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 ; Sat, 13 Oct 1990 01:49:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sat, 13 Oct 1990 01:49:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #452 SPACE Digest Volume 12 : Issue 452 Today's Topics: Hydyne discovered! U.S/U.S.S.R. space meetings to be held (Forwarded) Re: Deep Space Network use (Was: Ulysses Update - 10/06/90) Ulysses Update - 10/12/90 TDRSS, Security Trading, & Re: N-waste sea water dilution Re: Deep Space Network use (Was: Ulysses Update - 10/06/90) Re: Ulysses Update - 10/10/90 Re: Iron asteroid in orbit 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: 12 Oct 90 21:34:48 GMT From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!dil@purdue.edu (Jeff Smith) Subject: Hydyne discovered! In case anybody still cares what hydyne is (was), I have finally uncovered the answer. >From 'Space Travel: A History', by von Braun, Ordway, and Dooling , (c) 1985 published by Harper and Row, p. 128: Jupiter C, officially known as the Jupiter Composite Re-entry Test Vehicle ... provided the capability of a rudimentary carrier for placing a satellite in orbit, and later was known in this capacity as the Juno I. ... The Redstone first stage was lengthened to hold more propellant, and the engine was modified to operate on a new mixture called hydyne, a [60/40] mixture of unsymetrical dimethylhydrazine [UDMH] and diethylene triamine. On the facing page, a table indicates that the Redstone was LOX-ethanol. Items in [] are my additions. That seems to be about as definitive a word as there is. pgr -- Perry G. Ramsey Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences perryr@vm.cc.purdue.edu Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN USA dil@mace.cc.purdue.edu We've looked at clouds from ten sides now, And we REALLY don't know clouds, at all. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 90 23:53:08 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: U.S/U.S.S.R. space meetings to be held (Forwarded) Debra J. Rahn Headquarters, Washington, D.C. October 12, 1990 (Phone: 202/453-8455) RELEASE: 90-138 U.S./U.S.S.R. SPACE MEETINGS TO BE HELD United States and Soviet space and aeronautics officials will hold three separate meetings next week. Richard H. Truly, NASA's Administrator, will lead a U.S. Government delegation to the Soviet Union for general discussions on U.S./U.S.S.R. civil space programs and for visits to Soviet space facilities, October 15-19, 1990. In addition, the fourth U.S./U.S.S.R. Solar System Exploration Joint Working Group (JWG) meeting will be held October 15-22, in Crystal City, Virginia. A Soviet aeronautics team will also visit NASA's aeronautics centers to be briefed on our aeronautics programs, October 15-25. The U.S. Government delegation's visit to Moscow is in response to long-standing invitations to visit senior Soviet space officials and installations. The group will visit a number of Soviet organizations and facilities, including, tentatively, the Ministry of General Machine Building; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences; the Space Research Institute; Star City, the cosmonaut training center; the Ministry of Health's Institute of Biomedical Problems; NPO Energia; and the Flight Control Center in Kaliningrad. In addition to Admiral Truly, members of the U.S. delegation are NASA officials Samuel W. Keller, Associate Deputy Administrator; Margaret G. Finarelli, Acting Associate Administrator for External Relations; and Arnauld Nicogossian, Director of Life Sciences; John Boright, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology Affairs, Department of State; Raymond Walters, Director of Policy and International Coordination, National Space Council; and John Thomas, Special Assistant for Soviet Affairs, Defense Technology Security Administration. Discussions during the Solar System Exploration JWG will include the status of planned cooperation on the Mars Balloon Relay mission; the Antaractic Balloon Flight Program; coordination of the Soviet Vesta (Mars '94) and U.S. Mars Observer missions and the exchange of scientific data; exchange of U.S. and Soviet scientists on the Magellan, U.S. Mars Observer and Soviet Mars '94 missions; and possible cross-support of the Mars Observer and Mars '94 missions. The U.S.S.R. Ministry of Aviation Industry (MAI) hosted a NASA aeronautics team in Moscow last May and arranged visits to its facilities conducting aeronautical research. NASA will host a reciprocal visit by a Soviet aeronautics team in October. The Soviet team will be led by Deputy Minister V. M. Chuiko. They will visit NASA's Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, Calif., Ames Research Center, Mountain View, Calif., Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, and NASA Headquarters. The exchange of visits will give both sides an opportunity to become acquainted with their ongoing aeronautical research programs. Space cooperation between the two nations was established by the U.S./U.S.S.R. Civil Space Agreement signed in Apri1 1987. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 90 21:02:22 GMT From: sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!forsight!jato!mars!baalke@ucsd.edu (Ron Baalke) Subject: Re: Deep Space Network use (Was: Ulysses Update - 10/06/90) In article <1990Oct12.070733.28173@watcsc.waterloo.edu> death@watcsc.waterloo.edu (Trevor Green) writes: >barnes@Xylogics.COM (Jim Barnes) writes: >>If Ulysses needs 8 hours per day of coverage, Magellan is returning radar >>images several times a day, and Galileo is doing some interesting things >>at the same time, are there enough minutes in the day? Will we just >>ignore the Voyagers/Pioneers/etc. for a while? How much extra bandwidth >>does the DSN have? > >Well, for starters, DSN has 72 hours per day. The three receivers >(Madrid, Canberra and West Virginia(?)) each operate continuously >except for maintenance and power failures. > Deep Space Network has 3 tracking facilities located throughout the world, one in Canberra, Australia, another in Madrid, Spain, and the third in Goldstone, California. Each tracking facility has 4 antennas: one 70 meter, two 34 meter, and one 26 meter antenna. DSN tracks several spacecraft, including Galileo, Magellan, Ulysses, Voyager 1 & 2, Pioneers 10 & 11, ICE, Nimbus-7, and DSN also backups the Hubble Space Telescope and the Space Shuttle. Since Magellan, Galileo and Ulysses are in the prime mission phase, they get top priority. However, the Pioneers and Voyagers need DSN support for survival requirements. Magellan is currently receiving 36 hours of DSN support every day. DSN is very busy at the moment, and scheduling of antenna time is done well in advance to iron out any conflicts. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| | | | | __ \ /| | | | Ron Baalke | baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |___ Jet Propulsion Lab | baalke@jems.jpl.nasa.gov /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| M/S 301-355 | |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ Pasadena, CA 91109 | ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 90 22:40:32 GMT From: snorkelwacker!usc!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov!baalke@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Ron Baalke) Subject: Ulysses Update - 10/12/90 ULYSSES MISSION STATUS October 12, 1990 Ulysses today is completing a two-day series of maneuvers that will turn the large dish of the spacecraft's high- gain antenna toward Earth. On Saturday morning, October 13, communication will be switched to the high-gain antenna; since launch the craft has been using its low-gain antennas. The high- gain antenna eventually will permit Ulysses to send science data at rates of up to 8,192 bits per second (bps). Currently the craft is transmitting engineering data at rates up to 1,024 bps. The flight team has also been completing plans for a trajectory correction maneuver next week, in which Ulysses will fire its thrusters to fine-tune its course to Jupiter. Beginning at about 9 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) Monday, October 15, and ending at about 3 a.m. PDT Wednesday, October 17, Ulysses will pulse thrusters on and off firing for a total of 26 hours to speed itself up by 99 meters per second, or 222 miles per hour. This -- combined with the slightly greater-than-expected velocity following launch last Saturday -- will move Ulysses's Jupiter closest approach 60 hours sooner than originally planned, now occurring at 12:00 Universal Time (UTC) (4 a.m. Pacific Standard Time (PST)) on February 8, 1992. The earlier arrival will enhance the mission's science objectives by giving the spacecraft 235 days above 70 degrees solar latitude, instead of a planned 228 days. It will also allow Ulysses to reach a maximum solar latitude of more than 80 degrees, instead of a planned 79 degrees. The thrusters to be fired Monday through Wednesday to speed up Ulysses are its radial thrusters, or small jets on the craft's line of travel. On Thursday, October 18, the trajectory maneuver will conclude when Ulysses pulses its axial thrusters -- located on the spacecraft's sides -- to adjust its aim point at Jupiter. On Friday, October 19, flight controllers will begin to turn on Ulysses's nine science instruments. Including instrument tests, the entire operation will span a 6-1/2-week period. All onboard systems were operating normally. At midday today PDT, Ulysses was 4.29 million miles from Earth and traveling at a velocity of 25,370 miles per hour in relation to Earth, and at a velocity of 91,950 miles per hour in relation to the Sun. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| | | | | __ \ /| | | | Ron Baalke | baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |___ Jet Propulsion Lab | baalke@jems.jpl.nasa.gov /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| M/S 301-355 | |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ Pasadena, CA 91109 | ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 90 09:54:16 From: George Cross Subject: TDRSS, Security Trading, & Reply to: TDRSS, Security Trading, & Clown College Hi, The October 8th, 1990 issue of the New Yorker contains a Profile of Gary Isaacs by Lawrence Weschler (p76--97). Isaacs worked at TRW on the TDRSS Delta V and the article describes this and the problems encountered with getting TDRSS-1 into orbit. After TRW he moved on to modelling and trading mortgage-backed securities as well as enrolling in Clown College. This is a very nice article. --George - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - George R. Cross cross@ctc.contel.com Contel Technology Center Intelligent Systems Laboratory (703)-818-4504 15000 Conference Center Drive Chantilly, VA 22021-3808 ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 90 14:26:16 GMT From: rochester!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!haake@louie.udel.edu (Bill Haake) Subject: Re: N-waste sea water dilution In article <1456@blenheim.nsc.com> alan@spitfire.nsc.com (Alan Hepburn) writes: >In article <1990Oct10.180030.8211@cpsc.ucalgary.ca> hermann@cs-sun-fsc.cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Michael Hermann) writes: >+In article <1452@blenheim.nsc.com> alan@spitfire.nsc.com (Alan Hepburn) writes: >+>Picture this: a supertanker modified slightly so that the nuclear >+>waste starts out in the bow tank, being diluted 100:1 with sea water. >+>This mix is then pumped to the next tank where it is diluted 100:1 with >+>sea water. And so on till the last tank, which is pumped into the open >+>ocean. You would be unable to detect other than background radiation >+>in the resulting water. >+ >+Gee, that's such a good idea. We could even do the same thing on land. >+Perhaps in the desert. Or normal garbage headed for the landfill. I'm sure >+Mr. Hepburn wouldn't mind us using his local landfill site. Afterall, one >+backyard is as good as another. >+ >+I hope you were joking. >+ >+| Mike Hermann | hermann@cpsc.ucalgary.ca ..!uunet!ubc-cs!calgary!hermann >+_Organized_ religion is like organized crime: it preys on peoples' weaknesses, >+generates huge profits, and is nearly impossible to eradicate. > >My point was that sufficient dilution would render the waste harmless. >The human race is not creating radioactivity; it is merely concentrating >that which is already here. By unconcentrating what we concentrate, we >are merely returning it to its natural form. What is a cubic metre of >any material when diluted with of cubic metres of >seawater? Try this experiment: place 1 ounce of food colouring into >a large (say 10,000 gallons) tank of clear water. Will it be detectable? > > > > >-- >Alan Hepburn "It is better to know nothing than to know >mail: alan@spitfire.nsc.com what ain't so." > - Josh Billings First off, I am not an "ecohysteric". I am not opposed to nuclear power, launching RTG's, building spaceports or storing radioactive waste where it will safe for a *long* time, but... Your argument is widely known by the phrase "The solution to pollution is dilution". This is an incredibly short-sighted approach to waste management. The problem is that many substances are concentrated in the food chain until they get to the point that they *are* at levels that cause problems. This is compounded by the fact that once certain kinds of compounds get into an organism they stay there. This is how we almost wiped out many birds of prey in the 60's and 70's. The fish they ate had harmful levels of pesticides in them and this caused the eggs to be too fragile to support the weight of the parents when they sat on them. An example that applies to radioactive waste is iodine. It is concentrated in mammals by the thyroid gland. How much must you dilute it to prevent any significant accumulation over the lifetime of a whale, seal, or some other organism that concentrates iodine? What about the same question for strontium, uranium, plutonium, thorium, cobalt or .... ? You say that we are just concentrating naturally occurring radioactivity. What really matters is whether we change what that radioactivity can do in a biological sense. If we create biologically important isotopes from ones that are relatively inert, then we will be greatly increasing the chance that there will be undesired consequences. We mine our isotopes from the land, if we dumped our waste products in the oceans, then would be increasing their concentration there. What is the naturally occurring concentration of plutonium (or any other isotope you want to dump) in seawater? Bill -- Bill Haake haake@cvs.rochester.edu (128.151.80.13) University of Rochester (716) 275-8680 ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 90 17:36:46 GMT From: sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!rex!rouge!dlbres10@ucsd.edu (Fraering Philip) Subject: Re: Deep Space Network use (Was: Ulysses Update - 10/06/90) What about an additional DSN dish in the S.U. as a candidate for covering the previously mentioned 'gap' in the DSN? ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 90 21:47:59 GMT From: amethyst!organpipe!achilles.lpl.arizona.edu!ron@noao.edu (Ron Watkins) Subject: Re: Ulysses Update - 10/10/90 On the 10Oct90 Ulysses update, the relative speeds of the spacecraft with respect to the sun and earth are given. I can understand how it`s possible for the relative speed with respect to the earth is slowing, but whats confusing my mind is how the relative speed with respect to the sun is steadily increasing? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Are we using some gravity assist or slow but continous burn? Its probably somthing simple, right??? Ron Watkins ron@argus.lpl.arizona.edu ------------------------------ Date: 10 Oct 90 16:14:03 GMT From: edsews!teemc!fmeed1!cage@uunet.uu.net (Russ Cage) Subject: Re: Iron asteroid in orbit In <9010091641.AA06231@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> roberts (John Roberts) writes: >Actually, given the low price of most of the metals, it's hard to come up >with anything to *do* with a huge chunk of iron that you couldn't do cheaper >by digging and refining your own ore. It's much easier to break up a big chunk >of rock than an equivalent piece of iron. Sawing is possible, but slow and >probably too expensive. An electric arc or an oxygen torch *might* be >economical, but a pulsed laser probably not. Crushing is out of the question, >as are explosives. (Not even fission bombs would have much effect.) Oh, I dunno. Spinning it up, heating one of the faces with a big mirror, and letting the molten metal fall into ingot molds of any desired shape doesn't seem too difficult to me. Or put it through a carbonyl-process refinery to get all the valuable stuff separated from the mundane stuff. You wouldn't want to lose nickel and gold to ablation when you can make the ablation surface of pure iron. -- Russ Cage Ford Powertrain Engineering Development Department Work: itivax.iti.org!cfctech!fmeed1!cage (Business only, NO CHATTY MAIL PLS) Home: russ@m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us (Everything else) I speak for the companies I own, not for the ones I don't. ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V12 #452 *******************