Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v13_7/v13_792.txt

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-05 | 19KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from hogtown.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/4cRL9Ci00WBw0LSE58>;
          Sat,  6 Jul 91 03:33:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat,  6 Jul 91 03:33:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #792

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 13 : Issue 792

Today's Topics:
            Shuttling to the Cape
             Magellan GIF Images
         NASA Headline News for 06/25/91 (Forwarded)
               Re: NASA Budget
             Re: Hermes (was Re: (none))
         Re: USF Reply from Rick R. Dobson ( Founder)
          Re: SPACE STATION FREEDOM WOUNDED
          Not "The Face" Again! Aaaaaaaah!!!
       Re: Request For Discussion: sci.space.moderated
         NASA technology development vs. utilization

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  [e-mail].  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests,
  should be sent to [e-mail], or, if urgent, to
             [e-mail]

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

Date: 25 Jun 91 20:33:17 GMT
From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu![e-mail]  (Paul Larsen)
Subject: Shuttling to the Cape

I recently heard on the radio that NASA finally has determined that it would
be cost effective to land the Space Shuttle at Cape Canaveral.  This would
replace the need to land it at Edwards Air Force Base and then fly it to
Florida.  Supposedly this will save one million per flight.  That's a lot of
taxpayers' money that they have been wasting for the past 10 years.  I know
when the program first started NASA said that landing at EAFB would only be
temporary.  Does anyone know why this practice lasted for as long as it did?


                Paul Larsen

                [e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Jun 91 03:24:07 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Magellan GIF Images


                            ======================
                              MAGELLAN GIF IMAGES
                                June 25, 1991
                            ======================

     I've placed 16 more Magellan images in GIF format at the Ames SPACE
archives, bringing the Magellan GIF total to 62 images.  All of the images
are obtainable via anonymous ftp from ames.arc.nasa.gov (128.102.18.3), and
are in the pub/SPACE/GIF directory.

     The new GIF files and their sizes are:

          alcott.gif    201,831 bytes
          alcott1.gif   237,110 bytes
          alcott2.gif   242,533 bytes
          ammavaru.gif  121,035 bytes
          ammavar1.gif  204,651 bytes
          ammavar2.gif  182,678 bytes
          ammavar3.gif  236,200 bytes
          ammavar4.gif  228,600 bytes
          ammavar5.gif  198,536 bytes
          arachcom.gif  266,802 bytes
          gulamons.gif  250,132 bytes
          gulamon1.gif  335,488 bytes
          gulamon2.gif  321,321 bytes
          pandora.gif   177,163 bytes
          pandora1.gif  274,967 bytes
          sifflows.gif  157,810 bytes

     I've converted the images from the VICAR images I placed at the Ames
site last week.  All of the GIFs are in a 640x480, 256 color resolution.
      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 301-355        | "Imagination is more
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | important than knowledge"
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | Albert Einstein

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

Date: 25 Jun 91 17:30:44 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!news.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 06/25/91 (Forwarded)


            Headline News
Internal Communications Branch (P-2) NASA Headquarters

           Audio Service: 202 / 755-1788

This is NASA Headline News for       . . .

Despite heavy winds and constant lightning which struck Cape
Canaveral late last night, Atlantis was rolled out to the pad
following a slight delay and reached pad 39-A at 7:09 am today.
Work on the vehicle today includes hooking up the launch pad
connections.  The Tracking and Data Relay Satellite-E will be installed
into Atlantis' payload bay tomorrow.  Payload electrical connections
will be made during the weekend.  The STS-43 terminal countdown
demonstration test currently is set for next week.  The flight
readiness review for the mission will be held July 11 and 12 at
Kennedy.

In the orbiter processing facility, work to remove the Spacelab from
shuttle Columbia is expected to begin tomorrow and conclude Friday.
The Spacelab should be back in the operations and checkout
building by the weekend.

                  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Tomorrow, at 1:00 pm EDT, the STS-43 crew will hold their pre-
flight press briefing at the Johnson Space Center.  On Thursday,
the mission flight director's briefing will be held at 9:00 am EDT.  That
briefing will be followed by a series of briefings on the TDRS, its
inertial upper stage rocket, and the three secondary payload
experiments on the STS-43 flight.  On Friday, at 2:00 pm, the STS-40
crew will hold their post-mission press conference.  All briefings will
be televised on NASA Select TV.

                  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The first mirror for the Advanced X-ray Astrophysics Facility
was completed by Hughes Danbury Optical System and shipped to
the Eastman Kodak Rochester facility for assembly.  This first mirror
will be paired with another mirror, now in the final stages of
polishing at Danbury, expected to be shipped by June 30 to Rochester.
The shipment of the two mirrors marks the culmination of the first
phase in the AXAF development program -- which was to produce a set
of mirrors and validate the manufacturing process, including the
sophisticated measurements taken of the mirrors' shape.  The process
has included the use of multiple cross checks and self-consistency tests,
as well as end-to-end testing.  The AXAF is another of NASA's
Great Observatories, and will be deployed late this decade to explore
the world of celestial X-ray sources.  The telescope uses six pairs of
grazing incidence mirrors to focus incoming X-rays.

                  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Stennis Space Center officials will break ground for a North
Wing addition to Building 1100 this afternoon.  This is the main
administrative building at Stennis.  Groundbreaking ceremonies are
set for 2:00 pm EDT.

The center also reports that 2,693 visitors toured Stennis exhibits
last week, including more than 500 students from 15 different schools.

Here's the broadcast schedule for Public Affairs events on
NASA Select TV.  Note that all events and times may change
without notice, and that all times listed are Eastern.
indicates a program is transmitted live.

Wednesday, 6/26/91
           1:00 pm     STS-43 flight crew briefing, from JSC.

Thursday, 6/27/91
           9:00 am     STS-43 flight director mission briefing, from JSC.
          10:00 am     Tracking and Data Relay Satellite briefing, from JSC.
          11:00 am     Inertial Upper Stage briefing, from JSC.
          11:30 am     STS-43 SHARE payload experiment briefing, from JSC.
          12:00 pm     STS-43 BIMDA payload experiment briefing, from JSC.
          12:30 pm     STS-43 Protein Crystal Growth experiment briefing,
              from JSC.
           1:00 pm     Total Quality Management Colloquium, from NASA HQ.

Friday, 6/28/91
           2:00 pm     STS-40 post mission flight crew briefing, from JSC.

This report is filed daily at noon, Monday through Friday.  It is
a service of NASA's Office of Public Affairs.  The contact is
Charles Redmond, 202/453-8425 or CREDMOND on NASAmail.
NASA Select TV is carried on GE Satcom F2R, transponder 13,
C-Band, 72 degrees West Longitude, transponder frequency is
3960 megaHertz, audio is offset 6.8 MHz, polarization is
vertical.

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

Date: 25 Jun 91 18:20:07 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!hela![e-mail]  (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: NASA Budget

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

>...growing realization within the real science community that the pseudo
>science community is their natural ENEMY.

For those of you who are new to the net, "real science" is composed of
projects which Mr. Bowery likes. "Pseudo science" is composed of projects
Mr. Bowery does not like.

  Allen
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Allen W. Sherzer |   DETROIT: Where the weak are killed and eaten.         |
|   [e-mail]   |                                                         |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: 25 Jun 91 16:26:24 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Hermes (was Re: (none))

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Les Carleton) writes:
>Does this mean that Hermes is actually being funded by ESA. I thought
>it had been killed by lack of finance...

Hermes is in both technical and financial difficulties but its official
status is still "full speed ahead".  Germany has been arguing for putting
the brakes on hard.  Many people seem to agree that the current plan is
a little too optimistic, although the German position is seen as extreme.
None of this has reached the level of official ESA decision-making, yet.
--
"We're thinking about upgrading from    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
SunOS 4.1.1 to SunOS 3.5."              |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 25 Jun 91 19:13:27 GMT
From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu!pop.stat.purdue.edu![e-mail]  (Herman Rubin)
Subject: Re: USF Reply from Rick R. Dobson ( Founder)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Greg Moore) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Herman Rubin) writes:
> >In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

            ...................

>   Ah, Herman, ever hear of Checks and Balances? A concept used in our
> government.  You see, we have a body that proposes laws, (Congress) and one
> who can disapprove them, the President.
>
>   Of course you want a body to disapprove projects, not every project
> proposed will be worthwhile to do.

You do not seem to understand.  Our science is already greatly suffering
from centralized funding in each country separately.  If we are really to
explore and utilize space, it must not be centrally directed or funded.

A project is worthwhile to do if a group of individuals, corporations, etc.,
think it is, and we should pressure our government to remove the restrictions
on this NOW.  Without the Cold War driving it, I see space activity shrinking
to almost nothing.  Without the Cold War, I doubt that we would even have
reached the stage of weather satellites.
--
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: [phone]
[e-mail] (Internet, bitnet)   {purdue,pur-ee}!l.cc!hrubin(UUCP)

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

Date: 25 Jun 91 16:44:56 GMT
From: news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: SPACE STATION FREEDOM WOUNDED

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Frank Radley) writes:
>You say that aerospace companies prefer to be spoon fed instead
>of risking their own money.
>   The reason is simple, aerospace companies do not have anything
>like the sums of money needed for large scale space devlopments.

It depends on what you mean by "large scale".  Boeing sees nothing very
unusual about spending two or three *billion* dollars of *its own money*
(not even borrowed from a bank) on developing a new airliner or two.
It's done that repeatedly.  Done properly, without government pork
barrel and red tape, that amount of money could fund almost any conceivable
project in cislunar space.  (Art Dula once estimated a respectable space
station, built by construction companies and launched by Soviet boosters,
at $500M.)

The problem is not lack of money, but lack of reliable customers.  Boeing
doesn't start putting big bucks into the 7*7 until it's pretty damn sure
that it can sell a whole bunch of them.  With the marginal exception of
comsats, putting big bucks into a space project has historically been
a good way to go broke.  The only major customer is the US government,
which has an unequalled record of snubbing, disregarding, and out-and-out
shafting attempts at private space development.
--
"We're thinking about upgrading from    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
SunOS 4.1.1 to SunOS 3.5."              |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 91 10:22:37 PDT
From: [e-mail]
X-Vmsmail-To: UTADNX::UTSPAN::AMES::"[e-mail]"
Subject: Not "The Face" Again! Aaaaaaaah!!!


Aaaaaaaaaaaah!  I can't believe the "Face On Mars" is still getting such
mileage.  Repeat after me: "There is no face on Mars, there is no face on Mars,
there is no face on Mars, etc., etc."  Okay, okay.  I'm calm now.  There.

It's really quite simple to convince yourself that this feature on Mars is not
an artificial construct, if you have access to the raw data and even the most
rudimentary image processing software.  All you have to do is adjust your gray
levels to bring out the shadow detail, and you find that there is no symmetry
between the dark side and the bright side, and the dark side doesn't look like
a face at all.  Also, there is a hole in the dark side which is much darker
than the rest of the dark side.

Of course, most of the published pictures of the face are printed so as to
maximize detail in the bright areas.  Since printed materials can't handle the
contrast of the original, the dark parts go black, and the mind, extrapolating
detail into the darkness, constructs a virtual face where no real face exists.

_____________
Dale M. Greer, whose opinions are not to be confused with those of the
Center for Space Sciences, U.T. at Dallas, UTSPAN::UTADNX::UTDSSA::GREER
"Mars is essentially in the same orbit.  Mars is somewhat the same
 distance from the Sun, which is very important.  We have seen pictures
 where there are canals, we believe, and water.  If there is water,
 there is oxygen.  If oxygen, that means we can breathe."
 -- J. Danforth "just-a-heartbeat-away" Quayle, 11-AUG-1990

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

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 91 09:06:15 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jim Bowery)
To: crash![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Request For Discussion: sci.space.moderated

Doug Mohney writes:
>There is a VERY REAL difference between informational postings given to us by
>the NASA folks and the frothing at the mouth which sci.space readers have had
>to endure by People With Agendas.

That depends on whether the information postings are scientific in
nature or not.  If they are really scientific in nature your statement
is true.  However, if they are about engineering of space systems,
they are inseparable from the politics that fund the engineering.
Lest we forget, engineering is the art of getting things done within
a budget.

NASA just loves to make all debate in terms of things like O-rings
as opposed to accountability for past actions.  Those of us who dislike
seeing hundreds of billions and decades go down the drain have a problem
with this world-view.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Bowery      619/295-3164               The Coalition for
PO Box 1981                                   Science and
La Jolla, CA 92038                             Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 26 Jun 91 01:16:59 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!freedom!avdms8![e-mail]  (J. Porter Clark)
Subject: NASA technology development vs. utilization

In this newsgroup the following opinions are often expressed:

  (1) NASA should develop new technology; spinoffs are part of its
      reason for being.

  (2) NASA should use off-the-shelf technology and existing industry
      and government standards as much as possible to reduce costs.

I find it difficult to reconcile these opinions.  I have often heard
(1) espoused, both in and out of NASA.  There is a lot of emphasis on
(2) at NASA.  It may be that one's attitude depends on one's particular
field.  That is, if your area of interest (whether it is financial or
intellectual) is hypersonic transport, nearly anything NASA does in
support of technology development in hypersonic transport is a good
idea, but NASA should "go cheap" and not develop other technology areas
such as computers.  Are there technology areas that NASA shouldn't
develop?

In the flight avionics world that I'm a part of--admittedly a very
small part of the overall picture--it seems that NASA almost always
goes for (2).  During the early Space Station Freedom development, the
computers and communications for SSF were pretty much state-of-the-art
or even past that.  As time went on and money ran out, things went
backwards, until there was a lot of emphasis on using old Orbiter
designs.  IMHO, most of the old Orbiter avionics equipment uses
obsolete, not current techology.

The difficulties of developing flight equipment seem to be beyond the
comprehension of people outside NASA--sometimes inside NASA, too.  (Our
contractors consistently underestimate what it takes.)  It is
surprisingly expensive and manpower-intensive to space-qualify a new
design.  In general, a single program, even a big one like SSF, will
balk at developing new techology in what it considers to be a "support"
area.  I don't see much co-operation between programs to co-develop
this type of equipment either.

All of this is strictly my opinion, not NASA's.

I would say, "flames > /dev/null" as so many others have, but these days
one should perhaps say, "drag all flames to the trash"--Wuggh!
--
J. Porter Clark    [e-mail]

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #792
*******************