Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from beak.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 ; Tue, 12 Sep 89 19:24:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Tue, 12 Sep 89 19:24:16 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #31 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 31 Today's Topics: List of Space Grant Colleges and Consortia (Forwarded) Re: Pluto fly-by Re: Question Re: Progress M-1 (new type of cargo craft) launched to USSR's Mir station Re: Voting via taxes and other 3&*%^#! NASA designates 17 space grant colleges/consortia (Forwarded) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 1 Sep 89 03:38:56 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: List of Space Grant Colleges and Consortia (Forwarded) SPACE GRANT COLLEGE AND FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM DESIGNATED SPACE GRANT COLLEGES/CONSORTIA 1. Alabama Space Grant Consortium o University of Alabama in Huntsville o Alabama A&M University, Normal o University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa o Auburn University o University of Alabama at Birmingham 2. Arizona Space Grant College Consortium o University of Arizona, Tucson o Arizona State University, Tempe o Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff 3. California Space Grant Consortium and Fellowship Program o University of California, Berkeley o University of California at San Diego o University of California at Los Angeles 4. Colorado Space Grant Consortium o University of Colorado, Boulder o Fort Lewis College, Durango o Colorado State University, Fort Collins o Mesa State College, Grand Junction o University of Colorado, Colorado Springs o University of Southern Colorado, Pueblo 5. Cornell Space Grant College Consortium o Cornell University, Ithaca, NY o Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY 6. Florida Space Grant Consortium o University of Florida, Gainesville o Florida A&M University, Tallahassee o Florida State University, Tallahassee o University of Miami 7. Georgia Institute of Technology Space Grant Consortium o Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta o Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta o Georgia State University, Atlanta o Tuskegee University, Ala. 8. Aerospace Illinois Space Grant Consortium o Illinois Space Institute o University of Chicago o University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign o University of Illinois, Chicago o Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago o Northwestern University, Evanston 9. The Johns Hopkins Space Grant Consortium o The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore o Morgan State University, Baltimore o Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore 10. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge 11. Michigan Space Grant College Program o University of Michigan, Ann Arbor o Wayne State University, Detroit o Michigan Technological University, Houghton o Saginaw Valley State University, University Center 12. Ohio Aerospace Institute o University of Akron o University of Cincinnati o Cleveland State University o University of Dayton o Ohio State University, Columbus o Ohio University, Athens o University of Toledo o Wright State University, Dayton o Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland 13. Pennsylvania State University, University Park 14. Rocky Mountain Space Grant Consortium o Utah State University, Logan o University of Utah, Salt Lake City o University of Denver, Colo. 15. Texas Space Grant Consortium o University of Texas, Austin o University of Texas at Arlington o Texas A&M University, College Station o University of Texas at El Paso o Baylor University, Waco o University of Texas at San Antonio o UT Health Science Center, Houston o Texas Southern University, Houston o UT Health Science Center, San Antonio o Texas Christian University, Fort Worth o UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas o Rice University, Houston o University of Houston o Prairie View A&M University o University of Houston at Clear Lake o Southern Methodist University, Dallas o Texas A&M University at Galveston o Texas Technological University, Lubbock o Texas A&I University, Kingsville 16. Virginia Space Grant Consortium o University of Virginia, Charlottesville o Hampton University o College of William and Mary, Williamsburg o Old Dominion University, Norfolk o Virginia Polytechnical Institute and State University, Blacksburg 17. University of Washington, Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 89 09:12:18 PDT From: greer%utd201.dnet%utadnx@utspan.span.nasa.gov X-Vmsmail-To: SPAN::AMES::"space+@andrew.cmu.edu" Subject: Re: Pluto fly-by In Space_Digest V10 #8, D. Scott Hess asks: >... I've spent time trying to figure out >exactly how gravity-assist works, and thus far, its beyond me... To which Henry Spencer answers: >I'll explain it briefly here, because it's relevant below. (This one is >common enough that it probably ought to go in the frequently-asked- >questions list.) Doing a pass by Jupiter will not change your speed >with respect to Jupiter, but it will change the direction of your motion. >This matters because Jupiter itself is moving. Call Jupiter's orbital >velocity J (don't have the number handy). If you approach Jupiter "from >the front" at 5 km/s relative to Jupiter, and do a tight hyperbola around >it so that the direction of motion with respect to Jupiter gets pretty >much reversed, then with respect to Jupiter you went in at 5 km/s and came >out at 5 km/s, but with respect to the *Sun* you went in at J-5 km/s and >came out at J+5 km/s. Jupiter got slowed down infinitesimally in the >process. Which is partly wrong. You have to come from the back, not the front. Imagine that the Mighty Hand of Jove grabs you as you go by and flings you in the direction of his own motion. Also, with respect to the Sun, you went in at 5 km/s and came out at 5+J km/s. The Voyager Updates from JPL were introduced with one of Jeff Blinn's(?) animations of Voyager's trajectory, which showed the gravity assist effect nicely. Perhaps one day they'll make a video tape library available... For only $19.95 you'll get the first installment in the Voyager video library: Encounter with Jupiter. Examine it for ten days and send it back if you're not satisfied. Order now, and receive your free Voyager mission lapel pin... ---- "Drive Friendly or Die" | Dale M. Greer Proposed Texas License Plate Motto | Center for Space Sciences -- Anonymous | University of Texas at Dallas | UTSPAN::UTADNX::UTDSSA::GREER The opinions are my own, and may or may not reflect those of my employer. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Aug 89 23:46:24 GMT From: sumax!amc-gw!sigma!uw-nsr!gtisqr!kevin@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Kevin Bagley) Subject: Re: Question In article <1989Aug26.044140.9306@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <979@lzfmd.att.com> rds@lzfmd.att.com (rds) writes: >> Would a clock (earth time) placed on voyager >> 12 years ago be presently running at a different time >> compared to current earth time due to relativistic >> effects? >A very, very little bit. The crucial issues are velocity (special >relativity) and gravitational fields (general relativity), both of >which affect clocks. Voyager is moving (mostly) at fairly modest >speeds, and is also in (mostly) somewhat weaker gravitational fields >than clocks here. The effects ought to be detectable but would not >be dramatic. I vaguely remember a newspaper article about some researchers at a university (don't remember which one) detecting the time difference (due to relativistic) effects, on a outbound probe. It may have been a Pioneer, or the Voyager probe. It seems like it was prior to Jupiter that the announcement was made. I seem to recall that the researchers were rather excited about having another confirmation of special relativity. Does anybody out there recall anything like this. I think the University was a major one. MIT, Stanford, ??? So sorry for the vagueness of this, but they say the mind starts to go with age. >-- >V7 /bin/mail source: 554 lines.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology >1989 X.400 specs: 2200+ pages. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu -- _____ Kevin Bagley Global Technology Mukilteo WA 98275 (206)742-9111 )__) _ _ _ UUCP:uw-beaver!uw-nsr!gtisqr!kevin _/__) (_(_(_)_/_)_ ARPA:uw-nsr!gtisqr!kevin@beaver.cs.washington.edu ____________/ Disclaimer: "I did not say this. I am not here." ------------------------------ Date: 31 Aug 89 01:49:14 GMT From: ibmpa!szabonj@uunet.uu.net (nick szabo) Subject: Re: Progress M-1 (new type of cargo craft) launched to USSR's Mir station In article <8908240509.AA26806@ll-vlsi.arpa> glenn@VLSI.LL.MIT.EDU (Glenn Chapman) writes: > >Aviation Week and Defense Daily describing the possible substantial >reductions in the Freedom station it may be that Mir will exceed >the NASA/International station this year when the expansion module >is launched in October. Do you really want that? > Yes! Let the Sovs spend billions on obsolete, labor-intensive capsules which go nowhere but LEO, are filled with vibrations, and contaminated by fluid leaks. By scrapping "Freedom" we will save at least $30 billion, which I suggest we divy up as follows: Planetary Expoloration: an extra $10 billion --5 more Galileo-class (Mariner Mk. II) missions: to Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, asteroid rendesvous/comet flyby, and (if technology permits) Mercury orbiter/lander. --2 more Observer-class missions: Lunar Polar Orbiter, and Mars Observer follow-on. --Thousand-Astronomical-Unit mission --ground-based asteroid survey --Antartic meteor hunts (retrieve lunar, Martian, asteroid and comet samples) Mission to Planet Earth: an extra $5 billion Basic technology prototyping: an extra $5 billion aeronautical research electric propulsion nuclear propulsion laser propulsion optical communications EML tethers automated microgravity labs etc. Private launch company purchase guarantees: $10 billion Nick Szabo uunet!ibmsupt!szabonj These opinions are not related to Big Blue's ------------------------------ Date: 31 Aug 89 18:53:11 GMT From: terry@astro.as.utexas.edu (Terry Hancock) Subject: Re: Voting via taxes and other 3&*%^#! In article <3025@cveg.uucp> jws3@hcx.uucp (6079 Smith James) writes: > >In article <8908291631.AA24231@gemini.arc.nasa.gov>, greer%utd201.dnet%utadnx@utspan.span.nasa.gov writes: >> [Advocacy for "Tax Voting" --- selecting who gets your tax money] > >Neat idea. Pretty soon we'd spend 70% of the budget on Social Security, >25% on Welfare, 4% on defense, and maybe .00001% on space. If you let >people vote themselves a free lunch, they'll take it. > The people who have more money would have more taxes. Tax-voting would favor the rich and middle class -- not people who benefit from welfare and social security. We would more likely see a crueler poverty than we have now if total tax-voting were implemented. Allowing the voter to redirect 25% to 50% of his taxes would be reasonable for several agencies which are supported only by sections of the population. Space, all basic research, the environment, and the arts would probably be bolstered by such a system. Naturally, some of the rich, conservative, and scared will still spend huge sums on defense, in any taxation system. This country has a long way to go toward a constructive, non-paranoid posture. > >Essentially, if we want a space program, we'll have to buy stock in >private space companies (NOT milindustrial governmentplace contractors). Maybe. Launchers, space exploitation, hardware, yes. Space exploration and science, I doubt it. The best you can do there is to sell the info you get. This is detrimental toward scientific progress (it promotes secrecy), and won't generate much revenue. Those who do pay a lot for it will have government grants for basic research anyway -- so it still takes government funding. I do agree this is the way to handle the development of space, but I suspect subsidies may be needed. Space colonies, for instance, will take a long time to start generating their own revenue -- or even break even. You can't sell much stock to people who won't live to see the dividends. The best you can do is sell it to them as an investment for their heirs -- I have no idea if that will work. >The uneducated, pap-fed population of this country simply isn't >interested in long-range planning beyond their new TV. > I realize this was intended as a generalization, but I object to it. It may be that 60, 70, or even 90% of the population is a lot like what you describe -- but the remainder can do a lot if they try. Saying that no one will follow is a common excuse for not leading. Remember all the people who DO care, please. > >Elitist ranting from: >James Smith >JWSMITH@nasamail.nasa.gov You said it, I didn't. ************************* Terry Hancock terry@astro.as.utexas.edu ************************* ------------------------------ Date: 1 Sep 89 03:37:16 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: NASA designates 17 space grant colleges/consortia (Forwarded) Terri Sindelar Headquarters, Washington, D.C. August 31, 1989 RELEASE: 89-136 NASA DESIGNATES 17 SPACE GRANT COLLEGES/CONSORTIA NASA today announced the selection of 17 universities and consortia as Designated Space Grant Colleges/Consortia in the first element of NASA's new National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program. The program was mandated by Congress in 1987. Its first element names certain schools or consortia of schools as Designated Space Grant Colleges/Consortia. These designated institutions, which are already significantly involved in space-related activities, will receive grants and fellowships. The designated colleges/consortia were selected based on a competitive evaluation of the institutions' existing aerospace activities as well as the quality of their plans to strengthen the national educational base for science, math and technology. The original program announcement forecast the number of expected space grant college designations as no more than 12, due to anticipated budget limitations. However, NASA Administrator Richard H. Truly decided to extend designations to 17 colleges/consortia in response to the high quality of the proposals received and as an indicator of NASA's desire to get this important program off to a strong start. Truly said, "I expect this program to have a very significant educational impact throughout the nation, by enhancing the training of future scientists and engineers at the university level, as well as by improving the teaching of science, mathematics and technology at the elementary and secondary levels." The Designated Space Grant Colleges/Consortia will provide leadership and form partnerships with other universities, government and industry to better understand, develop and use space resources through research, education and public service functions. The 17 designated universities and consortia, listed in alphabetical order, are: Alabama Space Grant Consortium; Arizona Space Grant College Consortium; California Space Grant Consortium; Colorado Space Grant Consortium; Cornell Space Grant Consortium; Florida Space Grant Consortium; Georgia Institute of Technology; Aerospace Illinois Space Grant Consortium; The Johns Hopkins Space Grant Consortium; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Michigan Space Grant College Program; Ohio Aerospace Institute; Pennsylvania State University; Rocky Mountain Space Grant Consortium; Texas Space Grant Consortium; Virginia Space Grant Consortium; and the University of Washington. NASA expects to designate additional Space Grant Colleges/Consortia in future years as funds become available and as schools expand their capabilities in the space area. These Designated Space Grant Colleges/Consortia will receive funding for 5 years. In fiscal year 1989 each designee will receive $75,000. In subsequent years, the institutions will receive up to $225,000 per year and are expected to obtain, as a minimum, matching non-Federal funds. In addition, these designated institutions will receive $100,000 funding to support fellowships for undergraduate and graduate students beginning in fiscal year 1990. "The National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program will help maintain America's leadership in aerospace research, training and education," Adm. Truly said. "The investment in these universities and consortia will greatly impact and nourish all levels of education. I am very pleased with the growing aerospace education programs and the strong desire of universities to expand and coordinate these activities. In light of the President's recently announced space exploration initiative, this program will be key to attracting and developing future generations of the most talented engineers and space scientists." The National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program comprises three elements: (1) designation of Space Grant Colleges/Consortia which will provide for a national network of universities and colleges; (2) awards to support space grant programs at other institutions that will expand participation of colleges/universities/consortia that have not been as extensively involved in aeronautics and space research and education; and (3) space grant fellowships that will be made available to students at institutions selected in the first two elements. The first of the elements is the subject of this announcement. The second and third elements of the National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program will be initiated in fiscal year 1990. ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #31 *******************