Date: Sat, 30 Jan 93 05:11:27 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #095 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 30 Jan 93 Volume 16 : Issue 095 Today's Topics: Precursors to Fred (was Re: Sabatier Reactors.) Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger 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: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 13:35:22 GMT From: "Allen W. Sherzer" Subject: Precursors to Fred (was Re: Sabatier Reactors.) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Jan27.191218.1@fnalf.fnal.gov> higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: >In article <1993Jan26.222349.29804@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: >> I assert that if the station fails because Spacelab spent the $$ which >> should have gone to proper integration testing then they will have a >> lesser degree of success. >This is an irrelevant bait-and-switch argument. You can't prove that >the Spacelab budget steals from Freedom's integration-testing budget. OK. I stand corrected. >If you want to have a discussion about integration testing, fine, but >that's not the subject here and I can't see how it connects to a >program of getting your experiments, and experimenters, ready to use >Fred's laboratories. The subject is if microgravity experiments are an important precursor to Fred. Since Fred could be built without ever conducting a single spacelab flight I don't think it can be called an important precursor. allen -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves | | aws@iti.org | nothing undone" | +----------------------137 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jan 93 13:43:44 GMT From: "Allen W. Sherzer" Subject: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle In article shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes: >I've seen at least one person call the deaths of the astronauts a >great tragedy; here in the flight test community, this is not a >widely-held belief. Those seven people were doing something that they >_really_ wanted to do, something that they had volunteered for, waited >for, trained for. They knew and accepted the risks. Their deaths >were sad, of course, but it was not a great tragedy. At the time I was an engineer designing avionics at Texas Instruments and most of us felt just like this. It's too bad it happened but it isn't a national tragedy. Some of our engineers had been working on flight test for the F-111 radar where a few crews where killed. It's part of the job. The one exception I would make would be the teacher. I think the others where in the profession and had a realistic understanding of the risks involved and could make intelligent decisions regarding it. I don't think the teacher was. Allen -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves | | aws@iti.org | nothing undone" | +----------------------137 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+ ------------------------------ From: "Allen W. Sherzer" Newsgroups: sci.space Subject: Re: Clinton's Promises (space) in Charlotte Observer Message-Id: <1993Jan29.132235.10764@iti.org> Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow References: <21JAN199320444611@judy.uh.edu> <1993Jan27.021023.8557@pages.com> <1k6beeINNgtf@mojo.eng.umd.edu> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 13:22:35 GMT Lines: 56 Sender: news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU In article <1k6beeINNgtf@mojo.eng.umd.edu> sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes: >> [Kill SSF and buy a station instead] >Gosh, you been hanging out with Jerry Pournelle, huh? Jerry has a lot of flaws Doug but it wouldn't hurt you to hang around him a bit. He is somebody unhappy with the current stagnation in our space program and is willing to consider and work for solutions. >I got some questions for you: First of all, think of the last car you bought. You went in with some performance related requirements on price, fuel economy, power, looks, and other performance criteria. You didn't worry about what technology was used to cast the engine block or what kind of fasteners where used to connect the fuel line to the fuel injectors. When NASA builds anything, they are almost the opposite. They are more interested, it seems, in telling the contractor what fasteners to use then is wether the thing works or not. Under this proposal, buying stations would be no different from buying cars. > A) Who owns possession of the technology used to develop the station? The same as the technology used to develop your car: the contractor. > B) Who owns the data? That's like saying who drives your car. The contractor doesn't get to drive your car, you do. > C) How do you set the damned thing up without using goverment help > in the first place? Guess who owns all the big launch facilities. Commercial airlines work off of government owned airports and commercial launches happen from government owned spaceports. > D) Does it have to be a U.S. corp? What if I use off-shore tech, say > get the Italians into building my living modules? Up to the contractor and the buyer. >IF, in exchange for the prize money, the government gets rights to the >"science" without infringing on trade secrets, it might work. Of course they do. They own it. Allen -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves | | aws@iti.org | nothing undone" | +----------------------137 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+ ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 095 ------------------------------