Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 05:16:29 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #353 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Tue, 23 Mar 93 Volume 16 : Issue 353 Today's Topics: Canada Space Program Clue-challenged rants COSMIC Catalog CRAF's budget Dust for Venus Dust Impacts and Interstellar Flight FLOX and methane Grand Plan Grechko in Chicago Just a little tap (was Re: Galileo HGA) Lunar Arctic, pressure, antifreeze (was Re: Lunar ice transport) Lunar ice transport Magellan Update - 03/19/93 Personal hygiene in space Space markets SSTO: A Spaceship for the rest of us (2 msgs) temperature of Lunar soil The Aluminium story............ Water Simulations (Was Re: Response to various attacks on SSF) (2 msgs) What happened to CRAF? 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 Mar 93 20:28:37 GMT From: INNES MATTHEW Subject: Canada Space Program Newsgroups: sci.space In article umsemen6@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Joel Semeniuk) writes: >I need information about the Canadian Space program. Does anybody know where >I can obtain information pertaining to jobs in the space program. If anyone >has any information that they can give me about who or where I can contact I >would really appreciate it. Thanks. > > > This from a want ad by the Canadian Space Agency in the paper a few months ago: Mrs. Nicole Paul-Hus Public Service Commission of Canada Guy-Favreau Complex 200 Rene-Levesque Blvd. West West Tower, 8th Floor Montreal, Quebec H2Z 1X4 This was the contact address in an ad looking for various kinds of managers to work for the Space Agency. This person might not know anything personally, but should be able to point you in the right direction. The Canadian Space Agency is indeed a difficult organization to track down; they don't even have a phone number listed in Ottawa. Hope this helps. -- Matt Innes ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 18:57:00 EST From: Tom <18084TM@msu.edu> Subject: Clue-challenged rants Dennis Wingo sez; >As for the clueless post that someone else made. I do this because this is >where our future is. I cannot help that the Szabos and others out there are looney toons and scream at the top of their lungs about their pet projects. Dennis, you sound threatened. The things I've been 'screaming' about, that I see intersecting with Allen, Nick, and others, to some degree, is opening space operations to market forces. How does this constitute a 'pet project'? Market means "Whatever you like", after all. >The human race is at a threshold and a choosing point. We can either turn >inward as the Jane Fonda's and Ted Turner's and their ilk want us to do and >turn our lives over to "those who know better" or we can turn outward and >take our future into our own hands as our ancestors have for thousands >of years. Do you not see the link between the 'Turner/Fonda ilk' and your support for centralizing goals and methods? They want to centralize, too. >of years. This network and the people who post here are for the most part >intelligent and have strong convictions: However there is a fatal flaw that >I see here and that is you never consider the other interests groups >views. Maybe I'm attributing an attitude toward you that I've misread, but support for the market is support for the consideration of other's views, with an eye toward extreme pragmatism. Why do you have a problem with that? (assuming I've read you right) >It is not that space is not relevant, it is >just that not one poster that I have seen on this net addresses their >issues within the context of the larger world. I disagree. Market issues are only concerned with the 'larger world'. Otherwise, MacElwaine would be rich! :-) >BUT I submit to you >readers that the manned space program has changed more lives for the better >than any self help program or psychciatrist (sp) in the world. I have seen >and met and work with students that from the age of 3 years old have dedicated >their lives to working in space. There is something to this if it can >bring forth this level of dedication, motivation, and effort that lasts from >babyhood to adulthood. This is why Space Station Freedom is ultimately >important. It is a symbol of what can be done, it is a beacon to light >the way for the children like myself and many many others who chose this >path from our earliest thoughts. Actually, it sounds like you are the one who is insulated. Many people are inspired by the works that humans can do. Just as many are radicalized, cycnicized, and pissed-off at how quickly NASA and other gov agencies can trash those works and dreams. FRED's a symbol of what can be done in 2 senses, which I've seen expressed both here and in 'the public at large': "Think how much we could have done if we spent the $$ better." And "Why aren't we doing what could be done, instead of useless, prestige-oriented missions?" In the context of NASA's history, combined with fabulous evidence of incredible technology and know-how, of course children will get infected with the space bug! NASA's history explains why so many think space is irrelevant, or over-priced for the return. >It is a faith that we will do good up there. What is that faith based upon? >Besides the technical promise that is held out, there is the fact that in >every new frontier that mankind has ever embarked upon, the sum total has >been the improvment of life for all mankind. Sure, but we aren't achieving a frontier with Plans, Goals, and Programs, a la NASA operations! >Take a look around, get off the terminal for a day or two and read the >papers. What other endevaour in this world holds out for a postive >future where individual freedom remains? Where you can do your best and >make a large contribution? A gov agnecy? >There are 100 billion stars in this galaxy. We are so arrogant to think that >all of the answers are here on the earth. From the earliest days of mankind >we have learned by looking upward not backward. All OUR answers are here on Earth! (for now :-) I agree we should look upward. But I think NASA can only look inward, based on it's earth-bound concerns, which dominate it's results: Politics, cover-your-hiney, how can we sell funding, pounds of paperwork. In the search for answers, why does NASA and their affiliates refuse the market option? If you really want new answers, act like it for crying out loud! >This is why I post about a plan an a lack thereof. With one exception by >a poster that is not a regular, all I have heard is the regurgitation of >peoples pet plans with no consideration on how these plans fit in with the >larger realm of mankind. >Come on out there, think about these things and post something. What about >me? Well..... just wait and see. C'mon Dennis! I have posted stuff, and you've ignored it! Here's my plan: Get NASA out of the way of Market forces. No subsidies for shuttle. No 'developing' things that others are already building with their own $$. No handholding WRT 'commercialization' or 'privatization' or whatever they call it: Actually sell the operations off, and let the buyer assume all liability. We've seen several governements around the world change radically in the last 5 years. No one will care if the US breaks the treaty that would prevent handing liability over. NASA should focus on resources. Find what's out there, and sell people on going up there and using it. R&D on processes would be nice, too, like vapor-deposition, for example. But get it out of operations. Why should NASA have a monopoly on operations? What do they have, as a gov agency, that the same people couldn't have, as a private group? -Tommy Mac ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom McWilliams | 517-355-2178 (work) \\ Inhale to the Chief! 18084tm@ibm.cl.msu.edu | 336-9591 (hm)\\ Zonker Harris in 1996! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 17:39:51 GMT From: "Adam R. Brody " Subject: COSMIC Catalog Newsgroups: sci.space stallcup@stsci.edu (Scott Stallcup) writes: > Could someone please post or mail me ordering information for > NASA's COSMIC software catalog. I need a phone number > and/or address to order a copy. > Thanks, > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Scott Stallcup (stallcup@stsci.edu) > Space Telescope Science Institute I can't find my catalog, but you might try Scott Clark at 404/542-3265. He's the assistand director. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 18:28:50 EST From: Tom <18084TM@msu.edu> Subject: CRAF's budget >>>I agree with you and there is nothing in the Grand Plan that contradicts >>>this. > >>What about cancellation of CRAF? Delay of Galileo? >CRAF was cancelled because it had overrun its budget massively, and Congress >was giving clear signals that this would not be tolerated. This had nothing >to do with the manned/unmanned wars. I have a quibble: FRED has overrun it's budget, but it lives. Why the 'selective prosecution', if it's not about manned/unmanned, or at least an effect of un/manned? -Tommy Mac ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom McWilliams | 517-355-2178 (work) \\ Inhale to the Chief! 18084tm@ibm.cl.msu.edu | 336-9591 (hm)\\ Zonker Harris in 1996! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 18:51:19 EST From: Tom <18084TM@msu.edu> Subject: Dust for Venus Gregso Vaux sez; >Will this proposal of putting dust >in orbit around Venus in order to cool the planet work? I am afraid >that over time, the dust will heat up and begin radiating infrared >light which may slightly help warm Venus. I don't think, however, >that this effect would be significant. Should I assume that because >no one responded to the dust proposal, that everyone thinks that >it will work? Venus's albedo is already pretty high. The dust that fell out from orbit would only decrease the albedo, increasing absorbtion. Maybe if you had some really reflective dust? Also, dust is an efficient converter of UV/optical to IR radiation, so that effect could be quite high. Plus, with dust in orbit, the venus-dust system will have a higher cross-section, catching more light than ever. -Tommy Mac ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom McWilliams | 517-355-2178 (work) \\ Inhale to the Chief! 18084tm@ibm.cl.msu.edu | 336-9591 (hm)\\ Zonker Harris in 1996! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 21:05:06 GMT From: "John S. Neff" Subject: Dust Impacts and Interstellar Flight Newsgroups: sci.space Is Interstellar Dust a Hazard to Interstellar Flight? To answer this question we need to know the impact rate per unit area per unit distance traveled by the spacecraft, and the relation between crater diameter and the mass and relative velocity of the dust particle. The impact rate is about one per square meter per kilometer if we use one interstellar dust particle in a cube 10 meters on a side for the number density. The number density of intestellar dust varies over a vary large range so this is a guess at the mean value. If I use a relation bewteen crater size and the mass and speed of the projectile based on older data there does not appear to be much of a hazard. I doubt that the relation I used is valid in this context. When a spacecraft strikes a dust particle with a speed > 2.5 km/sec there is a hypervelocity collision (i.e. the particle and the spacecraft act like liquids). Some of the material is splashed out of the target forming a micro-crater. At a some higher speed the particle and spacecraft act as a high temperature gas. This transition probably takes place at a speed less than 40 km/sec. I understand that it is possible to accelerate very low mass dust particles to speed as high as 100 km/sec in the laboratory, so it should be possible to estimate the speed needed to produce a high temperature plasma. Can anyone shed light on this subject? Furthermore how do the crater sizes depend on mass and velocity above and below the transition between liquid and gas production? If one has a relation between crater size and impact speed for the high speed case would it be valid to extrapolate to the very high speeds needed for interstellar flight? ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 21:54:18 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: FLOX and methane Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Mar22.115049.16820@ee.ubc.ca> davem@ee.ubc.ca (Dave Michelson) writes: > was powered by a combination of FLOX (fluorine and liquid oxygen) > and methane, two propellants chosen for their safe storability > over nearly a year in space before engine firing. > >I would have thought some sort of non-cryogenic/hypergolic propellant >would have been preferable. Can anyone shed light on what I'm missing? I'm sure that combination is hypergolic -- almost anything involving fluorine is. As for non-cryogenic, bear in mind that in *space*, "storable" and "cryogenic" are not incompatible; indeed, one of the design headaches with conventional "storable" propellants aboard spacecraft is making sure they don't freeze. In near-Earth space, an object that is carefully shielded against sunlight and Earth emissions can easily be kept at LOX temperatures. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 22:11:49 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Grand Plan Newsgroups: sci.space In article <21MAR199323071556@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: >>... "The Space Studies Board has found the cost growth >>in the Comet Rendezvous Asteroid Flyby and Cassini program to be very >>frustrating and difficult to understand." -- Louis Lanzerotti, chairman >>of NRC's Space Studies Board... > >... In fact, to quote the very same article you refer to: > > "if Congress had fully funded both spacecraft, they could have been > completed on time for the original price tag, but the savings of > designing a single frame for two spacecraft were lost when the comet > mission was cut". That is Fisk's opinion, not necessary widely shared. (For those who don't read Space News, the article was about Fisk's promotion to a non-management post, and about the question of whether he'd done a good job as management or not. The big question mark against him is cost bloat in projects like CRAF.) Lanzerotti doesn't seem to think the explanation is that simple. I'd also note that CRAF was attempting to "stay within budget" by shedding pieces as the overruns mounted. For example, the penetrator got dropped from the mission to save money. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 21 Mar 93 22:12:10 From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org Subject: Grechko in Chicago Newsgroups: sci.space BH>> Dr. Georgi Grechko, Cosmonaut Lecture Tour of the United States [long grueling itinerary which ends with:] Travel to Chicago, IL April 6 Other speaking engagements may be added. If Dr. Gretchko is scheduled for your area, call the local planetarium for mor information. BH>Various local National Space Society members, notably Jim Plaxco, have been hustling to set up speaking dates for Dr. Grechko: BH>Harper College, Palatine IL April 6 BH>Schaumburg High School*, Schaumburg April 7 BH>14th District Activities Ctr, Chicago April 7 BH>Museum of Science & Industry*, Chicago April 8 BH>Council on Foreign Relations, Chicago April 8 BH>================================= Folks, if you have a chance to see Dr. Grechko, don't miss it. He visited San Diego a few years, and was one of the more informative and entertaining speakers on space I have met. He is one of the few former Soviet cosmonauts who will answer *any* questions you ask about their space program. ___ WinQwk 2.0b#0 --- Maximus 2.01wb ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 19:46:40 GMT From: Anita Cochran Subject: Just a little tap (was Re: Galileo HGA) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1ofbm9INN8vl@access.digex.com>, prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: > Oh, the galileo engineering team deserves the Edison Prize for > their work in coping with a basically disasterous event. > The DSN improvements and the new coding schemes are terrific, > but I think 30% is a number placed on for PR purposes, not > in any way a real number. The imaging people get hosed, > the Fields people do okay, the Probe people do good. One must be careful in discussing the 70% figure here. The project has never claimed to save 70% of the data but to acheive 70% of the project goals. This is a very different statement. Also, though the number comes from the project office as Ron Baalke stated, it does not necessarily come from ALL of the scientists. I was at a briefing that Project Scientist Torrence Johnson made and he showed how they got the 70% figure. Some of the others in the room were atmospheric dynamics people and they argued his figures for that aspect of the mission were a little optimistic. The biggest hit to science will be the atmospheric dynamics stuff since this requires lots of images over time. The probe will lose virtually no science and right there that is a major goal of the mission so that goes a long way towards the 70%. Also, very little satellite science will be lost with most loss on Io time-resolved stuff. Particles and fields do pretty well. Actually Torrence said in some sense data compression is easiest in images because of the nature of the data and because it DOES come in large quantities so can be efficiently packed. The reason the HGA loss is not worse than it is is because of the excellent tape recorders and the plans to use these at various mission phases even if the HGA was alive. One can quibble with the exact number for the 70% but what they will be getting is quite impressive. -- Anita Cochran uucp: !utastro!anita arpa: anita@astro.as.utexas.edu snail: Astronomy Dept., The Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX, 78712 at&t: (512) 471-1471 ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 22:23:41 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Lunar Arctic, pressure, antifreeze (was Re: Lunar ice transport) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Mar22.213424.25572@sol.UVic.CA> rborden@uglx.UVic.CA (Ross Borden) writes: >I agree. I think the solution is to preheat the pipeline with steam, and use >hot water. The low thermal conductivity of the lunar regolith should keep >the water from losing too much heat. Are there any firm numbers on the >conductivity of regolith? 1.5-3.0 *10^-4 W/cm/K. There may be regional variations beyond that, we only have two data points (Apollos 15 and 17). -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 17:58:21 GMT From: Dave Stephenson Subject: Lunar ice transport Newsgroups: sci.space Since everyone is now talking about pipelines, how about electrolysing the ice at the pole, after all the Sunlight is continuous up there, and then building two pipelines one for the OX the other for the H2 and down at lunar base the gases supply fuel cells to produce water and provide electrical power during the lunar night. During the lunar day the H2 and O2 supplies would come in very useful for fuel and LSS, and I guess a good proportion of any lunar ice if found will end up being electrolysed anyway. -- Dave Stephenson Geodetic Survey of Canada Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Internet: stephens@geod.emr.ca ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1993 14:17:58 -0500 From: Pat Subject: Magellan Update - 03/19/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary In article shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes: >On the other hand, our C-47 Gooney Bird went to step 4, ending up at >Ole Miss. Of course we surplussed it because it had a nasty habit of >catching the left engine on fire, so how worth having it was is a >real judgment call. That's not a Bug, That's a Feature. In Flight, Port Side, Omni-directional Illumination and Convection heating system. pat ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 21:05:10 GMT From: "David L. Miller" Subject: Personal hygiene in space Newsgroups: sci.space In article drumhell@claudette.nrl.navy.mil (David Drumheller) writes: > > (1) What kind of backup systems do the current shuttle crews have for >handling human waste when the toilet fails? I presume they resort to the >old "shit mit" for fecal matter, and "motorman's friend" for urine. > I remember an interview with one of the astronauts aboard the shuttle when the tiolet failed. He said they had to get quite creative. He did not go into details, but "socks" were mentioned... -- ***************************************************************************** David L. Miller Internet: dmiller@beta.tricity.wsu.edu Systems Programmer/Network Analyst BITNET: MILLERD@WSUVM1 Washington State University Tri-Cities UUCP: ...!yoda!dmiller 100 Sprout Road Richland, WA 99352 Phone: (509)375-9245 ***************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 21:55:54 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Space markets Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1ojfi4$ltq@access.digex.com> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >The movie the Last Action Hero will be a sticker on an upcoming >Delta Launch. Actually, it's on the Conestoga launcher for Comet 1, I believe. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1993 14:40:45 -0500 From: Pat Subject: SSTO: A Spaceship for the rest of us Newsgroups: sci.space I think Dave Akin misses the Point. The DC-X is just that, an eXperimental prototype. I actually expect it to have some problems, and maybe have to go back to the shop at various times. Some of the manuevers, it will test, really make my stomach roll, but that's why it's unmanned. But I think Pete Conrad is up to flying her later in the program. Of COurse DC-X only has to have 1 Success. That is rapid Refurbishment. She may be a little heavy, but I imagine smart engineers can somehow work the mass fraction one way or another. Now if we had built some small scale shuttle prototypes before the STS, then we would have had a much better idea of what performance we could expect. pat ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 17:50:04 GMT From: Dave Stephenson Subject: SSTO: A Spaceship for the rest of us Newsgroups: sci.space henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >For those unfamiliar with the name, Hunter was chief engineer for Thor, >which eventually became Delta, and is the father of the current SSTO >project. Much of my technical-issues writeup was based on his "The SSX: >SpaceShip Experimental", revised draft, 11 March 1989. (Please don't >ask where you can get a copy -- I don't know.) >-- Contact the High Frontier Organisation for a copy of its special edition of the Journal of Practical Applications in Space. Winter 1992 I think. This is a streamlined version of its Space 2000 Prime report and contains articles by Hunter, Glaser, Graham, a review panel on the SSTO concept and, er ehem, Me (they needed a little speculative light relief). Price $10.00 (I think) Try shadow@bix.com for the editor. -- Dave Stephenson Geodetic Survey of Canada Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Internet: stephens@geod.emr.ca ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 22:16:57 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: temperature of Lunar soil Newsgroups: sci.space In article rcs@cs.arizona.edu (Richard Schroeppel) writes: > Note that that's at a depth of 1m. Our measurements go down only 2-3m > ... but it looks like the temperature rises at something > like 1.3K/m... > >That's 1300K/km, right? Selenothermal power! Well, assuming that we can extrapolate one set of measurements across three extra orders of magnitude, which is, shall we say, not recommended procedure! The very low thermal conductivity of the regolith would also interfere with attempts to do anything like this, unless you can find more conductive stuff deeper down. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1993 14:23:00 -0500 From: Pat Subject: The Aluminium story............ Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.materials If aluminum was noted during roman times, then it indicates it needed even less of a technology base to extract then I guessed. I guess Bronze age technologies could reach it. Probably the Indians or Arabs also had identified aluminum. IT probably wasn't useful though given it's nearly difficulty to work. Plus other metals were much cheaper toe xtract and much better in their character. pat ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 22:07:46 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Water Simulations (Was Re: Response to various attacks on SSF) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1oifie$up@umd5.umd.edu> dakin@ssl.umd.edu (Dave Akin) writes: >Wait a second, how do you figure that? The Solar Max >grapple (STS 41-C) failed due to a mechanical failure, but >when the satellite was captured, the servicing procedure went >smoothly... The Palapa/Westar rescues were >complicated by lack of configuration control on the satellites, >so the interface bars didn't fit as planned. The Leasat repair >was completely nominal, the GRO contingency only took a >few seconds of actual "hands-on" to get the boom deployed, >and the Intelsat rescue went fine as soon as the satellite was >captured. In other words: "once the hard parts were out of the way, the easy parts went as planned". That's what I said: three out of four with serious problems, if we neglect the GRO contingency. Leasat went fine. The rest didn't. Of course, if you excuse every one of the problems as a special case that will never happen again, then everything's fine. Except that the evidence so far rather suggests that those special cases are going to keep on happening. I agree that the EVA planners can do a good job on some things. The point is that the boundaries are poorly defined. It is hubris of the worst kind to say that this will not cause problems for the space station (or to say that it will!), because we *don't know*. This is not a trivial problem. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 93 21:57:23 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Water Simulations (Was Re: Response to various attacks on SSF) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1ojede$k20@access.digex.com> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >SO Henry, you think Mechanical counterpressure suite may now >be ready for use? ... Ready for use? No. Deserving more investigation? Definitely. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 18:20:36 EST From: Tom <18084TM@msu.edu> Subject: What happened to CRAF? Thanks for the answers about what happened. To recap, paraphrased, of course: >>>>CRAF was cancelled because it had overrun its budget massively.... >>>CRAF/Cassini did not overrun its budget. Congress cancelled CRAF because >>>they wanted to same some money in the short term... >>NASA proposed to do both for $1.6G. By the time CRAF died, Cassini alone >>was going to cost that much... >>The CRAF/Cassini budget did go up, but only after Congress underfunded >>the mission which caused a 2 year extension. >>JPL had kept their end of the bargain, Congress did not. But I don't really >>blame Congress for all this. I blame the budgetary process. I does not OK, so the bottom line is, congress caused CRAF/Cassini's budget to go up, after which, congress decided it was too expensive. Typical, I'd agree, but is there any way to change this situation in the context of a gov agency? -Tommy Mac ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom McWilliams | 517-355-2178 (work) \\ Inhale to the Chief! 18084tm@ibm.cl.msu.edu | 336-9591 (hm)\\ Zonker Harris in 1996! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 353 ------------------------------