Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Sun, 9 Apr 89 05:16:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 05:16:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #352 SPACE Digest Volume 9 : Issue 352 Today's Topics: Ozone Astronauts named for two space science missions (Forwarded) Re: NSS Hotline Update 3/31/89 Re: Apollo [non] Fire Re: more on Liberty Bell 7 (and other s'craft) Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter? Re: Ozone Re: NSS Hotline Update 3/31/89 Magellan's Trajectory Re: Magellan's Trajectory Re: NSS Hotline Update 3/31/89 Re: alien contact Re: Room Temperature fusion - possible indications? Re: Magellan's Trajectory ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 Apr 89 22:20:44 GMT From: tektronix!percival!parsely!agora!ihf1!hutch@uunet.uu.net (Stephen Hutchison) Subject: Ozone In article <1410@meccsd.MECC.MN.ORG> vin@meccsd.UUCP (Vincent J. Erickson) writes: <...> >A more elegant solution might be a sunscreen, rather than a reflector. >A large enough piece of mylar which allows all the visible light, but >reflects some of the infra-red light. This would keep shadows from >projecting on the Earth. This same method would be useful for blocking >ultraviolet radiation in the event we destroy the ozone layer as well. Could some kind person clarify this for me? I've been told by an acquaintance who I would expect to have some knowledge of chemistry, that the Ozone layer gets rebuilt at night (since catalysts work both ways) and that it may actually be rebuilt somewhat in excess of the day's losses. Has anyone tested this? He seemed convinced it was true and adequately explained the difference between the expected readings and the actual measurements. Hutch ------------------------------ Date: 5 Apr 89 23:23:46 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Astronauts named for two space science missions (Forwarded) Barbara Selby Headquarters, Washington, D.C. April 5, 1989 Jeffrey Carr Johnson Space Center, Houston RELEASE: 89-44 ASTRONAUTS NAMED FOR TWO SPACE SCIENCE MISSIONS Astronaut crew members have been named for two scientific Space Shuttle missions scheduled for launch in 1990. USAF Col. Steven R. Nagel will be commander of the Space Shuttle Discovery on mission STS-37. USMC Lt. Col. Kenneth D. Cameron will serve as pilot. Mission specialists are USAF Lt. Col. Jerry L. Ross, Jay Apt, Ph.D., and Linda M. Godwin, Ph.D. Following Discovery's launch next April, the crew will deploy the Gamma Ray Observatory (GRO) from the payload bay using the Shuttle's robot arm. The GRO will explore gamma ray sources throughout the universe, studying the origin of our own galaxy and others, and examining quasars, pulsars and supernova remnants from an altitude of 243 miles above the Earth. USMC Col. Bryan D. O'Connor will be commander of STS-40, the space and life sciences-dedicated mission, SLS-1. Serving as pilot aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia will be USAF Col. John E. Blaha. Also named as a mission specialist is Tamara E. Jernigan. SLS-1 mission specialists M. Rhea Seddon, M.D., and James P. Bagian, M.D., and payload specialists F. Drew Gaffney, Ph.D., and Robert W. Phillips, Ph.D., were named previously. Inside a pressurized laboratory fixed in Columbia's payload bay, the SLS-1 crew will conduct more than two dozen life sciences investigations in the microgravity environment. Launch Nagel has flown twice in space -- as a mission specialist on Shuttle mission STS 51-G in June 1985 and as pilot on STS 61-A in October 1985. He was born Oct. 27, 1946, in Canton, Ill. Cameron will make his first space flight. He was born Nov. 29, 1949, in Cleveland, Ohio. Ross has previously flown on two Shuttle missions, STS 61-B in November 1985 and STS-27 last December. Ross was born Jan. 20, 1948, in Crown Point, Ind. Apt will make his first space flight. He was born April 28, 1949, in Springfield, Mass., but considers Pittsburgh, Pa., to be his hometown. Godwin also will make her first flight in space. She was born July 2, 1952, in Cape Girardeau, Mo. O'Connor has flown previously as pilot on STS 61-B in November 1985. After the Challenger accident, he was named chairman of NASA's Space Flight Safety Panel. O'Connor was born Sept. 6, 1946, in Orange, Calif., but considers Twentynine Palms, Calif., to be his hometown. Blaha made his first space flight last month as pilot of STS-29. He was born Aug. 26, 1942, in San Antonio, Texas. Jernigan will make her first flight in space. She was born May 7, 1959, in Chattanooga, Tenn., but considers Santa Fe Springs, Calif., to be her hometown. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Apr 89 13:47:00 GMT From: pur-phy!tippy!fireman@ee.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Re: NSS Hotline Update 3/31/89 Yes, there was a control group of 16 that was not launched.... The experiment was based here at Purdue so I have been hearing a lot of it lately, I'll try to drum up some paper articles to post here. Rob Dale - tippy!fireman@newton.physics.purdue.edu ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 02:30:44 GMT From: epiwrl!parker@uunet.uu.net (Alan Parker) Subject: Re: Apollo [non] Fire In article <16278@oberon.USC.EDU> robiner@ganelon.usc.edu (Steve) writes: >When Apollo 13 had an electrical fire, loss of some power and system >failure, they said "uh, Houston, we have a problem." somewhat toned >down for public consumption. > There was no electrical fire. A tank ruptured. I suspect that the time of that transmission, that is exactly all they knew; that "we have a problem". ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 04:28:55 GMT From: ames.arc.nasa.gov!watson@ames.arc.nasa.gov (John S. Watson) Subject: Re: more on Liberty Bell 7 (and other s'craft) Any chance that a German V-2 could be stuck in the mud off Prenemunde (sp?)? John S. Watson, Civil Servent from Hell ARPA: watson@ames.arc.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center UUCP: ...!ames!watson Any opinions expressed herein are, like, solely the responsibility of the, like, author and do not, like, represent the opinions of NASA or the U.S. Government. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Apr 89 13:27:20 GMT From: b.gp.cs.cmu.edu!Ralf.Brown%B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU@pt.cs.cmu.edu Subject: Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter? In article <748@m3.mfci.UUCP>, rodman@mfci.UUCP (Paul Rodman) writes: }In article <16278@oberon.USC.EDU> robiner@ganelon.usc.edu (Steve) writes: }>When Apollo 13 had an electrical fire, loss of some power and system }>failure, they said "uh, Houston, we have a problem." somewhat toned }>down for public consumption. }I belive the quote was "Uh, Houston, we have a problem here.". } }I think toned down due to the nature of the Astronaut saying it, not for }any worry of public consumption. Then again, when Challenger exploded, the special report on CBS started with "There has been a major malfunction...." -- UUCP: {ucbvax,harvard}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf -=-=-=- Voice: (412) 268-3053 (school) ARPA: ralf@cs.cmu.edu BIT: ralf%cs.cmu.edu@CMUCCVMA FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/31 Disclaimer? I claimed something? You cannot achieve the impossible without attempting the absurd. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 13:41:19 GMT From: att!cbnewsl!sw@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Stuart Warmink) Subject: Re: Ozone In article <609@ihf1.UUCP>, hutch@ihf1.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) writes: > [...] I've been told by an acquaintance who I would expect to have some > knowledge of chemistry, that the Ozone layer gets rebuilt at night > (since catalysts work both ways) and that it may actually > be rebuilt somewhat in excess of the day's losses. [...] Ozone molecules are formed by the action of UV light on oxygen (smell an EPROM eraser after it has been used!). -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Captain, I see no reason to stand here | Stuart Warmink, Whippany, NJ, USA and be insulted" - Spock | sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (att!cbnewsl!sw) -------------------------> My opinions are just that <------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: 5 Apr 89 20:07:51 GMT From: aablue!jb@uunet.uu.net (John B Scalia) Subject: Re: NSS Hotline Update 3/31/89 In article <147@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> pipes@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov (David Pipes ) writes: > Howeird, > (Cool name...) > CBS News stated, several days after the landing, that the >experiment was done with a control group, and implied that none had >died from that group (it could have been that only the 'expected' >number had died...I am not sure. What floored everyone is that the >expected results were on the order of deformities, low hatching weight >or the like. No one expected dead chickens. Furthermore, it appears >that the most vulnerable ones were those in very early stages of >development. This could be very important to people who want to design > [some deletions] I have to question whether some conclusions may be being drawn here that absolutely cannot be made. Without some definitive details as to the time of embryo death, how can we decide that "spaceflight" is not conducive to reproduction. I'd really like to know more details about this. For instance, did all the embryos die at once or over a period? Were they killed at liftoff, due to G-stresses? Could we design an experiment to fertilize additional eggs once space-borne and allow them to come to term? Really, I believe this is opening a can worms, not answering anything. ---- -- A A Blueprint Co., Inc. - Akron, Ohio +1 216 794-8803 voice UUCP: {uunet!}aablue!jb Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who FidoNet: 1:157/697 wants to spend their life in an institution. EchoNet: US:OH/AKR.0 ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 14:16:19 GMT From: cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!bonin@rutgers.edu (Marc Bonin) Subject: Magellan's Trajectory I've read that Magellan will take 15 MONTHS to reach Venus. A minimum energy Hohman trajectory from Earth to Venus only takes on the order of 8 months or so. Anyone know why they are sending it on such a roundabout trajectory ??? Marc Bonin University of Texas at Austin ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 89 00:15:22 GMT From: m2c!wpi!tmurphy@husc6.harvard.edu (Tom [Chris] Murphy) Subject: Re: Magellan's Trajectory In article <11788@ut-emx.UUCP> bonin@ut-emx.UUCP (Marc Bonin) writes: > I've read that Magellan will take 15 MONTHS to reach Venus. A minimum >energy Hohman trajectory from Earth to Venus only takes on the order of 8 >months or so. Anyone know why they are sending it on such a roundabout >trajectory ??? Apparantly the optimum launch time for a Venus trajectory is in October, which is when Galileo will be launched to Juptier. Because the liquid-fuel Centaur stage will not be carried aboard the shuttle, a less powerful solid rocket must be used to launch the Jupitee probe, requiring a gravitational assist from Venus. So Magellan must settle for a less optimum launch time. (Galileo will take some 2.5 years to get to Jupiter I believe.) Tom -- Thomas C. Murphy Worcester Polytechnic Institute CAD Lab Internet: tmurphy@zaphod.wpi.edu tmurphy@wpi.wpi.edu BITNET: TMURPHY@WPI CompuServe: 73766,130 "I drank what?" - Socrates ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 14:11:24 GMT From: dftsrv!nssdcs!pipes@ames.arc.nasa.gov (David Pipes ) Subject: Re: NSS Hotline Update 3/31/89 In article <560@aablue.UUCP> jb@aablue.UUCP (John B Scalia) writes: > >I have to question whether some conclusions may be being drawn here that >absolutely cannot be made. Without some definitive details as to the time >of embryo death, how can we decide that "spaceflight" is not conducive to >reproduction. I'd really like to know more details about this. For >instance, did all the embryos die at once or over a period? Were they killed >at liftoff, due to G-stresses? Could we design an experiment to fertilize >additional eggs once space-borne and allow them to come to term? Really, >I believe this is opening a can worms, not answering anything. I agree that the experiment poses more questions than it answers. All of those you list are good, but the point is that no one seemed to expect that they would actually have to be tried (at least, that is the impression the Washington Post gave in their article.) Now that the last of the eggs sent up have died -- even those which survived the trip -- it still seems that no one understands why. So perhaps some of these possible experiments will happen. The original poster wondered why we should do them at all. I just pointed out that there are things which we don't know which could be useful in the future. >---- >-- >A A Blueprint Co., Inc. - Akron, Ohio +1 216 794-8803 voice >UUCP: {uunet!}aablue!jb Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who >FidoNet: 1:157/697 wants to spend their life in an institution. >EchoNet: US:OH/AKR.0 | EMail: pipes@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov David Pipes | | Vox: (301) 286-2248 | | These opinions are mine, not my employers. You may share | | them, but please put them back neatly when you are done. | ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1989 12:50-EDT From: Dale.Amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU Subject: Re: alien contact > Yup, clearly the people who can fly an entirely unmanned shuttle mission > with a crosswind landing and a launch in freezing weather, perfectly, > the first time, are ahead on quality. Same conclusion -- they'll go to > Baikonur. Gee, is this some comment about that other shuttle? The one that blows up in freezing weather, can't take off in a crosswind and can't land near its takeoff site because of crosswind limitations? Naaahh. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 16:12:08 GMT From: haven!aplcen!aplcomm!stdb.jhuapl.edu!jwm@purdue.edu (Jim Meritt) Subject: Re: Room Temperature fusion - possible indications? In article <1989Apr5.194855.4674@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: }In article <17272@cisunx.UUCP> jcbst3@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu (James C. Benz) writes: }>Well, if you are going to assume *lots* of relatively free fusion energy, }>why not just accelerate at 1G or some appreciable fraction thereof, until }>you are halfway there, then turn around and decelerate at the same rate? } }Because the power requirements are not merely high, but staggering, if }the fuel consumption is to be kept sane. I did the calculation in sci.space }a week or two ago; it was way up in the terawatts, as I recall, given some }reasonable assumptions. uh, friend... Maybe terawatt-hours? terawatt is, I believe, power, not energy.... And as such, while the momentary power requirements would be in terms of watts, that would say nothing about the energy requirements (except, perhaps, for peak load). I hope you watched your units in your calculations... Disclaimer: "It's mine! All mine!!!" - D. Duck ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 89 17:39:22 GMT From: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu (Matthew T. DeLuca) Subject: Re: Magellan's Trajectory In article <11788@ut-emx.UUCP> bonin@ut-emx.UUCP (Marc Bonin) writes: > > I've read that Magellan will take 15 MONTHS to reach Venus. A minimum >energy Hohman trajectory from Earth to Venus only takes on the order of 8 >months or so. Anyone know why they are sending it on such a roundabout >trajectory ??? I believe that they're doing something like a 'double Hohman' orbit; the first loop in, Venus will be somewhere else, but the second time, it will be there. The launch window for a 'single Hohman' is in October, which they're reserving for Galileo; the decision to abandon the Centaur liquid- fuel booster can be thanked for this. Instead of a direct shot to Jupiter, Galileo will make a loop in towards Venus, out to Earth, and (I think) a *second* loop in to Venus and Earth before heading out, to build up velocity. Since the double loop orbit is the only option for a while, they went ahead and took it, to get the thing off the ground. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Matthew DeLuca : Georgia Institute of Technology : Remember, wherever you go, there you are. ARPA: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V9 #352 *******************