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 ; Wed, 4 Oct 89 04:23:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Wed, 4 Oct 89 04:23:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #107 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 107 Today's Topics: Re: YAHSS (Yet Another Henry Spencer Signature) Re: NASA Headline News for 09/27/89 (Forwarded) Re: power source for the space station Re: NASA Headline News for 09/27/89 (Forwarded) Re: NASA and face data Plutonium is the least of our worries Re: Toxic materials on the Shuttle Re: NASA images Re: Toxic materials on the Shuttle Re: power source for the space station Mars fetish ( or why not visit the rocks of Kansas first. ) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Sep 89 14:43:10 GMT From: calvin!johns@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (John Sahr) Subject: Re: YAHSS (Yet Another Henry Spencer Signature) In article <1989Sep28.154612.2266@sics.se> pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) writes: >Well, Trump is no dummy (or else he wouldn't be immensely rich) Okay, maybe we should have the richest man in the U.S.A. be king. -- John Sahr, Dept. of Electrical Eng., Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 johns@{alfven,calvin}.ee.cornell.edu, {rochester,cmcl2}!cornell!calvin!johns --When the dust settles, each B2 bomber will fund NSF for more than a year-- ------------------------------ Date: 29 Sep 89 15:45:00 GMT From: mailrus!sharkey!itivax!vax3!aws@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Allen W. Sherzer) Subject: Re: NASA Headline News for 09/27/89 (Forwarded) In article <32628@ames.arc.nasa.gov> yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) writes: >Thursday, September 28.... > > 3:30 P.M. Amroc launch with Air Force/MIT experiments > from Vandenberg AFB. Window opens at 4:30 > P.M. So does anybody know if it went up? If not, when? I didn't see it on the news (although CNN said they would cover it when we called). Allen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Allen Sherzer | DETROIT: | | aws@iti.org | Where the weak are killed and eaten | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 29 Sep 89 16:33:10 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: power source for the space station In article <1072@otc.otca.oz> gregw@otc.otca.oz (Greg Wilkins) writes: >Has solar-thermo-couple power been considered, ie a solar collector >focused on one end of a bank of thermocouples??? Is this an improvement >on solar panels in any shape or form??. Thermocouples are awesomely inefficient, even worse than solar panels. I don't think it would be worthwhile. -- "Where is D.D. Harriman now, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology when we really *need* him?" | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 29 Sep 89 19:27:43 GMT From: usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jpl-devvax!leem@apple.com (Lee Mellinger) Subject: Re: NASA Headline News for 09/27/89 (Forwarded) In article <3991@itivax.iti.org> aws@vax3.UUCP (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: :In article <32628@ames.arc.nasa.gov> yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) writes: :>Thursday, September 28.... :> 3:30 P.M. Amroc launch with Air Force/MIT experiments :> from Vandenberg AFB. Window opens at 4:30 :> P.M. :So does anybody know if it went up? If not, when? :| Allen Sherzer | DETROIT: | It did not launch, scrubbed due to weather (fog I believe). Next launch attempt will be monday I think. Lee "I'm the NRA" |Lee F. Mellinger Caltech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory - NASA |4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109 818/393-0516 FTS 977-0516 |{ames!cit-vax,}!elroy!jpl-devvax!leem leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV ------------------------------ Date: 29 Sep 89 18:05:02 GMT From: sjsca4!greg@uunet.uu.net (Greg Wageman) Subject: Re: NASA and face data Opinions expressed are the responsibility of the author. In article <8909282014.AA01251@gemini.arc.nasa.gov> greer%utd201.dnet%utadnx@utspan.span.nasa.gov writes: > > Many thanks to Loren Carpenter for supplying the raw data for the Mars >"face" images. I wrote a small program to help analyze the images and spent >some time looking at them. The results of about a half-day's worth of effort? >It's a pile of dirt, of course! > > So why hasn't NASA made greater efforts to bring this disproof to >light? Why should they? It's just a trick of the lighting! They already said >it was a trick of the lighting and apparently most people have been satisfied >with that answer (if they ever knew the question in the first place!). There >never was a cover-up, wasn't any need for one, and if researchers don't seem >interested it is because a) they'd rather be doing science and b) the people >who pay their salaries (i.e., taxpayers) have deemed the "face" a nonissue. I attended a Smithsonian Lecture in San Jose last evening, where a gentleman who specializes in image processing lectured on the latest Mars data and analysis. He did not mention the "face" until asked by an audience member, whereupon he produce two slides which he had obviously expected to need. The first was of the unprocessed "face"; the second was computer-enhanced in the manner described above. With the shadow on the right side, it looks like a very regular face. When the area in shadow is contrast stretched, the symmetry is completely broken. As he said, "Either the Martians had some strange projection on the right side of their faces under their chins", and their eyes were not symmetrical, or it's just a rock. He also implied, however, that it is not in NASA's best interest to dissuade interest in space exploration, even if the interest is generated by something as insignificant as the "face". If that's what it takes to get public support to send an orbiter and/or lander up and get better resolution pictures of the thing, then so be it. I can't really argue with that. Copyright 1989 Greg Wageman DOMAIN: greg@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!greg San Jose, CA 95110-1397 BIX: gwage CIS: 74016,352 GEnie: G.WAGEMAN Permission granted for not-for-profit reproduction only. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Sep 89 15:56:33 GMT From: voder!pyramid!infmx!cortesi@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (David Cortesi) Subject: Plutonium is the least of our worries In the 9/29 San Jose Mercury there is a long and well-balanced article on the Galileo/Plutonium suit. To me the most interesting feature was a chart headed "Galileo risk analysis." A footnote to the chart says "Source: Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel." I am reproducing the chart below, not for what it says about plutonium but for the very remarkable and frightening things it seems to say about the shuttle. To keep the width below 80 bytes I have used exponential notation instead of "million" and "billion"; also edited the captions. =========================================================================== Accident Risk of Risk of Pop. Fatal Individual Accident Pl. release Exposed* Cancers Risk External fuel tank explodes on launch pad 1:256 1:1e6 860,000 40 1:25e9 Shuttle hits tower and explodes 1:5,000 1:1e6 670,000 20 1:33e9 Shuttle breaks up after launch; fuel explodes 1:667 1:167,000 110,000 0.4 1:50e9 SRB ruptures just after launch 1:556 1:1e6 880,000 80 1:11e9 SRB ruptures within 10-20 sec. of launch 1:2,222 1:1e6 460,000 9 1:50e9 SRB ruptures within 70-105 sec. of launch 1:3,125 1:1e6 0 0.5 insignificant Galileo crashes to Earth before/during deployment 1:37 1:1e6 27,000 0.08 1:300e9 Galileo crashes to Earth during later flyby 1:2e6 1:2e6 4.5e9** 0-2,000 1:50e9 * Exposure is more than 1 millirem in 50 years ** the entire population of the world =========================================================================== There are some strange things in this chart; for instance the next-to-last row may or may not represent a total for the preceding rows; the Merc. didn't print it as if it were a summary but it's hard to see how to get a 1:37 chance any other way. But what is very clear is that the "Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel" (whoever they are) have published some very scary numbers on the risk of an unsuccessful shuttle launch. 1 chance in 256 of the external tank blowing! 1 in 556 of SRB rupture at launch! Where did these first-column numbers come from? Are they correct? /////// / David Cortesi {pyramid|uunet}!infmx!cortesi ////// // /////////////////////////////////// //// / /// Informix Software // I don't fly nothin' what got // /// / //// 4100 Bohannon Drive // odds of explodin' that fit // // / ///// Menlo Park, CA 94025 // in no 16-bit word! // / //////// (415) 926-6300 /////////////////////////////////// ------------------------------ Date: 29 Sep 89 17:00:15 GMT From: rochester!dietz@rutgers.edu (Paul Dietz) Subject: Re: Toxic materials on the Shuttle In article <228@xpiinc.UU.NET> ctr@xpiinc.uu.net (Christian Reimer) writes: > The point you are missing is that while the shuttle's beryllium will only >become a health hazard if it is vaporized/powdered and dispersed (so that it >can get *inside* an organism), plutonium can and will pose a threat to public >health even if it is dispersed in large chunks (radioactivity can act from >*outside* an organism). Wrong. Pu238 is an alpha emitter that emits very little gamma radiation (which is why it is used in RTGs). It would only be a hazard if particles were to lodge inside the body -- alpha particles cannot even penetrate skin. Paul F. Dietz dietz@cs.rochester.edu ------------------------------ Date: 29 Sep 89 13:57:14 GMT From: gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jpl-devvax!leem@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Lee Mellinger) Subject: Re: NASA images In article <8909282019.AA00690@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> CCCRAIG@UMCVMB.BITNET ("Craig Pepmiller") writes: :Where should I write at NASA to get access to Voyager/Pioneer produced images :for research? Also does NASA have a repository of Earth and Lunar images? : :Thanks, : :Craig Pepmiller :Computing Services :University of Missouri--Columbia Write to the Regional Planetary Image Facility Jet Propulsion Laboratory MS 202-201 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena, Ca 91109-8099 or call them at 818-354-3343. All of the images that JPL has received are stored here, are available for viewing, and I believe, can be acquired in electronic form (laser video disks) for the reproduction costs. Lee "I'm the NRA" |Lee F. Mellinger Caltech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory - NASA |4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109 818/393-0516 FTS 977-0516 |{ames!cit-vax,}!elroy!bentley!leem leem@bentley.JPL.NASA.GOV ------------------------------ Date: 29 Sep 89 19:18:38 GMT From: m2c!wpi!tmurphy@husc6.harvard.edu (Tom [Chris] Murphy) Subject: Re: Toxic materials on the Shuttle In article <228@xpiinc.UU.NET> ctr@xpiinc.uu.net (Christian Reimer) writes: > > Radioactivity isn't just a boogey-man; it does bring into play different >health hazards, and warrants greater concern than purely chemical toxins. Having a basic, but not indepth, knowledge of radiological systems, I am courious about the 'greater concern' warrented by radiation over chemical toxins. True, they pose different problems, but chemical toxins always seem more worrisome to me. Thomas C. Murphy Worcester Polytechnic Institute CAD Lab Internet: tmurphy@wpi.wpi.edu tmurphy@zaphod.wpi.edu BITNET: TMURPHY@WPI BIX: tmurphy CompuServe: 73766,130 If the Universe is constantly expanding, why can't I ever find a parking space? ------------------------------ Date: 30 Sep 89 01:12:32 GMT From: phoenix!puppsr!marty@princeton.edu (marty ryba) Subject: Re: power source for the space station gregw@otc.otca.oz (Greg Wilkins) writes: >Has solar-thermo-couple power been considered, ie a solar collector >focused on one end of a bank of thermocouples??? Is this an improvement >on solar panels in any shape or form??. Big NO. The thermoelectric generators used in RTG's have a thermodynamic efficiency of only 5% or so. Combine this with mirror inefficiencies and radiative losses, and you lose a lot. Solar cells are approaching 20% efficiency over the visible spectrum; although it does degrade some over time, the direct conversion is still far superior, and much more reliable to boot. >If the collector was big enough, it would also provide a solar furnace, >which I am sure some material scientists would like to use in low Gs. A solar furnace for it's own sake sounds interesting; I would suggest talking seriously about this to someone official; NASA Lewis in Cleveland is in charge of development of the power systems; I'm sure that idea would have an impact on their electrical considerations. My feeling though is that the small gain in efficiency and initial cost doesn't make up for the problems of having the furnace as a separate module instead of something that would be inside and more accesible. >If solar-thermo-couple is not better than solar panels, can anybody think >of and arrangment of solar panels that would allow the waste heat and >reflected light to be used by thermocouples? Low grade heat isn't a valuable resource. Thanks much for the interesting ideas.... Marty Ryba (slave physics grad student) They don't care if I exist, let alone what my opinions are! marty@puppsr.princeton.edu Asbestos gloves always on when reading mail ------------------------------ Date: 30 Sep 89 01:39:38 GMT From: milton!maven!games@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Games Wizard) Subject: Mars fetish ( or why not visit the rocks of Kansas first. ) This facination with Mars probably comes from the relative excitement factor of the planet. Joe Blow who is a steel worker in Detroit Listens to Dan Quale, and thinks that this is a good deal, some day his kid may live on Mars because there is oxygen there. Big rocks in space don't interest him. What this perception means is that the politicians, and everyone else that relies upon public opinion ( via congressmen, donations, etc... ) will put forth a voyage to mars before a rock, because it will have more mass appeal, and hence more of a chance of success ( public opinion DOES influence funding ) What people involved in some of these other projects should be doing is telling the public that thier project is tied to the "MISSION TO MARS", and that it will help ensure its success. LIE THROUGH YOUR TEETH, AND YOU WILL GET WHAT YOU WANT. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Trendy footer by: John Stevens-Schlick Internet?: JOHN@tranya.cpac.washington.edu 7720 35'th Ave S.W. Seattle, Wa. 98126 (206) 935 - 4384 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My boss dosen't know what I do. ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #107 *******************