Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v10_3/v10_398.txt

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 20KB

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/cZeYmni00VcJ82:U5l>;
          Tue,  9 Jan 90 15:42:29 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue,  9 Jan 90 15:41:56 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #398

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 398

Today's Topics:
       Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles
        Re: Magellan Special Report - 01/04/90
         Re: Patentability as public/private division
    Hot news from Aviation Week & Space Technology 1 January 1990
       Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles
           NASA Prediction Bulletin Format
            Re: Pegasus situation?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 5 Jan 90 18:04:09 GMT
From: hplabsb![e-mail]  (David Smith)
Subject: Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Terry Conklin) writes:
>Certainly, press abuses (case in point the extensive coverage given to
>the incredibly minor group of people protesting Galileo's powercell) in
>the name of "news" haved given considerable power to reactionary
>minorities.

Especially when their claims are not adequately countered.  I watched
the Nightline debate over Galileo's RTGs.  What a disaster.  NASA did not
provide an advocate, so ABC used their standing consultant Eugene Cernan
as their "scientific consultant".  He did not know anything technically,
and simply repeated the fact that committees had gone over the issues
several times before giving the go-ahead.  I was also disappointed in
Ted Koppel.  He should have been able to poke holes in the Christic
Institute representative's claims by himself.  But he didn't know anything,
either.


            David R. Smith, HP Labs
            [e-mail]
            [phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|"Meanwhile Newton became as mad as a hatter:  by 1692 he was suffering |
|from depression, paranoia, insomnia and forgetfulness, and his hands   |
|shook.  Poor Newton's scientific work was impaired but in that state   |
|he was judged fit for public office and went on to become Master of    |
|the Mint and a Member of Parliament." -- Nigel Calder                  |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 5 Jan 90 17:15:43 GMT
From: thorin!homer![e-mail]  (Jonathan Leech)
Subject: Re: Magellan Special Report - 01/04/90

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:
>     Magellan's command and data system (CDS) experts said today
>an error the spacecraft detected in its privileged memory is
>apparently an oxide problem, and not a single event upset caused
>by solar radiation.

    Does "oxide problem" have some specific meaning, or just refer
to memory errors?
--
    Jon Leech ([e-mail])    __@/
    "We are Buddhists. We believe in God. We also believe in Hewlett-Packard"
    - Kenichi Horie

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

Date: 5 Jan 90 08:57:08 GMT
From: ubc-cs!cheddar.cc.ubc.ca![e-mail]  (Paul-Andre Panon)
Subject: Re: Patentability as public/private division

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim Bowery) writes:
>
>        In civil space, as in many other technical areas that posess
>        commercial potential, the correct division between public and
>        private sector responsibilities is exactly the same as that
>        defined in patent law between "unpatentable" research (science)
>        and "patentable" development (technology).  Grassroots space
>        activists, in advocating related reforms of our civil space
>        policy, are now enjoying far greater political influence than
>        we ever experienced as just another special interest asking
>        Congress for more money.  Experiencing such influence is not
>        only motivating and exciting, it is proving to be the cure
>        for a malaise that has, for years, plagued our space movement.
...
>
>---
>Typical RESEARCH grant:
>$
>Typical DEVELOPMENT contract:
>$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Which seems to summarize a lot of statements made in the white paper he
posted to the net recently - I unfortunately only read the first part of
the paper because (it seems) I didn't get to save the second half when it came
down the pike (the undergrad machines I WAS using to read sci.space were
undergoing changes over the Christmas break).  What I didn't see addressed
anywhere (or at least not in the first half of the paper and not in the above
article) is the need for an efficient method of information/technology transfer
between the research lab and the development lab.  I have gotten the impression
from a number of sources that this is where the Japanese, among others,
win in the race to place finished products on the market.  I think a lot of the
arguments for the privatization of the development section of the space program
make sense, but they MUST be balanced by better systems/structures for
technology transfer.  I fear that if this is not done, any advantages gained
from competition will be killed by the increased time between research and
development.

I think you have a lot better chance of pushing something like this through now
than, say, a year ago.  I think there are some pretty good arguments that some
of the knowledge/technology being developed at NASA has military applications.
I suspect some 'hawks' might feel uncomfortable with making this available to
the private sector where it might be more difficult for 'proper security
measures' to be followed (sure, this already happens for many defence contracts
but I think the likely variety/number of bidding contractors would be larger
for space stuff than for defence contracts).  If this isn't the case, then why
does NASA require U.S. citizenship for all its positions and a security
clearance for many of those positions as well?  This particular argument against
privatization should get weaker once the implications of the Eastern European
changes sink in.  Of course, there's always China.

--
      [e-mail]      or      USERPAP1@UBCMTSG
or    [e-mail]    or      [e-mail]
"What should the role of the University be? It should be to enlighten Society."
  -Luis Sobrino

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

Date: 4 Jan 90 00:03:00 GMT
From: mirror!frog![e-mail]  (John Woods)
Subject: Hot news from Aviation Week & Space Technology 1 January 1990

Considering the controversy rumbling here over the use of the Long March
launcher, there is an article in this week's AvLeak which is very interesting.

{begin quote}
   The Swedish Space Corporation, the prime contractor for the Swedish Board of
Space Activities' Freja Satellite, signed an agreement with Orbital Sciences
Corp. and Hercules, Inc., the joint developers of the winged booster which is
launched in the air from under the wing of a U. S. Air Force B-52 aircraft.
   The agreement, signed Dec. 13 in Solna, Sweden, also involves Arianespace,
the Pegasus marketing representative in Europe.
   Barbara Zadina, an official of Orbital Sciences, said the Swedes' move
toward the U.S. launch vehicle [away from the Chinese Long March] is being made
"as a result of political circumstances and because Pegasus is a dedicated
launch platform."
   ...
   While [$7.5M] may be more than the Chinese charge for the Long March,
[Antonio Elias, Orbital's engineering VP] said the Swedes will likely save
on other expenses involved in launching from China.
   The Freja satellite, carrying instruments for research into aurora and
other phenomena of the Earth's magnetosphere, includes U.S. experiments.  It
would be the first spacecraft to make certain high-resolution measurements
in the auroral zone.
   {end quote}

There is also, on the same page, an article headlined "U.S. Approval of
Satellite Launches By China Not the End of Sanctions", which can be summarized
as saying "probably no more approvals for Long March, and no Soviet approvals
ever, hahahahahahaha."

One of the two "US" satellites to be launched on Long March is Asiasat 1,
nee' Westar 6 (one of the satellites retrieved by the Shuttle).
--
John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA, [phone]
...!decvax!frog!john, [e-mail], ...!mit-eddie!jfw, [e-mail]

Happiness is Planet Earth in your rear-view mirror.    - Sam Hurt

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

Date: 5 Jan 90 20:02:26 GMT
From: rochester![e-mail]  (Paul Dietz)
Subject: Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:

>I don't see
>what difference it makes that the reactor is not operational until after
>departure, unless the fuel elements are launched in special protective
>containers and only installed in the reactor in orbit, and that would
>complicate design quite a bit, too.

The halflife of U-235 is eight million times the halflife of Pu-238
(the stuff used in RTGs), so, pound for pound, it is about 8 million
times less radioactive.  The only way nonfissioned U-235 in an inert
reactor core could harm someone would be if it fell on them.

You would want to design the core to make sure it could not go
critical in a launch accident.  That should not be hard.

    Paul F. Dietz
    [e-mail]

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

Date: 30 Dec 89 23:43:09 GMT
From: ncis.tis.llnl.gov!blackbird![e-mail]  (TS Kelso)
Subject: NASA Prediction Bulletin Format


As a service to the satellite user community, the following description
of the NASA Prediction Bulletin's two-line orbital element set format is
uploaded to sci.space on a monthly basis.  The most current orbital elements
from the NASA Prediction Bulletins are carried on the Celestial RCP/M, (513)
427-0674, and are updated several times weekly.  Documentation and tracking
software are also available on this system.  The Celestial RCP/M may be
accessed 24 hours/day at 300, 1200, or 2400 baud using 8 data bits, 1 stop
bit, no parity.

==============================================================================

Data for each satellite consists of three lines in the following format:

AAAAAAAAAAA
1 NNNNNU NNNNNAAA NNNNN.NNNNNNNN +.NNNNNNNN +NNNNN-N +NNNNN-N N NNNNN
2 NNNNN NNN.NNNN NNN.NNNN NNNNNNN NNN.NNNN NNN.NNNN NN.NNNNNNNNNNNNNN

Line 1 is a eleven-character name.

Lines 2 and 3 are the standard Two-Line Orbital Element Set Format identical
to that used by NASA and NORAD.  The format description is:

Line 2
Column     Description
 01-01     Line Number of Element Data
 03-07     Satellite Number
 10-11     International Designator (Last two digits of launch year)
 12-14     International Designator (Launch number of the year)
 15-17     International Designator (Piece of launch)
 19-20     Epoch Year (Last two digits of year)
 21-32     Epoch (Julian Day and fractional portion of the day)
 34-43     First Time Derivative of the Mean Motion
        or Ballistic Coefficient (Depending on ephemeris type)
 45-52     Second Time Derivative of Mean Motion (decimal point assumed;
           blank if N/A)
 54-61     BSTAR drag term if GP4 general perturbation theory was used.
           Otherwise, radiation pressure coefficient.  (Decimal point assumed)
 63-63     Ephemeris type
 65-68     Element number
 69-69     Check Sum (Modulo 10)
           (Letters, blanks, periods = 0; minus sign = 1; plus sign = 2)

Line 3
Column     Description
 01-01     Line Number of Element Data
 03-07     Satellite Number
 09-16     Inclination [Degrees]
 18-25     Right Ascension of the Ascending Node [Degrees]
 27-33     Eccentricity (decimal point assumed)
 35-42     Argument of Perigee [Degrees]
 44-51     Mean Anomaly [Degrees]
 53-63     Mean Motion [Revs per day]
 64-68     Revolution number at epoch [Revs]
 69-69     Check Sum (Modulo 10)

All other columns are blank or fixed.

Example:

NOAA 6
1 11416U          86 50.28438588 0.00000140           67960-4 0  5293
2 11416  98.5105  69.3305 0012788  63.2828 296.9658 14.24899292346978

Note that the International Designator fields are usually blank, as issued in
the NASA Prediction Bulletins.

--
Dr TS Kelso                           Asst Professor of Space Operations
[e-mail]          Air Force Institute of Technology

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

Date: 3 Jan 90 00:46:44 GMT
From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!uplherc!esunix!bambam![e-mail]  (Bob Pendleton)
Subject: Re: Pegasus situation?

From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Will Martin):

> But,
> if everything works OK, why wait a month? Why not then go up in a day or
> two and do it for real? What's the purpose of forcing a month's delay in
> any case?

Data reduction, inspection, and analysis.

It could easily take a month to verify that everything did go OK.
Finding internal debonds in composites takes a bit more than just
eyeballing the outside of the case.

Anyway, the flight test article isn't a flight ready Pegasus.

            Bob P.

--
              Bob Pendleton, speaking only for myself.
UUCP Address:  decwrl!esunix!bpendlet or utah-cs!esunix!bpendlet

                      X: Tools, not rules.

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

Date:     Thu, 04 Jan 90 15:16:20 -0900
Sender: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
From: "Robert J. Hale III"  <[e-mail]>

#16 ACAD3A::FSRRC       Thu 04 Jan  09:49  ( 102) U

January 1. 1990
ISECCo PROJECT UPDATE #9: 1989 Newsletter.
     The following is an extract from our annual newsletter.   We
are  sending  it  so that you can see the  general  outline  and,
hopefully, encourage your interest in space in general and us  in
particular!   If you would like the entire newsletter but do  not
wish  to join please send a self-addressed, stamped  envelope  to
ISECCo: we will be happy to send you one!
     We  of ISECCo hope you had happy holidays and that your  new
year is enjoyable and industrious.

 International   Space  Exploration  and  Colonization   Company
                           I.S.E.C.Co
 P.O. Box 60885                                Annual Newsletter
 Fairbanks, Ak. 99706                          Issue #3: 1989
 [phone]                                 January 1, 1990

                          INTRODUCTION
     This is the International Space Exploration and Colonization
Company's  third  annual newsletter.  There are 3  ways  you  can
obtain  these  newsletters:  pay $5 for a 10 year subscription to
it, do 2 or more  hours  of  volunteer  work in the  last year or
donate $20 or more in the last year.
     Except  as  noted  this newsletter was  written  by  Ray  R.
Collins,  the president and co-founder of ISECCo.   Other  people
who contributed to the writing, editing and distribution of  this
newsletter  are:  Debi Wilkinson, Patrick  Wilkinson  and  Robert
Hale,  and ISECCo extends it's thanks to their generous  donation
of time to this effort.
     Anyone wishing to join ISECCo can write to ISECCo, P.O.  Box
60885, Fairbanks AK 99706 and request an information package  and
membership form.

                            CONTENTS:

Introduction................................Page 1,  Column 1
Contents....................................Page 1,  Column 1
Overview....................................Page 1,  Column 1
Biosphere Grant Application.................Page 1,  Column 2
Biosphere Land Lease........................Page 2,  Column 1
Biosphere Excavation........................Page 2,  Column 1
Volunteer Workers...........................Page 2,  Column 1
Videos of Biosphere Project.................Page 2,  Column 2
Biosphere II................................Page 2,  Column 2
ISECCo Support..............................Page 2,  Column 2
An ISECCo Vacation by Wilkinson.............Page 2,  Column 2
1989 Successes and Setbacks.................Page 3,  Column 1
Non-Profit Status...........................Page 3,  Column 2
1990 Projects...............................Page 3,  Column 2
Selected Project Updates....................Page 4,  Column 1
     #4: Hydroponics & Space Utilization....Page 4,  Column 2
     #6: Crop Cycling.......................Page 5,  Column 1
     #7: Questions & Answers................Page 5,  Column 2
     #8: Summer Activities..................Page 6,  Column 1
The Last Line...............................Page 6,  Column 2

                            OVERVIEW
     1989 was a successful one for ISECCo.  The Biosphere Project
has progressed to the point where construction can proceed,  some
preliminary work has been done on the aero-space plane model, our
office procedures are getting smoothed out, and (after more  than
15 months) the IRS granted our request for non-profit status.
     Early in 1989 Gene and Marilyn Rowley offer to let us  build
the  Biosphere on their land.  By May we had an agreement  worked
out for a lease to their land. During May, when Richard Kline and
Debi Wilkinson were up from Florida donating 2 weeks of labor, we
got  the Biosphere site cleared and ready to begin  digging.   In
the  early fall we obtained the used of some heavy equipment  and
managed to get a lot of dirt excavated before freeze-up.
     Our  core  membership stands slightly over 50  people  right
now.  We have members from Alaska, California, Georgia,  Florida,
Michigan, Kentucky, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Ohio,  Washington,
Illinois,  New York, Canada, and people in Belgium, New  Zealand,
India  and Australia have also expressed interest.  Our principal
method of reaching these people is via the computer mail networks
such as BITNET.  Our progress reports, which are distributed this
way,  have proven to be an excellent method of  informing  people
what we are about, where we are headed and generating interest in
our activities.  This is, in effect, passive advertising.  In the
upcoming year we plan to do a little more active advertising, for
now  that we have a project underway we need to develop a  better
support  network.  In this we request your help:  If you know  of
any classified advertisers who allow free ads please send one  of
their coupon to us!
     1990  is going to be a busy year for ISECCo.  We  expect  to
make good progress with the biosphere, getting the hole  finished
and  the  concrete slab poured.  We also plan to plant  a  garden
again, which will be used to help feed ISECCo volunteers.  We are
going  to continue expanding our hydroponic gardens, as  well  as
increasing   our   fish  tank  capacity.   We   plan   to   begin
experimenting   with  several  new  support  systems,   including
saprophytes (ants, earthworms), rabbits, and bacterial  breakdown
of  plant  waste products.  To keep our  more  dedicated  members
better  informed  we  plan to start  bimonthly  mailings  of  the
project updates to those members contributing $10/mo or more.


                                          Ray R. Collins::President
                                          ISECCo.

For more information about ISECCo you can write us at the address
above or send a note to Robert Hale FNRJH@ALASKA

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

End of SPACE Digest V10 #398
*******************