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 ; Thu, 9 May 91 02:12:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <8c-CV9u00WBw09b05U@andrew.cmu.edu> Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Thu, 9 May 91 02:12:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #512 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 512 Today's Topics: Galileo Status for 05/03/91 (Forwarded) SPACE Digest V13 #492 Re: Goddard's Small Explorers (was Re: space news from March 11 AW&ST) Re: SPACE Digest V13 #494 Re: Terraforming Mars? Why not Venus? POTENTIAL MAJOR SOLAR FLARE WARNING Want info. on SETI project??? Re: EXPLOSION over Los Angeles Re: Ethics of Terraforming (was Re: Terraforming Venus) 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: 6 May 91 18:47:07 GMT From: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Galileo Status for 05/03/91 (Forwarded) GALILEO STATUS REPORT May 3, 1991 The Galileo spacecraft early today entered safing mode, flight controllers have reported. In safing mode, the spacecraft dropped the speed of the digital data it sends to Earth from 1,200 bits per second (bps) to 10 bps. In addition, the spacecraft carried out the first of a series of Sun-pointing maneuvers designed to orient itself properly in relation to the Sun as part of the safing response. In safing mode this maneuver is automatically carried out every 12 hours. According to the flight team, data from Galileo show that the incident was caused when one of the spacecraft's two redundant Command & Data Subsystem computers detected a problem with itself, prompting it to take itself off-line. The other computer continued to function properly and carried out all intended operations. The incident appears similar to one March 26 when Galileo also entered safing mode. In both cases the spacecraft reacted exactly as intended. Flight controllers said the spacecraft is responding properly to commands and they expected to have the rate of data Galileo sends to Earth restored to 1,200 bps later today. The incident is not expected to have any permanent effect on the mission, and appears to be completely unrelated to the recent difficulty in deploying Galileo's high-gain antenna. Engineers are continuing to analyze antenna data and work with test equipment on the ground. ------------------------------ ReSent-Message-ID: Resent-Date: Mon, 06 May 91 17:40:22 EDT Resent-From: Tommy Mac <18084TM@msu.edu> Resent-To: space+@andrew.cmu.edu Date: Mon, 6 May 91 02:48:12 EDT Reply-To: space+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@msu.edu From: space-request+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU%CARNEGIE.BITNET@msu.edu Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #492 Comments: To: space+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU To: david polito <15432DJP@MSU.BITNET>, Tom McWilliams <18084TM@MSU.BITNET> Re: Galileo flyby of ateroids. Sure dropping Jupiter for a 'few measly asteroids' would seem to be a waste. But dropping Jupiter for the most abundant, accessible resources and plantetary science specimens in the Solar System is a FANTASTIC idea. Remember that, unlike the Planets, we can (eventually) study every gram of the Asteroids, given the time and determinantion. We will never study the interior of any of Jupiter's moons, let alone Jupiter. This not only means the Asteroids would make better scientific specimens, but also means we can recover all the heavy metals (i.e. gold, iron, lead, copper) that are forever hidden at the center of the other planets. And finding those heavy metals could be the incentive that private industry needs to get their butts busy building a space infrastructure. You would like to see a space infrasturcture wouldn't you? Tommy Mac Acknowledge-To: <18084TM@MSU> >Yes, but at present Galileo is a very lousy asteroid probe. You aren't going >to get much info from a bunch of 100 or so meters/sec flybys from a great >distance. Something a lot smaller than Galileo, with instruments more >appropriate to the task, could for less money than the replacement to >Galileo to Jupiter give us a lot better asteroid data. >Besides, for economic development, you'd want to look at the >near-earth asteroids. >Am I the only one here who understands that you won't get optimal >data using a planetary orbiter to look at asteroids? Sure, I understand it fine. I'm not suggesting that Galileo would even make a GOOD ateroid probe, let alone the best possible. But, IMHO, even a really lousy view of a large number of asteroids would be more valuable than any view of Jupiter's moons, for exactly the reasons I've given above, especially if a mal-function meant that we'd get a lousy view of Jupiter's moons, too. If I had the cash, (So you're the new Lotto winner?) I'd donate the whole wad to JPL, if they'd spend it on a decent Apollo Asteroid probe. I really want to see if this civilization is going anywhere or not, and and the rate things are going, if it doesn't start soon, I'll be dead before it happens (if it happens). What do we know about the 'stroids? Only what we've got from telescopes, spectroscopes, and inferences from meteors. They might be the stepping- stones :-) to the stars. I think we'd better spend our un-manned budget on them, before our 'launch- window' closes. P.s. - good joke in yer sig. Looking forward to more Tommy Mac "One giant leap for a man, One small step for Mankind." -What he SHOULD have said. Acknowledge-To: <18084TM@MSU> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 1991 11:04 EST From: AMINUS USQUE ---TSK TSK TSK X-Vms-Cc: U91_ARICARDO Can someone on this list tell me how to de-subscribe. Because I am graduating and moving on the better things than college. Thanks a lot. Alex if you can send me a note personally I would appreciate it so as not to screw up the LISTSERV's conversations. My address on BITNET is: U91_ARICARDO@SITVXA thanks a lot. alex ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 91 18:28:25 GMT From: snorkelwacker.mit.edu!think.com!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Goddard's Small Explorers (was Re: space news from March 11 AW&ST) In article yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi) writes: >Does anyone have any more details about the Small Explorer program? >Are these orbital satellites or lunar/planetary probes? ... I don't know much about the Small Explorer effort in particular, but the Explorer series in general has been aimed almost exclusively at near-Earth space science (note, this has a more specific meaning than just "science in space") and astronomy. There have been Explorer missions that got as far as the Moon, but that was for the convenience of their particular missions rather than for planetary exploration. The one exception was the improvised rethinking of the ISEE-3 mission, well after launch, to turn it into a comet mission after all attempts to get a US comet mission going as a new start had failed; ISEE-3 was a space-science mission by design, studying the solar wind, but happened to have instruments useful for studying a comet's tail and enough propulsion to get to Giacobini-Zinner (using some elaborate gravity assists). -- And the bean-counter replied, | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology "beans are more important". | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 91 18:28:42 EDT From: Tommy Mac <18084TM@msu.edu> Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #494 Re; Next step in space: I've become curious as to the general opinions of this group as to what should be done next in space. i.e. GOALS, rather than implementation. If you would like to participate in an informal survey, please send me a note telling me your idea of the best nest-step. Possibilities include but are certainly not limited to; MANNED UNMANNED Mars Mission (Base?) Asteroids (Near-Earth or Belt?) Moon Base Terra-formation experiments Space Station comet interceptions Biological Experiments R & D Alternate Propulsion Systems Interantional efforts Feel free to give a *SHORT* expalnantion of why. If you feel that a multi-pronged effort is necessary, please give no more than five (5) answers, with your favorite numbered 1, second, 2, etc. I'll post results when there are enough to make it interesting. Pleas send to: Tom McWilliams (Tommy Mac) 18084TM@MSU.BITNET Acknowledge-To: <18084TM@MSU> ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 91 20:02:27 GMT From: news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@uunet.uu.net (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Terraforming Mars? Why not Venus? In article <9666@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL> lev@slced1.nswses.navy.mil (Lloyd E Vancil) writes: >>Actually, not so. The space environment is much more controllable. It's >>the variations that kill you, not the constant and predictable part of the >>environment... > >Space is constant, A hard vacum and nothing to slow the solar wind -- >In space a hard vacum outside requires your vessel to be much stronger than on >the surface of a planet with a parial pressure ie Mars... Check out the specs for worst-case wind loads on structures on Earth, not to mention snow loads. Space structures are much thinner and lighter than structures on Earth, for the most part. Pressure loads are absolutely predictable, and suitably-shaped pressure vessels can be very light. The solar wind exerts no mechanical force worth mentioning. >In space a mechanical >failure of the containment (space craft or space station) makes people DEAD >now... Exactly the same is true on Mars. The surface of Mars is in vacuum for all biological purposes. Also all mechanical purposes; a pressure hull for the Martian surface has to be just as strong as one for space. >What Mr O'Neill was alluding to is the Eggs-in-one-basket syndrome... Sorry, wrong. Have you *read* what he wrote? I have. His conclusions had nothing to do with eggs-in-one-basket. The surface of a planet simply is an inferior location for an industrial civilization; open space is a better location in almost every way. Atmosphere and gravity are easy to arrange (in space) if you want them, but hard to get rid of (on a planet) if you don't. -- And the bean-counter replied, | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology "beans are more important". | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 91 12:10:28 MDT From: oler <@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU:oler@HG.ULeth.CA> (CARY OLER) Subject: POTENTIAL MAJOR SOLAR FLARE WARNING X-St-Vmsmail-To: st%"space+@andrew.cmu.edu" /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ POTENTIAL MAJOR FLARE WARNING /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ May 06, 1991 ATTENTION: Solar Region 6615 (located at S10W14 at 18:00 UT on 06 May) has developed a complex Beta-Gamma-Delta magnetic configuration. It has also experienced growth in both optical complexity and spot count. This region may be capable of producing a major solar flare at any time. So far, only low-level M-class flares have been observed, but the risk for a major flare from this region is now possible. If major flaring develops, this region may be quite capable of producing potentially strong proton activity. It is now well placed for producing potential terrestrial impacts and will be in an optimum position for producing proton effects (in tandem with flaring) within the next 48 to 72 hours. Major flaring is possible from this Region. Watch for possible major flare alerts. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ ------------------------------ Date: 5 May 91 07:40:55 GMT From: munnari.oz.au!uniwa!cc.curtin.edu.au!tlijy@uunet.uu.net Subject: Want info. on SETI project??? George Gallup Jr says fifty per cent of Americans share the belief that there are 'people somewhat like ourselves living on other planets in the universe'. The planetary Society, a privately funded organisation has been searching for 'logic electromagnetic wave pattern from the space' several years. They use a sophisticated scanner that looks for a coherent signal out of the jumble of electronic radiation bombarding Earth. The society is also collaborating with NASA in what promises to be the most thorough search yet. NASA is desgining equipment to scan signals from several of the world's largest radio telescopes. It is called SETI project (Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence) which is headed by Dr Michael Klein, manager of NASA's SETI project at JPL, Pasadena. The search will be in two phases. One will target specific stars within 80 light years of Earth. The other will survey the entirre sky. NASA expects to monitor 14 million channels simultaneously. Can someone from JPL, Pasadena shed some light on fresh development of SETI project. -- _Jason Y. Li =============================================================================== Satellite & Remote Sensing Res. Group |1) PSImail: psi%050529452300070::TLIJY Dept. of Applied Physics __________|2) Internet: TLIJY@cc.curtin.edu.au Curtin Univ. of Tech. |3) Bitnet: TLIJY%cc.curtin.edu.au@cunyvm.bitnet Perth, West. Australia |4) UUCP : uunet!munnari.oz!cc.curtin.edu.au!TLIJY <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People who have nothing to say are quickly tired of their own company. [Collier] ------------------------------ Date: 8 May 91 01:10:10 GMT From: pyramid!lstowell@hplabs.hpl.hp.com (Lon Stowell) Subject: Re: EXPLOSION over Los Angeles >In article <2907@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk> sfleming@cs.hw.ac.uk writes: > >>Tell me, is it true that you need a license to use a camcorder in LA >>these days ? > In article <1991May07.181052.12695@convex.com> cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes: >Not only that--there's a 7 day "cooling off period" before you can buy one. Yeah, and you can even get a "Camcorder Equipped" window sticker to put next to your NRA member sticker. >:-) ------------------------------ Date: 8 May 91 01:14:02 GMT From: pyramid!lstowell@hplabs.hpl.hp.com (Lon Stowell) Subject: Re: Ethics of Terraforming (was Re: Terraforming Venus) In article <1991May7.183026.9800@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: > >However, I must admit I don't understand this attitude. If Mars is a >lifeless rock what does it matter what we do with it? As to the evils >above, aren't they bad because they make it harder for life to continue? >If so, then wouldn't steps to promote life be good? Life continuance and even quality doesn't depend on terraforming. Halfdome is just a lifeless rock. Fisher Towers are just lifeless rocks. Has anyone considered making a "planetary park" out of Mars to preserve Mt. Olympus and some of the other formations? Just cause it is lifeless doesn't mean it is without beauty...and worth preserving. Go terraform an ugly planet. ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #512 *******************