Message-ID: <kaYMTOG00VcJ48HE5U@andrew.cmu.edu>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
Date: Wed,  4 Jul 1990 02:08:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #13

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 12 : Issue 13

Today's Topics:
	       Payload Status for 07/03/90 (Forwarded)
		   Re: grim tidings for the future

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  space+@andrew.cmu.edu.  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription notices,
  should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to
			 tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu

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

Date: 3 Jul 90 20:51:39 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Payload Status for 07/03/90 (Forwarded)


    Daily Status/KSC Payload Management and Operations 07-03-90.
    
    
    - STS-35 ASTRO-1/BBXRT (at OPF) -
    
    Experiment monitoring continues.  A video search will be
    conducted at the OPF in the orbiter bay for a small piece of
    safety wire that was misplaced.
    
    
    - STS-37 GRO (at PHSF) -
    
    Test batteries will not be discharged today; awaiting
    possible manifest/schedule impacts.
    
    
    - STS-40 SLS-1 (at O&C) -
    
    GTA pressure monitoring, MLI installation and installation
    of flight caps on experiment subsystem computers ongoing
    today.
    
    
    - STS-41 Ulysses (at Hanger AO) -
    
    At the VPF, preps for CITE testing will continue today.
    
    
    - STS-42 IML-1 (at O&C) -
    
    Rack, floor, and module staging is continuing.
    
    
    - Atlas-1 (at O&C) -
    
    Temperature sensors and cables will be installed today.
    
    
    - STS-46 TSS-1 (at O&C) -
    
    VFI hardware removal and EMP paper closure continues.
    
    
    - STS-47 Spacelab-J (at O&C) -
    
    Rack 5, and 7 staging continues.
    
    
    - HST M&R -
    
    Work on three PR'S scheduled for today.

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

Date: 3 Jul 90 23:00:35 GMT
From: usc!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!deimos.caltech.edu!ih@ucsd.edu  (Irwin Horowitz)
Subject: Re: grim tidings for the future

In article <9007032002.AA23483@ibmpa.paloalto.ibm.com>, szabonj@ibmpa.UUCP (Nicholas J. Szabo) writes...
> 
>Time for a little quiz:
>        Who built the first rocket designed solely for commercial purposes
>                (and the most successful commercial rocket to date)?
>        Who designed and flew the first orbital launcher from an airplane,
>                reducing the entry-level cost to orbit by a factor of 5,
>                and spending only 1/5 of 1% what NASA spent to develop
>                the Shuttle?
>        Who built a prototype of a coil gun that could reduce the cost
>                to orbit by a factor of 100?
>        Who is building a prototype of a laser launcher that could also
>                greatly reduce cost to orbit?
>        Who built a prototype gas gun launcher, ditto?
>        Who is building a prototype of inflatable space stations that could
>                reduce the cost of putting astronauts on the Moon and Mars?
>        Who is working on nuclear-thermal propulsion that could be over
>                4 times as efficient as chemical rockets at moviing payloads
>                and people beyond low earth orbit?
>        Who flew the first operational ion rocket in space?
>        Who has kept people in space, doing a wide variety of studies,
>                almost continuously for the last 10 years?
>        Who has launched the most satellites into space over the last
>                10 years?
>        Who set the record for human duration in space?
>        Who has an operational, permanent micogravity furnace?
> 
> 
>Hint: not NASA.
> 
>Nearly all of the breakthroughs in space technology during the last 10 years
>have been accomplished by somebody other than NASA, despite the fact that
>NASA has spent more money on space than any other agency (over $100 billion
>in the last 10 years -- more than $400 for every adult and child in the
>U.S.)  The space program can certainly survive without NASA; it would
>likely thrive.
> 
How about another quiz...
	1) What is the only organization to successfully send men to the moon
	   and return them to the earth?
	2) What is the only organization to send robotic missions to the
	   outer planets?
	3) What organization has launched the largest space station in 
	   history?
Now I realize that these are all over 10 years old and that during the past
decade NASA has not had much in the way of individual achievements (this is
mainly due to international cooperation).  However, to say that NASA has
spent 100 billion dollars and not advanced the state of the art in space
technology is a gross mistatement and is entirely misleading.  To begin 
with, NASA programs have led to a revolution in detector technology used in
most of the basic sciences, such as CCD cameras which are now the norm at
astronomical observatories around the world.  The list of technology 
spinoffs from NASA programs is enormous, and that is but one small part of
what NASA has done.  Granted your quiz above does point out a number of 
areas that NASA has not been the leading contender, but to expect that 
NASA is going to be the leader in everything is not only unrealistic, but 
is also insulting to those other organizations which are working hard to
push the limits of technology.

Personally, I don't mind having spent $0.11/day on NASA for the past 10 years 
(and would rather spend it on NASA than on most of the other things that the 
government spends money on).  If every citizen of the US knew that they 
were only spending $0.11/day on NASA, and that a small increase in that 
could result in a large increase in the effectiveness of NASA, then they 
would certainly want to do so.

>Quiz answers follow (don't peak!)
>
>Arianespace, Orbit Sciences Corp./Hercules/DARPA, Sandia Labs et. al.,
>Lawrence Livermore Labs, University of Washington et. al., Lawrence
>Livermore Labs, Los Alamos Labs, Rocket Research Co., Glavkosmos,
>Glavkosmos, Glavkosmos, Glavkosmos.
> 
> 
>Nick Szabo
>uunet!ibmsupt!szabonj
> 
>These opinions do not reflect those of any organization I may be
>affiliated with.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irwin Horowitz                        |"Suppose they went nowhere?"-McCoy
Astronomy Department                  |"Then this will be your big chance
California Institute of Technology    | to get away from it all!"-Kirk
irwin@romeo.caltech.edu               |       from STII:TWOK
ih@deimos.caltech.edu                 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

End of SPACE Digest V12 #13
*******************