Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Tue, 9 Jan 90 15:42:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <8ZeYmGy00VcJA28k4D@andrew.cmu.edu> Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Tue, 9 Jan 90 15:41:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #398 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 398 Today's Topics: Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles Re: Magellan Special Report - 01/04/90 Re: Patentability as public/private division Hot news from Aviation Week & Space Technology 1 January 1990 Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles NASA Prediction Bulletin Format Re: Pegasus situation? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 5 Jan 90 18:04:09 GMT From: hplabsb!dsmith@hplabs.hp.com (David Smith) Subject: Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles In article <5927@cps3xx.UUCP> conklin@frith.UUCP (Terry Conklin) writes: >Certainly, press abuses (case in point the extensive coverage given to >the incredibly minor group of people protesting Galileo's powercell) in >the name of "news" haved given considerable power to reactionary >minorities. Especially when their claims are not adequately countered. I watched the Nightline debate over Galileo's RTGs. What a disaster. NASA did not provide an advocate, so ABC used their standing consultant Eugene Cernan as their "scientific consultant". He did not know anything technically, and simply repeated the fact that committees had gone over the issues several times before giving the go-ahead. I was also disappointed in Ted Koppel. He should have been able to poke holes in the Christic Institute representative's claims by himself. But he didn't know anything, either. David R. Smith, HP Labs dsmith@hplabs.hp.com (415) 857-7898 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- |"Meanwhile Newton became as mad as a hatter: by 1692 he was suffering | |from depression, paranoia, insomnia and forgetfulness, and his hands | |shook. Poor Newton's scientific work was impaired but in that state | |he was judged fit for public office and went on to become Master of | |the Mint and a Member of Parliament." -- Nigel Calder | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 90 17:15:43 GMT From: thorin!homer!leech@mcnc.org (Jonathan Leech) Subject: Re: Magellan Special Report - 01/04/90 In article <2509@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov> baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > Magellan's command and data system (CDS) experts said today >an error the spacecraft detected in its privileged memory is >apparently an oxide problem, and not a single event upset caused >by solar radiation. Does "oxide problem" have some specific meaning, or just refer to memory errors? -- Jon Leech (leech@cs.unc.edu) __@/ "We are Buddhists. We believe in God. We also believe in Hewlett-Packard" - Kenichi Horie ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 90 08:57:08 GMT From: ubc-cs!cheddar.cc.ubc.ca!panon@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Paul-Andre Panon) Subject: Re: Patentability as public/private division In article <9001021920.AA29347@trout.nosc.mil> jim@pnet01.cts.COM (Jim Bowery) writes: > > In civil space, as in many other technical areas that posess > commercial potential, the correct division between public and > private sector responsibilities is exactly the same as that > defined in patent law between "unpatentable" research (science) > and "patentable" development (technology). Grassroots space > activists, in advocating related reforms of our civil space > policy, are now enjoying far greater political influence than > we ever experienced as just another special interest asking > Congress for more money. Experiencing such influence is not > only motivating and exciting, it is proving to be the cure > for a malaise that has, for years, plagued our space movement. ... > >--- >Typical RESEARCH grant: >$ >Typical DEVELOPMENT contract: >$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Which seems to summarize a lot of statements made in the white paper he posted to the net recently - I unfortunately only read the first part of the paper because (it seems) I didn't get to save the second half when it came down the pike (the undergrad machines I WAS using to read sci.space were undergoing changes over the Christmas break). What I didn't see addressed anywhere (or at least not in the first half of the paper and not in the above article) is the need for an efficient method of information/technology transfer between the research lab and the development lab. I have gotten the impression from a number of sources that this is where the Japanese, among others, win in the race to place finished products on the market. I think a lot of the arguments for the privatization of the development section of the space program make sense, but they MUST be balanced by better systems/structures for technology transfer. I fear that if this is not done, any advantages gained from competition will be killed by the increased time between research and development. I think you have a lot better chance of pushing something like this through now than, say, a year ago. I think there are some pretty good arguments that some of the knowledge/technology being developed at NASA has military applications. I suspect some 'hawks' might feel uncomfortable with making this available to the private sector where it might be more difficult for 'proper security measures' to be followed (sure, this already happens for many defence contracts but I think the likely variety/number of bidding contractors would be larger for space stuff than for defence contracts). If this isn't the case, then why does NASA require U.S. citizenship for all its positions and a security clearance for many of those positions as well? This particular argument against privatization should get weaker once the implications of the Eastern European changes sink in. Of course, there's always China. -- Paul-Andre_Panon@cheddar.cc.ubc.ca or USERPAP1@UBCMTSG or Paul-Andre_Panon@undergrad.cs.ubc.ca or USERPAP1@mtsg.ubc.ca "What should the role of the University be? It should be to enlighten Society." -Luis Sobrino ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jan 90 00:03:00 GMT From: mirror!frog!john@CS.BU.EDU (John Woods) Subject: Hot news from Aviation Week & Space Technology 1 January 1990 Considering the controversy rumbling here over the use of the Long March launcher, there is an article in this week's AvLeak which is very interesting. {begin quote} The Swedish Space Corporation, the prime contractor for the Swedish Board of Space Activities' Freja Satellite, signed an agreement with Orbital Sciences Corp. and Hercules, Inc., the joint developers of the winged booster which is launched in the air from under the wing of a U. S. Air Force B-52 aircraft. The agreement, signed Dec. 13 in Solna, Sweden, also involves Arianespace, the Pegasus marketing representative in Europe. Barbara Zadina, an official of Orbital Sciences, said the Swedes' move toward the U.S. launch vehicle [away from the Chinese Long March] is being made "as a result of political circumstances and because Pegasus is a dedicated launch platform." ... While [$7.5M] may be more than the Chinese charge for the Long March, [Antonio Elias, Orbital's engineering VP] said the Swedes will likely save on other expenses involved in launching from China. The Freja satellite, carrying instruments for research into aurora and other phenomena of the Earth's magnetosphere, includes U.S. experiments. It would be the first spacecraft to make certain high-resolution measurements in the auroral zone. {end quote} There is also, on the same page, an article headlined "U.S. Approval of Satellite Launches By China Not the End of Sanctions", which can be summarized as saying "probably no more approvals for Long March, and no Soviet approvals ever, hahahahahahaha." One of the two "US" satellites to be launched on Long March is Asiasat 1, nee' Westar 6 (one of the satellites retrieved by the Shuttle). -- John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA, (508) 626-1101 ...!decvax!frog!john, john@frog.UUCP, ...!mit-eddie!jfw, jfw@eddie.mit.edu Happiness is Planet Earth in your rear-view mirror. - Sam Hurt ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 90 20:02:26 GMT From: rochester!dietz@rutgers.edu (Paul Dietz) Subject: Re: March 1990 ANALOG article on self-refueling vehicles In article <5264@sequoia.UUCP> jkg@sequoia.UUCP () writes: >I don't see >what difference it makes that the reactor is not operational until after >departure, unless the fuel elements are launched in special protective >containers and only installed in the reactor in orbit, and that would >complicate design quite a bit, too. The halflife of U-235 is eight million times the halflife of Pu-238 (the stuff used in RTGs), so, pound for pound, it is about 8 million times less radioactive. The only way nonfissioned U-235 in an inert reactor core could harm someone would be if it fell on them. You would want to design the core to make sure it could not go critical in a launch accident. That should not be hard. Paul F. Dietz dietz@cs.rochester.edu ------------------------------ Date: 30 Dec 89 23:43:09 GMT From: ncis.tis.llnl.gov!blackbird!tkelso@lll-winken.llnl.gov (TS Kelso) Subject: NASA Prediction Bulletin Format As a service to the satellite user community, the following description of the NASA Prediction Bulletin's two-line orbital element set format is uploaded to sci.space on a monthly basis. The most current orbital elements from the NASA Prediction Bulletins are carried on the Celestial RCP/M, (513) 427-0674, and are updated several times weekly. Documentation and tracking software are also available on this system. The Celestial RCP/M may be accessed 24 hours/day at 300, 1200, or 2400 baud using 8 data bits, 1 stop bit, no parity. ============================================================================== Data for each satellite consists of three lines in the following format: AAAAAAAAAAA 1 NNNNNU NNNNNAAA NNNNN.NNNNNNNN +.NNNNNNNN +NNNNN-N +NNNNN-N N NNNNN 2 NNNNN NNN.NNNN NNN.NNNN NNNNNNN NNN.NNNN NNN.NNNN NN.NNNNNNNNNNNNNN Line 1 is a eleven-character name. Lines 2 and 3 are the standard Two-Line Orbital Element Set Format identical to that used by NASA and NORAD. The format description is: Line 2 Column Description 01-01 Line Number of Element Data 03-07 Satellite Number 10-11 International Designator (Last two digits of launch year) 12-14 International Designator (Launch number of the year) 15-17 International Designator (Piece of launch) 19-20 Epoch Year (Last two digits of year) 21-32 Epoch (Julian Day and fractional portion of the day) 34-43 First Time Derivative of the Mean Motion or Ballistic Coefficient (Depending on ephemeris type) 45-52 Second Time Derivative of Mean Motion (decimal point assumed; blank if N/A) 54-61 BSTAR drag term if GP4 general perturbation theory was used. Otherwise, radiation pressure coefficient. (Decimal point assumed) 63-63 Ephemeris type 65-68 Element number 69-69 Check Sum (Modulo 10) (Letters, blanks, periods = 0; minus sign = 1; plus sign = 2) Line 3 Column Description 01-01 Line Number of Element Data 03-07 Satellite Number 09-16 Inclination [Degrees] 18-25 Right Ascension of the Ascending Node [Degrees] 27-33 Eccentricity (decimal point assumed) 35-42 Argument of Perigee [Degrees] 44-51 Mean Anomaly [Degrees] 53-63 Mean Motion [Revs per day] 64-68 Revolution number at epoch [Revs] 69-69 Check Sum (Modulo 10) All other columns are blank or fixed. Example: NOAA 6 1 11416U 86 50.28438588 0.00000140 67960-4 0 5293 2 11416 98.5105 69.3305 0012788 63.2828 296.9658 14.24899292346978 Note that the International Designator fields are usually blank, as issued in the NASA Prediction Bulletins. -- Dr TS Kelso Asst Professor of Space Operations tkelso@blackbird.afit.af.mil Air Force Institute of Technology ------------------------------ Date: 3 Jan 90 00:46:44 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!uplherc!esunix!bambam!bpendlet@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Pendleton) Subject: Re: Pegasus situation? From article , by wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL (Will Martin): > But, > if everything works OK, why wait a month? Why not then go up in a day or > two and do it for real? What's the purpose of forcing a month's delay in > any case? Data reduction, inspection, and analysis. It could easily take a month to verify that everything did go OK. Finding internal debonds in composites takes a bit more than just eyeballing the outside of the case. Anyway, the flight test article isn't a flight ready Pegasus. Bob P. -- Bob Pendleton, speaking only for myself. UUCP Address: decwrl!esunix!bpendlet or utah-cs!esunix!bpendlet X: Tools, not rules. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Jan 90 15:16:20 -0900 Sender: Reply-To: From: "Robert J. Hale III" #16 ACAD3A::FSRRC Thu 04 Jan 09:49 ( 102) U January 1. 1990 ISECCo PROJECT UPDATE #9: 1989 Newsletter. The following is an extract from our annual newsletter. We are sending it so that you can see the general outline and, hopefully, encourage your interest in space in general and us in particular! If you would like the entire newsletter but do not wish to join please send a self-addressed, stamped envelope to ISECCo: we will be happy to send you one! We of ISECCo hope you had happy holidays and that your new year is enjoyable and industrious. International Space Exploration and Colonization Company I.S.E.C.Co P.O. Box 60885 Annual Newsletter Fairbanks, Ak. 99706 Issue #3: 1989 (907)457-2674 January 1, 1990 INTRODUCTION This is the International Space Exploration and Colonization Company's third annual newsletter. There are 3 ways you can obtain these newsletters: pay $5 for a 10 year subscription to it, do 2 or more hours of volunteer work in the last year or donate $20 or more in the last year. Except as noted this newsletter was written by Ray R. Collins, the president and co-founder of ISECCo. Other people who contributed to the writing, editing and distribution of this newsletter are: Debi Wilkinson, Patrick Wilkinson and Robert Hale, and ISECCo extends it's thanks to their generous donation of time to this effort. Anyone wishing to join ISECCo can write to ISECCo, P.O. Box 60885, Fairbanks AK 99706 and request an information package and membership form. CONTENTS: Introduction................................Page 1, Column 1 Contents....................................Page 1, Column 1 Overview....................................Page 1, Column 1 Biosphere Grant Application.................Page 1, Column 2 Biosphere Land Lease........................Page 2, Column 1 Biosphere Excavation........................Page 2, Column 1 Volunteer Workers...........................Page 2, Column 1 Videos of Biosphere Project.................Page 2, Column 2 Biosphere II................................Page 2, Column 2 ISECCo Support..............................Page 2, Column 2 An ISECCo Vacation by Wilkinson.............Page 2, Column 2 1989 Successes and Setbacks.................Page 3, Column 1 Non-Profit Status...........................Page 3, Column 2 1990 Projects...............................Page 3, Column 2 Selected Project Updates....................Page 4, Column 1 #4: Hydroponics & Space Utilization....Page 4, Column 2 #6: Crop Cycling.......................Page 5, Column 1 #7: Questions & Answers................Page 5, Column 2 #8: Summer Activities..................Page 6, Column 1 The Last Line...............................Page 6, Column 2 OVERVIEW 1989 was a successful one for ISECCo. The Biosphere Project has progressed to the point where construction can proceed, some preliminary work has been done on the aero-space plane model, our office procedures are getting smoothed out, and (after more than 15 months) the IRS granted our request for non-profit status. Early in 1989 Gene and Marilyn Rowley offer to let us build the Biosphere on their land. By May we had an agreement worked out for a lease to their land. During May, when Richard Kline and Debi Wilkinson were up from Florida donating 2 weeks of labor, we got the Biosphere site cleared and ready to begin digging. In the early fall we obtained the used of some heavy equipment and managed to get a lot of dirt excavated before freeze-up. Our core membership stands slightly over 50 people right now. We have members from Alaska, California, Georgia, Florida, Michigan, Kentucky, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Ohio, Washington, Illinois, New York, Canada, and people in Belgium, New Zealand, India and Australia have also expressed interest. Our principal method of reaching these people is via the computer mail networks such as BITNET. Our progress reports, which are distributed this way, have proven to be an excellent method of informing people what we are about, where we are headed and generating interest in our activities. This is, in effect, passive advertising. In the upcoming year we plan to do a little more active advertising, for now that we have a project underway we need to develop a better support network. In this we request your help: If you know of any classified advertisers who allow free ads please send one of their coupon to us! 1990 is going to be a busy year for ISECCo. We expect to make good progress with the biosphere, getting the hole finished and the concrete slab poured. We also plan to plant a garden again, which will be used to help feed ISECCo volunteers. We are going to continue expanding our hydroponic gardens, as well as increasing our fish tank capacity. We plan to begin experimenting with several new support systems, including saprophytes (ants, earthworms), rabbits, and bacterial breakdown of plant waste products. To keep our more dedicated members better informed we plan to start bimonthly mailings of the project updates to those members contributing $10/mo or more. Ray R. Collins::President ISECCo. For more information about ISECCo you can write us at the address above or send a note to Robert Hale FNRJH@ALASKA ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #398 *******************