From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #035 To: Space.Digest.Readers@isu.isunet.edu Precedence: bulk Space Digest Fri, 24 Jul 92 Volume 15 : Issue 035 Today's Topics: ESA Future Facility Tours GPS for satellite positioning Imminent demise of comsats predicted (for the dozenth time :-) Sat->Ground Optical Communications? Star Trek and public perception of space/science/engineering Whales (SETI) Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "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: 22 Jul 92 16:25:47 GMT From: clements@vax.ox.ac.uk Subject: ESA Future Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Jul21.160023.20724@en.ecn.purdue.edu>, dominop@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Philippos A. Peleties) writes: > In article <63941@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: >>In article henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >>>In article <63877@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: >>>>Well, yes, but then they don't have independent acess to space, which was one >>>>of the reasons ESA was founded in the first place. Sort of pointless. >> The Arianne series would still be running with or without Hermes. There's your independent access to space. >>>Not at all. Just make Russia an ESA member. It *is* a European country! >> >>Well, geographically it is partly in Europe, (it's as much Asian as >>European, if we want to get picky) but socially, economically, and >>culturally it is pretty far off...I can't see them getting into the ESA, >>especially with all the petty bickering and infighting among the member >>nations. >> > The point is this: ex-Soviet (Russian/Ukranian) technology most likely > will be used in some rather substantial capacity and some combination > of the above countries will become ESA members whether they are geographically > located in Europe or not. Geography never mattered anyway. Canada's a member of ESA and ESA's launch facilities are in south america. ESA's just a name, and that never stopped politicians before... -- ================================================================================ Dave Clements, Oxford University Astrophysics Department ================================================================================ clements @ uk.ac.ox.vax | Umberto Eco is the *real* Comte de dlc @ uk.ac.ox.astro | Saint Germain... ================================================================================ ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 24 Jul 1992 08:45:13 CET From: TNEDDERH@ESOC.BITNET Subject: Facility Tours Newsgroups: sci.space Sorry, but I haven't followed the full story, what's about JSC and White Sands? Regards -Thorsten- ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jul 92 05:33:43 GMT From: Charles F Randall Subject: GPS for satellite positioning Newsgroups: sci.space I've been told that there are _no_ satellites that use GPS for their positioning data. I find this hard to believe. I've seen advertisements for the Monarch GPS receivers in 'Space News'. Does anyone know of an actual satellite that uses GPS for it's positioning data? Or part of it's positioning data? It is my understanding that the current level of GPS is only capable of providing lat. and long. information and in the future, they plan to incorporate elevation. Is this correct? Finally, does anyone know if crew members of the Shuttle have taken up a hand held GPS unit? Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Randy Charles F. Randall IV | _ | "Are you kidding? I study Aerospace Engineering | == \---------.., | from crisis to crisis!" Iowa State University | ==___-----_____> | -anonymous student cfrandal@iastate.edu | _____b________d___ | <== ascii space shuttle ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jul 92 09:19:25 GMT From: Nick Szabo Subject: Imminent demise of comsats predicted (for the dozenth time :-) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <20831@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL> slb@suned1.UUCP (Shari L Brooks) writes: >As an aside. The value (or rather, usefulness) of COMSATs is decreasing, not >increasing; also, they are getting more expensive relative to the superior >communications offered by fiber optics. The second point is valid for point-to-point communications, but the first is false. Wall Street is bullish on space communications. Comsat stock is near its all-time high, and large amounts of new capital are going into mobile-communications ventures like American Mobile Satellite Corp., Alpha Lyracom, European/Loral Globalstar, Motorolla/Lockheed Iridium, Orbital Sciences Corp. Orbcomm, and even more $billions are going into foreign ventures. The mobile and broadcast functions of comsats are not being replaced by fiber, and are expanding far faster than the point-to-point market is moving to fiber. The "unused capacity" Gary keeps harping on has always been a normal part of the comsat business; backups are necessary because of the unreliable nature of launch services. Both the builders and operators are making money despite that constraint, but costs would come down even farther, and the market expand more quickly, by making launchers more reliable. For a successful, $multi-billion space program that pays for itself, comsats sure get dismissed a lot. In my more derogatory moments, I start thinking that some fans of other parts of the space program can't stand success. :-) -- szabo@techbook.COM Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks Public Access UNIX and Internet at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400, N81) ------------------------------ Date: P From: Charles F Randall Subject: Sat->Ground Optical Communications? Newsgroups: sci.space Date: 24 Jul 92 05:23:51 GMT Article-I.D.: news.1992Jul24.052351.12502 References: <9207221207.AA29101@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> <1992Jul24.022700.4040@ke4zv.uucp> Sender: USENET News System Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA Lines: 29 Source-Info: Sender is really news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU I'm looking for references concerning optical communications systems for transmitting data from a low-Earth orbiting satellite to a ground station. I know that optical communications systems are typically used for sat->sat comm. systems and can typically achieve approximately 300 Mbits/s data rates. I also know that the atmosphere causes considerable problems when attempting sat->ground optical communication. It is my understanding that this limitation is the reason that the optical communication systems are currently only applied to sat->sat. However, I have heard that the US Navy uses (sometimes?) an optical communication system from sat->sub. I also heard that this can be done even with the submarine under the polar ice caps. I'm wondering if there are currently any NASA funded research projects concerning sat->ground optical communications. Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, -Randy Charles F. Randall IV | _ | "Are you kidding? I study Aerospace Engineering | == \---------.., | from crisis to crisis!" Iowa State University | ==___-----_____> | -anonymous student cfrandal@iastate.edu | _____b________d___ | <== ascii space shuttle ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 07:48:46 GMT From: Colby Kraybill Subject: Star Trek and public perception of space/science/engineering Newsgroups: sci.space In article <13200@pogo.wv.tek.com> bobt@pogo.wv.tek.com (Bob Tidrick) writes: > >it alone!" We have no business disturbing something which may one day evolve >into a more complex form. However if nothing is found than it is a mear rock >and we have dibs. Wait a second. Just by existing on *this* planet do we disturb the way everything else evolves. By your logic, we should halt our existance on Earth. -- Colby Kraybill Space and Planetary Image Facility University of New Mexico ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jul 92 06:28:48 GMT From: Nick Janow Subject: Whales (SETI) Newsgroups: sci.space rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace) writes: > Whales are _not_ intelligent in any significant sense of the word. If they > were, they could prove it in about 30 seconds, by any number of means (e.g. > whistle the prime numbers, *-* *-*-* *-*-*-*-* etc. - for that matter just > whistle the numbers from 1 to 10). In fact, if they were intelligent, since > they were physically quite a lot tougher than the whaling ships of the 18th > and 19th centuries, they could have developed tactics to defeat them (e.g. > several whales surround a whaling ship and clobber it, rather than all the > whales trying to dive, and the ship gets one of them). That doesn't prove that they are not intelligent. They could have reasons for letting men kill them; reasons that they understand but we don't. Look at all the absurd things humans do in the name of religion. Aliens judging humans by a few religious fanatics might decide that humans aren't intelligent. :) I'm not arguing that whales are intelligent. However, your argument simply isn't valid for disproving intelligence. -- Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 035 ------------------------------