Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Fri, 2 Jun 89 05:16:32 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Fri, 2 Jun 89 05:16:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #469 SPACE Digest Volume 9 : Issue 469 Today's Topics: Private launchers NASA Commercial Programs Office to exhibit at Paris Air Show (Forwarded) gps satellites Re: Sun's invisible partner NEMESIS Magellan Status for 05/30/89 - 06/03/89 (Forwarded) Re: Venus & the Greenhouse effect.. Re: Amazon Forest Destruction (was Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs) Re: Private Space Companies ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 19 May 89 22:54:32 GMT From: ccncsu!handel.colostate.edu!bogartc@boulder.colorado.edu (Chris Bogart) Subject: Private launchers I understand there are, or have been, several private corporations working on their own launch vehicles, under a loosening of restrictions on non-NASA launches. Does anyone know if any of these comanies still exist? Please reply by e-mail and I'll post a summary of responses I get. I'm interested more in for-profit companies intending to put up communication satellites or whatever, than in futurist groups like the L-5 society. Thanks for your help, Chris Bogart bogartc@handel.cs.colostate.edu ------------------------------ Date: 30 May 89 16:28:17 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: NASA Commercial Programs Office to exhibit at Paris Air Show (Forwarded) Jim Ball Headquarters, Washington, D.C. May 30, 1989 RELEASE: 89-81 NASA COMMERCIAL PROGRAMS OFFICE TO EXHIBIT AT PARIS AIR SHOW An exhibit featuring the cooperative efforts of NASA and U.S. industry to commercially develop space will be displayed in the United States National Pavilion at the 38th Paris Air Show, June 9-18. The exhibit highlights the development of commercial applications, and focuses on current research activities underway by NASA and U.S. companies through programs such as Joint Endeavor Agreements and the Centers for the Commercial Development of Space. Also displayed with the exhibit will be scale models of commerical space hardware provided by U.S. commercial space transportation firms, satellite manufacturers, and privately- developed orbital laboratory facilities. The commercial programs exhibit will be located with U.S. industry displays and staffed by representatives of NASA's Office of Commercial Programs. The Office of Commercial Programs was created in 1984 to provide a focus for efforts to encourage greater private sector involvement and investment in the nation's civil space program. ------------------------------ Date: 30 May 89 15:12:29 GMT From: vsi1!daver!wombat!george@apple.com (George Scolaro) Subject: gps satellites I have just bought a handheld gps receiver from a company in L.A. called Magellan. The unit works well, and is an impressive piece of technology. My question is: what is the schedule for more gps satellites going up. It seems that there are 7 up now, as has been since the beginning of the year(?). -- George Scolaro george@wombat (try {pyramid|sun|vsi1|killer} !daver!wombat!george) ------------------------------ Date: 30 May 89 19:55:55 GMT From: agate!rocket.ssl.berkeley.edu!gckaplan@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George Kaplan) Subject: Re: Sun's invisible partner NEMESIS In article <1928@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU> bentson@grieg.CS.ColoState.Edu.UUCP (the root) writes: >In article <29218@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> bwood@janus.UUCP (Blake Philip Wood) >writes: >>Prof. Richard A. Muller, here at Berkeley, is the originator of this idea. >>About a year ago he wrote a book on the subject: "Nemesis". > >I checked our libary listings and found > ... >There is no listing for Miller. Can anyone help? From the MELVYL online catalog at UC Berkeley: Author: Muller, R. (Richard) Title: Nemesis / Richard Muller. 1st ed. New York : Weidenfeld & Nicolson, c1988. Description: xiii, 193 p. : ill. ; 24 cm. Notes: Includes index. Subjects: End of the world (Astronomy) Planets, Minor. Extinction (Biology) Call numbers: UCB Astronomy QB638.8 .M851 1988 UCB Main QB638.8 .M851 1988 UCB Physics QB638.8 .M851 1988 George C. Kaplan Internet: gckaplan@sag4.ssl.berkeley.edu Space Sciences Lab UUCP: ...!ucbvax!sag4.ssl!gckaplan University of California (415) 643-8610 Berkeley, CA 94720 ------------------------------ Date: 30 May 89 22:04:37 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Magellan Status for 05/30/89 - 06/03/89 (Forwarded) MAGELLAN WEEKLY STATUS May 30-June 3, 1989 This is a weekly status report. The next report will be issued June 5. The spacecraft is in good health following the long holiday weekend. All momentum wheel desaturations and star calibrations were performed routinely. The Attitude Control team determined on May 27 that a ground software error was responsible for an attitude update problem and the error is being corrected. No flight software changes are required, but gain changes will be uploaded. The Cruise-3 computer command sequence was successfully tested in the System Verification Lab and is to be uploaded this afternoon. Cruise-3 contains wheel desaturations at 12:45 p.m. and 12:45 a.m. and the star calibration at 1 p.m. daily. It also contains radio tests and arming of the Solid Rocket Motor on June 7 at 3 p.m. Arming is done early so that any possible problems later in the cruise will not prevent its arming. SPACECRAFT Distance From Earth (mi) 3,735,101 Velocity Geocentric 5,531 mph Heliocentric 60,293 mph One Way Light Time 20.0 sec ------------------------------ Date: 30 May 89 03:26:59 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!me!ecf!murty@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Hema Sandhyarani Murty) Subject: Re: Venus & the Greenhouse effect.. In article <8905290636.AA03541@crash.cts.com>, dwelliver@pro-hysteria.cts.COM (System Administrator) writes: > > I heard that Venus used to be a flourishing planet, and could have been much > like Earth, until the Greenhouse took into effect there. Does anyone know if > this is true, and if so, can you fill in a few details? Thanks.. > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________________________________________ Venus has almost the same mass, size and density as the Earth, which has earned the nickname 'Earths sister'. However, there are some important differences. Surface Venus temperature is 900 deg. F and surface Venus pressure is 90 atmospheres. Its atmosphere is 96 percent carbon dioxide and this is responsible for the massive greenhouse effect - a planet-wide catastrophe. The Earth also has a greenhouse effect due to its carbon dioxide and water vapor. The global temperature of the Earth would be below the freezing point of water if not for the greenhouse effect. Like Venus, the Earth also has about 90 atmospheres of carbon dioxide; but it resides in the crust as limestone and other carbonates and not in the atmosphere. If the Earth were a little closer to the Sun, the temperature would increase, driving some of the carbon dioxide out of the surface rocks, generating a stronger greenhouse effect, which in turn would heat the surface further. A hotter surface would vaporize still more carbonates into carbon dioxide and this would lead to a runaway greenhouse effect. This is just what we think happened in the early history of Venus because of Venus' proximity to the Sun. This is warning to all of us life forms on this planet - burning fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide into the air. This is the only home we know. Hema Murty Institute for Aerospace Studies, University of Toronto 4925 Dufferin St., Downsview, Ontario, M3H 5T6 Canada ------------------------------ Date: 30 May 89 20:50:24 GMT From: oliveb!3comvax!michaelm@apple.com (Michael McNeil) Subject: Re: Amazon Forest Destruction (was Re: Asteroids and Dinosaurs) In article <1989May27.225453.4952@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <463@cybaswan.UUCP> iiit-sh@cybaswan.UUCP (Steve Hosgood) writes: >>it's like asking the original white settlers of what is now the USA and >>Canada not to got west because they'll destroy the Amerinds. They'd have >>shot you and continued regardless. > >Speak for yourself, Yanqui. :-) If they'd tried that in Canada, the RCMP >(or RNWMP or NWMP as it then was, depending on the year) would have hauled >them off to jail fairly promptly. The Canadian West was very different >from the American West: in Canada, the police arrived *before* the settlers. >Mostly because of lawless characters leaking up from down south, too. I notice that the area of Indian reservations in western Canada is similar to that of the western United States -- i.e., a small percentage of the total land area. Despite the vigilance of the Mounties, the Indians don't seem to come out of it much better. >The Mounties' job was to make sure that the Amerinds were destroyed in a >peaceful and superficially-lawful manner. :-( This is largely what happened in the United States as well. It's a myth that the Indian displacement was mostly accomplished by massacre. The Federal government was charged with protecting the Indians' rights and made a considerable effort to do so -- but it was pretty much a matter of trying to hold back the sea. In fact, your statement above could almost be a paraphrase of what Alexis de Tocqueville wrote back in the 1830's, comparing the U.S.'s approach to the Indians with that of the Spaniards: The Spaniards let their dogs loose on the Indians as if they were wild beasts; they pillaged the New World like a city taken by storm, without discrimination or mercy; but one cannot destroy everything, and frenzy has a limit; the remnant of the Indian population, which escaped the massacres, in the end mixed with the conquerors and adopted their religion and mores. [FN: But one should not give the Spaniards any credit for this result. If the Indian tribes had not been settled agriculturists when the Europeans arrived, no doubt in South America they would have been destroyed just as they were in the North.] On the other hand, the conduct of the United States Americans toward the natives was inspired by the most chaste affection for legal formalities. As long as the Indians remained in their savage state, the Americans did not interfere in their affairs at all and treated them as independent peoples; they did not allow their lands to be occupied unless they had been properly acquired by contract; and if by chance an Indian nation cannot live on its territory, they take them by the hand in brotherly fashion and lead them away to die far from the land of their fathers. The Spaniards, by unparalled atrocities which brand them with indelible shame, did not succeed in exterminating the Indian race and could not even prevent them from sharing their rights; the United States Americans have attained both these results with wonderful ease, quietly, legally, and philanthropically, without spilling blood and without violating a single one of the great principles of morality in the eyes of the world. It is impossible to destroy men with more respect to the laws of humanity. Alexis de Tocqueville, *Democracy in America*, 13th Edition, 1850, Edited by J. P. Mayer, Translated by George Lawrence, Anchor Books, Doubleday and Co., Inc., New York, 1975, p. 339. >Van Allen, adj: pertaining to | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology >deadly hazards to spaceflight. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu -- Michael McNeil michaelm@vax.3Com.Com 3Com Corporation hplabs!oliveb!3comvax!michaelm Mountain View, California work telephone: (415) 969-2099 x 208 We do not believe. We fear. Aua (a Central Eskimo shaman, when queried about Eskimo beliefs), from *Arctic Dreams: Imagination and Desire in a Northern Landscape*, by Barry Lopez, 1986 ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 89 19:40:22 GMT From: skipper!shafer@ames.arc.nasa.gov Subject: Re: Private Space Companies In article <1989May26.155141.28293@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: Contrary to popular misconception, the KC-135 and the 707 are **not** the same aircraft -- they don't even have the same fuselage cross-section -- although they share a common [privately funded] ancestor.) This is not a popular misconception. Let's look at Jane's All the World's Aircraft, which is a very authoritative source. On page 238 of the 1976-77 edition we find the following: Boeing Model 707 US Air Force designation: VC-137 The prototype of the Boeing Model 707 was the first jet transport designed as such to be completed and flown in the United States. It made its first flight on 15 July 1954. Designated Model 367-80, it was built as a private venture and was used to demonstrate the potential of commercial and military developments of the design for a period of more than 15 years. During its early test programme, it was fitted with a flight refuelling boom, to prove the capability of this type of aircraft for refuelling present and future jet bombers, fighters and reconnaissance aircraft at or near their operational altitudes and speeds. As a result, a developed version was ordered in large numbers for the USAF under the designation KC-135. [stuff about donation of prototype to Smithsonian] On 13 July 1955 Boeing was given clearance by the USAF to build commercial developments of the prototype concurrently with the production of military KC-135 tanker-transports. These transports have the basic designations of Boeing 707 and 720, but were made available in many versions, of which a total of 919 had been sold and 905 delivered by 31 August 1976 [when this went to press]. These totals include five specially-equipped aircraft delivered to the USAF under the designations VC-137A (now VC-137B) and VC-137C, and two AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) aircraft which were used, under the designation EC-177D, for competitive trial of downward-looking radars. They are now being used in the next phases of the E-3A programme. [gives specs of only version available, 707-320C] End of excerpt. Thus we see that a privately developed prototype became the VC-137 (probably A) which turned into the KC-135. The Air Force then gave Boeing _permission_ to build a commercial version, known as the 707 and 720, concurrently. I'm not sure what is implied by this permission, but it sounds like the Air Force had some sort of rights which they shared with Boeing. Having the Air Force pay for the jigs and assembly-line setup makes it a lot cheaper to build the commercial version. The Air Force also paid for the CAT I testing, which would have put the commercial version further up the maturity curve, even though it would not suffice for the FAA certification. On page 239, we also find, in reference to the 727, the following: In other respects [refers to the innovative rear-engined layout] the 727 bears a resemblance to the 707 and 720 series. It has an identical upper fuselage section and many parts and systems are interchangeable between the three types. I guess this makes the 727 a KC-135/VC-137 derivative too. :-) The Air Force paid for the YC-14 prototypes, since this was back in the era of fly-offs. This certainly contradicts the "Boeing has never been paid by the government to build an aircraft" line. They (Boeing) spoke then of a commercial version, probably to compete with the L-100 (commercial version of the C-130). They're also building the Osprey and were talking about building a civilian version of this. Boeing is much less concerned about ideological purity than some people on the net are. Rather, they'll take any advantage they can (IMO as they should) to continue building successful and profitable aircraft. -- M F Shafer NASA Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility shafer@elxsi.dfrf.nasa.gov or shafer@drynix.dfrf.nasa.gov NASA management doesn't know what I'm doing and I don't know what they're doing, and everybody's happy this way. ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V9 #469 *******************