Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from hogtown.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 ; Mon, 25 Feb 91 01:25:13 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Mon, 25 Feb 91 01:25:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #199 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 199 Today's Topics: Japanese Space Effort Re: tuning in on Hubble Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D NASA Radio Frequencies? Re: Japan's Space Industry Gaia Re: UN Moon Treaty Administrivia: Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to space+@andrew.cmu.edu. Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests, should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20 Feb 91 15:24:16 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!nss!Paul.Blase@handies.ucar.edu (Paul Blase) Subject: Japanese Space Effort Re. recent postings here concerning the Japanese space effort, here are some miscallaneous bits and pieces: (Aerospace America, March 1989, pp 12-18, "Japan broadens its aerospace interest") -"Work is progressing at NASDA's [Japan's National Space Development Agency] on design and development of a reusable orbital plane called HOPE." (Aviation Week & Space Technology, April 3, 1989, pp57,58) ("Japanese Refining Unmanned HOPE Orbiter for planned 1996 Launch") "The Japanese are planning to use their unmanned HOPE orbiter as a research development springboard towards the construction of a horizontal takeoff and landing, single-stage-to-orbit aerospace plane." "The HOPE (H-2 orbiting space plane) is planned to operate automatically, carry out unmanned cargo transport and land horizontally on a runway." "The Japanese also plan to use the vehicle to obtain experience in activities such as space rendezvous and docking...." ("Japan Explores Liquid Air cycle Engine For Future Rocket Propulsion Needs") "The Japanese are examining liquid air cycle engines to leapfrog the theoretical performance limits attainable with conventional chemical propellent rocket engines." "The liquid air cycle engine (LACE) is essentially a hydrogen/oxygen propellent rocket engine that uses atmospheric oxygen liquified during flight as an oxidezer." (Aviation Week and Space Technology, August 13, 1990, pp36-71) ("Japan Forging Aggressive Space Development Pace") "Japan's massive new H-2 launch facilities at Tanegashima Space Center illustrate the Pacific nation's commitment to an aggressive development program that will position it as a major space power in the 21st century." "The H-2, scheduled for first launch in 1993, will have a capability comparable to the U.S. Titan 34D and European Ariane-4 boosters." ("Japanese Accelerate Space Program for 21st Century") "Japan, already a major space power, has begun to gear its space program toward space station operations, development of an infrastructure for manned flight and the launch of spacecraft to the Moon, Mars, and Venus." "'Twenty years ago we were introducing technologies from the U.S. and trying to master those technologies,' Yamano [NASDA president] said. 'Over the last 10 years, however, we have developed our own technology based on what we learned from the U.S. 'Now going into the 21st century, our technology will enable Japan to explore the Moon and planets.'" "NASDA also is expanding its interests to planetary missions. Managers are seeking government approval to develop a 2-ton Mars orbiter spacecraft that would carry visible, near infrared and X-ray cameras to survey Mars from a 235-mi (378-km) orbit." "Some indicators of space support provided by Japanese industry involve: *Keidanren Space Activities Council--This powerful group, comprising 94 companies and trade associations involved in Japanese space development, has asked the Japanese government to double its $1.5 billion space budget to handle major new Japanese space programs.... *Joint government/corporate organizations--Since 1985 the Japanese have formed six new cooperative organizations involving contractors and government agencies. The new organizations have received over $6 million in government and corporate support. All of the new organizations are tied to MITI [the Japanese ministry of trade].... *Privatization moves--Two new Japanese corporations, founded by Japan's largest industrial contractors, banks and insurance companies, have been created to privatize large portions of Japan's space station activites and H-2 booster procurement and operations." ("Space Agency Considers Doubling Size of HOPE Unmanned Space Vehicle") "Japan is studying a plan to double the size of its HOPE unmanned spaceplane to a 20-metric-ton vehicle.... (continued) --- via Silver Xpress V2.26 [NR] -- Paul Blase - via FidoNet node 1:129/104 UUCP: ...!pitt!nss!Paul.Blase INTERNET: Paul.Blase@nss.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: 20 Feb 91 21:31:16 GMT From: bonnie.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!lethe!yunexus!ists!nereid!white@uunet.uu.net (Harold Peter White) Subject: Re: tuning in on Hubble In article <1991Feb20.173218.27276@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <1991Feb16.071104.1483@ms.uky.edu> ghot@s.ms.uky.edu (Allan Adler) writes: >>Is it possible to tune in on transmissions from the Hubble space telescope ? > >Yes and no. All the necessary information is probably available if you work >hard. Actually, you don't have to work that hard. Someone used one of the satellite dishes available at Saint Mary's University in Halifax to 'tune in' on the Hubble as it transmitted some image. I remember reading the article, probably from the Halifax Chronicle Herald, which stated this fella just wrote NASA, asked them if he could listen in, and they wrote him back the needed info so he could do it. He then got permission from the SMU Physics Dept. to use their dishes and equipment. I've seen that stuff, the dishes are not much bigger than TV satellite dishes, and the equipment is basic, nothing advanced. If you're interested, I could probably find the exact reference, or maybe you could just write SMU and ask the Physics Dept. or the Astronomy Dept. about it. H. Peter White ISTS/SAL ------------------------------ Date: 24 Feb 91 12:25:15 GMT From: dftsrv!amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov!packer@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer) Subject: Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D In article <21217@crg5.UUCP>, szabo@crg5.UUCP (Nick Szabo) writes... > Here is a list of important 20th-century technology > advances that most greatly impact space travel today, and > what kinds of people or groups developed them: > > * Airplane (bicycle shop) > * Computer (many small groups in universities & corporations) > * Liquid-fuel rockets (physics professor on a farm) > * Nuclear fission (German university research lab) > * Transistor (Bell Labs) These may have been discovered or invented as stated, but in the case of the computer and fission, the government got interested soon enough so that it's probably impossible to say what would have happened with respect to their =development= if the government hadn't intervened. With rocketry though, if I remember the history, we know what happened until the (German) government got interested: nothing. ------------------------------ Date: 24 Feb 91 20:30:58 GMT From: magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!tosh!starta@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (John Starta) Subject: NASA Radio Frequencies? I am looking for the various radio frequencies used by NASA. Is there a list somewhere that I can FTP, or does anyone have a list that they can send me? I recall someone posting the frequency used at Huntsville, but I am looking for Houston and Florida (CC). Looking forward to some comments. John -- John A. Starta Internet: tosh!starta@asuvax.eas.asu.edu Software Visionary UUCP: ncar!noao!asuvax!tosh!starta AOL: AFA John; CompuServe: 71520,3556 ------------------------------ Date: 25 Feb 91 03:47:51 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!crg5!szabo@uunet.uu.net (Nick Szabo) Subject: Re: Japan's Space Industry In article <217.27C3A53D@nss.FIDONET.ORG> Paul.Blase@nss.FIDONET.ORG (Paul Blase) writes: >>>Japanese companies also seem to have more of a long-term vision with >>>regard to space development. I've heard that Shimizu has plans for an >>>orbital space station (for tourism), a lunar base, and a Mars base, >>>and that Ohbayashi has plans for a lunar mining complex. > > NS> The U.S. also has "plans" for this space mythology, for what it > NS> is worth. No profitable corporation in either country is > NS> spending serious money for any of this. > >WRONG!!! The Japanese ARE spending serious money on the subject. They >intend to MAKE A PROFIT!!!!!!!!! (at our expense). Questions: * What amount are they in fact spending? * What to they intend to charge for what kind of space flight, and do they have a market study? * What do they intend to mine? To whom do they intend to sell it, for what? And comments: * launch costs and space station costs must drop over an order of magnitude for unsubsidized space tourism to be viable, according to a market study I done by a tourist company in the early 80's. (I forget the specifics, but they specialize in unconventional tourism like visits to Antartica and the like). * No exportable deposit has been found on the Moon * No space mining technology exists, and developing it is not a trivial problem The Japanese know this, and from what I can tell there is no official funding or support for Moon or Mars bases. Japanese research _is_ very interested in today's practical applications (consumer electronics, launching satellites, etc.) Manned spaceflight (except for Japan's token contribution to Fred) is considered fringe "lunacy" in Japan. This strikes me as similar to the 60's and 70's in the automotive business -- while GM and Ford were making large, polluting gas-guzzlers and had their heads in the clouds, the Japanese were striving to make more practical, efficient, clean cars with many small, incremental improvements. I hope our aerospace industry fares better than Detroit.... -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com "What are the _facts_, and to how many decimal places?" -- RAH ------------------------------ Date: 24 Feb 91 19:24:10 GMT From: emanon.cs.jhu.edu!arromdee@umd5.umd.edu (Kenneth Arromdee) Subject: Gaia This is getting pretty far from sci.space. Note the followup-to line. (Though of course if you get the group via digest, you might not have any choice....) >>For instance, automobiles >>-- use energy >>-- experience growth (by performing functions for humans, in exchange for >> which the humans replace parts) >>-- reproduces (an automobile factory is a place for reproduction of >> automobiles; just because it's external doesn't mean it's not reproduction. >> Plus, automobiles play a part in maintaining the very economy that makes >> it profitable for automobile factories to work in the first place). >Remember, I posted this so someone could get a (probably very limited, simple >and non-technical) understanding of the GAIA hypothesis. If you want the REAL >understanding (I.e. nitty-gritty, super jargon-filled version) there are lot's >of books on the subject (I haven't found the intuitive kind yet). If you want >the easy, down-to-earth kind, grow up on a farm. >But I believe that the biosphere (the tao?) is alive, so I will defend it: >Second, to qualify as reproduction, some material from the parent must be moved >to the body of the offspring. A seed would be the minimal case (not including >the questionable case of a virus). DNA, at the least, would be required. By >this defention, Gaia's potential reproduction fits, while the car anology does >not. To qualify as growth, material that the organism takes into itself must >be remade into parts of the organism. Interesting. So if someone invents a Star-Trek type transporter, and transports someone by reconstituting them from atoms available at the destination, mankind can spread through the solar system without Gaia being alive, since no material from the Earth is used in the process? I doubt you meant this. You also seem to suggest that sterile humans are not alive, since they cannot reproduce. (Of course, other humans reproduce, but then other machines build cars....) >I.e. you are what you eat. Cars do not >make spare parts out of gas and oil (food?)... Sure they do. Cars have many parts: doors, steering wheel, engine, gas tank, battery, gas tank contents, stored energy within battery. They cannot easily replace the first five without the aid of symbiotic humans, but by consuming gasoline they can replace the last two parts using material from their food source. >One less stringent defention that Gaia fits anyway: > - Possesses DNA (This is why a virus doesn't count) 1) This means that _some_ viruses do count. 2) This would mean that a test tube full of artificially synthesized DNA counts as alive too. (You could object that the DNA must be a blueprint for the organism containing it, but then Gaia no longer fits your definition.) -- "This theory of yours -- that painful memories can be surgically removed..." "I can't share details... one of my colleagues might steal my idea." --Brenda Starr, 12/25/90 Kenneth Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm; INTERNET: arromdee@cs.jhu.edu) ------------------------------ Date: 25 Feb 91 10:02:41 GMT From: munnari.oz.au!yoyo.aarnet.edu.au!sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au!levels!etssp@uunet.uu.net Subject: Re: UN Moon Treaty yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi) <9102202032.AA00483@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> writes >Yes, this treaty would have killed private enterprise in space -- if >it had been ratified. Fortunately, the L5 Society came to the rescue >and convinced Congress NOT to ratify the Moon Treaty. In fact, >according to NSS literature, no major nation has ratified the Moon >Treaty. This is without question the single most important action >taken by a pro-space organization. It's reassuring to know that a >group of space activists could triumph over the political power of the >UN in this matter. The countries that have ratified the Moon Treaty (formerly known as the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies) as of 1989 are Australia Austria Chile Netherlands Pakistan Philippines Uruguay The Moon Treaty entered into force on 11 July 1984 and those countries who have signed are obliged to follow it. Those countries that havn't signed are not obliged to follow the Moon Treaty. In the tables I have, the following countries had an `Xu' next to them for the Moon Treaty. Unfortunatley, I do not know what Xu means. Perhaps it means ratified but unsigned. France Guatemala India Morocco Peru Romania For those of you unfamiliar with the Moon Treaty, here are some notes from the International Space University Space Policy and Law notes on the Moon Treaty. The Moon Agreement of 1979 Opened for signature: 18 Dec. 1979 Entered into force : 11 Jul. 1984 1. The Agreement applies to the moon and other celestial bodies within the solar system, other than the earth. Reference to the moon shall also include orbits around or other trajectories to or around it (Article 1); 2. The moon shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes (Article 3); 3. States Parties shall take measures to prevent the disruption of the existing balance of the moon's enviroment (article 7); 4. The moon and its natural resources are the "common heritage of mankind". The moon is not subject to claims of appropriation. Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor natural resources in place become the property of any State, international intergovernmental or non- government organisation (Article 11); 5. When the exploitation of the moon's natural resources become feasible, States Parties undertake to create an international regime to govern such exploitation (Article 11 (5)); 6. The main purpose of the international regime are: (a) the orderly and safe development of the natural resources of the moon; (b) the rational management of those resources; (c) the expansion of opportunities in the use of those resources; (d) equitable sharing of the benefits derived from those resources. 7. With the exception of Articles 17 to 21, reference to States shall include international intergovernmental organisations if the organisation has declared its acceptance of the rights and obligations of this Agreement and a majority of its members are Parties to both this Agreement and the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. -- Steven Pietrobon, Australian Space Centre for Signal Processing, School of Electronic Engineering, University of South Australia, The Levels, SA 5095, Australia. steven@rex.sait.edu.au ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #199 *******************