Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v10_3/v10_354.txt

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

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from beak.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/cZWnAd200VcJA6oU5C>;
          Sun, 17 Dec 89 01:33:13 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 89 01:32:51 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #354

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 354

Today's Topics:
         Re: proposed "space-mail" incentive
               An ICBM question
            Re: New years eve 1999
             Re: Magellan Update 12/12/89
             Re: An ICBM question
            Re: Pilgrimage to KSC
             Re: Magellan Update 12/12/89
              Big Bang:  Did it happen?
      Re: New years eve 1999 and the methods of counting
            Re: New years eve 1999
            Re: New years eve 1999
            Re: Pilgrimage to KSC
              Mir clones made in Japan?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Dec 89 14:54:19 PST
From: mordor!lll-tis!ames!scubed!pnet01.cts.com![e-mail] (Jim Bowery)
To: crash![e-mail]
Subject: Re: proposed "space-mail" incentive

Travis Butler writes:
>Flame pre-empt:  No, I don't think American business got out of the risk
>taking business because the government stepped in. I think (and this is
>after doing some reading on the subject) that business got fat and lazy
>during the post-World War II decades, when they were the only industrial
>game in town. They were taking in steady profits for so long that they
>got used to it as the nature of business, and hence won't even think
>about risk-taking if there's a chance they'll lose that steady profit.

1) Big businesses, with defense contracting predisposition, come out of WW II.

2) They use their size to begin a combination of anticompetitive activities
to suppress innovative start-up companies AND political action to enhance
their ability to engage in anticompetitive activities without negative
legal consequences as well as to obtain further military contracts.

3) Found themselves highly profitable, with lots of political clout
and lots of military contacts in technology development with no
competition which would require them to apply military technology
or internally developed technology to the needs of the market-place.
Still living off the technical capital built up through the war.

4) Eisenhower warns that the "military industrial complex" is a danger
to the nation.  Technical capital from WW II becoming stale.

5) Kennedy and Johnson succeed in destroying the last vestiges of integrity
in the military industrial complex by making the Viet Nam conflict part
of our economic policy with the bromide "military spending is good for the
economy." (We aren't hearing that much anymore are we?)  Positive feedback
of big business lobbying the government so they can get even bigger
is getting out of hand.

6)  Nixon is elected.  Apollo "proves" everything is OK technically
in the US.  NASA and its "spin-offs" are successfully portrayed as
a primary source of technical advance.  Military contracting patterns
have enough political power behind them that the Viet Nam conflict
is no longer a necessary support.  Technical capital from WW II is gone.
Industrial decline starts.  Women start going ape-shit.

7)  Carter makes half-assed attempt to reform government contracting
in DoD and NASA.  Also tries to enforce antitrust.  Succeeds only in
looking like a short sighted negativistic bad-guy for trying to
make us swallow some nasty medicine.  Inflation out of control as
baby-boomers place demands on economy that cannot be met by our
declining industrial base.

8)  As a result of Carter's efforts, the Fed and Reagan can now end
inflation (but not stagnation).  Reagan ends stagnation by telling us
everything is Hunky-Dorey and it's ok to borrow as much money as you
want to spend on whatever you want and be as absolutely corrupt as you
can get away with being (mainly within the $1 trillion dollar military
corrupt-up) so long as you look more "successful" than anyone else.
Endless yammering about "family values" while you can't have a home/family
anymore because 40% of your free time is gone, housing prices went through
the roof, both parents HAVE TO work (never mind feminism) and your retirement
money is being given to people who managed to be more corrupt than you.
Reagan effectively eliminates antitrust as a concept on behalf of big biz.

End result:  Industrial base gone.  MIC and NASA hopelessly corrupt.
Asset centralization makes United States look more like a banana republic.
Most of population demoralized with educational system being destroyed
by entrance of emotionally disturbed children.  Our future is mortgaged to
the Japanese.  Reagan is given $3 million dollar reward by Japanese and
a mansion in LA with address 666.

Yeah.... I think we should give out more government development money
to big businesses.... That'll fix our problems.
---
Typical RESEARCH grant:
$
Typical DEVELOPMENT contract:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

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

Date: 16 Dec 89 06:10:39 GMT
From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent![e-mail]  (Cliff White)
Subject: An ICBM question

I have a simple (maybe dumb) question:

With the current trend in Europe, there is a small hope of some
disarmament sometime .(let's not argue about that here)

The space question is:

The US currently has a large number of solid-fueled ICBM launchers.
Can any of these vehicles (Minuteman, MX) be used for orbital
payloads? I realize they were not designed for orbital speeds or
trajectories, but certainly a space payload would mass less than the
warhead/guidance/decoy/whatever package that the missile was designed
to boost.

What is the 'shelf life' of solid fuel, anyway? How long can a missile
sit in a silo before it's NFG?

just curious

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

Date: 16 Dec 89 17:46:55 GMT
From: calvin.spp.cornell.edu![e-mail]  (John Sahr)
Subject: Re: New years eve 1999

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>I might point out that the new millennium starts January 1, 2001.
This is, of course, the FORTRAN point of view.



--
John Sahr,                   | Electrical Engineering - Space Plasma Physics
[e-mail] | Cornell University,         Ithaca, NY  14853

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

Date: 14 Dec 89 17:07:24 GMT
From: dsac.dla.mil!dsacg2![e-mail]  (Tom Ohmer)
Subject: Re: Magellan Update 12/12/89

From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Ron Baalke):

<      Thermally, Magellan is stable and temperatures aboard the spacecraft
< are normal as it continues to move out towards the orbit of Earth. Magellan
< is now 179 million miles from Venus which it will orbit next August and

Ron, this is not a flame.  Help me understand this.  How is it headed for
Venus and out towards the orbit of Earth at the same time?  Thanks
--
Tom Ohmer @ Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center,
            DSAC-AMB, Bldg. 27-6, P.O. Box 1605, Columbus, OH  43216-5002
UUCP: osu-cis!dsac!tohmer   INTERNET: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]   AUTOVON:  850-9210   Disclaimer claimed

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

Date: 16 Dec 89 23:52:22 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: An ICBM question

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Cliff White) writes:
>The US currently has a large number of solid-fueled ICBM launchers.
>Can any of these vehicles (Minuteman, MX) be used for orbital
>payloads? ...

Yes, with suitable choice of trajectory and payload mass, they would be
suitable as launchers.  The accelerations might perhaps be a bit on the
high side (ICBMs are most vulnerable just after launch, when they're moving
slowly in thick air, so they're designed to really hustle), but that ought
not to be a large problem for most payloads.  There have been a number of
proposals to use Minuteman components for space launchers, and the Taurus
launcher being developed by an OSC subsidiary uses an MX first stage.
For that matter, one "basing" proposal for MX was that on going to high
alert, some of them would launch and place their warheads in orbit.

>What is the 'shelf life' of solid fuel, anyway? How long can a missile
>sit in a silo before it's NFG?

Much depends on details.  I vaguely recall that ten years is considered
a reasonable shelf life for large solid motors.  The USAF regularly fires
Minutemen down the Vandenberg-Kwajalein range for training purposes (at
least, they did last I heard), and one reason why they can afford this is
that the missiles have a limited life and *must* be either fired or
scrapped eventually.
--
1755 EST, Dec 14, 1972:  human |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
exploration of space terminates| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 16 Dec 89 04:32:41 GMT
From: att!cbnews![e-mail]  (donald.l.doughty)
Subject: Re: Pilgrimage to KSC

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (robert.r.rowe,alc,) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter Armenia) writes:
>>...to see a shuttle launch. ...
>>
>>I would appreciate any info that would be helpful in getting as close as
>>possible to the launch sight, photographing the launch, KSC tours, lodging
>>etc. ...
>>

    Check out the National Space Society Shuttle Launch Tours.  They can be
contacted at [phone].

                Don... att!mvuxd!dou

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

Date: 17 Dec 89 00:01:39 GMT
From: attcan!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Magellan Update 12/12/89

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Ohmer) writes:
>... Help me understand this.  How is [Magellan] headed for
>Venus and out towards the orbit of Earth at the same time? ...

Magellan is parked in an elliptical orbit, waiting for Venus to move around
to the right place.  Magellan passed perihelion (point farthest inward,
roughly at Venus's orbit) and is now headed outward toward aphelion (point
farthest outward, roughly at Earth's orbit).  Venus encounter will be at
the next perihelion.

Normally an Earth->Venus trajectory is half of such an orbit, with Venus
encounter at the first perihelion.  However, Galileo (which also wants
a Venus encounter, as its first stop on the way to Jupiter) had higher
priority for the launch window for that trajectory.  In pre-Challenger
days, NASA would have simply scheduled two launches for the same window.
(Galileo and Ulysses were set to go into the same Jupiter launch window
in spring 1986.)  Nowadays, that's felt to be pushing the system too far.
So Magellan gets to twiddle its thumbs in interplanetary space for one
orbit, which let it use a different window.
--
1755 EST, Dec 14, 1972:  human |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
exploration of space terminates| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 14 Dec 89 19:05:17 GMT
From: ssc-vax!shuksan!tahoma![e-mail]  (James P. Galasyn)
Subject: Big Bang:  Did it happen?


I just heard from a fairly reliable source that CalTech has demonstrated
the Big Bang never happened.  This is from the mother of a friend of mine
who's studying cosmology there.  Bright guy, real bright guy, but I haven't
spoken to him yet, so who knows?  Last I heard Alan Guth's Inflationary
model was the best theory...anybody know more?  Apparently this discovery
was made several weeks ago.


Jim "Death" Galasyn
..!uunet!bcstec!tahoma!jpg3196
..!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!shuksan!tahoma!jpg3196

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

Date: 17 Dec 89 05:21:27 GMT
From: milton!maven![e-mail]  (Games Wizard)
Subject: Re: New years eve 1999 and the methods of counting

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David Kinny) writes:
> Is it really desirable that the years 2000 and 2001 be part of
> different centuries, or that the year 1990 be part of the eighties ?
> This is about as sensible as suggesting that babies be one-year-olds
> at birth, and turn two on their first birthdays !  The only sensible

In japan this is the case, they base life counting on the conception date.
( O.K. so it is only 9 months off, but we are talking flame on principal
here. )

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trendy footer by:
            John Stevens-Schlick
            Internet?: [e-mail]
            7720 35'th Ave S.W. Seattle, Wa. 98126
            (206) 935 - 4384
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My boss dosn't know what I do.

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

Date: 16 Dec 89 05:43:46 GMT
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: New years eve 1999

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>   According to what I have read, the coming of the next millenium should
>   be celebrated towards the end of the year 2000, since there was no year
>   0 according to our calendar ...   Thus it would more appropriate
>   to postpone the celebration until new year's eve 2000, but I wonder if
>   anybody (except for chronology fans) have thought of it?

57000 chronology fans have thought of it, and never cease to remind everyone
about it, at great and tedious length, every time the subject is mentioned.
NOBODY ELSE CARES; so far as everyone else is concerned, it's that top
digit turning over that matters, and our ancestors' silliness in putting
a one-year offset into their calendar is boring and irrelevant.

Sorry, Tom, not aimed at you personally...  It really gets tiresome to be
lectured about this every few months.
--
1755 EST, Dec 14, 1972:  human |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
exploration of space terminates| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 16 Dec 89 15:37:35 GMT
From: bfmny0![e-mail]  (Tom Neff)
Subject: Re: New years eve 1999

Gee, I guess this 'when does the decade/century/millenium begin/end'
question should go into the Frequently Asked Questions list.

Now let's see -- should the FAQ list go out on the FIRST day of the new
month, or the LAST day of the previous month?...  :-)
--
Psychoanalysis is the mental illness   \\\    Tom Neff
it purports to cure. -- Karl Kraus      \\\   [e-mail]

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

Date: 16 Dec 89 23:16:18 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Pilgrimage to KSC

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (donald.l.doughty,wi,) writes:
>>>I would appreciate any info that would be helpful in getting as close as
>>>possible to the launch sight, photographing the launch, KSC tours, lodging
>>>etc. ...
>>>
>    Check out the National Space Society Shuttle Launch Tours...

Although I am generally very unimpressed with NSS (as distinct from some of
its chapters), I second this recommendation.  The launch tours are one of
the few things NSS is good for.
--
1755 EST, Dec 14, 1972:  human |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
exploration of space terminates| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry [e-mail]

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

Date: 16 Dec 89 00:44:40 GMT
From: amdahl!drivax![e-mail]  (MacLeod)
Subject: Mir clones made in Japan?


:Space News says a Japanese firm has purchased a backup Mir space
:station from the Soviet Union for $10 million.  The Horie Group,
:a private trading firm dealing in space technology, says the Mir
:station and accompanying Kvant module will be marketed to
:Japanese commercial space interests for future projects.  There
:is no immediate plan to launch the station which had been on
:display in Japan for several months earlier this year.

I remember when the Japanese decided to enter the car market.
The story goes that Nissan bought a BMW 2002 and reverse-engineered
it down to the thread patterns on the screws.  The result was the
Datsun 510, a nimble little sedan (I once owned one) and an affordable
alternative to American iron (at the time).

Some time ago here I said that, in my opinion, it was time to standardize
docking hardware and life support specifications so that a multitude of
parties could make human-rated space equipment.  It seems to me that this
issue is the "bus structure" equivalent for the space hardware industry.
I don't care if it's 400Hz or 60Hz power; I just want to know what to
expect so my add-on will talk to your core.

The US might have been considered for some input, but it looks like the
defacto standards will be Soviet standards.  Once the Japanese are making
iron with these specs, it will be hard for others to penetrate the
international market with other schemes.

I've seen it all before.  Remember CP/M?  We do...

"CP/M will be around for ten years or more...look at all the software
 that runs on it!" ...lots of Digital Research employees, in 1981.

Michael Sloan MacLeod  (amdahl!drivax!macleod)

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

End of SPACE Digest V10 #354
*******************