Date: Fri, 17 Jul 92 05:02:37 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #009 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Fri, 17 Jul 92 Volume 15 : Issue 009 Today's Topics: apollo 10 Energy from Dirt! (was Re: Space Power) Fate of Magellan Operations (was Re: Magellan Update - 07/16/92) (2 msgs) FTL drives Interplanetary communications relays Looking gif horse in mouth Mir diary pt.1 Need Testers for MS Windows Astronomy Program (3 msgs) Propulsion questions (2 msgs) Solar Power Satellites (2 msgs) Space Transportation Infrastructure Costs (Was Re: Inter Space Transportation Infrastructure Costs (Was Re: Interstates) UFO-pic from Phobos2-probe posted ! Visual acuity for MS (2 msgs) Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu" (on Internet). If you are on Bitnet, you must use a gateway (e.g., "space%isu.isunet.edu@CUNYVM"). Please do **NOT** send (un)subscription requests to that address! Instead, send the message "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), RICE::BOYLE (SPAN/NSInet), UTADNX::UTSPAN::RICE::BOYLE (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17 Jul 92 05:33:19 GMT From: John Roberts Subject: apollo 10 Newsgroups: sci.space -From: 3001crad@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Charles Frank Radley) -Subject: Re: apollo 10 -Date: 16 Jul 92 16:50:13 GMT - Nobody seems certain of the origin of "Mascons", they might -be massive buried meteorites. Relatively thin layers of lava (slightly more dense than the surrounding material) are thought to be the cause of the positive gravity anomaly mascons. Apparently modeling them as surface phenomena rather than buried meteorites fits all the observed data. The main "mascons" are therefore the maria and the other large filled impact craters. (As mentioned in my previous post, there are also "negative mascons".) John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 21:22:18 GMT From: Sherwood Botsford Subject: Energy from Dirt! (was Re: Space Power) Newsgroups: sci.space Goody. 20 Kg chunks of this and that moving at 10^4 km/sec or so. Stay out of the way of these. One could ruin your day for sure. Of course there's lots of room to miss... Seems to me that using the moon/asteroids as a source of kinetic/potential energy is superfluous. You already have an energy density of 2 Kw/m^2 in the form of sunlight. Blowing a polymer bubble a Km in diameter, and then boiling a pound of aluminum inside with an appropriate nozzle gives you a giant christmas tree bulb silvered on one half. Spherical aberation limits the focus to about 100m, but that 100 m circle has an energy density of .2 MW/m^2. Can you say industrial strength heating? Besides, you want to use asteroids and lunar regolith as raw materials. Figure the worth of a 1 Km asteroid firstly as just iron. Then figure it out as raw material in LEO. The latter is in the trillions of bucks. (So lets snag Icarus next time around... ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 92 21:25:04 GMT From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey Subject: Fate of Magellan Operations (was Re: Magellan Update - 07/16/92) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Jul16.180311.4412@news.arc.nasa.gov>, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT > July 16, 1992 [troubles with a spacecraft transmitter] > 7. Magellan's objective of obtaining a full cycle of gravity > data during Cycle 4 is unaffected by the transmitter > concerns because only the carrier signal is required. Yeah, but is there money for this in the budget? I'm unclear on what happened after the attempted "cancellation." "Do you know the asteroids, Mr.Kemp?... Bill Higgins Hundreds of thousands of them. All wandering around the Sun in strange Fermilab orbits. Some never named, never charted. The orphans of the Solar higgins@fnal.fnal.gov System, Mr. Kemp." higgins@fnal.bitnet "And you want to become a father." --*Moon Zero Two* SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jul 92 13:50:12 GMT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Fate of Magellan Operations (was Re: Magellan Update - 07/16/92) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Jul16.152504.1@fnalo.fnal.gov>, higgins@fnalo.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes... >In article <1992Jul16.180311.4412@news.arc.nasa.gov>, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: >> MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT >> July 16, 1992 >[troubles with a spacecraft transmitter] >> 7. Magellan's objective of obtaining a full cycle of gravity >> data during Cycle 4 is unaffected by the transmitter >> concerns because only the carrier signal is required. > >Yeah, but is there money for this in the budget? I'm unclear on what >happened after the attempted "cancellation." The Magellan project is funded through May 1993 and this includes Cycle 4. The question is will Congress fund the project for $50 million for a three year extension or turn off the spacecraft? ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Most of the things you /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | worry about will never |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | happen. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 92 18:58:26 GMT From: Gary Coffman Subject: FTL drives Newsgroups: sci.space In article <66410001@acf3.NYU.EDU> fink@acf3.NYU.EDU (Howard Fink,Ed Site,83422,_) writes: >The Lensmen series used an inertialess drive. Somehow, the ship lost >its inertia, and a reaction drive sped the ship to the limit of heating >caused by skin friction with the ether. Ships were streamlined and >refrigerated to go faster. I always liked this method, it was so Victorian. It also presented some pretty problems in weapon design. Gary ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jul 92 02:31:36 GMT From: John Roberts Subject: Interplanetary communications relays Newsgroups: sci.space -From: dong@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Don M. Gibson) -Subject: Re: Interplanetary communications relays -Date: 16 Jul 92 16:58:36 GMT -Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin, Texas -gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes: ->True, but I would like to belabor the obvious for just a while longer. ->A relay at Jupiter orbit for a Saturn mission would still require a -this assumes that jupiter and saturn are in conjunction. if they aren't, -then it is *real* dumb to put a relay satellite around jupiter for -a saturn mission. That's why I said "for a few years of every Jupiter orbit". They don't have to be exactly in conjunction. As others have pointed out, DSN is so good that such a relay (long distance to both the Earth and space probe) built with current technology wouldn't really give any advantage. John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 92 23:12:35 -0500 From: tffreeba@indyvax.iupui.edu Subject: Looking gif horse in mouth Newsgroups: sci.space Does anybody know if you can get gifs on discs (or send them a disc with a wish list) from Ames? I am ftp-ing them through school but it takes _forever_ to get them onto my machine via Kermit. I am losing valuable sack time, what with the time differences and all. Thanks in advance, Thomas Freebairn TFFREEBA@INDYVAX.IUPUI.EDU ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jul 92 05:42:21 GMT From: TIMOTHY FREER Subject: Mir diary pt.1 Newsgroups: sci.space MIR DIARY Pt.1 (Feb86 to Jul89) ------------------------------- This is the first in a series of 'Salyut' diaries that I will be presenting. The purpose of these is that they will provide readers with an accurate reference, which lists all major events surrounding Soviet/CIS space station activities since 1977. This first diary lists major events involving the Mir space station during it's first three years of manned operations. This period begins with the launch of the core module in February 1986, and ends with the four month gap in manned activities during mid 1989. Listed are all launches to Mir, all dockings, port transfers, space walks, undockings, and re-enries, that occured during this period. All dates are in GMT , and are reasonably accurate. If you have any corrections, please post them to me with your sources. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mir diary pt.1 (Feb86 to Jul89). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1986 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19 FEB Mir launched by Proton rocket into 172 x 301km orbit at 51.6 degrees inclination. 06 MAR Mir established in its 332 x 342km operational orbit. 13 MAR Soyuz T-15 launched with Leonid Kizim and Vladimir Solovyev aboard. 15 MAR Soyuz T-15 docks with the extreme forward port. 19 MAR Progress 25 launched. 21 MAR Progress 25 docks with the rear port. 17 APR Mir's orbit adjusted to match Salyut-7's - the two laboratories are now flying in formation at 4000km separation to avoid radio- interference. 20 APR Progress 25 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn up. 23 APR Progress 26 launched. 25 APR Progress 26 unable to dock because of problems with Mir's radio- communications system. 26 APR Progress 26 docks with the rear port. 04 MAY Mir's orbit is lowered, causing it to catch up with Salyut-7. 05 MAY Soyuz T-15 undocks, carrying Kizim and Solovyev across to Salyut-7. 21 MAY Soyuz TM, an updated design of the Soyuz T craft, launched on an unmanned test mission. 23 MAY Soyuz TM docks with the extreme foward port. 29 MAY Soyuz TM undocks. 30 MAY Soyuz TM re-enters unmanned. 22 JUN Progress 26 undocks. 23 JUN Progress 26 directed into the atmospere to burn up. 25 JUN Soyuz T-15 leaves Salyut-7 with Kizim and Solovyev aboard. 26 JUN Soyuz T-15 docks for a second time with the extreme forward port. 16 JUL Soyuz T-15 undocks and re-enters with Kizim and Solovyev aboard. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1987. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16 JAN Progress 27 launched. 18 JAN Progress 27 docks with the rear port. 05 FEB Soyuz TM-2 launched with Yuri Romanenko and Alexsandr Laveikin aboard. 07 FEB Soyuz TM-2 docks with the extreme forward port. 23 FEB Progress 27 undocks. 25 FEB Progress 27 directed into the atmosphere to burn up. 03 MAR Progress 28 launched. 05 MAR Progress 28 docks with the rear port. 26 MAR Progress 28 undocks. 28 MAR Progress 28 directed into the atmosphere to burn up. 31 MAR Kvant-1 module, carrying the Rontgen astrophysical observatory, launched by Proton rocket. 06 APR Kvant-1 arrives, but a problem on its final approach to Mir causes the docking to be postponed. 09 APR Kvant-1 links-up with the rear port, but an obstruction in its docking unit prevents the two craft from being sealed together. 11 APR Romanenko and Laveikin make a 3 hour 40 minute spacewalk to examine the docking units of Mir and Kvant-1 - Laveikin removes 'a twisted piece of cloth', and ground control completes the docking by remote control while the cosmonauts look on. 12 APR Kvant-1's 'space tug' departs, leaving a new docking unit open at the rear of the complex. 21 APR Progress 29 launched. 23 APR Progress 29 docks with Kvant-1's rear port, creating the worlds first four-spacecraft link-up. 11 MAY Progress 29 undocks and is directed into the atmospere to burn-up. 19 MAY Progress 30 launched. 21 MAY Progress 30 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 12 JUN Romanenko and Laveikin make a 1 hour, 53 minute spacewalk to commence the assembly of a third panel of solar cells on the outside of Mir. 16 JUN Romanenko and Laveikin make a 3 hour, 15 minute spacewalk to complete assembly work on the solar panel. ?? JUL Prorgess 30 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 22 JUL Soyuz TM-3 launched with Aleksandr Viktorenko, Alexsandr Alexsanderov and Muhammand Faris (Syria) aboard. 24 JUL Soyuz TM-3 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 29 JUL Soyuz TM-2 undocks carring Viktorenko, Faris and Laveikin, returning because of 'an irregularity in his heart rhythm'. 30 JUL Soyuz TM-2 re-enters. 30 JUL Soyuz TM-3 is transfered from Kvant-1's rear port to Mir's extreme forward port by Romanenko and Alexanderov. 03 AUG Progress 31 launched. 05 AUG Progress 31 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 21 SEP Progress 31 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 23 SEP Progress 32 launched. 26 SEP Progress 32 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 10 NOV Progress 32 undocks from Kvant, edocking 98 minutes later in a test of new fuel saving software for Mir. 17 NOV Progress 32 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 20 NOV Progress 33 launched. 23 NOV Progress 33 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 19 DEC Progress 33 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 21 DEC Soyuz TM-4 launched with Vladimir Titov, Musakhi Manarov and Alexsandr Levchenko aboard. 23 DEC Soyuz TM-4 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 29 DEC Soyuz TM-3 undocks and re-enters carring Romanenko, Alexsanderov and Levchenko. Romanenko sets new endurance record. 30 DEC Soyuz TM-4 is transfered to Mir's extreme forward port by Titov and Manarov. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1988. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 JAN Progress 34 launched. 23 JAN Progress 34 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 26 FEB Titov and Manarov make a 4 hour, 25 minute spacewalk to install an experimental solar cell on the third solar panel outside Mir. 04 MAR Progress 34 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 23 MAR Progress 35 launched. 25 MAR Progress 35 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 05 MAY Progress 35 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 13 MAY Progress 36 launched. 15 MAY Progress 36 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 05 JUN Progress 36 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 07 JUN Soyuz TM-5 launched with Anatoly Solovyov, Viktor Savinykh and Alexsandr Alexsanderov (Bulgaria) aboard. 09 JUN Soyuz TM-5 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 17 JUN Soyuz TM-4 undocks and re-enters carring Solovyov, Savinykh and Alexsanderov. 18 JUN Soyuz TM-5 is transfered to Mir's extreme forward port by Titov and Manarov. 30 JUN Titov and Manarov make a 5 hour, 10 minute spacewalk to commence repairs on the Kvant-1 module. 18 JUL Progress 37 launched. 20 JUL Progress 37 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 12 AUG Progress 37 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 29 AUG Soyuz TM-6 launched with Valery Lyakhov, Valery Poliakov and Abdol Muhamand (Afghanistan) aboard. 31 AUG Soyuz TM-6 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 05 SEP Soyuz TM-5 undocks with Lyakhov and Muhamand aboard. 06 SEP Soyuz TM-5 re-entry delayed 24 hours by retro-rocket malfunction. 07 SEP Soyuz TM-5 lands. 08 SEP Soyuz TM-6 is transfered to Mir's extreme forward port by Titov, Manarov and Poliakov. 09 SEP Progress 38 launched. 12 SEP Progress 38 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 20 OCT Titov and Manarov make a 4 hour, 12 minute spacewalk to complete repairs on the Kvant-1 module. 23 NOV Progress 38 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 26 NOV Soyuz TM-7 launched with Alexsandr Volkov, Sergei Krikalyov and Jean-Loup Chretien (France) aboard. 28 NOV Soyuz TM-7 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 09 DEC Volkov and Chretien make 5 hour, 7 minute spacewalk to install French instruments. First spacewalk by a French 'spationaut'. 21 DEC Soyuz TM-6 undocks and re-enters with Titov, Manarov and Chretien aboard. Titov and Manarov establish a new endurance record of 365 days in orbit. 21 DEC Soyuz TM-7 transfered to Mir's extreme forward port by Volkov, Krikalyov and Poliakov. 25 DEC Progress 39 launched. 27 DEC Progress 39 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1989. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 07 FEB Progress 39 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 10 FEB Progress 40 launched. 12 FEB Progress 40 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 03 MAR Progress 40 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 16 MAR Progress 41 launched. 18 MAR Progress 41 docks with Kvant-1's rear port. 25 APR Progress 41 undocks and is directed into the atmosphere to burn-up. 27 APR Soyuz TM-7 undocks and re-enters with Volkov, Krikalyov and Poliakov aboard. Mir left vacant. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- end. My next diary will be Mir pt.2, which will list major events involving Mir from Aug89 to Jul92. In the near future I will also be posting diaries for Salyut-7 and Salyut-6 operations. Bye for now Tim Freer. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 22:33:45 GMT From: "Mr. 2030 on my GRE! " Subject: Need Testers for MS Windows Astronomy Program Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.windows.ms.programmer,sci.astro,sci.space,sci.edu,comp.ibm.pc.misc I have a problem: I was trying to respond to the post regarding testing for Windows software, and I replied, but I got a message back that said there is no such user as: ebergman@nyx.cs.du.edu so...what to do now? thomas ehardt tpe36878@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 23:20:57 GMT From: Steve Emmett Subject: Need Testers for MS Windows Astronomy Program Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.windows.ms.programmer,sci.astro,sci.space,sci.edu,comp.ibm.pc.misc So was mine! I'd like to be a tester Eric. Steve Emmett ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1992 03:19:53 GMT From: David Harper Subject: Need Testers for MS Windows Astronomy Program Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.windows.ms.programmer,sci.astro,sci.space,sci.edu,comp.ibm.pc.misc Add me to the list too, please - my mail bounced as well. How about another address? Dave Harper - Convex Computer Corp. E-mail address: 3000 Waterview Pky. Richardson, TX 75081 harper@convex.com (214) 497-4525 (W) (214) 727-4206 (H) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jul 92 21:42:35 GMT From: Joshua Bell Subject: Propulsion questions Newsgroups: sci.space In article tjn32113@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Thomas J. Nugent) writes: > Also, back >in the 60's the idea was actually proved (unintentionally I suspect) by >some weather satellite/balloon which was in orbit but had some aluminized >mylar balloon about 30 ft across. Can't remember what it was called, >but supposedly light pressure affected the perigee of its orbit by some >500 km! Dunno where this stands on the fact-fiction continuum (someone out there's bound to know for sure :), but I'd read/heard that one of the early Venus orbiters, out of fuel for stationkeeping, was reprogrammed with instructions to rotate its solar pannels to do limited solar sailing (solar tacking?) to maintain its orbit for a little while longer. Confirmation anyone? Joshua "Why is it you get formal when you're about to say something stupid?" / _ \ - Princess Leia |=(_)=| jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca \ / Academic Computing Services, University of Calgary ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1992 05:01:57 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Propulsion questions Newsgroups: sci.space In article <92Jul16.214235.18316@acs.ucalgary.ca> jsbell@acs3.acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell) writes: >one of the early Venus orbiters, out of fuel for stationkeeping, >was reprogrammed with instructions to rotate its solar pannels to >do limited solar sailing (solar tacking?) to maintain its orbit >for a little while longer. Confirmation anyone? This is a garbled account of Mariner 10's experience. M10 did Venus and Mercury flybys. It was reprogrammed to use solar-panel tilt to help with *attitude control*, to economize on fuel a bit. No spacecraft ever flown has had enough solar-array area to produce any useful amount of propulsive thrust from light pressure. -- There is nothing wrong with making | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1992 01:39:56 GMT From: "Phil G. Fraering" Subject: Solar Power Satellites Newsgroups: sci.space tjn32113@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Thomas J. Nugent) writes: >ralph.buttigieg@f635.n713.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Ralph Buttigieg) writes: >> to make it worse. Most people will live on Earth for some time to come, >> to have humanity denied the sight of the stars would be tragic. >> ta >Well, if you live anywhere near any half pint city, you are mostly denied >the sight of the stars. I live in Urbana, with the local population on >the order of 100,000. You have to go really far out of town to see more >than a dozen stars or so. That's what bothers me about all the people griping about light pollution from the SPS's. They probably won't be much brighter than Jupiter, and in most major cities, the light pollution will be so bad you'll be lucky to see the powersats to begin with. -- Phil Fraering pgf@srl0x.cacs.usl.edu where the x is a number from 1-5. Phone: 318/365-5418 "There are still 201969 unread articles in 1278 groups" - nn message "57 channels and nothing on" - Bruce Springsteen ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jul 92 05:39:46 GMT From: John Roberts Subject: Solar power satellites Newsgroups: sci.space -From: tjn32113@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Thomas J. Nugent) -Subject: Re: Solar Power Satellites -Date: 16 Jul 92 18:08:29 GMT -Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana -ralph.buttigieg@f635.n713.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Ralph Buttigieg) writes: -> to make it worse. Most people will live on Earth for some time to come, -> to have humanity denied the sight of the stars would be tragic. -Well, if you live anywhere near any half pint city, you are mostly denied -the sight of the stars. I live in Urbana, with the local population on -the order of 100,000. You have to go really far out of town to see more -than a dozen stars or so. Also, they'd just trace a narrow line across the sky, not cover it entirely. At GEO, I doubt they'd be anywhere near bright enough to wash out the sky entirely. Related question: are there any current GEO satellites that are bright enough to be seen by the naked eye? That would be interesting to see - one "star" stays in place while the other stars move by. John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jul 92 03:42:07 GMT From: Bruce Dunn Subject: Space Transportation Infrastructure Costs (Was Re: Inter Newsgroups: sci.space > Allen W. Sherzer writes: > Or consider this idea I have been tossing about inside my head: > > 1. The Feds form a non-profit company and for five to ten years invest in > it what they now spend on the Shuttle (about $5B/year). > > 2. The compnay invests the money in bonds with a target yeild of about 10%. > (Could be a bit more or less). > > 3. The compnay uses the interest to buy water (or whatever) delivered to > a useful orbit. They pay $1,000 per pound first come first served until > the interest income for that year runs out. (if nobody buys then the money > is re-invested and the market will be larger next year). > > In the first year they should be able to buy ~500,000 pounds of water and > an additional 500,000 pounds per year after. > > 4. Any year where more than 80% of the available funds are spent the offering > price of water to LEO will drop by 10%. > > 5. When the price drops to $250/pound or so the effort ramps down with other > launch service users taking the slack. > > 6. When the company is no longer buying launch services, the company is > liquidated and the principle returned to the government. > Add two steps: 7. Send up a solar powered electrolysis unit and a cryogenic storage tank farm. Sell the cryogenic propellants produced to those wishing to go beyond low earth orbit. 8. As the cryogenic propellants in orbit are exhausted, pay for replenishment water or matching amounts of hydrogen and oxygen from any source, including extraterrestrial sources. -- Bruce Dunn Vancouver, Canada Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jul 1992 05:10:16 GMT From: George William Herbert Subject: Space Transportation Infrastructure Costs (Was Re: Interstates) Newsgroups: sci.space sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes: >gwh@soda.berkeley.edu (George William Herbert) writes: >> If NASA were willing to look past the Shuttle, it would realize >>that it could redesign the station in 15klb chunks (ugh), develop the >>DC SSTO concept, and fly Freedom in it for less than it'll cost to >>fly it on Shuttle as is. >> Anyone for shooting the Shuttle program office people >>in the name of progress? 8-) > >Are you NUTS? > >Fly Russian! It's developed, it'll cut down on Shuttle flights for assembly, >and help out people who need it. ...and artificially depressed right now. If the Russian economy recovers from the current problems, the fair market price of their vehicles will be higher than current prices (less than Western, to be sure, but still significant). If they DON't recover, then their space program is gone for a long, long time. I.e. while supporting the Russians is a good idea (IMHO), it's NOT a long term solution to cheaper launch costs. SSTO in some form and NASP are both attempts to do that right. NLS/ALS/whateveritisthismonth is a halfhearted attempt. People should be prodded (with cattle prods if need be) into supporting these projects. -george william herbert gwh@soda.berkeley.edu gwh@lurnix.com gwh@uchu.isu92.ac.jp until 28 aug ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 92 23:22:50 GMT From: Stefan Hartmann Subject: UFO-pic from Phobos2-probe posted ! Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,sci.space,alt.paranormal,sci.skeptic Hi, I have posted the much discussed UFO-pic from the phobos 2 probe into alt.binaries.pictures.misc and alt.alien.visitors newsgroups ! Get the uuencoded JPEG pic from there ! It is the scanned picture of one of the last frames Phobos2 send to Earth before going malfunction ! It is an infrared exposure with 8 seconds duration, so it is overexposed, You only see a white surface, no surface detail ! The UFO is approximately 15 and 1/2 miles long ! Thanks to Don Ecker for making this publically available and also thanks to Kean Thomas, who send me a photocopy for scanning. Please send Your view about it to my email adress below. Could this be any CCD chip error, like someone on the net stated ? Best regards Stefan Hartmann. email to: leo@zelator.in-berlin.de -- ************************************************************* * Stefan Hartmann This is how to contact me: * * EMAIL: leo@zelator.in-berlin.de * * Phone : ++ 49 30 344 23 66 FAX : ++ 49 30 344 92 79 * ************************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 92 21:53:26 GMT From: Claudio Egalon Subject: Visual acuity for MS Newsgroups: sci.space Most of the literature that I have read about the visual acuity requirements for Missions Specialists, MS, says that the applicant must have a 20/100 uncorreted *however* last time that NASA put a pamphelet describing the requirements for MS (which was the last time when they were accepting applications for the astronaut corps) they were talking about a visual acuity of 20/150 uncorreted! Was it a misprint, a misinterpretation of mine or NASA indeed relaxed its requirements for MS??? Detail: I noticed that back in the 60's the visual acuity requirement for astronaut-scientist was more strict. Claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1992 04:58:49 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Visual acuity for MS Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Jul16.215326.9130@news.larc.nasa.gov> claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Egalon) writes: >Most of the literature that I have read about the visual acuity >requirements for Missions Specialists, MS, says that the applicant >must have a 20/100 uncorreted *however* ... The exact number is probably pretty much irrelevant. You'd have to be awfully good to overcome a handicap like poor vision. Remember, most of the rejected applicants meet the official requirements. Those requirements are just there to thin out the throngs a little bit. In practice, having *anything* wrong with you is almost an automatic disqualification -- there are so many other applicants who don't have that problem, whatever it is. -- There is nothing wrong with making | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 009 ------------------------------