Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 12:29:12 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #414 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 3 Apr 93 Volume 16 : Issue 414 Today's Topics: Abyss: breathing fluids Another Kuiper Object Found? Atlas rocket question Dust for Venus Keeping Magellan Alive (Was Re: Mars Observer Update - 03/29/93) lie low netters! UFO's want you! Luddites in space Magellan Update - 04/02/93 Mars '94 Contract Mars Observer Update #2 - 03/29/93 nuclear waste (2 msgs) PBS space special Position at Tandem Computers (Cupertino CA) Tommy's Oil Why use AC at 20kHz for SSF power 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, 2 Apr 1993 22:03:29 GMT From: Ed McCreary Subject: Abyss: breathing fluids Newsgroups: sci.space I forgot that I had typed this in for a posting in rec.arts.movies. Enjoy. from Cinefex, issue 39. pg 46. Although fluid breathing had figured prominently in his seminal short story, it was not until "The Abyss" that James Cameron had occasion to fully research the subject. "We tend to associate underwater breathing only with fish, but essentially the lung and the gill use the same kind of oxygen membrane. Only the structure is different. Lungs are, of course, much less efficient than gills at getting oxygen out of fluids. To compensate for this evolutionary bias, loads of oxygen must be put into the breathing medium. Johannes Kyltra - who pioneered in the research - worked first with saline solutions, but later determined that fluorocarbon solutions would hold more oxygen. Once the oxygen bonding problem was solved, there was another barrier - how to get rid of the carbon dioxide. Someone came up with the idea of using a sodium carbonate material like the kind used in air scrubbers on submarines. It worked; but the substance was caustic, so it had to be put in an emulsion from where individual particles were isolated from the lung tissue. Unfortunately, significant research in fluid breathing has ground to a halt because the FDA will not approve the stuff for internal use on humans. Ironically, however, the same exact fluorocarbon emulsion is being marketed by 3M for electronic part deoxidizing." It was the commercially available product that would provide the setup for fluid breathing early in the film. In response to questions about the deep suit, one of the SEAL members demonstrates by submerging a pet rat into a small container of the liquid breathing medium. "We actually did that for real on the set. We picked up some of the 3M fluorocarbon emulsion, heated it up to rat body temperature and did the scene. The rat struggled for a few seconds and bubbles came out of his mouth and then he started to swim - breathing liquid! And you see it on the screen. The rat was fine - but obviously when it came time for Ed Harris to breath the same stuff, we simulated it." -- Ed McCreary ,__o edm@twisto.compaq.com _-\_<, "If it were not for laughter, there would be no Tao." (*)/'(*) ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 15:16:30 -0600 From: "Anita L. Cochran" Subject: Another Kuiper Object Found? Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space In article <1993Apr2.110744.27548@hemlock.cray.com> bobo@thejester.cray.com (Bob Kierski) writes: > >In article <1APR199323501958@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: >> According to IAU Circular #5730, Luu and Jewitt, using the 2.2 meter >> telescope at the University of Hawaii, have discovered a faint object that >> may be another Kuiper object. The object is designated 1993 FW and is >> similar in motion and brightness to 1992 QB. Computations done by Brian >> Marsden indicates that 1993 FW is currently between 38 to 56 AU from the >> Earth. >Could someone please translate this and fill in more details? I'm not familiar with 1992 QB. I am not sure what exactly you want translated but I will try to explain. Many have believed since 1950 that there is a reservoir of comets in a halo around the sun named the Oort cloud (after Jan Oort who proposed it in 1950). However, recent dynamical studies have shown that if the Oort cloud is spherical then there should be no preferred inclinations for comets we see. However, the comets with the shortest period orbits (<20 years known as the Jupiter family) all are in orbits with inclinations of <~10 degrees. Thus, it was proposed that inside of the the Oort cloud but outside the planets, there must be a disk of comets which are the source of the short period comets. This is known as the Kuiper disk (for historical reasons -- the current work is by Duncan, Quinn and Tremaine). The Oort cloud comets would be too faint to see with current techniques but larger members of the Kuiper disk would be visible with the most modern techniques. Thus, several surveys were started. Only 3 can really see faint enough and they are one by Tyson and co-workers at Bell Labs (which is aimed really at galaxies but sometimes collects data compatible to the Kuiper search), one by Jewitt and Luu at Hawaii and one by myself and co-workers at McDonald Observatory. The search is slow and painstaking and up till this past summer, no objects had been found with the surveys going to m fainter than 24 (Tyson's goes to 25). Then, in late August, Jewitt and Luu found a slow-moving object designated 1992QB1 (note the 1 at the end -- this is important to the designation) which now appears to be in a Kuiper disk compatible orbit. Last week, they discovered another object, which Ron announced. The orbit for 1992QB1 is being improved and indeed seems to be a Kuiper object. The discovery orbit for 1993FW is still too preliminary to know for sure. Our search has still not found any despite going > 1mag fainter than QB1 and FW so I admire the luck that Jewitt and Luu have had. They have an advantage at Mauna Kea of superb seeing which gives them a real edge. If this second object turns out to be a real Kuiper disk object, then we have the start of an important class for our understanding of the dynamics of the solar system. The important point is that the Kuiper disk must have formed where it presently is found (more or less) but the Oort cloud comets formed elsewhere and were scattered out into the cloud. -- Anita Cochran arpa: anita@zinfandel.as.utexas.edu anita@astro.as.utexas.edu snail: Astronomy Dept., The Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX, 78712 at&t: (512) 471-1471 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 21:09:19 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Atlas rocket question Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Apr2.165119.24152@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes: >>... the two booster engines. They're jettisoned to >>save weight, getting much the same effect as a complete staging with >>less complexity... > >Is the entire engine jettisoned, or just the combustion chamber and >nozzle? What's jettisoned is the structural base ring of the Atlas, which carries (among other things) the two booster engines and most associated systems. >What is the usual ratio of engine mass to total vehicle >dry mass for several representative vehicles? I was under the impression >that the chambers and nozzles just aren't that massive. The key thing to remember is that the Atlas is not a representative vehicle. :-) With the balloon tanks and near-complete absence of any structural members, the engines are *most* of the mass of a stage using Atlas technology. This is what you get when you really lean on rocket engineers to make a lightweight rocket stage, instead of having them build a heavy-duty tank with rocket engines attached. Which is why Atlas made it into orbit on 1.5 stages in 1958, a performance unequalled to this day. -- All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 17:56:37 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: Dust for Venus Newsgroups: sci.space In <93085.001041GRV101@psuvm.psu.edu> Callec Dradja writes: >In article , 18084TM@msu.edu (Tom) says: >> >>Gregso Vaux says: >>>Will this proposal of putting dust >>>in orbit around Venus in order to cool the planet 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 >Perhaps what you say makes sense, but are you sure that putting dust >in orbit would not cool the planet? Once again, I want you to think >of the "nuclear winter" effect. First, get this 'nuclear winter' stuff out of your head. It is pretty well acknowledged that Sagan, et al, exaggerated their numbers by several orders of magnitude in order to get the results they wanted. In actuallity, a total nuclear exchange falls into the 'fuzz' of the uncertainties, so we can't be sure if Nuclear Winter would or would not happen. For anything significantly smaller than a full exchange, it is not a major issue. >If dust in our upper atmosphere would >cool our planet, why would not dust in orbit around Venus do the same >thing? Why isn't dust around Venus analagous to dust around earth? You need to consider what change gets effected by the dust. The difference between the case for Earth and that for Venus comes down to the difference in albedo (how much gets reflected vs. how much gets absorbed). The Earth has (relatively) few clouds. All that ground surface is a good absorber of heat during the day and a good emitter at night. Venus has a total cloud deck, which tends to be highly reflective. Now, let's look at what the dust does. In the case of earth, the dust cloud effectively decreases insolation at the surface because it blocks off the sunlight. Therefore, there is less heat absorbed during the day and things become cooler. However, Venus, with its high albedo, already reflects a large amount of the energy from the sun and insolation at the surface is pretty much a non-existent effect in the heat of the planet, which results from greenhouse effect (the clouds get heated, radiate IR downward, and reradiation to space is blocked). A dust cloud would act very much like the clouds do, but would have a lower albedo (and hence absorb more energy from sunlight). Thus more IR gets emitted downward, and the mean temperature rises. >I suspect that the clouds of Venus do significantly cool the planet >but the greenhouse effect is so strong that the surface temperature >will melt lead. I believe that dust would indeed cool Venus, even >black dust much as would be thrown up by a nuclear weapon or a >volcanoe (mount Pinatubo) on Earth. Your suspicion appears incorrect to me. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 23:08 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Keeping Magellan Alive (Was Re: Mars Observer Update - 03/29/93) Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary In article abdkw@stdvax (David Ward) writes: > > >$70 million seems awfully high to keep any mission going. Where >do your numbers come from and is there something I'm missing in >the translation between planetary spacecraft and Earth orbiters? The $70 million is an old number used a couple of years ago to fund Magellan through 7 cycles into 1995. This included DSN resources, aerobraking lasting about a cycle (200-300 days), a full science team and operations support and SAR processing of the radar data. The amount of data already returned has been a bit overwhelming, three times the amount of all the data returned from all the previous planetary missions combined. Now to keep Magellan going this year, only 8 million dollars is need. The aerobraking has been reduced to about 70 days, the science team has been reduced, and the operations team has been reduced as well. The mission is running at a higher risk factor with the reduced operations team, by the way. The emphasis is now on obtaining the improved gravity data after the aerobraking, which is much cheaper to obtain than the radar data. I don't think there is much hope on getting any more radar data from Magellan, with the primary transmitter out of commission and a flaky backup transmitter. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Being cynical never helps /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | to correct the situation |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | and causes more aggravation | instead. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 20:46:53 GMT From: Trey Arthur Subject: lie low netters! UFO's want you! Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro In article <1993Apr1.182335.29872@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, martin@space.ualberta.ca (Martin Connors) writes: |> This from todays Global Mail (Canada's 'national newspaper'): |> === |> "There is a clear pattern of mysterious disappearances of people widely |> known as space experts who use computer systems. The only consistent |> explanation is UFO abductions, especially given the global extent of the |> problem", Swura claims in a press release today. "Hopefully the current |> documentary film Fire in the Sky will stimulate research in this area." |> Mr. Spenser could not be reached for comment. So tell us something we don't know. I happen to KNOW from a reputable $ource that a CERTAIN member of the NET was ABDUCTED. During captivity, he ate SPACE POTATO$ out of RU$$IAN $PACE BOWL$. After providing much entertainment for the ALIEN$, they quickly RETURNED him and declared the human $pecie$ a LOWER life form. The alien$ now only abduct people with unexplainable BIRTHMARK$. Thi$ per$on CONTINUE$ to PO$T today. This information should be dismembered. trey -- *************************************************************** * Trey Arthur CSC at NASA Langley * * Aerospace Engineer MS 157D, Hampton, VA 23666 * * j.j.arthur@larc.nasa.gov (804) 865-1725 * *************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 21:35:45 GMT From: Doug Mohney Subject: Luddites in space Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space In article <1pfie8$5pv@access.digex.com>, prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >I guess the best response would be to point out that you like mohney >couldn't have been very good economists. You couldn't get jobs in the field. That's a rather broad assumption without analyzing the underlying decision-making process one makes in getting a career. Of course, Pat, since you seem to have infinite knowledge with finite common sense, I'm not surprised. >Now considering that one of the partners in the medical practice that I go >to never went to med school what does that mean. SChools only teach dogma. So what's the big deal about my degree and Fred's degree? We got our tickets punched. But you want to be snide about it and go "Nya-nya, you couldn't get a job in Econ." To you I say: Big Freakin' Deal. >And in fact numerous people conduct highly valuable research without >having a Degree at all. That's true, but obtaining a degree means you have a certain amount of effort at a certain set of standards. Called ticket punching. > My Grandfather is one of the greatest economists to live >in in this century, and I probably learned more about the fundamentals >of economic theory hanging around him then in all the classes I did >take as an undergrad. Since you're going to name drop, who is your grandfather? Marx? > You see I took the classes, I just never bothered >with the detail work to get the major. OK, fine, so you were lazy and didn't bother to get the degree. Thank you for clarifying that. >So fred. Do you with all your Brilliant economic reasoning think that >the last administrations economic policies were advantageous to the >american people and th economy? So Pat, why do you have to solicit diatrabes about general economic policy? Finished second-guessing everyone else at NASA? >Or here. Postulate what role Space has in improving our GNP over the >next 10 years, and what should be done to implement it and what levels >of funding should be committed. Sounds like you're fishing to be a critic. If you want people to write you essays, so you can sit back on your high horse and shoot at them, why don't you go into academia and become a professor. Oh, I forgot, you don't want to bother with the detail work. Software engineering? That's like military intelligence, isn't it? -- > SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU < -- ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 22:06 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Magellan Update - 04/02/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary Forwarded from Doug Griffith, Magellan Project Manager MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT April 2, 1993 1. The Magellan spacecraft is operating normally in Venus orbit, transmitting a signal which is used to collect gravity data. 2. Preparations for aerobraking continue to go well. Changes to the on-board attitude control software were uplinked this week and are being verified by memory readout. 3. Magellan has completed 7122 orbits of Venus and is now 53 days from the end of Cycle 4 and the start of the Transition Experiment. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Being cynical never helps /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | to correct the situation |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | and causes more aggravation | instead. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 21:24 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Mars '94 Contract Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary Debra J. Rahn Headquarters, Washington, D.C. April 2, 1993 (Phone: 202/358-1639) RELEASE: 93-62 NASA AND THE RUSSIAN SPACE AGENCY SIGN MARS '94 CONTRACT NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin and Russian Space Agency (RSA) Director Yuri Koptev today announced that they have signed a contract with a potential value of $1.5 Million to fly two U.S. Mars Oxident Experiment (MOX) instruments on the Russian Mars '94 Mission. The Mars '94 Mission, to be launched in November 1994, will deploy small landing stations and penetrators and carry a complement of instruments to study the surface and atmosphere of the planet Mars. Under the contract, the Babakin Engineering Research Center, Moscow, and the Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, will provide technical services for integrating and testing the U.S. MOX instruments. A duplicate MOX instrument will fly on each of the two Russian small stations. These instruments will conduct soil reactivity/composition experiments to provide chemical information about the volatile components in the martian soil. These experiments will enable scientists to characterize the martian physical and chemical surface environment. Subject to appropriation of funds in FY 94, NASA plans to exercise an option under the contract to procure an engineering model of the Mars '94 small station. This will allow NASA to perform integration tests with the U.S.- supplied flight instrument systems in preparation for integration on the flight models with minimal impact to existing instrumentation. The model also will improve NASA's understanding of lander technology for future mars missions. The implementing agreement on NASA's participation in the Russian Mars '94 Mission was signed by NASA and RSA on October 5, 1992, in Moscow. - end - ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Being cynical never helps /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | to correct the situation |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | and causes more aggravation | instead. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 20:12:06 GMT From: "Richard A. Schumacher" Subject: Mars Observer Update #2 - 03/29/93 Newsgroups: sci.space What's the deal with MO, anyway? First they decide after it's halfway there to turn the instruments on before insertion, instead of waiting 8 months to circularize the orbit. Now JPL is holding "anomalous orbit insertion" exercizes. Am I ignorant, or are neither of these typical mission activities? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 18:18:17 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: nuclear waste Newsgroups: sci.space In pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu (Phil G. Fraering) writes: >mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >>Just a bit off, Phil. We don't reprocess nuclear fuel because what >>you get from the reprocessing plant is bomb-grade plutonium. It is >>also cheaper, given current prices of things, to simply fabricate new >>fuel rods rather than reprocess the old ones, creating potentially >>dangerous materials (from a national security point of view) and then >>fabricate that back into fuel rods. >This is not so. Or else the military in the US would not have needed >special-purpose reactors in order to generate bo}imb-grade >plutonium (the stuff from waste is a blend of two isotopes, and >isn't useful for building bombs, or so I've heard. I'm sorta >trolling for a reference now. Designing a weapon is *easier* with purer isotopes (and we got there early, remember? ;-)). However, we have designed, built, and test fired one fueled by reprocessed reactor fuel. So it turns out that you can make a bomb out of reprocessed fuel, but it probably shouldn't be described as 'bomb-grade'. However, as it was reported, I was left with the impression that what the Japanese were getting was indeed weapons grade material. Of course, that assumes that the Press got it right. >>I think Dyson actually wrote a book about this back in the 70's or >>80's. I saw it in a used bookstore, but I don't remember if I bought >>it or not. >Dyson may have written a book on it too, but I wonder if >you're thinking of _The Curve of Binding Energy_ instead. It may well be. I looked last night and I did get the Dyson book, but it wasn't the one I remembered. Was about weapons control, instead. >Finally: of the umteen or so nations that have "the bomb" none >have gotten their fissionables from processing the waste >from an off-the-shelf commercial nuclear power plant. >They always use some ort of "research reactor." This is certainly *easier*, but it's not the only way. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1993 21:13:33 GMT From: Doug Mohney Subject: nuclear waste Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Apr2.150038.2521@cs.rochester.edu>, dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes: >The real reason why accelerator breeders or incinerators are not being >built is that there isn't any reason to do so. Natural uranium is >still too cheap, and geological disposal of actinides looks >technically reasonable. Uh, I thought one of the reasons why the accelerator-incinerator concept was being looked at was as a (politically acceptable) alternative to sticking the waste in the ground. "Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist" seemed to be pretty gushy about the concept. Get rid of it now rather than worry about it for 10,000 years and all that stuff... Software engineering? That's like military intelligence, isn't it? -- > SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU < -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 21:05:22 GMT From: Josh Hopkins Subject: PBS space special Newsgroups: sci.space higgins@fnalo.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: >I am interested in the Net's reaction to last night's PBS special, >whose prosaic title "Living and Working in Space" concealed the >unorthodox sights and sounds within. I've only watched a fraction of >the tape, so I'll reserve my opinion for now. I thought the graphics were well done and some of the segments were pretty well done. I liked the fact that they included some fairly respectable people (Lewis, Zubrin, O'Neil, etc). I liked the emphasis both on math and science, and on the fact that all professions are going to have jobs in space. What I didn't like is the atitude that you have to talk down to the target audience. My teaching style is to simplify the material under the assumption that people just don't know the subject. This show seemed to be fluffing things up as if people were stupid and don't want the details. -- Josh Hopkins jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu "Tout ce qu'un homme est capable d'imaginer, d'autres hommes seront capable de la realiser" -Jules Verne ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 21:32:38 GMT From: Mike Fleice Subject: Position at Tandem Computers (Cupertino CA) Newsgroups: sci.space Mea Culpa for posting this here for Mike, but we're looking for someone special: Tandem Computers is currently looking for a software wizard to help us architect & implement a fault-tolerant generalized instrumentation subsystem as part of our proprietary operating system kernel (TNS Kernel). The TNS Kernel is a proprietary, loosely-coupled parallel, message-based operating system. The TNS Kernel has wide connectivity to open standards. In this key individual contributor role, you will work with other developers working on various components of the Transaction Management Facility. Your background needs to encompass some of the following 4 categories (3 of 4 would be excellent): Category 1. Math: Working knowledge of statistics, real analysis, as used in experimental physics or chemistry, or in engineering. Category 2. Working knowledge of telemetry issues-- i.e. time series, autocorrelation, and statistical correlation of data streams. Category 3. Integration & Test -- Instrumentation of systems under test, i.e. payloads, flight modules, etc. Category 4: Software Engineering: programming skills, algorithms, and systems software techniques. Please send your resume to Mike Fleice, Tandem Computers 10555 Ridgeview Ct., LOC 100-27, Cupertino, CA 95014-0789; Fax (408) 285-0813; or e-mail fleice_mike@tandem.com ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 93 17:40:00 PST From: "RWTMS2::MUNIZB" Subject: Tommy's Oil On Date: 30 Mar 93 04:45:31 GMT, William Reiken writes: / A Question: Has oil been found anywhere eles in our Solar System / in the raw form that we dig it up in here on earth? I gave a presentation ~1979 during a ME class I had in Alternate Energy Sources discussing the possiblity of pockets of non-biological methane which were trapped deep within the Earth during its formation. I can't remember much else other than my original interest was sparked by an article in Scientific American that was written at that time. Disclaimer: Opinions stated are solely my own (unless I change my mind). Ben Muniz MUNIZB%RWTMS2.decnet@consrt.rockwell.com w(818)586-3578 Space Station Freedom:Rocketdyne/Rockwell:Structural Loads and Dynamics "Man will not fly for fifty years": Wilbur to Orville Wright, 1901 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 18:37:24 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: Why use AC at 20kHz for SSF power Newsgroups: sci.space In <1pgdno$3t1@access.digex.net> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >In article <1993Mar31.222456.29249@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >|>WHo'se located in Fort Worth? >| >|General Dynamics. Bell Helicopter (nearby, actually, I think). Just >|to name a couple of big ones. >I always thought GD's Fighter plants were in Long Island. All the F-16's are built at the 'bomber plant' in Ft Worth. The same was supposed to be the case for the A-12 (which was cancelled). Needless to say, the cancellation of A-12 and the cutbacks in F-16 orders have led to a lot of layoffs in Ft Worth, to go with the shutting down of one of the largest SAC bases in the country. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ To: bb-sci-space@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Newsgroups: sci.space Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!csc.ti.com!tilde.csc.ti.com!mksol!mccall From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: Re: nuclear waste Message-Id: <1993Apr2.181001.2821@mksol.dseg.ti.com> Organization: Texas Instruments Inc References: <829@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp> <833@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp> <1993Mar31.191658.9836@mksol.dseg.ti.com> <1993Apr1.052152.15604@ke4zv.uucp> Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 18:10:01 GMT Lines: 32 Sender: news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU In <1993Apr1.052152.15604@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes: >You don't get "bomb grade" plutonium in this type of reprocessing. >You need a starter material that comes from a short cycled production >reactor, otherwise there's too much Pu240 in the product that you can't >easily separate out. You also don't reprocess to "pure" plutonium, you >just enrich enough to make it viable reactor fuel again, say 5%. To >get to bomb grade, you "only" need to chemically process the fuel >elements, but that's a very nasty and difficult process. In the end >you still have too much Pu240 unless you use mass spectrograph separation >processes. It isn't quite Manhattan Project in complexity and expense, >but it's close enough that only a determined country is going to be able >to do it. If they're that determined, they can make bombs the old fashioned >way. I was under the impression that the Japanese plutonium was more 'enriched' than this; however, that was from press coverage of the transshipment, and we know what the gentlemen of the Press can be like when it comes to strict factuality on issues like this. It is also worth noting that somewhere back there the United States designed, built, and tested a nuclear weapon made from just such reprocessed material, just as proof that it could indeed be done. I think this was done as a politically motivated 'technology demonstration' sort of project, to try to push the IAEA into tougher regulation of reprocessed fuel. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 414 ------------------------------