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 01:51:35 -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 01:51:30 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #201 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 201 Today's Topics: Re: Terraforming, sun shield Re: Pioneers 7 & 8 Update - 02/11/91 Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D Japanese Space Effort, II Re: Japan's Space Industry space news from Jan 7 AW&ST 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: 24 Feb 91 21:16:06 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!watmath!watdragon!watyew!jdnicoll@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (James Davis Nicoll) Subject: Re: Terraforming, sun shield In article <91055.151757GILLA@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> "Arnold G. Gill" writes: > > Well, then, do what happened to the Earth -- get a bigger planetoid. The >big Earth impact was supposed to be Mars-sized -- you might even get a moon >for Venus out of it. If we are terraforming Venus, do we need Mars for >anything anymore? :-) > I bet that the Post Smash Venus wouldn't be terraformable for a long time as we bags of tainted water measure time. Besides, Mars is a perfectly *nice* planet as it is; why destroy it to perhaps slightly enhance the sewer that is Venus? Remember, we'd still have to Tform the sucker. Besides, I bet it takes less energy to strip off Venus' atmosphere than it does to move Mars from 1.5ish AU to .7 AU :) Ah, why not 'just' set up lots and lots of surface based 'rockets', and jet the atmosphere away at very high velocities? You might change the rotation rate *and* dump the excess gas at the same time. Very high is defined as at least Solar Escape Velocity; jetting 89 atmospheres of CO2 into the inner system might be seen as pollution :) James Nicoll ------------------------------ Date: 25 Feb 91 04:41:36 GMT From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!csri.toronto.edu!wayne@apple.com (Wayne Hayes) Subject: Re: Pioneers 7 & 8 Update - 02/11/91 In article <1991Feb23.042803.3404@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > > PIONEER 7 & 8 STATUS REPORT > February 22, 1991 > Attempts to command the >spacecraft were unsuccessful. Three attempts were made at an uplink power of >18 kW. Telemetry received during the pass is being analyzed to evaluate the >communications subsystem. At the next tracking opportunity the uplink power >will be increased. I don't quite understand this. Does "telemetry" require any active participation by the spacecraft? I would have thought that in order to know precisely where the craft is (that's what telemetry is, right?) you would need a signal coming from it. If that's the case, what is the problem? Is it just mosying along saying "HERE I AM!" but not responding otherwise? -- "You ask me what I think about war and the death penalty. The latter question is simpler. I am not for punishment at all, but only for the measures that serve society and it's protection." -- Albert Einstein Wayne Hayes INTERNET: wayne@csri.utoronto.ca CompuServe: 72401,3525 ------------------------------ Date: 25 Feb 91 03:20:51 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!crg5!szabo@uunet.uu.net (Nick Szabo) Subject: Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D In article yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi) writes: [More examples of efficient, shorter-turnaround private R&D; notes government funding of many university projects] >Bringing this back to space exploration, maybe a step in the right >direction would be to JPLize the other NASA centers, by having them >administered by universities and companies with proven records of >excellence in research, while remaining funded by the government. This is an _excellent_ idea. Wish I'd thought of it! My guess is that this would entail a shift from engineering and administration towards university-style scientific projects (which would be in line with Augustine Commission reccomendations). It would also provide for healthy competition between labs, as well as cooperation and an influx of new ideas. I can't see anything wrong with it as a direction to go; in its practical implementation it might face stiff resistance from the larger more centralized projects. Another source of resistance will be geographical sites that have been picked for political reasons, and don't necessarily correspond to good university or corporate centers. Fortuneately, we have a different set of people from different states in power right now. If we can match them to good universities, perhaps we can get somewhere with this. Keep the great ideas coming! -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com Think long-term, act now. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Feb 91 15:41:38 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!nss!Paul.Blase@handies.ucar.edu (Paul Blase) Subject: Japanese Space Effort, II (I am placing this in a new posting for emphasis) (Aviation Week and Space Technology, August 27, 1990, pp72-83) ("Japanese Space Studies Focus On Stations, Lunar Bases, Launchers") "Japan's space agencies and major industrial companies have begun engineering studies on an autonomous Japanese space station, lunar base and other futuristic launch concepts for the 21st century. The studies are significant becouse they involve olmost all of the major companies that make up the industrial fabric of Japan - not just aerospace contractors. Many of the firms are multimillion dollar engineering and architectural companies. The pursuit of major 21st century space initiatives is not just being emphasized by the space agencies and contractors - it is formal Japanese government policy as laid out by the Space Activities Commission (SAC). SAC's space planning objectives are considered so important to Japan's future that they are one of the few technological areas specifically coordinated with the prime minister's office. [!] Those projects targeted by the SAC for basic and applied research with federal funds through the year 2000 include: *An orbital servicing vehicle.... *An orbital transfer vehicle or space tug.... *Development of advanced space technologies such as magneto-plasma-dynamic thrusters for use in deep space missions.... *Space factory concepts in which Japan would establish commercially viable materials processing plants in space." "Some of the more futuristic Japanese station, lunar base and launch vehicle studies are funded by the National Space Development Agency (NASDA)....Some examples are: *Autonomous Japanese space station.... *Japanese lunar base.... *Unusual launch concepts - Taisei Corp., a major Japanese construction company, has a concept that would involve building a launching structure [that would use] a 'linear motor car system' powered by superconducting magnets [to provide initial launch propulsion for a spaceplane orbiter]. Another big Japanese engineering company, Hazama-Gumi, Ltd., has done an engineering study of a different concept - an 'underground rocket launcher.' Hazama propooses to use compressed air to blow a Japanese manned spaceplane and its booster out of a mile-deep silo at Mach 1." "The activities of Shimizu Corp., the largest construction company in the world, also are indicative of how nonaerospace companies here are forming small space teams to prepare for 21st century markets. The company has studied how concrete will perform in a lunar environment and how concrete structures can be built on the Moon using lunar soil as a primary constituent." They are taking this stuff seriously folks, and they intend to make a profit out of it! By the way, notice the name of the Japanese space agency: National Space Development Agency. ----------- --- 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: 19 Feb 91 17:11:52 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!nss!Paul.Blase@handies.ucar.edu (Paul Blase) Subject: Re: Japan's Space Industry >>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). NS> I challenge anybody on the net to present a business plan -- NS> the market plan, R&D plan, projected financing and cash flows NS> will suffice -- for any one of the following: NS> * space station NS> * lunar base NS> * Martian base Coming up. --- 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: 25 Feb 91 01:33:10 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: space news from Jan 7 AW&ST Launch of the next Almaz radarsat slips to late Jan [I believe it has since slipped further] due to delays in testing of the data-relay system. Astro-1's Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope team, after first looks at UIT's film, are very happy: alignment on targets seems to have been excellent and stability during long exposures was adequate. Photograph of the Gulf area by moonlight, taken by the Astro-1 crew. Both Spot and Eosat say the remote-sensing market is starting to grow rapidly and they expect double-digit sales growth in 1991. Spot sales in the second half of 1990 exceeded total sales in 1989 [although the Gulf might perhaps have had something to do with that...] and their projected growth rate in 1991 is 30%. NASA to establish a Nuclear Propulsion Systems Office at Lewis, as a joint project with DoE and DoD, to resume work in advanced propulsion. [About %$#$%#$%ing time!!!] The official goal is a functional test engine by 2005 to support Moon/Mars efforts. Both nuclear-thermal [classical nuclear rockets] and nuclear-electric [nuclear-powered ion thrusters] are being considered, and the choice will be made late this decade. There will also be some funding for high-risk-high-payoff concepts like gaseous-core reactors. NASA's last formal nuclear-rocket project died in 1973. Japan's Superbird A, a nearly new large comsat, died Dec 23. On Dec 18 a valve either malfunctioned or was left open, and most of the oxidizer in the maneuvering system leaked off into space. The loss of attitude control made the satellite useless and it was shut down. Massive insurance claims are already being filed [with lawsuits to follow, I shouldn't wonder...]. This failure is especially nasty because Superbird B was lost in the Ariane failure last Feb, and a replacement cannot be launched before November. Space Communications Corp. is trying to lease transponders on other satellites in the interim, and JC-Sat has agreed to make capacity available on JCSat 1 and 2. Postmortem on the Dedicated Display Units that failed aboard Astro-1 shows identical failures, tentatively the result of debris clogging heat sinks. The debris is still being analyzed but "...it looked like it consisted of blue lint, human hair of several different colors, several colors of paint chips, a piece of food that looked like a piece of a peanut, and some clear bits, probably of glass and plastic". The source of the debris is not known, but Astro-1 spent six months waiting for launch due to hydrogen leaks and other problems, and there was a lot of activity aboard the orbiter meanwhile. [Also of note is that the DDUs reportedly have a history of overheating problems.] Pictures of Earth and Moon from the Galileo flyby Dec 8. Nothing remarkable. GAO says that NASA has not maintained its facilities adequately, and this has led to recent incidents that are starting to threaten major failures. Mission-critical facilities like the pads and the orbiter-processing building are in good shape, but other buildings are starting to suffer. KSC has had to install a net under the deteriorating ceiling of the VAB to keep concrete fragments from striking workers or equipment. Except for JPL, which is operated by Caltech, NASA centers are spending only about 1% of the replacement value of facilities annually on maintenance, and 2-4 times that is needed. (JPL spends 2.3%.) Minor electrical fire at KSC due to an error during improvements to ground power supplies in the Orbiter Processing Facility Dec 14. Discovery powered down 16 hours during troubleshooting. No damage to flight hardware, and no schedule impact is expected. Aerospace Ambassadors, of Huntsville, a nonprofit tour organization, signs with NPO Energia for exclusive rights to tours of Baikonur. AA has already done two test tours to Baikonur, which were allowed to visit facilities like shuttle pads and processing bays that are typically off-limits in the US. Weather-satellite picture of the Gulf area, showing thunderstorm activity that might affect military preparations. [Not seriously, as it turned out.] -- "But this *is* the simplified version | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology for the general public." -S. Harris | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #201 *******************