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 ; Fri, 23 Nov 1990 01:34:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Fri, 23 Nov 1990 01:34:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V12 #584 SPACE Digest Volume 12 : Issue 584 Today's Topics: Re: Big bang discovered 1400 years ago ? Little Joe Re: The Space Plane Re:Save our Shuttle data? Psych effects + Space M+A+X Re: Little Joe Total Solar Eclipses Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red? Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red? Congrats to Ted Molczan Re: Photon Engine Re: Pity The Much Abused Shuttle Re: LLNL Astronaut Delivery Re: The Space Plane Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red? Re: Photon Engine 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: 19 Nov 90 23:49:59 GMT From: cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Big bang discovered 1400 years ago ? In article <299@sgfb.ssd.ray.com> plw@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Paul L. White) writes: >Your article on the koran and the Big Bang was extremely enlightening. >Tell me more about the koran, please...especially the enlightening part >about clitorectomies in the Moslem culture. Not in sci.space, please. -- "I don't *want* to be normal!" | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology "Not to worry." | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 90 15:30:18 GMT From: csus.edu!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!cunews!mitel!testeng1!stanfiel@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu (Chris Stanfield) Subject: Little Joe I have seen references to the above by Wales Larrison and Henry Spencer. At first I thought that it meant the Apollo escape system, but Henry's post makes me think that it is something else altogether, seemingly to do with the qualification program for Apollo. So my question is, what is (was) Little Joe? Chris Stanfield, Mitel Corporation: E-mail to:- uunet!mitel!testeng1!stanfiel (613) 592 2122 Ext.4960 We do not inherit the world from our parents - we borrow it from our children. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 90 06:17:22 GMT From: wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@decwrl.dec.com (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: The Space Plane In article yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi) writes: > ...speculation that a good bit of the X-30 work may be a duplication of > "black" programs which already have flying hardware). > >Are you talking about Aurora (a rumored Mach 5 (?) reconnaissance >aircraft), or about something different? Yes. :-) >According to Aviation Week, if Congress approves building the X-30 in >1993, the first flight would be in 1997, and the first >single-stage-to-orbit test would be in 1999. >So, I suppose the relevant questions are: >(1) Will the X-30 keep to its schedule? Very unlikely, in my opinion. Support is too weak and money is too tight. The project is rather ambitious, and there will be no shortage of technical difficulties to provide excuses for delay. >(2) After a successful orbital flight, how long will it take to >develop a passenger or cargo carrying version? A decade, minimum, given that it will be a government project. (There is no other significant market.) This just might be shortened if the X-30 works so well that a relatively simple derivative can be useful. Don't bet your shorts on it. >(3) Will the resulting passenger/cargo vehicle be commercially viable, >or will it be another shuttle ... Given the newness of the technology, I'd be very surprised to see the first generation of X-30 derivatives commercially viable. A side issue, but not insignificant, is that much of the technology will probably be classified for a long time to come. Especially if it's successful. -- "I don't *want* to be normal!" | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology "Not to worry." | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 90 01:40:40 GMT From: van-bc!ubc-cs!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!mcdphx!citek.mcdphx.mot.com!hbg6@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Subject: Re:Save our Shuttle data? >There's been a lot of speculation on what it would take to (re) build a 1990 >Apollo command module or a Saturn V, and the typical answer seems to be "You >can't; they burned/lost/destroyed/buried the plans." >Maybe we need Leonard Nimoy to do a "In Search of" the Saturn V specifications. Why can't the remaining pieces on display here and there simply be reverse engineered? Or are they non-functional models? John ..................................................................... reply to 'from' address; hbg6@citek.mcdphx.mot.com NOT the 'sender' line address! Someday my sysadm will decide this is a 'real' problem. :-) ..................................................................... All opinions expressed are mine and not Motorolas, their loss. ..................................................................... ------------------------------ Date: 16 Nov 90 13:07:27 GMT From: wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!execu!sequoia!memqa!titan.kingston.ac.uk!me_s420@decwrl.dec.com Subject: Psych effects + Space M+A+X Two things .... 1) Pyschological Effects of Moonwalking A month ago I posted request for info on this topic as I was hoping to disprove the urban myth that 'the Apollo astronauts all became very religous or alcohlics'. (No arbitary judgement of religous people or alcoholics implied, folks) I only had two bits of mail (a belated 'thanks' to Mike M. and Mary S.) on this subject and a post from Nick Watkins, so the subject is still wide open. So, if you know something MAIL ME ! I will summarise to the net if I get enough information. 2) Space M+A+X I already have the 'Entertainment Version' of this. Final Frontier Software ahve just sent me a 'Christmas Catalog' plugging new, improved version V3.1, 'The College Version'. Does anyone out there have any feedback on V3.1 ? Is it significantly better ? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Welch Janet: cswelch@kingston.ac.uk Kingston Polytechnic Bitnet: cswelch%kingston.ac.uk@uk.ac U.K. 'Two men look out through the same bars: One sees the mud, and one the stars.' F.Langbridge -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 90 21:11:29 GMT From: bacchus.pa.dec.com!rust.zso.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!star.dec.com!hughes@decuac.dec.com (Gary Hughes - VMS Development) Subject: Re: Little Joe In article <5393@testeng1.misemi>, stanfiel@testeng1.misemi (Chris Stanfield) writes... >I have seen references to the above by Wales Larrison and Henry >Spencer. At first I thought that it meant the Apollo escape system, >but Henry's post makes me think that it is something else altogether, >seemingly to do with the qualification program for Apollo. So my >question is, what is (was) Little Joe? > >Chris Stanfield, Mitel Corporation: E-mail to:- uunet!mitel!testeng1!stanfiel >(613) 592 2122 Ext.4960 >We do not inherit the world from our parents - we borrow it from our children. You are close. The Little Joe II rocket was used to test the Apollo LES under various flight conditions. The LJ I did the same for the Mercury LES. Both were built out of existing off-the-shelf solid rocket motors clustered. Different combinations were used for different tests. gary hughes @star.dec.com ------------------------------ Date: 21 Nov 90 01:02:52 GMT From: snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!mel.dit.csiro.au!dmp.csiro.au!sfy@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Shane Youl) Subject: Total Solar Eclipses Can anyone tell me if there will be any total solar eclipses visible during the next 12 months and suitable locations for viewing. ADVthanksANCE -- ____ _____ ____ ____ Shane Youl / \ / / / \ / \ CSIRO Division of Mineral Products / /_____ / /_____/ / / PO Box 124 Port Melbourne 3207 / / / / \ / / AUSTRALIA \____/ _____/ / / \ \____/ Internet : sfy@dmp.CSIRO.AU Phone : +61-3-647-0211 SCIENCE ADVANCING AUSTRALIA ------------------------------ Date: 21 Nov 90 18:34:26 GMT From: uvaarpa!murdoch!COLE%SAMSON.PHYS.VIRGINIA.EDU@mcnc.org Subject: Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red? In article <1990Nov21.015643.14727@ariel.unm.edu>, john@ghostwheel.unm.edu (John Prentice) writes: >If the red color of the shuttle was due to the passage of light through >the atmosphere, as has been suggested by people on the net, then why >haven't people been seeing this phenomena regularly over the last 30 >years? Certainly other spacecraft have been as large (or larger) such >as Skylab, Mir, etc... One would think that if the explanation is as >simple as just illumination by light passing throught the atmosphere, >it would be a common phenomena.> It is visible under certain conditions, particularly through binoculars or a telescope. With the unaided eye the effect is rather subtle because the reddening is accompanied by a dimming and it is harder to judge the color. On NASA Select payload bay TV camera views, however, the reddening is very apparent as the orbiter passes into the Earth's shadow. My interpretation of the unusual coloration seen is that it was probably the shiny radiator panels on the payload bay doors reflecting the setting sun. ------------------------------ Date: 19 Nov 90 13:22:21 GMT From: research!phacb@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (A.C.Beresford) Subject: Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red? ------------------- I was wondering too, i think you might find the angle between path of atlantis & terminator was fairly small. In this case it seems a better hypothesis. As a long term observer of lacrosse, i can say with some authority that it looks reddish at most sun-satellite-observer angles. I think I was one of first to remark on its distinct colour, which struck me as unusual in 30 years of satellite observing, though i gather rosat has similar colour. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 90 03:53:01 GMT From: rex!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!charlie@g.ms.uky.edu (Charlie Thompson) Subject: Congrats to Ted Molczan I picked up a copy of the Washington Post today and noticed that fellow satellite chaser Ted Molczan made the 'Around the Nation' column (Page A16 Monday, November 19,1990). Apparently Ted noticed something 'unusual' about the Shuttle and it's classified payload. The article suggests that the Shuttle crew may have had to rescue the spy satellite but NASA has remained silent on any possible problem. Nice going Ted...keep 'em honest. -Charlie Thompson WB4HVD ------------------------------ Date: 19 Nov 90 16:48:09 GMT From: unisoft!hoptoad!pacbell!pbhyg!aff@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Attila F. Finta) Subject: Re: Photon Engine In article <7$_^^Z#@rpi.edu> jimcat@itsgw.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak) writes: > 11 Gigawatts? But the only place you can get that much energy is... >a bolt of lightning! Isn't this a line from "Back To The Future (Part1)"? Attila Finta bcr!pacbell!pbhyg!aff ************************************************************ ------------------------------ Date: 19 Nov 90 17:28:57 GMT From: att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uflorida!rex!rouge!dlbres10@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Fraering Philip) Subject: Re: Pity The Much Abused Shuttle In article <513@newave.UUCP> john@newave.UUCP (John A. Weeks III) writes: >I think that it would be safe to assume that destroying a shuttle in flight >would probably be an act of war... 1. The original poster had spoken about the shuttle as having utility as a utility vehicle. 2. We would probrably respond the same way as when the North Koreans captured the Pueblo, or when the Israelis nearly sank the Liberty. Absolutely nothing. ------------------------------ Date: 19 Nov 90 09:57:09 GMT From: mcsun!hp4nl!dutrun!dutlru1!dutlru2!wi@uunet.uu.net (Edwin Wisse) Subject: Re: LLNL Astronaut Delivery In article <2733@polari.UUCP> crad@polari.UUCP (Charles Radley) writes: > >+Why not let the free-flyer be the one to orbit without the thruster >+corrections, except for the ones necessary to maintain orbit, let the manned >+platform do the formation flying? >- >VERY heavy on propellant, current Freedom weight budget does not allow >for that amount of propellant consumption. Manouvering a 250 tons >ship takes a lot more propellant than for a 5 ton free-flyer. >Freedom has a sever weight problem, and that concept cannot be >accomodated. > So what? Why do these things have to fly in formation anyway? It is much easier to let the free-flyer drift where-ever gravity takes it and let it return under its own power when the time for maintenance has arrived. After all, why should it be near the station all the time? The free-flyer will not be visited when it is in operation and will not be maintained by an EVA crew from the Freedom, it will dock to Freedom or Hermes when the experiments have been concluded. The ESA free-flyer is planned to operate in this way. Edwin Wisse wi@dutlru2.tudelft.nl BITNET: vlrustc@hdetud1 ------------------------------ Date: 22 Nov 90 07:11:16 GMT From: tahoe!unssun!zielke@apple.com (John Zielke) Subject: Re: The Space Plane Question: there has been some talk about the Space Plane; so tell me, whats the difference between the Space Plane and the Shuttle? Is one intended to be a work horse while the other is a passenger ship? john zielke zielke@unssun.nevada.edu ------------------------------ Date: 20 Nov 90 19:45:03 GMT From: csus.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!src.honeywell.com!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!kksys!orbit!pnet51!schaper@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu (S Schaper) Subject: Re: STS 38 Observation Reports -- red? Could an oms type burn have been seen as the orange flash, and sunset projected on the shuttle the reddening effect, with the other sat having transfered? Or somebody shining a laser on Atlantis :-) ************************************************************************** Zeitgeist Busters! UUCP: {amdahl!bungia, uunet!rosevax, chinet, killer}!orbit!pnet51!schaper ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!schaper@nosc.mil INET: schaper@pnet51.cts.com ------------------------------ Date: 21 Nov 90 19:01:39 GMT From: att!linac!tellab5!balr!clrcom!rmartin@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Bob Martin) Subject: Re: Photon Engine In article <7$_^^Z#@rpi.edu> jimcat@itsgw.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak) writes: >In article CSVCJLD@NNOMED.BITNET (Jimmy Dean) writes: >> >> I read an article a few months ago about a laser driven directly >>from a nuclear reactor. (Sorry, I don't remember the name of the >>magazine.) Supposedly, it generated an 11 Gigawatt laser beam. Does >>anyone know anything about this? I figure it'd generate about 10 >>pounds of thrust. Would this be a useful rocket engine? > > 11 Gigawatts? But the only place you can get that much energy is... >a bolt of lightning! > > I think it could only get you going at about 88 miles per hour. (-: > I also read an article several years ago on this subject. The idea is to base the laser on the Ground. Your space craft has its rear end coated with a _thick_ layer of ablative (right word?) material. You pop the craft a few hundred feet into the air and then train the laser on its rear end. The material vaporizes and creates _lots_ of thrust. It also carries away the heat (Like an ablative heat sheild). The ship is OK as long as it has enough of the ablative to get it into orbit.... -- +-Robert C. Martin-----+:RRR:::CCC:M:::::M:| Nobody is responsible for | | rmartin@clear.com |:R::R:C::::M:M:M:M:| my words but me. I want | | uunet!clrcom!rmartin |:RRR::C::::M::M::M:| all the credit, and all | +----------------------+:R::R::CCC:M:::::M:| the blame. So there. | ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V12 #584 *******************