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, 30 May 89 05:16:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Tue, 30 May 89 05:16:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #466 SPACE Digest Volume 9 : Issue 466 Today's Topics: Re: Private Space Companies Meteorite impact in Soviet Union in 1947. Re: Private Space Companies Re: Oort cloud is not `mythical' Re: How Hubble will get there Payload Status for 05/26/89 (Forwarded) Re: New Orbiter Name Announced Re: Proposed improvements for Arecibo Re: Sun's invisible partner NEMESIS Re: UFOs and other weird stuff on this list. Payload Status for 05/26/89 [Corrected] (Forwarded) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 May 89 05:56:25 GMT From: amdahl!reddy@ames.arc.nasa.gov (T.S. Reddy) Subject: Re: Private Space Companies In article <1989May25.164803.1255@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: > In article ESC1325@ESOC.PROFS (Lutz Massonne, +49-6151-886-701) writes: ... > > Boeing -- which is not currently in the space-launch business, although > it has a long-standing interest in the notion -- is probably the only > big aerospace company in the world that can afford to go its own way > and make its own decisions. > I doubt that Boeing can develop a new space vehicle given that it cannot even build a new airliner from scratch without collaborating with another company or without government aid. -- T.S.Reddy Arpa: reddy@uts.amdahl.com uucp:...!{ames,decwrl,uunet,pyramid,sun}!amdahl!reddy ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 13:14:03 GMT From: renoir.dec.com!klaes@decwrl.dec.com (CUP/ASG, MLO5-2/G1 8A, 223-3283) Subject: Meteorite impact in Soviet Union in 1947. According to the May 1989 issue of the Boston L5/NSS SPACE NEWS newsletter on page 2, a relatively large meteorite struck the Soviet Union on February 12, 1947 only 400 kilometers (250 miles) from the city of Valivostok with the force of an atomic bomb. This event was unknown to me until this article. Does anyone have any further information on this meteorite strike? Thanks. Larry Klaes ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 15:40:00 GMT From: skipper!shafer@ames.arc.nasa.gov Subject: Re: Private Space Companies In article <718@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: In article reddy@uts.amdahl.com (T.S. Reddy) writes: >> > I doubt that Boeing can develop a new space vehicle given that it >cannot even build a new airliner from scratch without collaborating with >another company or without government aid. Er, what planes, what company, and what government? I don't know about all of their planes, but I don't recall the government subsidizing the development of the 757 and 767, and I don't know what you mean by collaboration; Boeing is 'borrowing' workers from Lockheed, here in Atlanta, and they do contract some of their work out ,butI don't think that qualifies as collaboration. I have to agree with Henry (I think it was Henry...); Boeing is probably the only company that can develop it's own launch system. -- The 707 was originally the KC-135. Actually, Boeing proposed this aircraft originally as being both military and civilian. It was bought by the Air Force and, some time after it entered military service, Boeing asked the AF for permission to build and sell a civilian version. The AF agreed, probably partly on the basis that economies of scale would keep costs down. The 747 was initially proposed as an entry in the competition that the C-5 won. (That's why it has a through deck.) I don't think that the E-3 and SCA contributed to any economy of scale, however. But, in terms of subsidization, the 747-400 has winglets that were conceived by a NASA aerodynamicist (Whitcomb or Jones, I don't remember) and flown in a technology-demonstration program funded jointly by NASA and the Air Force. This latter makes a really good point. Essentially all aerospace is subsidized _somehow_ by military and government entities. DARPA subsidized superplastic forming. NASA works on aircraft fuel economy (e.g. supercritical wings and laminar flow). Jet engine developement by the Luftwaffe and RAE. Practical rocketry from Germany. Composites, fly-by-wire, telemetry, advanced instrumentation, hot section materials, radar and other avionics, structures, on-board computers, tooling, and so on. Even Pegasus, which is touted as private enterprise at its best, is subsidized by NASA providing the B-52 and the test range at a ridiculously low cost. I, incidentally, think that this is appropriate behavior on the part of the government entities. It's an important part of NASA's charter. But it is a subsidy. -- M F Shafer NASA Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility shafer@elxsi.dfrf.nasa.gov or shafer@drynix.dfrf.nasa.gov NASA management doesn't know what I'm doing and I don't know what they're doing, and everybody's happy this way. ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 89 17:29:13 GMT From: visdc!jiii@uunet.uu.net (John E Van Deusen III) Subject: Re: Oort cloud is not `mythical' In article GILL@QUCDNAST.BITNET writes: > > ... I agree that the location of the Oort cloud is in dispute, and > that its existence is circumstantial. ... The evidence for the existence of the oort cloud seems to me to be reasonably direct. I think it is fairly well accepted that the solar nebula cooled to form a broad band of planetesimals. When the major planets began to accrete, the orbits of the planetesimals were perturbed. In an episode of intense bombardment, perhaps 5 to 10 percent of the planetesimals were captured by the sun and major planets, and the rest were flung out of the solar system. The evidence to this point is quite direct, including photographs that date the period of bombardment. To the extent that the solar nebula extended appreciably beyond the orbit of Neptune, one would expect to find a band of planetesimals, unperturbed by the major planets. -- John E Van Deusen III, PO Box 9283, Boise, ID 83707, (208) 343-1865 uunet!visdc!jiii ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 12:59:43 GMT From: stsci!sims@noao.edu (Jim Sims) Subject: Re: How Hubble will get there In article <3313@kalliope.rice.edu>, phil@rice.edu (William LeFebvre) writes: > [ Excuse the cross-posting, please. ] > > Here's something I found out yesterday. Currently, the Hubble Space > Telescope is being stored in California. Everyone knows that it is going > to be launched (some day) on a shuttle from the Cape (Florida east coast). > But apparently, the only safe way to transport it is by boat. Which means > it will almost certainly have to go thru the Panama canal.........Let's > hope things improve down that way in the next year. Sigh. > For the (hopefully) last time, guys - HST will arrive in Florida shortly before launch, transport is via modified C-5A, courtesy U.S. Air Force (wonder why they need a C-5A to transport HST sized/shaped cargo ;-) ) yes, HST will occasionally look at the Earth, Moon, Sun (through the "back-door" for UV Flood on the WFPC). No, the sensors won't burn out. No, it won't focus that 'close' either (but the defocus/deblurring algorithms are known :-) ). 'nuff said? -- Jim Sims Space Telescope Science Institute Baltimore, MD UUCP: {arizona,decvax,hao,ihnp4}!noao!stsci!sims ARPA: sims@stsci.edu SPAM: SCIVAX::SIMS ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 17:16:19 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Payload Status for 05/26/89 (Forwarded) Payload Status Report Kennedy Space Center May 26, 1989 George H. Diller Galileo/IUS-19 (Atlantis) The Galileo spacecraft left the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California on May 12 and arrived at KSC's SAEF-2 planetary spacecraft checkout facility at 7:30 p.m. on May 16. Galileo and its support equipment were entered through the airlock and unloaded on May 17 and 18. On May 19 Galileo was hoisted into a test stand and access platforms were moved into position around the spacecraft. The Galileo probe arrived at KSC over a month ago on April 17, and has been in an adjacent SAEF-2 test cell undergoing final assembly and checkout. On May 23, it was moved into the SAEF-2 high bay with the Galileo orbiter to prepare it for integration scheduled for late next week. This will be followed by the final buildup of the spacecraft during early June. Atlas Centaur AC-68/FltSatCom The AC-68 launch vehicle arrived at the Skid Strip on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station at 7:00 a.m. Wednesday, May 24. It was offloaded and taken to Hangar J for receiving inspections. On or about Tuesday, May 30 the Atlas will be taken to Pad B at Launch Complex 36 for erection. It will be followed by the erection of the Centaur stage approximately two days later. The FltSatCom spacecraft is expected to arrive in mid-June. The launch is expected to occur shortly after Labor Day. Delta/COBE The necessary refurbishment of Space Launch Complex 2-West at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California is complete. Assembly and checkout of the spacecraft continues at NASA's Goddard Spaceflight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The launch of Delta/COBE is not expected to occur until at least the end of October. The erection of the booster will begin when a launch time frame is determined. ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 89 16:54:09 GMT From: att!mcdchg!ddsw1!corpane!sparks@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (John Sparks) Subject: Re: New Orbiter Name Announced In article <104932@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler%concertina@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) writes: >In article <13000@ut-emx.UUCP>, bonin@ut-emx.UUCP (Marc Bonin) writes: >> It's interesting to note that every shuttle orbiter except Columbia has ^^^^? >> a fictional counterpart Er, what about 'Atlantis'? Sure it's a mythical contenent, but what fictional ship was it named after? -- John Sparks | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks | D.I.S.K. 24hrs 1200bps [not for RHF] | sparks@corpane.UUCP | 502/968-5401 thru -5406 Mixed Emotions: When you see your mother-in-law back over a cliff in your new Mercedes Benz. ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 18:23:35 GMT From: mfci!rodman@CS.YALE.EDU (Paul Rodman) Subject: Re: Proposed improvements for Arecibo In article <8905251829.AA07652@cmr.icst.nbs.gov> roberts@CMR.ICST.NBS.GOV (John Roberts) writes: > >(From the May 1989 issue of Sky & Telescope) > >The 1000-foot radio telescope at Arecibo Observatory has a spherical rather >than parabolic nonmoving dish, so the telescope can be "pointed" in different >directions by moving the pickup point. Unfortunately, this induces spherical >aberration (the received energy does not all focus on a single point), so >a 96-foot line of receivers must be used as the pickup. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hmmm. They meant to say a "linear feed antenna". The receivers are in a building, far from the feed antenna! My dad designed the antennas used at the Five College Radio Astronomy Observatory in Mass. The array consisted of 4 120' spherical dishes, phased together and used at meter-wavelengths to observe pulsars. The feed was a funny looking pyramid-shaped log-periodic linear feed that he designed to work at 150 and 450 Mhz. Like Arecibo the feed antenna moves to steer the beam, rather than the whole antenna. He always told me that it was no sweat building linear feeds. As a matter of fact he said they were easier in some ways that dealing with a single focus point. I assume Arecibo's desire to dump the linear feed is because they are doing much more centimeter stuff these days and at those frequencies it IS hard to build an efficient linear feed (line losses for one thing!). The Arecibo facility is quite incredible. Paul K. Rodman rodman@mfci.uucp __... ...__ _.. . _._ ._ .____ __.. ._ ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 23:44:53 GMT From: usc!csun!solaria!ecphssrw%afws.csun.edu@BLOOM-BEACON.MIT.EDU (Stephen Walton) Subject: Re: Sun's invisible partner NEMESIS Whatever the merits of the Nemesis hypothesis, the KT event doesn't fit it. The clay abundances, such as the iridium anomaly and the isotope ratios, point to the culprit as a nickel-iron asteroid. Comets are ice plus carbonaceous chondrite stuff, and it would take implausibly many of them to deposit significant heavy elements on the Earth. -- Stephen Walton, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Cal State Univ. Northridge RCKG01M@CALSTATE.BITNET ecphssrw@afws.csun.edu swalton@solar.stanford.edu ...!csun!afws.csun.edu!ecphssrw ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 12:06:34 GMT From: usc!merlin.usc.edu!nunki.usc.edu!manderso@BLOOM-BEACON.MIT.EDU (Mark Anderson) Subject: Re: UFOs and other weird stuff on this list. In article <18761@cup.portal.com> mmm@cup.portal.com (Mark Robert Thorson) writes: > >How do you like them apples? ET's and space habitats lumped together. >Think about that the next time you look for a consultant. Maybe that would >be a good screening question, "Do you believe Earth is being visited by ET's?" If it was a question, most people, who believed or have experienced something, would lie anyway. The current perception is that believing in ET visitations means that you have some sort of paranoic psychological problem and belong in an institution. This has caused many sightings and personal experiences to go underground or unreported altogether. Many pilots, especially, are threatened by this fear. It is kind of funny that people would actually get upset at this. It seems to rock some people's total outlook on the way they view the world, therefore these people pose a threat. The popular view is that if ETs were here, we would know about it for sure because we scientists are so smart. Or why haven't they made obvious contact, using our logic to justify theirs. Anyway, I have evidence of ETs in my basement. It is a 4'X10'X2" charred piece of metal like material that floats in water. I found it in the desert a few miles outside of Las Vegas. It has these funny little symbols on it. With all of this UFO paranoia going around, I think I'll just hold on to it so as to not stir up any controversy. Hope the government doesn't monitor this net. So much for that consulting contract. (Oh well) Mark manderso@nunki.usc.edu PS. I tried to get into a psyche ward but it was full. So I got a job instead. ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 22:25:56 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Payload Status for 05/26/89 [Corrected] (Forwarded) Payload Status Report Kennedy Space Center May 26, 1989 George H. Diller Galileo/IUS-19 (Atlantis) The Galileo spacecraft left the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California on May 12 and arrived at KSC's SAEF-2 planetary spacecraft checkout facility at 7:30 p.m. on May 16. Galileo and its support equipment were entered through the airlock and unloaded on May 17 and 18. On May 19 Galileo was hoisted into a test stand and access platforms were moved into position around the spacecraft. The Galileo probe arrived at KSC over a month ago on April 17, and has been in an adjacent SAEF-2 test cell undergoing final assembly and checkout. On May 23, it was moved into the SAEF-2 high bay with the Galileo orbiter to prepare it for integration scheduled for late next week. This will be followed by the final buildup of the spacecraft during early June. Atlas Centaur AC-68/FltSatCom The AC-68 launch vehicle arrived at the Skid Strip on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station at 7:00 a.m. Wednesday, May 24. It was offloaded and taken to Hangar J for receiving inspections. On or about Monday, June 5, the Atlas will be taken to Pad B at Launch Complex 36 for erection. It will be followed by the erection of the Centaur stage approximately two days later. The FltSatCom spacecraft is expected to arrive in mid-June. The launch is expected to occur shortly after Labor Day. Delta/COBE The necessary refurbishment of Space Launch Complex 2-West at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California is complete. Assembly and checkout of the spacecraft continues at NASA's Goddard Spaceflight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The launch of Delta/COBE is not expected to occur until at least the end of October. The erection of the booster will begin when a launch time frame is determined. ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V9 #466 *******************