From ota Wed Jun  8 03:07:26 1988
Received: by angband.s1.gov id AA09869; Wed, 8 Jun 88 03:07:12 PDT
	id AA09869; Wed, 8 Jun 88 03:07:12 PDT
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 88 03:07:12 PDT
From: Ted Anderson <ota>
Message-Id: <8806081007.AA09869@angband.s1.gov>
To: Space@angband.s1.gov
Reply-To: Space@angband.s1.gov
Subject: SPACE Digest V8 #247

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 8 : Issue 247

Today's Topics:
		 Re: Antimatter propulsion questions
			     Night launch
	 Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST (ejection seats)
	 Re: Vocabulary lesson #7: Expendable launch vehicles
		     Space Technology Aids Vision
			   Re: Night launch
	    Re: A Soviet strategy for domination in space
			   Re: Night launch
		  Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 May 88 20:14:15 CDT
From: sedspace@doc.cc.utexas.edu (Steve Abrams)
Posted-Date: Sun, 15 May 88 20:14:15 CDT
Subject: Re: Antimatter propulsion questions


In V8, #221 of Space Digest, tektronix!sequent!mntgfx!mbutts@ucbvax.berkeley.edu  (Mike Butts) writes:

"1) If particle accelerators are used to create the antimatter fuel in the
first place, on a production basis, would there be any advantage to siting
them in space, driven by solar power and taking advantage of the natural
vacuum?  Would solar wind, cosmic rays, etc. interfere with the process?
If so, could reasonable shielding deal with that?"

If you are considering a toroidal accelerator, I should think that the solar
wind would be deflected perpendicularly to the plane of the accelerator via the
Lorentz force.  Does anyone know the average velocity of particles in the solar
wind at 1AU?  I shouldn't think it would be great enough to overcome the high
magnetic fields of the accelerator, but I could be wrong.  Cosmic rays, on the
other hand, are very energetic and (I believe) isotropic.  they might be a greater hazard.  Perhaps a much larger shield can be used to stop the primary rays
down to the less energetic secondary radiation that could then be handled by
the magnetic fields of the accelerator.

I would worry more about interplanetary dust -- much more massive and not as
easily deflected -- interfering with that "natural vacuum."

Steve Abrams			ARPANET:  sedspace@doc.cc.utexas.edu
c/o Graduate Office		CompuServe:  [70376,1025]
Dept. of Physics		(512)480-0895
University of Texas at	
	Austin			OR
Austin, TX  78705		c/o Students for the Exploration and	
					Development of Space
"The rate of increase of 	P.O. Box 7338
 the entropy of the        	358 Texas Union
 universe reaches its		University of Texas at Austin
 maximum value in my		Austin, TX  78713-7883
 immediate vicinity."		(512)471-7097

------------------------------

Date: 15 May 88 05:08:11 GMT
From: sonia!khayo@cs.ucla.edu  (Eric Behr)
Subject: Night launch

(May 14, 9:00 pm PST)
I just saw a fabulous sight - most likely a launch from
VAB. My windows are facing +/- North, facing the canyons
of Santa Monica Mountains. A luminescent white cloud was
trailing behind a very bright object which moved due West
about 4 times as fast as a commercial jet (there were a
few in the area, on approach to LAX - those people must
have had a view...); of course the geometry of the whole
thing makes velocity comparisons meaningless. The shining
"ghost", which took up about 25 degrees of the horizon when
it was largest, was caused by thin clouds/fog hanging over
the coastal area (I saw another Vandenberg launch on a
cloudless night and it wasn't as spectacular as this one).
What puzzled me was that it continued to shine brightly
for about a minute after the vehicle left the cloud layer,
and only a faint glow of the exhaust was visible through
a spotting scope. It looked as if a very strong reflector
was pointed from the ground towards the rocket (at first
I thought that it was just that, maybe some rocket modellers,
but judging from the distance/apparent size it was something
on a much grander scale). Could it be ionized air? or what?

I hope to read something about it in tomorrow's paper.
                                                       Eric

------------------------------

Date: 14 May 88 22:16:03 GMT
From: mnetor!utzoo!henry@uunet.uu.net  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST (ejection seats)

>... Why don't they install explosive-powered
>ejection seats on the shuttle...

It's been thought about; in fact that's what the pilots had for the first
few flights.  The trouble is that ejection seats are heavy and bulky.
There isn't room to provide a full crew with ejection seats.

A secondary problem is that ejection seats introduce their own safety
hazards, since they are dangerous explosive devices.  (People who have
to work around them treat them with great respect.)
-- 
NASA is to spaceflight as            |  Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
the Post Office is to mail.          | {ihnp4,decvax,uunet!mnetor}!utzoo!henry

------------------------------

Date: 14 May 88 22:12:13 GMT
From: mnetor!utzoo!henry@uunet.uu.net  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Vocabulary lesson #7: Expendable launch vehicles

> ... can be gotten rid of when they become politically
> inconvenient - or heaven forbit!  Inexpensive.

Since there is no chance of the latter while the US government is running
the show, it need not be mentioned.  Despite some of the nonsense one
hears from the more rabid anti-shuttle factions, current US expendables
are just as expensive as the shuttle.

Actually, my definition would be something like:  "a class of space launchers
which clearly are not considered expendable, based on the vast manpower and
expense devoted to every single launch".  (Case in point.  Delta is derived
from the Thor IRBM.  Thor specs said launch in 15 minutes with crew of 9.
NASA Delta launches required three months with a crew of 2000.  Yes, the
Delta is more complicated, and the payloads need more attention... but
three orders of magnitude?!?)  We will not have cheap space transportation
until we can treat space-launch failures like airliner crashes:  lamentable,
to be avoided, worthy of careful investigation... but not usually cause for
grounding the vehicle.
-- 
NASA is to spaceflight as            |  Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
the Post Office is to mail.          | {ihnp4,decvax,uunet!mnetor}!utzoo!henry

------------------------------

Date: 14 May 88 01:26:11 GMT
From: nbires!isis!scicom!embudo!markf@ucbvax.berkeley.edu  (markf)
Subject: Space Technology Aids Vision


NASA NEWS - Space Technology Aids In Improving Low-Vision Eyesight

NASA and the Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Institute, Balitimore, Md.,
will use space technology to develop a device designed to improve
the sight of millions of people with low vision. 

Scientists at NASA's National Space Technology Laboratories (NSTL),
Miss., and Wilmer scientists plan to adapt technology used for
computer processing of images from satellites and head-mounted 
imaging systems originally developed for NASA Space Station projects
to enhance vision.

According to officials in NASA's Technology Utilization Program, the
new collaborative project is expected to run at least 5 years and cost
a minimum of $5 million in its first phases.

The project will be carried out for NASA by NSTL's Earth Resource 
Laboratory, the installation's research and development organization.

The planned device, the Low-Vision Enhancement System, will resemble
"wraparound" sunglasses and will custom-tailor images of the outside
world for low vision patients. A version of the enhancement system is
expected to be available to patients through clinical tests in a few
years.

Approximately 11 million Americans have visual defects that cannot be
corrected medically, surgically or with glasses. Severe impairment
that causes disability, called low vision, affects 2.5 million Americans,
according to Eye Institute officials.

The transfer of NASA's technology will make it possible to improve the
visual capability of low-vision patients by appropriately enhancing and
altering images to compensate for the individual patient's impaired
eyesight. 

When the device is worn, the patient will see the world on two miniature
color television screens where the lenses of eyeglasses usually are
located. Lenses and imaging glass fibers will be embedded on each side
of the "wraparound" section where the front and ear pieces join.

The lenses will form images of the scene in front of the patient on the
surface of the fibers. The fibers, similar to those used to carry long-
distance telephone signals, carry pictures back to miniature solid-
state television cameras carried in a belt or shoulder pack. The images
are processed by a small, battery-powered system in the pack and, finally,
displayed on the television screens.

As planned, the device will be lightweight and confortable. The outside of
the television screens will be similar to mirrored lenses in sunglasses.

The system is expected to benefit patients who have lost their peripheral
or side field of vision, such as those suffering from glaucoma, an
increase of fluid pressure inside the eye that damages the optic nerve,
and from retinitis pigmentosa, a progressive degeneration of the retina,
the delicate light sensitive nerve layer lining the eye. The system also
is expected to benefit patients with central vision loss, the part of 
vision normally used for reading. These patients may have macular
degeneration associated with aging, or diabetic retinopathy, in which
diabetes causes swelling and leakage of fluid in the center of the
retina.

Ongoing Wilmer research supported by the National Eye Institute will
provide information on how images must be altered and enhanced for the
low-vision patient.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA News Release 88-57  April 27, 1988
By James Ball Headquarters, Washington, D.C.
and Myron Well National Space Technologies Lab., Miss.
Reprinted with permission for electronic distribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 16 May 88 13:17:15 GMT
From: cfa!cfa250!mcdowell@husc6.harvard.edu  (Jonathan McDowell)
Subject: Re: Night launch

>From article <12267@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>, by khayo@sonia.math.ucla.edu (Eric Behr):
> (About Trident launch..)

Boston Globe reports Trident launch from submarine along Western Test
Range at 2050 PDT May 14. 

This is the first submarine launched ballistic missile test from the
West Coast that I've heard of (for about twenty years - there were a
couple in the sixties..) Have there been others? I presume it was a
Trident I since I think Trident II is still in flat pad testing at
Canaveral.. 

If its the first to be done from WTR that explains why it looked unusual
to people..  Usually SLBM launches are done on the ETR from subs about
100 mi E of Cape Canaveral; every SSBN ballistic missile sub launches a
couple for crew training in initial checkout and after each refit. 
Maybe they decided there would be fewer Soviet fishing trawlers off
Point Mugu?


Jonathan McDowell

------------------------------

Subject: Re: A Soviet strategy for domination in space
Date: Tue, 17 May 88 18:57:02 -0400
From: Fred Baube <fbaube@note.nsf.gov>


Jim Bowery writes:
> The Soviets appear to be onto a really clever strategy for becoming
> the dominant space civilizaton:
> [Work with NASA, letting it take the credit while they do the
>  yeoman's share of the work.]
> Oh, but this couldn't work because NASA bureaucrats would NEVER
> take credit for the accomplishments of others and, of course, the
> Soviets are too short sighted to let us have even a decade or two of
> feeling good about ourselves in exchange for the solar system. ;-)

Silly me, I *honestly* thought the Soviets would be *idiots*
to work with NASA and let it take much more credit than is its
rightful due.  But when you put it *that* way .. talk about an
unholy alliance !  If the moon is made of cheese, Mars will
turn out to be borscht.

#include <disclaimer.h>

------------------------------

Date: 16 May 88 18:55:22 GMT
From: mtxinu!rtech!llama!wong@ucbvax.berkeley.edu  (J. Wong)
Subject: Re: Night launch

In article <12260@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> khayo@MATH.ucla.edu (Eric Behr) writes:
>(May 14, 9:00 pm PST)
>I just saw a fabulous sight - most likely a launch from
>VAB.
[description deleted]
>I hope to read something about it in tomorrow's paper.
>                                                       Eric

I believe the papers said it was a Trident missle launch
from a submarine just off the coast.
J. Wong			sun!rtech!wong
	      ucbvax!mtxinu!/
****************************************************************
S-s-s-ay!

------------------------------

Date: 16 May 88 18:51:32 GMT
From: mtxinu!rtech!llama!wong@ucbvax.berkeley.edu  (J. Wong)
Subject: Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST


From: sun!rtech!llama!wong (J. Wong)
Message-Id: <8805132107.AA17267@llama.rtech.UUCP>
To: mbunix!marsh
Subject: Re: space news from April 11 AW&ST
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
In-Reply-To: <31710@linus.UUCP>
References: <1988May9.004935.49@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: Relational Technology, Inc. Alameda, CA

In article <31710@linus.UUCP> you write:
>I'm willing to look really stupid... Why don't they install explosive-powered
>ejection seats on the shuttle.  I don't know enough about the technology,
>but there has to be some way for the pilot to get out of a SR-71 that
>should be close to useful, and require little effort on the part of the
>human.  What's the story ?

Ejection seats have a numerous problems, the worst being that
they are just dangerous (as is any high-explosive.)  Ejection
seats have exploded on the ground, killing any technicians or
pilots who are nearby.  They have also exploded improperly in
the air.  Also, canopies have failed to come off resulting in
the occupant being crushed when the seat ejected.  Passengers
have been known to lose various pieces of their bodies when
ejected (like fingers, hands, arms, legs.)

Tom Wolfe relates some incidents in his book, "The Right Stuff."
Apparently, if you were in a bad situation it was 50/50 whether
to eject or to try and ride the plane down.
-- 
J. Wong			sun!rtech!wong
	      ucbvax!mtxinu!/
****************************************************************
S-s-s-ay!

J. Wong			sun!rtech!wong
	      ucbvax!mtxinu!/
****************************************************************
S-s-s-ay!

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V8 #247
*******************

