Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v09_4/v9_407.txt

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 18KB

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/sYLzXGy00UkZQvnk4y>;
          Thu,  4 May 89 03:16:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu,  4 May 89 03:16:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #407

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 407

Today's Topics:
            space news from March 13 AW&ST
             Re: Private Space Companies
              Governmental restrictions
              Re: Smart Pebbles
           Destruction of organic material on Mars
              Re: Smart Pebbles
            Magellan Launch Window
              flames about my signature
                Voyager update
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 3 May 89 04:55:45 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: space news from March 13 AW&ST

[This issue has a big spread on "Mission to Planet Earth", the new name
for various Earth-sensing activities considered as one great aggregate.
I'll only skim the surface.]

Editorial observing that MtPE is being discussed as Commerce is working
on shutting down Landsat, and suggesting that Commerce has bungled
Landsat commercialization and the program should be taken away from them.
[Seems to me the mess is at least half Congress's fault.]

NASA forms Lunar Exploration Science Working Group to "develop new
strategies" for future exploration of the Moon.

OSC and its Space Data subsidiary start building a $14M assembly/test
facility in Phoenix, including thermal-vacuum test chamber and a
vibration-test facility for Pegasus etc.

USAF mothballing of the Vandenberg shuttle pad to be completed by the
end of Sept.

First Boost Surveillance and Tracking System satellites will not be
able to hand off targeting data to interceptor systems, although they
will be designed to permit later upgrades.  This change is intended to
help defuse treaty-compliance criticism of the SDI satellites, but it
may intensify the debate over whether BSTS is enough of an improvement
over existing warning satellites to be worth $8G.

Senate panel generally backs MtPE project, but raises concerns about
coordination:  "Management by a loose confederation of agencies is a
prescription for disaster".

Ariane launches JCSAT 1 and Meteosat MOP1 (Japanese comsat and European
weather satellite resp.) March 6, after a four-day delay due to a strike
by tracking crews and another two-day delay due to problems with umbilical
connectors.  Arianespace says contingency margins are adequate to cover
this delay and the rest of the 1989 schedule should not slip as a result.

Quayle intercedes to prevent Landsat shutdown.  New interim plans calls
for agencies using Landsat data to chip in to keep the satellites going;
details being worked out.  Commerce insists that Eosat Inc., the nominal
operator of the satellites, should contribute.  The underlying problem
is that the satellites are well past their their design lifetime (although
in another way this is a blessing, since no replacements are yet ready),
and the beancounters hadn't planned for continued funding.

Studies done for Congress and Commerce find that remote sensing is not
yet a commercially viable field, although this will improve considerably
in the next decade.  The studies were finished last summer, but were
withheld until Rep. George Brown threatened legislation to break them
loose.  Landsat, in particular, with its 30m resolution, is not even
competitive, much less viable.  The Geosat Committee, a group of
remote-sensing users, calls Commerce and NOAA leadership in remote
sensing "nonexistent", says US government basically doesn't care about
having a secure source of such data.  "Apparently this is because US
government needs can be met by classified means and US civil needs be
damned..."  Rep. Dave McCurdy says Congress is fed up with the Landsat
mess, and in particular the way it's being run into the ground by the
beancounters:  "The OMB has lost sight of the forest.  They're among
the trees and weeds right now.  There are guys in green eyeshades in
a basement somewhere deciding our space policy."

Canada exercises its associate membership in ESA, formally notifying
ESA of its intent to participate in Hermes and contribute funding for
it.  Canadian companies will get a commensurate amount of work; this
will probably mean building the flight simulators [CAE of Montreal is
one of the world's biggest simulator suppliers] and perhaps some work
in "aerodynamics and robotics".

Europe may move Meteosat 3 to provide better Atlantic weather coverage
in the wake of the GOES failure in January, although this will depend
on Meteosat MOP1 entering service successfully.

Two-page spread, the "first picture of the global biosphere", using
Nimbus 7 phytoplanton data for the oceans and NOAA 7 polar-metsat
vegetation data for land.  More images of various kinds, some fairly
striking, illustrating the MtPE coverage.

MtPE costs for the US will run $15G-$30G, depending on how ambitious the
project is; the major difference between low and high is a system of
five Clarke-orbit satellites to supplement low-polar-orbit instruments.
Bush has said he supports MtPE; next year he gets to prove it, when NASA
asks for $100M+ for instrument development.  Both the White House and
Congress are thought to like the idea.

Red letter day:  James Van Allen actually says something I agree with! :-)
He supports MtPE but would be happier if the polar platform were split
into a larger number of smaller satellites, to reduce integration problems
and minimize the consequences of a launch failure.  He also says that
making the polar platform officially part of the space station is
"political fraud" and the two should be separated.  Space-station managers
agree, saying that commonality is minimal, the joint organization is
clumsy, and the separation will happen eventually anyway.
--
Mars in 1980s:  USSR, 2 tries, |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
2 failures; USA, 0 tries.      | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 1 May 89 23:33:34 GMT
From: tektronix!tekgen!tekred![e-mail]  (Larry Brader)
Subject: Re: Private Space Companies

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>>A couple of weeks ago I remeber someone posted a brief note that
>>Rockwell tried to buy the shuttle from NASA..  <I believe it was
>>Henery S>..  Why didn't NASA sell them a couple of shuttles?
>
>Because NASA does not want to turn the shuttle, or any other NASA activity,
>over to anybody else.  NASA wants to stay in control.
>--
>Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology

I don't think it's just NASA.  Working as a ex-consultant for some of the
aerospace companies, there's definately an old boy network and they
are definately making money with there current scheme. Our phrase
for it was welfare for engineers. ;-)  ... Before flammage read ::
I'm not even talking about quality of engineers, BUT of the assine
projects I have seen money wasted on and not thought out.  Anyway
I digress from private space companies.

How much of Arianne is private?  Does Europe have  any totally private
space outfits?

Biosphere II is being supported by 1 indivual.  I cann't see him
spending all this money on Biohabs and not be planning on something
space related.  Given that the Biosphere II project will be over in
3 years, and I have heard rumours about Biosphere III .  And lets give
them about 5 years for that project ... add 3 years for fudge factor.
So in about 11 years the group will have extensive knowledge of
building a Biohabs . Also given our current rate of space growth. He'll
launch BioSphere IV into space with Russia, or Arianne.

--
Larry Brader  :: [e-mail]
Of course these are my views, any resemblance to reality is merely
a concidance.
"He's dead Jim, You grap his tricorder and I'll get his wallet"

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

Date: 1 May 89 15:46:52 GMT
From: cadnetix.COM!cadnetix![e-mail]  (Tim Beres)
Subject: Governmental restrictions

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>[Eloquent arguments against statism, etc.]
>I'm confident it will get better in the long run, but I, for one, am
>leaving the country in the interim. I have no intention in being around
>when a new McCarthyism starts.

I usually respect, if not always agree with your postings.  However...
You argue that "people" will, via the underground economies and
organizations, move towards libertarianism if and when the Supreme Court/
administration/moral guardians/et al *really* flog away at liberties.  No
problem with that argument (e.g., Roe v. Wade gets tossed back to the states
- you better believe that *my* legislature will protect a woman's freedom
of choice)  But then you state that you are outta here.  All talk I'm
afraid.  Why don't you stay and lead or work towards these goals?

On space:  There are a few efforts happening using the net as a crucible,
namely ISECCO's biosphere, the "model" orbital plane (sorry if misnamed)
and various organizational efforts.  Some thoughts:

    -  In lieu of governemental impedances on private sector space
       efforts, what type of organization (public or private corp.,
       representative or total democracy, 100% enfranchisment, secede
       from the US and start your own country (-: ...)
    -  What long term hazards do you foresee with the (assume US) gov't
       "handling" of your space efforts.
    -  Quasi-rhetorical question:  Assuming a private space colony, what
       type of gov't or management structures would appeal to you and
       what would actually work.


                Tim

------>MY SOAPBOX (I speak for myself)
 "You are going to hang from the neck until you're dead, dead, dead", Judge to
   Alferd Packer, alleged Colorado cannibal, who died, died, died in his 60's
Tim Beres   [e-mail]  {uunet,boulder,nbires}!cadnetix!beres

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

Date: 2 May 89 06:25:43 GMT
From: dogie.macc.wisc.edu!indri!aplcen!jhunix![e-mail]  (Philip Wong)
Subject: Re: Smart Pebbles

----- News saved at 2 May 89 06:22:34 GMT
Where did you see this film (or magazine)?  I missed a few posts about the
'pebbles', but want to see it in action...

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

Date: Tue, 2 May 89 11:28:12 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Destruction of organic material on Mars

In "Re: Some comments on comments...," Henry Spenser writes:
>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Stuart Warmink) writes:
>>> The Zoology department *here* isn't going to launch any Mars probes until
>>> somebody (i.e. the Soviets) finds life there.
>>
>>Assuming that the statement was not entirely tongue-in-cheek, it seems that
>>the US wasted its time with Viking; it wouldn't have found life anyway
>>because the landers had the wrong flag painted on them...
>
>Not quite what I meant.  The reason I said that is that the Soviets are
>the only ones still looking for life on Mars, so they are the only ones
>likely to find it.  Official NASA policy is that there is no life on Mars,
>so it is not worth flying hardware to look for it.
>
I have just returned from a trip to D. C. While there, I had time to visit
the Smithsonian and observe the graveyard of American space technology. The
Viking exhibit was especially interesting. While its true that the exhibit
said that Viking had found no evidence of life on Mars, the display also
contained this interesting statement:
>
>Martian surface chemistry may in fact result in the destruction of organic
>material.
>
The question is, why, and more importantly, how?
-
*   "If viruses are outlawed, only outlaws will have viruses"             *
*                                                                         *
*   Henry Edward Hardy                                                    *
*   University of Michigan Computer Consultant                            *
*   sysop, Arbor Intelligent Systems                                      *
*   President, Althing Communications                                     *
*                                                                         *
*   Henry Edward [e-mail]                                    *
*   Henry Edward [e-mail]                                    *
*   "Arbor" on MacNet                                                     *
*                                                                         *
*   disclaimer: "You might as well say that 'you breathe when you sleep'  *
*    is the same as 'you sleep when you breathe.' said the Hatter."       *

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

Date: 2 May 89 15:31:31 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Smart Pebbles

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (sealion) writes:
>Eventually, the size of the weapon is supposed to be reduced to that of
>a basketball with a weight of about 15 lbs. Thus the name "Brilliant
>Pebbles".

Uh, you're thinking of either an early stage or one of the more conventional
kinetic-energy weapons.  "Brilliant Pebbles" is aiming at things one or two
orders of magnitude smaller than that.  (The earlier KE weapons are called
"smart rocks".)
--
Mars in 1980s:  USSR, 2 tries, |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
2 failures; USA, 0 tries.      | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date:    Mon, 1 May 89 15:49:14 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Magellan Launch Window
X-St-Vmsmail-To: JPLLSI::"[e-mail]"

    Anybody out there know why the Magellan launch window is so narrow?
I'm talking about the time-of-day dependent window rather than the one that
depends on the day-of-year of the two planets.
    A co-worker suggested orbital inclination is the key element in
interplanetary launches.  I checked out the geometry of the launch on our
globe and found that at the initial launch time, the Cape was not quite at
its closest approach to the Earth's orbital plane, and its velocity vector
was pointing slightly toward solar south.  I assume this positioning minimizes
the fuel required to get Magellan into Venus' orbital plane.  Is this right,
or is there something else to it?

-- Dale M. Greer -- Center for Space Sciences / University of Texas at Dallas
-- UTSPAN::UTADNX::UTDSSI::GREER

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

Date: 2 May 89 18:23:24 GMT
From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: flames about my signature

I've heard that there has been some more flaming about my dreadful anti-
American signature, although I haven't seen much of it myself.  I would
observe that the effort spent flaming about it is better spent writing
to, or going to see, your Congressthing.  The biggest problem spaceflight
has is that so many of the people who "support" it are completely unwilling
to get off their behinds and *do* something to support it.

(That doesn't necessarily mean supporting *government* spaceflight; the
government has important effects on private spaceflight too.)

As for "Canada: 0 tries" and the like, note that Canada is an associate
member of the European Space Agency (didn't realize we were a European
country, did you? :-)) and small Canadian participation in future ESA
planetary projects isn't unlikely.  We're already a minor partner in
the Hermes spaceplane project.  (You'll see that in my AW&ST summaries
shortly.)
--
Mars in 1980s:  USSR, 2 tries, |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
2 failures; USA, 0 tries.      | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue,  2 May 89 15:47:17 PST
From: Peter Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject: Voyager update
X-Vms-Mail-To: EXOS%"[e-mail]"

Excerpted from NASA's _Voyager Bulletin_, Mission Status Report No. 86,
April 19:

                       Does Neptune have a Great Spot?
                       -------------------------------

A large dark spot and a dark band encircling the south polar region of Neptune
are visible in images acquired 90 minutes apart by Voyager 2 on April 3,
from a distance of 208 million km (129 million miles).  The spot rotates
around the planet in 17 to 18 hours.

[...] The spot extends from 20 degrees south to 30 degrees south latitude, and
spans 35 degrees in longitude [3 pictures are printed].  Relative to the size
of Neptune, the dimensions of the spot are comparable to Jupiter's Great Red
Spot.

The images were taken through the narrow-angle camera's clear filter, which is
most sensitive to blue light. The spot is 10% darker than its surroundings. The
smallest object that can be seen in these images is about 3850 km (2400 miles)
across.

Scientists have not yet determined whether this is the same spot seen in images
taken 70 days earlier in late January.  The spot seen in the January images
appears dark through the clear filter but bright through the orange filter.
Features seen through the orange filter may be at higher altitudes than those
visible in these most recent images.  [...]

[Then there is an article about how the VLA in New Mexico is being arrayed with
the Goldstone antennae to augment the DSN: "... Use of the VLA will add the
equivalent of about one and a half 70-meter antennas to the Network." The VLA
is being upgraded with X-band receivers.  "Data from the VLA will be routed to
Goldstone via a microwave link using a geosynchronous satellite. At Goldstone
the signals received at VLA and Goldstone will be combined. The data will be
recorded at both sites to prevent loss of data should the satellite link
fail."]

Peter Scott ([e-mail])

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #407
*******************