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 ; Tue, 25 Apr 89 03:16:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Tue, 25 Apr 89 03:16:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #392 SPACE Digest Volume 9 : Issue 392 Today's Topics: Re: NASA tank reuse fiasco Re: Soviet Launch Sites Re: Deadline set for next astronaut selection (Forwarded) Re: failures and engineering Re: US citizen - ET contact legal penalties Re: URGENT -- SPACE STATION FUNDING VOTE ON TUESDAY!! manned spaceflight funding Re: Conte's Bill (was NSS update) Re: NASA tank reuse fiasco Re: Shuttle Acceleration NASA-Marshall node Re: Proposed lunar simulation facility Re: Close encounter with an asteroid Re: Close encounter with an asteroid U4MIR, U5MIR Contacts Asteroid Nearby ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 22 Apr 89 21:50:38 GMT From: uflorida!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@g.ms.uky.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: NASA tank reuse fiasco In article <361@cybaswan.UUCP> iiit-sh@cybaswan.UUCP (Steve Hosgood) writes: >I used to wonder if it would be possible to redesign the ET so that: > >1) They could be taken to orbit They can be already; it simply costs something. >2) The end caps could be removed >3) The internal pressure vessels could be removed. There are no end caps or "internal pressure vessels"; an External Tank is a LOX tank and an LH2 tank joined together and coated with ablative insulation. There is no separate outer skin, unless you count the short ring that joins the two tanks. -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 21:53:36 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@purdue.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Soviet Launch Sites In article <258@ericom.ericsson.se> etxbrfa@kk36.ericsson.se (Bj|rn Fahller TT/MLG) writes: >>The other major Soviet launch site is Plesetsk; the traffic is split >>about 50-50. Plesetsk is primarily military and has been very highly >>secret until quite recently. > >Secret until how recently? In northern Sweden, where I come from, Rocket >launces from the Pletetsk base (Not more than 300kms from the Swedish border), >have been seen at night time for quite a few years now. It's been known in the West for a long time. But the Soviets have not officially admitted its existence until recently, and it has been very strictly off-limits to Westerners. -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 21:39:33 GMT From: uflorida!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@g.ms.uky.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Deadline set for next astronaut selection (Forwarded) In article <23996@ames.arc.nasa.gov> yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) writes: > NASA will continue to accept and review applications from >the general public on an ongoing basis... Note that, looking at who got picked in the last few years, the odds of getting selected are minimal unless you work for NASA. -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 21:44:02 GMT From: uflorida!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@g.ms.uky.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: failures and engineering In article <449@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) writes: >OK, so things do break - but with careful analysis and/or use of back-up >systems, Mariner 2 and Voyager 2 were (and are) highly succesful missions. Very true. But one should keep a sense of perspective: those missions had a certain amount of luck as well. I've observed before that a failure in such a mission is "just one of those things you have to expect", while a success is "a magnificent triumph demonstrating how well this approach works". >I'd say that on the whole NASA has had more first time successes than >the Soviets, especially in the field of planetary exploration. This must >say something for JPL's and contractors' designs. Yes, this is clearly true. Don't mistake me; NASA and ESA undoubtedly build very good spacecraft as a result of the effort to get everything right the first time. But "very good" is not "perfect". -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 21:56:05 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@purdue.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: US citizen - ET contact legal penalties In article <335@v7fs1.UUCP> mvp@v7fs1.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: >... I remember a reporter or two managing to get themselves >'contaminated', and ending up locked up with the astronauts in >quarantine for the duration. (I wonder if the reporter did that >deliberately...) ... I hadn't heard about that one, but at least one geologist got "contaminated" accidentally and found that it ended up being a heaven-sent opportunity to debrief the astronauts at length -- something that was otherwise almost impossible, since NASA gave it a low priority. -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 09:01:52 GMT From: indri!polyslo!jmckerna@ames.arc.nasa.gov (John McKernan) Subject: Re: URGENT -- SPACE STATION FUNDING VOTE ON TUESDAY!! In article <1989Apr21.195731.5636@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >This is tautological. Government is the only current source of the amount >of money needed to build large-scale space hardware THE GOVERNMENT WAY. >Of course, if you ask the government, they will assure you that it's the >only way. Even though doing the same things privately costs an order of >magnitude less. Government is the only current source of funds for a manned space effort regardless of which WAY it is done (excluding repitions of things that have already been done, such as simply putting a man up for a few orbits. It might be exciting if a private company did that, but it would not advance knowledge in manned space). This also applies to unmanned deep space research. John L. McKernan. Student, Computer Science, Cal Poly S.L.O. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The future is rude and pushy. It won't wait for us to solve today's problems before it butts in with tomorrow's. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 22:16:49 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@purdue.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: manned spaceflight funding In article <10597@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> jmckerna@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (John McKernan) writes: >>This is tautological. Government is the only current source of the amount >>of money needed to build large-scale space hardware THE GOVERNMENT WAY... > >Government is the only current source of funds for a manned space effort >regardless of which WAY it is done (excluding repitions of things that have >already been done, such as simply putting a man up for a few orbits. It might >be exciting if a private company did that, but it would not advance knowledge >in manned space)... If you insist on excluding everything that has been done already, you've excluded space stations (of which there have been half a dozen already), trips to the Moon, long-duration stays in space, etc etc... many of which promise to provide useful new knowledge. There is considerable precedent, in other areas, for private funding of science and exploration. Roald Amundsen had no government funding for his trip to the South Pole. Fleischmann and Pons had no government funding for their cold-fusion research. [Please refer arguments about whether the results are real or not to alt.fusion.] Bednorz and Muller had no government funding for their Nobel-Prize-winning work on superconductors. The Voyager round-the-world flight was privately funded. Several current projects for big astronomical telescopes are privately funded. For that matter, there was no shortage of private interest in funding space shuttle orbiters, including at least two companies which clearly had the financial resources for it. -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 21 Apr 89 15:43:04 GMT From: mcvax!ukc!etive!bob@uunet.uu.net (Bob Gray) Subject: Re: Conte's Bill (was NSS update) In article V131Q5CG@UBVMSC.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (John Taylor) writes: > Just out of curosity, has anyone noticed a correlation between >left/right political leanings and support of space and science? Or is it >just random? In this country, the UK, None whatsoever. The excuses made by an extreme left wing member of the Labour Governemt of the early 1970s when cancelling various British space projects of the day, Mr Anthony Wedgewood Benn, are EXACTLY the same as a member of Mrs T's Government when extracting the last drop of financial blood from the dismembered remains of British space research. Bob. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 89 02:46:43 GMT From: yalevm!HOWGREJ@CS.YALE.EDU Subject: Re: NASA tank reuse fiasco In article <361@cybaswan.UUCP>, iiit-sh@cybaswan.UUCP (Steve Hosgood) writes: >In article <1989Apr8.212353.76@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >>In article <10316@nsc.nsc.com> andrew@nsc.nsc.com (andrew) writes: >>>I was horrified to read that more than $8B has already been junked by >>>discarded fuel tanks; about $300M per tank... Whoa! Is this right? I didn't see the original posting, but $300M seems waaaay too high. Anyone have a published reference for this figure? Greg ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 21:59:57 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@purdue.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Shuttle Acceleration In article V131Q5CG@UBVMSC.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (John Taylor) writes: >>There are tradeoffs here. Higher acceleration is generally more efficient, >>as you spend less time fighting gravity. > > Less time fighting gravity? I can't see what time has to do with it. Remember that slow, ponderous rise of the Saturn V off the pad? Well, of those 7.5 million pounds of thrust, 6+ were doing nothing but holding the thing up against gravity. Only the remaining 1.5- were accelerating the rocket upwards. That's an expensive way to gain velocity, which is one of the reasons why the shuttle takes off rather more briskly. -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 17:48:40 GMT From: phoenix!kpmancus@princeton.edu (Keith P. Mancus) Subject: NASA-Marshall node Could someone tell me what the node name of MSFC (Marshall Space Flight Center) is? In fact, could someone state the general pattern of the nasa.gov.whatever nodenames? Note to Ken Jenks: I lost track of your new address. Thanks for the 'space jobs' posting; it was an enormous help. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ -Keith Mancus <- preferred ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 89 21:44:55 GMT From: uflorida!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@g.ms.uky.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Proposed lunar simulation facility In article <8904181746.AA07962@cmr.icst.nbs.gov> roberts@CMR.ICST.NBS.GOV (John Roberts) writes: >>Los Alamos proposes to build a lunar-surface simulation facility for >>testing lunar mining and construction hardware... > >Is that a computer simulation testbed, or an actual physical construction >to emulate the lunar terrain? The latter, complete with vacuum chamber etc. -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 89 21:10:33 GMT From: eugene@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Eugene Miya) Subject: Re: Close encounter with an asteroid Next time we should paint a giant Bull's eye somewhere facing up. Planetary science in action. ;) Longish signature follows "Type 'n' now" Another gross generalization from --eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: "You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?" "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology." {ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!eugene Live free or die. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 89 21:37:40 GMT From: bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) Subject: Re: Close encounter with an asteroid eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya) <3338@eos.UUCP> : > Next time we should paint a giant Bull's eye somewhere facing up. > Planetary science in action. ;) Trust someone who likes living on fault lines to suggest this! > Longish signature follows "Type 'n' now" Well, at least you didn't put your targeting coordinates in your signature, like some people. Remember that Peter Benchley always kept his umbrella fully deployed, to prevent being struck by asteroids. Claimed a 100% success rate, too.... ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 89 02:00:17 GMT From: w3vh!rolfe@uunet.uu.net (Rolfe Tessem) Subject: U4MIR, U5MIR Contacts Well, just as the Mir cosmonauts are closing up shop, I managed to finally work both the current crew (I think). On 4/16 at 13:58 GMT I worked U5MIR almost by accident -- I just happened to be in the shack with the radio tuned to 145.550, and today (4/23) I worked U4MIR at almost the same time -- 14:51 GMT. I assume that these callsigns represent each member of the crew, respectively. The cosmonaut signing U4MIR spoke decidedly better english, but neither was much for chitchat :-). I believe I did understand that they were closing down operations until August. Is that the general understanding? Does anyone have the names of the current crew handy? -- UUCP: uunet!w3vh!rolfe | Rolfe Tessem INTERNET: rolfe@w3vh.uu.net | P.O. Box 793 AMPRNET: rolfe@pc.w3vh.ampr.org [44.44.0.2]| Great Barrington, MA 01230 PACKET RADIO: w3vh@wa2pvv | (413) 528-5966 ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 89 06:51:33 GMT From: cfa!cfa250!willner@husc6.harvard.edu (Steve Willner P-316 x57123) Subject: Asteroid Nearby [Following is the text of a NASA press release. Apologies if someone else posts the same thing, but I haven't seen it yet. Followups to sci.astro are probably best.] Paula Cleggett-Haleim Headquarters, Washington, D.C. April 19, 1989 (Phone: 202/453-1548) NASA ASTRONOMER DISCOVERS "NEAR-MISS" ASTEROID THAT PASSED EARTH An asteroid, a half-mile or more in diameter, passed within a half million miles of the Earth - about twice the distance to the moon - on March 23, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration said today. "On the cosmic scale of things, that was a close call," said Dr. Henry Holt. Holt is a University of Arizona astronomer who discovered the asteroid while working on a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) project, funded by NASA, to detect and track unknown asteroids that cross the orbit of the Earth. The project is headed by Dr. Eugene Shoemaker, USGS. Dr. Bevan French, advanced program scientist for NASA's Solar System Exploration Division, Washington, D.C., said that if the asteroid had collided with the Earth, the impact would have been equivalent to the explosion of 20,000 hydrogen bombs creating a crater 5 to 10 miles in diameter - "enough to destroy a good-sized city." Landing in the ocean could have been worse since huge tidal waves could have been created that would sweep over coastal regions, he said. Although scientists do not know the asteroid's exact size, they believe it to be over a half-mile in diameter. A 6-mile- diameter asteroid hit the Earth about 65 million years ago. It is popularly believed that this caused a global catastrophe that destroyed the dinosaurs. The asteroid, currently designated 1989FC, came closer to Earth than any recorded since Hermes in l937, according to Dr. Brian Marsden, director of the Minor Planets Center at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, Mass. Hermes passed the Earth at approximately the same distance as 1989FC. The observatory, which is the international clearinghouse for such discoveries, recorded the discoveries of about 1,800 asteroids [This sounds far too high to me. Maybe it includes recoveries of previously known asteroids. Or maybe I'm all wet.--SW] in l988. In the designation l989FC, l989 is the year of discovery; F indicates discovery in the sixth half-month of the year (i.e. the end of March); C indicates that the asteroid was the third discovered in that period. If the asteroid is successfully observed on two subsequent approaches to Earth, Holt will be entitled to name it. Holt discovered the asteroid on a series of photographic plates taken March 31 using the 18-inch Schmidt telescope at the California Institute of Technology's Mount Palomar Observatory in California. The object - estimated to be travelling 46,000 miles an hour - appeared as a trail of light in two photographs of the sky near the constellation Coma Berenices. They were taken an hour apart. The asteroid was detected when the two photographic plates were examained under a stereo microscope. "I knew it was travelling fast by the elliptical spot that it created," said Holt. During the week following the discovery, subsequent observations of l989FC were made by Holt and other astronomers to determine its orbit. Like the Earth, l989FC takes about a year to go around the Sun. But its orbit is highly elliptical and extends past the orbit of Mars and inward past the orbit of Venus. Asteroid 1989FC is now moving rapidly away from the Earth and Sun. It will return, crossing the Earth's orbit again in early October 1989, this time at a greater distance from Earth. Asteroid l989FC is only one of about 30 Earth-crossing asteroids that have been discovered, although there may be many more. Estimates range from several hundred to more than a thousand. Holt and Shoemaker regularly observe the sky during the "dark of the moon," the period just before and just after the new moon. -- 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 ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V9 #392 *******************