Date: Sun, 31 Jul 88 01:05:26 PDT
From: Ted Anderson <ota@angband.s1.gov>
Message-Id: <8807310805.AA07116@angband.s1.gov>
To: Space@angband.s1.gov
Reply-To: Space@angband.s1.gov
Subject: SPACE Digest V8 #306

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 8 : Issue 306

Today's Topics:
		    Condensed CANOPUS - June 1988
			     Solar Sails
	 Re: advance space news from June 6 AW&ST -- Pegasus!
			   Re: Space Suits
	      International Geosphere-Biosphere Program
			   Re: Space Suits
			  Re: Spy Satellites
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 17 Jul 88 23:30:01 GMT
From: cfa!cfa250!willner@husc6.harvard.edu  (Steve Willner P-316 x57123)
Subject: Condensed CANOPUS - June 1988

Here is the unabridged CANOPUS for June 1988.  There are five
articles, one given by title only, three in condensed form, and one
short one in full.  Items in {braces} are from me and are signed
{--SW} when they represent personal opinion.  The unabridged CANOPUS
went to the mailing list last week; let me know if you expected a
copy and didn't get one.

CANOPUS is published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics.  Send correspondence about its contents to the executive 
editor, William W. L. Taylor (taylor%trwatd.span@star.stanford.edu; 
e-mail to canopus@cfa.uucp will probably be forwarded).  Send
correspondence about business matters to Mr. John Newbauer, AIAA,
1633 Broadway, NY, NY 10019.  Although AIAA has copyrighted CANOPUS
and registered its name, you are encouraged to distribute CANOPUS
widely, either electronically or as printout copies.  If you do,
however, please send a brief message to Taylor estimating how many
others receive copies.  CANOPUS is partially supported by the
National Space Science Data Center.

{one article by title only}
NASA RESEARCH ANNOUNCEMENTS RELEASED - can880605.txt - 6/27/88

SHUTTLE NEARLY READY FOR LAUNCH PAD ROLL-OUT;  BOOSTER QUALIFICATION
TEST HELD TUESDAY - can880603.txt - 6/15/88
{The main topic of this article has been widely reported; the
following paragraph was just an afterthought to the main article.}

In a related area, Morton-Thiokol has announced that it will not bid on
the development contract for the advanced solid rocket motor (ASRM)
that will replace the current SRM in the mid-1990s.  The ASRM will
increase Shuttle payloads by several thousand pounds and is being
justified in part as a means of reducing Space Station launches. NASA
is looking at producing it at government-owned facilities in the
southeast, among other areas.  Morton-Thikol cited a need to focus on
completing fixes to the current SRM as its reason for dropping out of
the competition.  

VOYAGER IMAGING NEPTUNE - can880604.txt - 6/27/88
{in full but short}

Voyager 2 now is returning images of Neptune and its moon, Triton, that
rival the best terrestrial photos of the eighth planet. On May 9
Voyager was 685 million km (425 million miles) from Neptune, and
produced an image with a resolution of about 7,857 miles per line pair
on the narrow-angle camera using clear and green filters.

The images, reconstructed with the aid of color cue from images taken
by terrestrial observatories, shows the planet with a bluish-green
caste because of its methane atmopshere, and Triton with a
reddish-yellow caste, probably due to methane-derived organic
compounds, according to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.  Neptune's image
was smeared by time expsoure, and Triton's brightness was enhanced
40-fold to make it visible on the photograph.

"QUICK IS BEAUTIFUL" REPORT SEEKS 5 PERCENT OF STATION RESOURCES -
can880602.txt - 6/7/88  {condensed}

Five percent of the Space Station's resources should be allocated for
"Quick is Beautiful" experiments that could be manifested in less
than three years and lead to larger, more complex experiments,
according to a study group chartered by NASA's associate
administrator for space station.  Appropriately the QIB report is
short -- fewer than 10 pages of text -- and does not recommend a
"Dear Colleague" letter be issued just yet.  That would leave too
many investigators waiting in line as has happened on Space Shuttle.

Their recommendation that standard interfaces be set early and rigidly
controlled arose from the concern that the planning and operations
process for Space Station as a whole not be significantly perturbed by
adding QIB experiments to the daily routine: "The quantity of
resources, complexity of interfaces, and level of management necessary
for QIB is not nearly as important as whether significant changes in
quantity, complexity, or level are required to accommodate QIB."

Getting the experiments to the Station is a problem that appeared
before the shuttle was grounded and can be expected to continue after
flights resume. The study group recommended that QIB payloads be
launched on a space available basis and stored on the Station to await
operation at a convenient time.

"CODE E" STRATEGIC PLAN RELEASED; "A PROGRAM IN TRANSITION"
can880601.txt - 6/5/88 {condensed but long}
{"Code E" is the Office of Space Science and Applications, OSSA}
{This article and the previous one indicate to me that OSSA is really
beginning to get its act together.  Let's hope the new Associate
Administrator, Lennard Fisk, can keep things moving.  --SW}

A measured, well-paced program for expanding U.S. science activities
in space has been outlined by the "Office of Space Science and
Applications 1988 Strategic Plan" recently released by NASA.  It
describes the nation's space science and applications program as "a
program in transition ... from the exhilirating pace of the 1960s"
through reduced missions in the 1970s, to the deliberately paced,
complex missions of the 1990s.

Significantly, the gray, 46-page booklet has no illustrations or
flashy layout. It is a well-paced document outlining the current
straits in which American space science finds itself {largely because
of launch vehicle problems, but also because of lack of resources
--SW}, and a measured approach to _retrieving_ {emphasis mine --SW}
and maintaining national leadership in space.

Given that budgets do not always materialize, Code E has established
rules for developing projects:

     Completion of ongoing programs come first, and new projects will
     not be pursued at their expense.

     Major missions will be sought when it makes sense, moderate
     missions when near-term and lifetime resources do not allow it.

     In all cases, small missions will be sought each year, preferably
     as complements to major and moderate missions.

     Space Station facilities will be developed by disciplne pace,
     balance, relevance, and maturity.

In line with the outline above, Code E is committing itself to
continuation of all programs now under way. In addition, Code E now
is seeking new start status for the Advanced X-ray Astrophysics
Facility (AXAF) and recently released an Announcement of Opportunity
for the Small Explorer program.

For Space Station a suite of six microgravity sciences facilities is
planned, along with life sciences facilities including a 1.8- meter
centrifuge. Both classes of facilities are to be tested in Spacelab
missions. An Announcement of Opportunity is to be released presently
for attached (external) payloads, one of which may be a Cosmic Dust
Collection Facility. The plan is to start with payloads that are "not
overly demanding on the [Station's] environment and pointing
capabilities," then to grow into more complex facilities.

Into the 1990's, Code E plans to seek a joint start on the Comet
Rendezvous/Asteroid Flyby and Cassini Saturn Orbiter/Probe missions. A
dual start will be sought since both missions can use the Mariner Mark
II spacecraft and would realize economies of scale. Cassini would be
attempted with the European Space Agency although the Strategy states
that missions normally will be started as U.S. flights with cooperation
being sought as they are developed.

Other major initiatives for the 1990's are the Earth Observing System
(for which the A.O. was released in January), the Space Infrared
Telescope Facility (the fourth member of the Great Observatories),
the Solar Probe (plunging to within 4-60 radii of the "surface"), the
High Resolution Solar Observatory (evolved from the scaled-down Solar
Optical Telescope), the Lunar Observer (built from Mars Observer
spares), and Gravity Probe-B (a "cornerstone" test of general
relativity). Although the Lunar Observer is listed after HRSO, it
will take higher priority, if necessary, in order to take advantage
of the Mars Observer production team.

Small missions will include a series of new Earth Probes, such as a
Tropical Rainfall Explorer, to complement EOS, and Lifesat, a series
of small, reusable spacecraft carrying life science experiments for
up to 40 days. This would be similar to the Soviet Union's Biovostok
program.

In the research base, the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared
Astronomy (SOFIA) will place a 3-meter IR telescope aboard a modified
Boeing 747 to fill the gap between IRAS and SIRTF, and the Earth
observing aircraft fleet will be updated.
-- 
Steve Willner            Phone 617-495-7123         Bitnet:   willner@cfa
60 Garden St.            FTS:      830-7123           UUCP:   willner@cfa
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA                 Internet: willner@cfa.harvard.edu

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

Date: 18 Jul 88 20:05:34 GMT
From: puff!eric@speedy.cs.wisc.edu  (Eric "TheBoo" Bazan)
Subject: Solar Sails


	The other day at the book store I was looking at an interesting paper-
back on solar sails. (It was a small paperback, but like most books on spec-
ialized subjects, it was quite expsenive - something like $25.00.) The book
went into detail on sail design/configurations, sail materials, navigation,
and possible accelerations. My question is this: just how does the sun 'push'
against the sail? Is it the solar wind of charged particles (protons and elec-
trons), or the the actual photonic flux, or both?
	If I recall, the solar constant above the Earths atmosphere is about
1.35 kW/m^2. (The best on the Earths surface is about 1 kW/m^2.) I can under-
stand how actual particles could exert a push against physical matter, but
not photonics energy. If so, how does photonic energy 'push' matter in a vac-
uum. I have a poor physics background, so this may be a stupid question, but 
I'm curious anyway.

			thanks,
				-Eric(eric@shorty.cs.wisc.edu)
				      eric@cs.wisc.edu

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

Date: 18 Jul 88 23:45:11 GMT
From: jtk@mordor.s1.gov  (Jordan Kare)
Subject: Re: advance space news from June 6 AW&ST -- Pegasus!

In article <1988Jul9.234143.15997@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>
>> The article also raises questions about possible
>> hidden subsidies: How much are OSC and Hercules paying for use of the
>> NASA B52?  How much are they paying for computing at Ames?
>
>This I don't know.  I would speculate that the B-52 is being provided
>on a basis of "until we have our own carrier aircraft, the customer has
>to supply it".  Ames is presumably involved in this for its own
>reasons, and may consider free computing time justified.  Remember that
>NASA *is* charged with advancing aerospace technology for use by
>private industry.

Hercules and OSC were at the AIAA/(various other acronyms) Joint
Propulsion Conference in Boston last week, and someone from OSC gave a
talk on Pegasus.  (He was an engineer, and fairly high in the team... I
have his card someplace...).  This question was raised, and as I recall,
he said NASA has a flat rental rate for the B-52 and its support
facilities of something like $30,000 per flight hour.  The existing drop
hardware will be used, so there is no cost to modify the plane.  I
believe they expect to use 8-10 hours of flight time before the first
drop.

Incidentally, the B-52 in question is one of 2 used to drop the X-15,
and made about 100 drops with it.  The plane has been flying since 1952
-- yet it only has about 2000 hours of flight time and is in like-new
condition.  Pegasus is almost exactly the same size, and very similar in
outline, to the X-15 (although it is slightly heavier) -- the speaker
noted that this was not intentional; they had just set out to build an
optimum vehicle that could be carried by the B-52, and even with all
their modern computers, etc. they came up with just about the same
results as the X-15 designers...

>> One of the more important aspects of this article is the tense...
>> Hercules and OSC have far to go before this project amounts to much
>> more than the inflated claims of a marketing campaign...
>
>One of the more important aspects of this article is the timing: after
>the project is well underway, not before it gets started.  I doubt very
>much that an official announcement could possibly have been postponed
>any longer, actually.  Given the way the aerospace industry usually
>ballyhoos its back-of-the-envelope design sketches, OSC and Hercules
>have actually shown remarkable restraint.

The talk at the Joint Propulsion Conference was an unscheduled addition
to the commercial launch vehicles program -- and the reason was that at
the time the schedule was made (last spring) OSC did not expect the
project to be public knowledge yet.  They have been playing their cards
_very_ close to their chest....

>Anyone who buys Wisconsin cheese is  |  Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
>a traitor to mankind.  --Pournelle   | {ihnp4,decvax,uunet!mnetor}!utzoo!henry

	Jordin Kare	jtk@mordor.uucp	jtk@mordor.s1.gov

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

Date: 19 Jul 88 00:30:32 GMT
From: voder!apple!ems@ucbvax.berkeley.edu  (Mike Smith)
Subject: Re: Space Suits

In article <957@cfa183.cfa250.harvard.edu> willner@cfa250.harvard.edu (Steve Willner P-316 x57123) writes:
>From article <8807112314.AA12967@diamond.tamu.edu>, by
>bruce@DIAMOND.TAMU.EDU (Bruce D. Wright): 
>>   Trying to hold 3 psi pressure in your lungs reletive to the
>> pressure outside of your body would probably cause an embolism to
>> occur, not to mention that breathing extreme possitive pressures
>> like this would be REALLY exhausting.
>
>From personal experience, I can say that pressure breathing at even a
>fraction of a psi is extremely uncomfortable and tiring.  This is NOT
>a viable option for normal EVA, and a whole psi is probably not even
>an option for emergencies.

An analog of the effect can be had by jumping into a swimming pool.  
Admitidly you have presure on the outside rather than the inside of
the lungs, but your muscles are about equally suited to pulling air in
so this can serve as a good 'reasonableness' test.  Take a tube 2 feet
long.  Try to breathe through it while your totally under water.  Just
try.  The bottom of your lungs (assuming you are standing on the pool
floor) are more than 2 feet down.  One tires quickly of the game...
One atmosphere is about 33 feet in water.  Three feet down is about
1.5 psi.  

E. Michael Smith  ...!sun!apple!ems

'If you can dream it, you can do it'  Walt Disney

This is the obligatory disclaimer of everything. (Including but
not limited to: typos, spelling, diction, logic, and nuclear war)

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

Date: 18 Jul 88 16:41:58 GMT
From: amdahl!bnrmtv!behm@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Gregory Behm)
Subject: International Geosphere-Biosphere Program

I am searching for information about the International
Geosphere-Biosphere Program, and hope that some of you on the net might
be of assistance.  Any information about the program, including (but not
limited to) planned or proposed research and participating
organizations, will be greatly appreciated.

E-mail or posted responses welcome.

			Thanks,

			  Gregory Behm

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

Date: 19 Jul 88 05:10:21 GMT
From: att!chinet!mcdchg!clyde!watmath!utgpu!utzoo!henry@ucbvax.berkeley.edu  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Space Suits

In article <8807112314.AA12967@diamond.tamu.edu> bruce@DIAMOND.TAMU.EDU (Bruce D. Wright) writes:
>Also, breathing pure oxygen at such low total pressure causes
>atelectasis to occur.  This is alveoli collapse caused by the oxygen in
>the alveoli being absorbed into the blood...  Adding good old inert
>nitrogen will alleviate these health risks...

Can you explain why the Apollo astronauts, breathing 3 psi of pure
oxygen for two weeks on lunar missions, had no problems?  Given that
base of experience, somehow I am not too worried about atelectasis.

More generally, I find it really strange that people have to be told, over
and over again, that the skin-tight-spacesuit idea HAS BEEN TRIED in
vacuum chambers and IT WORKS.  There seems to be an unlimited supply of
hypothetical problems that just don't exist in real life.
-- 
Anyone who buys Wisconsin cheese is|  Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
a traitor to mankind.  --Pournelle |uunet!mnetor!utzoo! henry @zoo.toronto.edu

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

Date: 19 Jul 88 05:16:31 GMT
From: att!chinet!mcdchg!clyde!watmath!utgpu!utzoo!henry@ucbvax.berkeley.edu  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Spy Satellites

In article <36178@linus.UUCP> marsh@linus.UUCP (Ralph Marshall) writes:
>... if in fact the orbits _ARE_ classified the fact that you
>discovered them on your own still does not give you permission to
>distribute the information.  It is still classified.

Sorry, wrong.  Only information about nuclear weapons is "born
classified" in this way, so that it is illegal to reveal it even if you
discover it independently.  (It is likely that "born classified" is
unconstitutional even for nuclear weapons, but so far the US government
has backed down rather than take the issue to the Supreme Court.)
Anything else is in the clear, provided you really did discover it
independently without use of classified materials AND you have not
signed a keep-your-mouth-shut agreement with the government (as a
result, say, of prior government employment in some sensitive area).

This doesn't mean, of course, that they can't harass you!

(Also, beware, I am not a lawyer -- consult a pro before doing anything rash.)
-- 
Anyone who buys Wisconsin cheese is|  Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
a traitor to mankind.  --Pournelle |uunet!mnetor!utzoo! henry @zoo.toronto.edu

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

End of SPACE Digest V8 #306
*******************