Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 05:01:25 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #331 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Wed, 21 Oct 92 Volume 15 : Issue 331 Today's Topics: DCX Status? Federation gives a decent explantion to you (3 msgs) NASA Shake Up Rumor? (2 msgs) SAREX QSL information Weather satellites & preventing property damage Weekly reminder for Frequently Asked Questions list 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: 20 Oct 92 22:15:00 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: DCX Status? Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Oct20.025843.23155@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes: >The paper on the DC-X is facinating. Is the prototype going to be flown >manned or unmanned?? The DC-X demonstrator is unmanned. The DC-Y design is meant to be flyable either manned or unmanned. I would hope that test flights would be flown manned, given experience on programs like the X-15 which clearly showed the value of a human pilot when something goes wrong. (The X-15 people estimated that if the X-15 had been unmanned and nonredundant, the first 50 flights would have written off 15 of them. Simply adding a pilot, or adding redundant systems, wouldn't help very much -- the pilot isn't very useful unless he has alternatives, and automated redundancy does not cope well with unanticipated problems, like having the landing gear drop down at Mach 5 [this happened]. The big win comes from having redundant systems to provide options, and a pilot to figure out which ones to use.) >There is a reference to a "near-crash" during a shuttle landing... There actually were several such, depending on how you define the term. If you exclude equipment problems of various kinds -- which arguably are one-time things, to be expected in a craft that is still in early phases of flight testing -- then you're left with the Atlantis landing in April 1991 (the Gamma Ray Observatory mission) which came down 600ft before the official start of the runway because of a meteorologist calling the winds wrong. No harm done, because the runway in question has an underrun area just in case, but hypothetically combine it with other problems -- e.g., use of an emergency landing site without an underrun -- and it could have been fatal. If memory serves, the NRC report on shuttle launch frequency said that a landing accident is the single most probable cause of the next loss of an orbiter (although the crew might survive). -- MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 20 Oct 92 16:07:27 GMT From: Chris Kostanick 806 1044 Subject: Federation gives a decent explantion to you Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.skeptic,alt.alien.visitors I bet if you do the math, you find out a couple of things: (1) The wattage to get photon pressure that actually lifts something is much too high to generate. (2) At the power levels necessary in (1) even a 99.99% efficient crystal vaporises before you get off the pad. Keep trying though, enthusiasm is worth more than pessimism. Chris Kostanick ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 21:12:47 GMT From: Max Elliot Subject: Federation gives a decent explantion to you Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.skeptic,alt.alien.visitors Well done! The material in that piece sounds almost realistic. I love great sci-fi. The next issue to address is how much 'harnessed nuclear force' one could actually generate using said device, and where this force would be applied/dissipated. Would we mount massive arrays of these devices at the propulsion end of our craft? Would we be able to generate significant force for acceleration? How long would it take us to reach Alpha Centauri? Do these devices operate in neutral and reverse as well and can we have automatic transmission? Put me on the list for tickets to ride the first craft powered by Quantum Effect Injection Laser! I really love this stuff, I do. -Max ------------------------------ Date: 20 Oct 92 17:41:33 GMT From: Walter Wohlmuth Subject: Federation gives a decent explantion to you Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.skeptic,alt.alien.visitors In article <1992Oct19.130157.1@acad2.alaska.edu> asljl@acad2.alaska.edu writes: >For all of you who have been waiting for a decent explanation of the >drive/laser system, from the Federation, Here you are: >Lady Rhavyn Asljl@acad2.alaska.edu, questions, ideas comments ? >1 Federation Science Academy; > Engineering Research Text > > >A FEDERATION RESEARCH PROPOSAL: > Why is this article in sci.space? Although the author presents a rather long-winded description of his/her proposal it is shear fantasy. The cost of this project is immense in regards to equipment and work required. > >By the synthesis of several fields of scientific and engineering >specialty, the production of a new form of space drive may be >possible. This new drive will represent a literal quantum leap in >space propulsion technology, entailing as if does the reduction of >space drive components to a single 51 centimeter crystal. > Excuse me, a crystal 51 cm long! Silicon wafers are currently about 24 to 30 cm in diameter. GaAs wafers are about 15 to 20 cm in diameter. >By exponential expansion, the crystal >electric-magnetic fields should reach a strong-force counter reaction >by the time the electron-current flow has reached the end of the >crystal. The end product of this action should be an quanta level >release burst of energy along most known frequencies of the >electromagnetic wave-band. ( Harnessed nuclear thrust.) I don't quite understand this. The highest fields achievable in Si or GaAs I think are about 20 KV/cm. Which is equivalent to 5 V appearing across a 0.25 mm gap. These 'high' fields are present in your basic computer chip. Electron current is proportional to electron velocity, but electron current is only proportional to electric field at low fields. Applying a higher E field will cause the current to reduce because the electron velocity will drop in GaAs, negative differential resistance. Excessive E fields will disrupt the crystal lattice. > >1.) If a conversion ratio of 1.5 Amperes produce 1/2 a watt of light >( 1.5a=1/2w ) in a device 0.25 millimeters long, what will the >wattage output be at the end of a device 51 centimeters long? > Most certainly not in the kW range, lucky if > 10 W are achieved. >7.) Combining semiconducting/piezoelectric lattice structures with >super conducting/quasi-crystal ceramic tiling junctions in a >north/front - south/back hyper-magnetic domain; what will be the >effect on piezoelectric compression? > Introduction of acoustic waves, which will reduce electron velocity, and aid in non-radiative recombination. > >9.) Experiments in 1981 proved that intense, coherent light flashes >in an area of less then 1 millimeter lasted only ten-trillionth of a >second produced electric fields thousands of times more powerful then >those used in particle accelerators; Combined with the possible >hyper-magnetic fields generated by electric fields in motion, what >would the classification of the field generated after the process has >reached the theoretical 51 centimeters? > I would like a reference to this point. It would be interesting to see the date at which the federation thinks it will complete this process. Completion of this project in ten years is sheer fantasy. Walter Anthony Wohlmuth Tri-University Meson Facility (TRIUMF) Microelectronics Lab ------------------------------ Date: 20 Oct 92 21:03:42 GMT From: Curtis Roelle Subject: NASA Shake Up Rumor? Newsgroups: sci.space What's going on at NASA H.Q.? There are rumors floating about. Here is a summary of what I have heard, and maybe someone closer to the source would care to elaborate. #RUMOR ON# On Thursday, Administrator Goldin appointed Lennard A. Fisk, Office of Space Science and Applications (OSSA), to be NASA's new Chief Scientist (a position which has been vacant for a number of years). OSSA is headless and budgetless. Wesley Huntress, also from OSSA, is now heading the Mission From Planet Earth effort. #RUMOR OFF# Is there any furter information, clarification, or correction available? CWR (views are not those of my employer, their clients, or mine for that matter) ------------------------------ Date: 20 Oct 92 22:41:35 GMT From: Josh 'K' Hopkins Subject: NASA Shake Up Rumor? Newsgroups: sci.space roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle) writes: >What's going on at NASA H.Q.? There are rumors floating about. Here is >a summary of what I have heard, and maybe someone closer to the source >would care to elaborate. >#RUMOR ON# >On Thursday, Administrator Goldin appointed Lennard A. Fisk, Office of >Space Science and Applications (OSSA), to be NASA's new Chief >Scientist (a position which has been vacant for a number of years). >OSSA is headless and budgetless. Wesley Huntress, also from OSSA, is >now heading the Mission From Planet Earth effort. >#RUMOR OFF# The latest _Space News_ has the story on page 3. Lennard Fisk, Tom Campbell and Marty Kress of science, comptroller and legislative offices respectively have been reassigned. Kress is now cheif scientist in Goldin's office, and the other two are in the space station program. The article includes some quotes saying it was a bad idea, some saying it was good and one from Kress that suggests he's happy with the move. Goldin is apparently opening the competion for replacements to outsiders, which has some worried that NASA will be taken over by DoD and DoE types. -- Josh Hopkins jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu The views expresed above do not necessarily reflect those of ISDS, UIUC, NSS, IBM FSC, NCSA, NMSU, AIAA or the American Association for the Advancement of Acronymphomaniacs ------------------------------ Date: 20 Oct 1992 20:00:27 GMT From: Jay Maynard Subject: SAREX QSL information Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,sci.space,sci.space.shuttle [Forwarded for Frank Bauer, KA3HDO, AMSAT VP of Manned Space Ops --K5ZC] The Dayton Amateur Radio Association (DARA) has agreed to distribute the QSL cards for the STS-50 mission. Keith Baker, KB1SF from DARA will be coordinating this effort. All STS-50 QSL cards received at the ARRL, the Goddard ARC and at the JSC ARC should be forwarded to DARA at the following address: DARA Box 44 Dayton, OH 45401 For your convenience, I have compiled the addresses of the QSL distributors for the STS-35, 37, 45 and 47 missions. These are shown below. STS-35 Frank Bauer, KA3HDO 9609 Tuckerman Ct Seabrook, MD 20706 STS-37 Frank Bauer, KA3HDO 9609 Tuckerman Ct Seabrook, MD 20706 STS-45 Sterling Park ARC P.O. Box 599 Sterling, VA 22170 STS-47 Jay Apt, N5QWL 806 Shorewood Drive Seabrook, Texas 77586 Please remind all that seek a QSL card, that to receive a QSL, they need to include the QSO information (e.g. Date, time in UTC, frequency, mode) which documents the contact or listener report. In addition they MUST also include an SASE using a large, business sized envelope if they wish to receive a card. No cards will be distributed without the proper postage affixed or sufficient IRCs included. The status of the various cards and their distribution follows: Mission Launch Date QSL Distribution Status STS-35 December 1990 QSL distribution complete. STS-37 April 1991 All who included SASE's for STS-37 should have received their QSL by now. Please note that I am still receiving 1-3 QSL requests per day. STS-45 March 1992 QSL distribution just beginning. STS-50 June 1992 QSL currently being printed, QSL distribution expected to start in approximately 4-6 weeks. STS-47 September 1992 QSL layout should be starting. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the QSL distribution, please contact me at ka3hdo@amsat.org 73, Frank H. Bauer, KA3HDO -- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu | adequately be explained by stupidity. Vote for a REAL change on 3 November: Throw out the check-bouncing, tax-and-spend Democrat Congress! (obviously, not an opinion of UTHSCH) ------------------------------ Date: 20 Oct 92 22:25:11 GMT From: Josh 'K' Hopkins Subject: Weather satellites & preventing property damage Newsgroups: sci.space rdale@nyx.cs.du.edu (Robert P Dale) writes: >In article jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes: >> I think hurricanes are the only major natural >>disaster we can predict reliably enough that people take it seriously and far >>enough in advance to do much good. >I dunno... Major tornadic outbreaks are well forecast and publicized >usually, although the warnings aren't always heeded (Wichita/Andover 1991.) The latter is why I discounted them. Tornadoes appear on short notice and the ratio of area that gets warned to area affected is so large that most people don't take warnings all that seriously. When people do start to take a warning seriously is when they can see the sky getting ugly outside their window. Hurricanes on the other hand can be detected a week or more in advance. More importantly, when the forecaster says where it's going to hit, you believe it. The story I forgot to mention about Houston was the hurricane tracking maps free in every grocery store. Anyone who really wants to can plot the location of every tropical depression in the Carribean just by watching the news. -- Josh Hopkins jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu The views expresed above do not necessarily reflect those of ISDS, UIUC, NSS, IBM FSC, NCSA, NMSU, AIAA or the American Association for the Advancement of Acronymphomaniacs ------------------------------ Date: 15 Oct 92 21:32:07 GMT From: Jon Leech Subject: Weekly reminder for Frequently Asked Questions list Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.space.shuttle This notice will be posted weekly in sci.space, sci.astro, and sci.space.shuttle. The Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) list for sci.space and sci.astro is posted approximately monthly. It also covers many questions that come up on sci.space.shuttle (for shuttle launch dates, see below). The FAQ is posted with a long expiration date, so a copy may be in your news spool directory (look at old articles in sci.space). If not, here are two ways to get a copy without waiting for the next posting: (1) If your machine is on the Internet, it can be obtained by anonymous FTP from the SPACE archive at ames.arc.nasa.gov (128.102.18.3) in directory pub/SPACE/FAQ. (2) Otherwise, send email to 'archive-server@ames.arc.nasa.gov' containing the single line: help The archive server will return directions on how to use it. To get an index of files in the FAQ directory, send email containing the lines: send space FAQ/Index send space FAQ/faq1 Use these files as a guide to which other files to retrieve to answer your questions. Shuttle launch dates are posted by Ken Hollis periodically in sci.space.shuttle. A copy of his manifest is now available in the Ames archive in pub/SPACE/FAQ/manifest and may be requested from the email archive-server with 'send space FAQ/manifest'. Please get this document instead of posting requests for information on launches and landings. Do not post followups to this article; respond to the author. ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 331 ------------------------------