the cold end where it is cooled and compressed
again.  The work from hot expansion exceeds the work of cold compression.
The efficiency depends primarily on the difference between the hot and cold
temperatures, according to the Carnot cycle, and secondarily on a large number
of engineering factors.

Actual engines have been built in the 5HP to 500HP range.  Pictures of two engines are
shown, one built by Philips in Holland and the other by GM.  Since it works from
steady heat, these engines have a burner at one end, burning anything from gasoline
to olive oil.  Cooling is done with water and a radiator, as in a car.  The
efficiency-temperature curve shows up to 40% efficiency has been measured on
an actual engine, with a burner temperature of 800 degrees C.  This drops to about 5%
at 200 degrees C.  I don't recall the cooling temperature, but it must be something
like 100 degrees C.

The energy breakdown is said to be 40% work, 10% burner exhaust, and 50% into
the cooling system.  Since the engine has a closed cycle, far more heat is dissipated
by the cooling system than with internal combustion, where the exhaust carries away
most of the waste heat.  Thus the cooling system must be much larger than in cars.
The torque is nearly constant per rotation and over speed for multi-cylinder
engines.  Speed is controlled by varying the pressure of the working fluid.  The engine
is perfectly balanced, the pistons move according to sinusoids, and there are no
explosive power events, so it is extremely smooth and quiet in operation.
(I want to drive one of these!)

We can easily imagine a palladium fusion reactor mounted to the head of a Stirling
engine.  The operating temperature is extremely important, as that determines efficiency.
800 degrees C is below the melting point of palladium, so we may hope that such
an engine will come to pass.  If the cost and efficiency are right, we might see
fusion-driven Stirling engines running cars (which are very clean and quiet and have
enormous grilles).  An engine like that would also be ideal for a home power station,
generating electricity from the crankshaft and heating the house with the coolant.

If such a device could be manufactured economically, it would be a tremendous boon to
developing nations, who could get high-grade power where and when needed, without
big capital investments in power stations and distribution systems, and without
the pollution and economic miseries of oil.

If and only if Pons is right, if enough palladium or a substitute can be found, cheap
enough, if it's as free of radiation as Pons says it is, if it can be made to run at
a high enough temperature for thermal efficiency, if it can be engineered, if it is
appropriate for intermittent use, etc.  Very big ifs, but we will certainly see!

Please followup to alt.fusion.
--
Mike Butts, Research Engineer         KC7IT           503-626-1302
Mentor Graphics Corp., 8500 SW Creekside Place, Beaverton OR 97005
...!{sequent,tessi,apollo}!mntgfx!mbutts OR  [e-mail]
These are my opinions, & not necessarily those of Mentor Graphics.

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #387
*******************