Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v16_4/v16no452.txt

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 19KB

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 05:09:09
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #452
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Mon, 12 Apr 93       Volume 16 : Issue 452

Today's Topics:
                Budget Astronaut (was: Idle Question)
                   Civilian use of Russian missiles
     Hey, it's over (was Re: International Space Year Compendium)
                Lockheeds Bus1  as a science platform.
               Louisiana ASteroid resources conference.
     New aircraft TU-154M for leasing, set spare parts. (2 msgs)
                  Question- Why is SSTO Single Stage
                  Reasons for a Biosphere for Space
                               SN1993J
                            Upcoming event
                  Venus Lander for Venus Conditions.

    Welcome to the Space Digest!!  Please send your messages to
    "[e-mail]", and (un)subscription requests of the form
    "Subscribe Space <your name>" to one of these addresses: listserv@uga
    (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle
    (THENET), or [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 05:03:27 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Budget Astronaut (was: Idle Question)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1q7urp$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>The gemini suit must have been tolerable,  i think on emission
>went 2 weeks,  but were they in suits the whole time?

No, for the long missions they took the suits off.

>    Oh while we are on the suit question?  Why do the shuttle
>astronauts wear a pressure suit at launch,  then switch to the EVA
>suits?  Are the EVA suits too bulky...

The EVA suits are heavy and require pre-breathing and other preparation,
and the shuttle typically only carries 2-3 of them.

>... If they were in orbit,
>and took an emergency depress,  would they re-don the pressure suits
>and then  make an emergency de-orbit.(Aassuming the bird is
>still landable)

There is an emergency oxygen system that is capable of maintaining a
breathable atmosphere in the cabin for long enough to come down, even
if there is something like a 5cm hole in the wall that nobody tries
to plug.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 04:58:44 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Civilian use of Russian missiles
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark Prado) writes:
>The idea is that instead of destroying many of these missiles, as
>we are currently planning to do, we could instead launch things
>into orbit...

The main reason those treaties tend to exclude space launches as an
acceptable way of "destroying" the missiles is the desire to see those
missiles *gone* within a specific and fairly short period of time.  It
is very difficult to establish that a missile sitting in a warehouse
waiting for a satellite to launch is *not* capable of being re-armed
and stuffed back down a silo on a few hours' notice.

>...perhaps in some great cooperative venture which would
>make some money (stimulate both economies and cooperation).

Bear in mind that this will have to be carefully designed if it is not
to harm some sectors of both economies (the ones that are trying to
sell commercial space launches).  It will have to be something that
was *not* already scheduled for launch.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 00:48:01 -0500
From: Mark Prado <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hey, it's over (was Re: International Space Year Compendium)
Newsgroups: sci.space

 > > Newsgroups: alt.education.distance,sci.edu,
 > k12.ed.science> Subject: REPOST: Space Resources
 > Compendium>
 > > Date: 1 Apr 93 21:08:32 GMT

 > > celebration for the 1992 International Year of Space.
 >
 > As a 1 April 1993 repost of a 15 January 1993 message, this
 > seems sadly out of date.

Another April Fool.

October, 1992, was the 500th anniversary of Columbus' discovery of
America.
Opportunity wasted.  (It's at least as much my fault as yours'.)

 > highway stretches endlessly ahead, featuring lowered
expectations,
 > squabbles over ever-shrinking space budgets, and lies told to
children
 > about their promising careers in asteroid mining and Moon
farming.

One would be best inclined to not look at NASA or DoD for
leadership in that direction.  Maybe a leader, but not NASA or
DoD.  Not only do those two shrinking pies have lots of
backstabing competing special interests, but they are also
simply government-related in nature.

Word to the wise:

As Dr. Andrew Cutler first told me, the way to plan for a life
of non-success is to rely on government to implement a large
scale project; and the best thing government could possible do
is offer a bottom line reward to the PURELY private sector for a
RESULT.

If President Clinton would make a standing offer that the first
company to bring back 100 tons of asteroidal material get a 5
billion award, the taxpayer would get the best RESULTS for their
money. Having spent a couple of years in government contracting
(in and around SDIO) (after GS service itself), followed by 6
years self-employed, I can see the difference clear as day.

Unfortunately, most NASA bureaucrats who I know would not be
hired by a successful 100% private company after an interview.

Unfortunately, civilization (or possibly our species) will not
be healthy if a strain of the AIDS virus evolves/mutates into
something that reproduces more quickly, and becomes as
cummunicable as the common cold/flu... and it may be too late
for space settlement in our lifetime (or for sending us off to a
cryogenic future in a shadow in space...)

There's both the negative and the positive sides to this.

It's up to _us_ to lead at this point in our lives.
What better time is there?

(Heavy, huh?)

 * Origin: Just send it to [e-mail]
(1:109/349.2)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 03:33:00 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Lockheeds Bus1  as a science platform.
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1q8088$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>
> Apparently, lockheed is proposing to build SSF using Bus1
> a declassified space craft uniform bus,  about 13 ft  by 9 ft
> in diameter,  mildly  tablet shaped.   it is pre-wired for
> power, comms,  etc  and is shuttle rated.
>
> My question,  would this make a good platform for
> planetary missions.  would Galileo or MO  type missions
> profit from using this standard bus,  It does seem
> larger then a Mariner,  and close in size to galileo.
>
> Granted for outer planets missions, youd toss the solar arrays
> for  RTG's,  but does anyone have any comment?
>
> pat

I know its about time someone did something, other than talk.. Go for it
Lockheed. I think it might work.. Atleast to get others to get off there
backsides and do something..

Seems like the current administration and NASA and such seem to be like
a bunch of monkey's sittign around talking about the price of bannanas..
When the tree is burning.

Michael Adams
NSMCA@ACAD@.ALASKA.EDU
I'm not high, just jacked

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

Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 00:31:00 -0500
From: Mark Prado <[e-mail]>
Subject: Louisiana ASteroid resources conference.
Newsgroups: sci.space

 > March 29 and 30, USL  held with support from SDIO and DOE,
 > a conference on Resource extraction  from Near Earth
Asteroids.
 >
 > Did anyone attend?

I'd be interested in the final report.  Having done direct
support for SDIO in the Pentagon for two years in the mid-1980's
and having pushed near-Earth asteroidal materials utilization
(though out of the loop for 5 years now), I'd be most interested
in seeing what DoD was up to.  In any case, the best bet is an
open forum.

For anyone new to this topic, I have "Briefs" on the issues
which are ftpmail requestable from permanet.org.  First, send a
message as follows (text after "------"):

To: [e-mail]
-------------
index

The requestor will get back a file listing all our files.  (Many
will be State Dept. stuff unrelated to space development, but
there will be a "PERMANENT" subsection with materials on the
above topic.)

Thereafter, further ftpmail messages can request files, e.g.,

get SBIR.txt
get products.txt
get ext-tank.txt

[etc.]

(Hey, it's a DOS box, unlike the Unix machine of the good man
Nick Szabo.  No path or case-sensitive stuff needed with my own
home-brewed DOS communications software.  Not cryptic at all.)

I run a few listserv mailing lists from my PC.  If anyone is
interested in a listserv on this topic, then, well, hmmm,
subscribe to a mailing list called LaNEAR (Lunar and Near Earth
Asteroidal Materials) which I'll create here before I save this
message ... DONE!  (If you've never subscribed to a ListServ
newsletter, then merely send a message to  [e-mail]

 > From: [e-mail] (Pat)
 > Organization: Express Access Online Communications,
 > Greenbelt MD USA

You're a local call for me in Reston, VA.  What's your voice #?
Mine is 703-715-8473.

-------------------------------------------------------------
                   P.E.R.M.A.N.E.N.T.
        Program to Employ Resources of the Moon
                and Asteroids Near Earth
                    in the Near Term

Send a message to [e-mail]
                            ^ (one N)
--------------------------------------------------------------

 * Origin: a politically correct native Arkansan :-)
(1:109/349.2)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 02:15:02 GMT
From: "gozdz,antoni s" <[e-mail]>
Subject: New aircraft TU-154M for leasing, set spare parts.
Newsgroups: misc.forsale,misc.invest,misc.jobs.contract,rec.aviation,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Category: Offers to leasing
>Headline: New Aircraft TU-154M
>
>New Aircraft TU 154M with a standart set of spare parts for Teasing
>Factory Number 92A935^ State Registration Wing Marking RA85753,
>produced in November, 1992, situated in Blagovechensk. Specification:
>seats (passengers) - 166;take-off and landing distanse-2500 m; Range
>fuel reserve:payload(18tons)- 3400 km, payload (12tons) - 5200 km.
>Equipment: long-rage navigation system A-723 "KVITOK", operating in
>systems of "OMEGA" and "LORAN-C".
>
>   Tel: [phone]    Fax [phone]
>   City: Moscow           Country: Russia
>   E-mail -> Relcom    [e-mail]
>--
>
>
>                  DIRECTOR  Shaxaliev Edward Agabalaevich
>             Fax (095)  973-36-41  Tel:  [phone]
>             E-mail  Relcom   [e-mail]
>
>
>

Mr. Director Agabalaevich:

No bombs included?! what a rip-off... I'll pass this one.

--T.

BTW, are these guys out of their [....] minds, or was
our propaganda so effective that they believe some
netters could actually buy such stuff and land in
their driveway? Too much soda pop, too quick...

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 07:09:27 GMT
From: Larion Tyshler <[e-mail]>
Subject: New aircraft TU-154M for leasing, set spare parts.
Newsgroups: misc.forsale,misc.invest,misc.jobs.contract,rec.aviation,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (gozdz,antoni s) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>Category: Offers to leasing
>>Headline: New Aircraft TU-154M
>>
>>New Aircraft TU 154M with a standart set of spare parts for Teasing
>>Factory Number 92A935^ State Registration Wing Marking RA85753,
>>produced in November, 1992, situated in Blagovechensk. Specification:
>>seats (passengers) - 166;take-off and landing distanse-2500 m; Range
>>fuel reserve:payload(18tons)- 3400 km, payload (12tons) - 5200 km.
>>Equipment: long-rage navigation system A-723 "KVITOK", operating in
>>systems of "OMEGA" and "LORAN-C".
>>
>>   Tel: [phone]    Fax [phone]
>>   City: Moscow           Country: Russia
>>   E-mail -> Relcom    [e-mail]
>>--
>>
>>
>>                  DIRECTOR  Shaxaliev Edward Agabalaevich
>>             Fax (095)  973-36-41  Tel:  [phone]
>>             E-mail  Relcom   [e-mail]
>>
>>
>>
>
>Mr. Director Agabalaevich:
>
>No bombs included?! what a rip-off... I'll pass this one.
>
>--T.
>
>BTW, are these guys out of their [....] minds, or was
>our propaganda so effective that they believe some
>netters could actually buy such stuff and land in
>their driveway? Too much soda pop, too quick...


You *WANT* bombs?  Just ask!

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 03:45:48 GMT
From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Question- Why is SSTO Single Stage
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Josh Hopkins) writes:

>[e-mail] (Bruce Dunn) writes:

...
>>The Voyager
>>aircraft, which went around the world non-stop, was more or less the aircraft
>>equivalent of an SSTO; something like 80 or 90% of the takeoff mass was fuel,
>>and its payload - two people- was tiny (I don't have the actual numbers
>>handy).  While it worked, a two stage system (or inflight refueling, which is
>>in effect a two stage system), might be much more cost effective for airplane
>>trips of this length.

>As you pointed out, the reason we are trying SSTO technology is similar to the
>reasons for flying Voyager (the aircraft).  The technology seems to be
>available.  If it really does work, it _will_ be better than a multiple stage
>rocket, so it makes sense to try and build one.  Even if the DC project works,
>multi stage rockets wouldn't stop flying for at least a decade or two, but
>eventually they would.  Of course, there is much more demand for a cheap
>vehicle that can fly to orbit than there is for a vehicle that can fly non-stop
>around the world.

But there does seem to be a great demand for high-altitude drones with
flight characteristics like Voyager (i.e. stay up for a week or so;
relatively high lift at low speeds, etc...). If I'm not mistaken all
of these things are one stage; I'm sure most of them are.
--
Phil Fraering         |"Seems like every day we find out all sorts of stuff.
[e-mail]|Like how the ancient Mayans had televison." Repo Man

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Reasons for a Biosphere for Space
Newsgroups: sci.space

Nntp-Posting-Host: acad3.alaska.edu
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 03:25:07 GMT
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

A biosphere as for space research is not to recreate a "real" earth ecosystem,
but one that will work in space.. Namely for long term space voyages, to allow
for food, mental stability (Ask an soldier about eating MREs for more than a
week, and see how excited they are about it.. MREs for a week, please don't get
me sick), also humasn do better with green, brown and color around them..
Also for air and such.. Recycling is the way to go and a space going
biospher/eco-system is the way to recycle things..

Such as human manure and such..

==
Michael Adams, [e-mail] -- I'm not high, just jacked

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

Date: 11 Apr 1993 23:00:30 GMT
From: Aaron Ray Clements <[e-mail]>
Subject: SN1993J
Newsgroups: sci.space

Just out of curiosity, does anyone have any good hard
data on the supernova?  We've been observing it here
with a 14" Celestron and can make it out, but the
smog in the LA area kind of makes observing difficult.

Just curious as to relative magnitude, etc.

thanks

aaron
[e-mail]

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

Date: 11 Apr 93  12:26:58
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Upcoming event
Newsgroups: sci.space

The San Diego L-5 Society announces a SPECIAL EVENT.
-
 A Tribute to Robert C. Truax; Space Rocketry Pioneer
 With Special Guest:  David Brin; Noted Science Fiction Author.
 Tuesday, April 27,  7:30pm  (Dinner served at 8:00pm)
 At the Raintree Restaurant,  755  Raintree Drive, Carlsbad, CA
 (Poinsettia Exit, I-5 Freeway)
-
 Robert Truax has had a lasting impact on America's space activities.
 Since 1937, he has been involved with the development of  JATO,
 LARK, X-1, X-15, Regulus, Polaris, Trident, Thor, Mercury, Skycycle,
 and Sea Dragon.
-
 His current work is with reusable rockets designed for lowest cost over
 a ten year life; a sensible option to the current design philosophy of
 throwaway rockets.
-
 Tickets are available to the event for $25.00 (regular seating) or
 $50.00  (seating at head table with special guests).
-
 Send your check to San Diego L-5,  P.O. Box 4636, San Diego, CA 92164
 (Please mention Vegetarian cuisine, if desired). Call 619/295-3690
 for more information.

--- Maximus 2.01wb

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 03:28:15 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Venus Lander for Venus Conditions.
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1q801j$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>
> it is probably easier to make the skin of the lander,  not reactive.
>
> Diamond or teflon coatings.  that sort of thing.
>
> pat


Well the outer skin can be reactive. Does not mean the inner skin has to be..


Like how tank armor works. I know its a jump in logic.. So I have wierd jumps.

Michael Adams
NSMCA@ACAD@.ALASKA.EDU
I'm not high, just jacked

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 452
------------------------------