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/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Sat, 21 Oct 89 16:25:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sat, 21 Oct 89 16:25:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #148 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 148 Today's Topics: Re: Pharmacies in Space MICROSAT LAUNCH DATE Re: Trump Station Re: What would we do WITHOUT 'Freedom'? Re: Galileo--- history repeats itself Re: Space goals, cheap launchers Re: What would we do WITHOUT 'Freedom'? Re: What would we do WITHOUT 'Freedom'? Soviet commercial space groups Re: The 'Face' of Mars Leap Second Re: Plutonium in space (was Risk of NOT launching Galileo) MARS OBSERVER INSTRUMENTS Re: astrodynamic software ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11 Oct 89 15:41:20 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Pharmacies in Space In article <1989Oct11.001602.25904@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu.UUCP (Paul Dietz) writes: >This was largely NASA-encouraged propaganda when they were trying to >sell the space station. McDonnell-Douglas had a project -- continuous >flow electrophoresis -- that was obsoleted by advances in earth-based >protein separation technology. McDD terminated CFE last year. Note, though, that they spent a good bit of their own money on it while it was going. I.e., it looked like a serious possibility. If they'd had all the flight opportunities they wanted, when they wanted them, the end of the story might have been different. -- A bit of tolerance is worth a | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology megabyte of flaming. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 10 Oct 89 20:05:28 GMT From: idacrd!mac@princeton.edu (Robert McGwier) Subject: MICROSAT LAUNCH DATE The new launch date for SPOT-2, Microsat, UOSAT has just been given to us by Arianespace. They are shooting for a January 19, 1990 launch. Bob McGwier N4HY ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 89 18:09:41 GMT From: phri!cooper!dasys1!rsweeney@nyu.edu (Robert Sweeney) Subject: Re: Trump Station In article <7799@maven.u.washington.edu> games@maven.u.washington.edu (Games Wizard) writes: >It is clear that this magnitude project puts him in the league where he is >willing to committ a LARGE ammount of money to see his name in lights >(or on the side of the building ). The question is : > How does one convince him that a space station, > or a space shuttle, or any space project x > is worth HIS getting involved. Note that although Trump is unimaginably rich, and unquestioniably the most famous billionaire in America today, his personal fortune is estimated at "only" around $ 1.7 billion. While this is an incredible amount of money, it's not enough to run a personal space program. Trump has made a name for himself as an effective manager of big projects, though, and perhaps this is where he'd be most useful. /rs -- Robert Sweeney ..!cmcl2!dasys1!rsweeney Big Electric Cat - Computerized Conferencing: (212) 879-9031/9033 Never eat anything bigger than your head. - B. Kliban ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 89 12:53:46 GMT From: eplrx7!leipold@louie.udel.edu (leipold) Subject: Re: What would we do WITHOUT 'Freedom'? In article <2490@ibmpa.UUCP> szabonj@ibmpa.UUCP (nick szabo) writes: >It takes twenty years to build something monstrous like the Station. >Small unmanned efforts can be mounted within 5-10 years of proposal. 'dja ever notice how everybody refers to it as _THE_ station? Why only one, huh? If DoD wants one, give it to 'em; if we need one for medical research, dedicate a station for the purpose; if the exotic materials people require better microgravity than DoD can guarantee in _its_ station, we'll build a separate station (compact, for the low gravity gradient) for materials research. Putting all our eggs in the basket of one space station sounds about as smart as depending on one launch system (remember the Shuttle?). Look at some of the problems caused by having only one station: 1) It has to be _perfect_ the first time around. Of course, this isn't a real practical attitude. 2) It has to do everything! Multipurpose tools aren't always useful; the classic example is the 100-bladed Swiss army knife. Besides, It may look like it would cost more to build several smaller stations, but the synergy among multiple program teams (exchange of personnel, and (hopefully) good-natured competition) would be better than having a single, humongous program office pronouncing the One True Way (tm) of conquering space. >Our real space efforts--planetary exploration, new technology, microgravity >research, privatization, etc. etc.--do not at all rely on the Station. I tend to agree, but by now it's politically infeasible to change horses in midstream. -- "As long as you've lit one candle, Walt Leipold you're allowed to curse the darkness." (leipolw%esvax@dupont.com) -- -- The UUCP Mailer ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 89 06:05:13 GMT From: bungia!orbit!pnet51!schaper@UMN-CS.CS.UMN.EDU (S Schaper) Subject: Re: Galileo--- history repeats itself Apparently Korac MacArthur is a product of the Amerian Public Educational System. Where did he get his history - Monty Python??? UUCP: {amdahl!bungia, uunet!rosevax, chinet, killer}!orbit!pnet51!schaper ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!schaper@nosc.mil INET: schaper@pnet51.cts.com ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 89 10:09:47 GMT From: mcsun!ukc!icdoc!syma!nickw@uunet.uu.net (Nick Watkins) Subject: Re: Space goals, cheap launchers In article <8909260257.AA19934@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts) writes: >Can any of these small launchers be equipped with a secondary booster, and get >a payload of usable size into lunar or interplanetary trajectories? Yes. The Taurus (MX plus Pegasus) now under development for DARPA "would be capable of sending 925 lb payloads on Earth escape trajectories to the Moon." "JPL has begun examining the type of small spacecraft that could be used in the 21st century for such high velocity, low cost missions to the planets." (AW&ST, 18-9-89, p.50) Sounds like Dyson's "Astrochicken" to me. Nick -- Nick Watkins, Space & Plasma Physics Group, School of Mathematical & Physical Sciences, Univ. of Sussex, Brighton, E.Sussex, BN1 9QH, ENGLAND JANET: nickw@syma.sussex.ac.uk BITNET: nickw%syma.sussex.ac.uk@uk.ac ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 89 14:00:35 GMT From: mailrus!sharkey!itivax!vax3!aws@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Allen W. Sherzer) Subject: Re: What would we do WITHOUT 'Freedom'? In article <2490@ibmpa.UUCP> szabonj@ibmpa.UUCP (nick szabo) writes: >It takes twenty years to build something monstrous like the Station. >Small unmanned efforts can be mounted within 5-10 years of proposal. Apollo was mounted within 5-10 years of proposal. It can be done if the political will exists. >NASA has basically promised Europe and Japan a free ride on our Station. >We spend the $30 billion, and they do the research. Blah to that! No they haven't. There is an article in the current Economist which gives figures but the partners are spending billions on the station. Allen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Allen Sherzer | DETROIT: | | aws@iti.org | Where the weak are killed and eaten | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 89 15:42:27 GMT From: mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: What would we do WITHOUT 'Freedom'? In article <2490@ibmpa.UUCP> szabonj@ibmpa.UUCP (nick szabo) writes: >NASA has basically promised Europe and Japan a free ride on our Station. >We spend the $30 billion, and they do the research. Blah to that! I've got news for you, Nick: they're spending their own billions on it, and the US gets quite a bit of use of the facilities they're supplying. On terms that they aren't too happy about, either. -- A bit of tolerance is worth a | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology megabyte of flaming. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 89 10:05 -0600 From: bradley thompson Subject: Soviet commercial space groups We have been setting up some space services deals with the Soviets and had been dealing with Glavcosmos. The Soviets have just informed us that they have created two agencies, the Estonian Aero-Space Agency and the Dniepepotrovsk Rocket and Space Scientific Test Centre to deal with commercial space projects. We are to deal with these groups instead of Glavcosmos. I am assuming these groups existed before, and are now being utilized for this new purpose. I will update as I get more info. Brad Thompson ------------------------------ Date: 9 Oct 89 13:47:00 GMT From: sun-barr!newstop!texsun!letni!merch!cpe!hal6000!trsvax!mike@apple.com Subject: Re: The 'Face' of Mars So you're kinda new to sci.space, eh? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Oct 89 16:28:35 PST From: Peter Scott Subject: Leap Second X-Vms-Mail-To: EXOS%"space@andrew.cmu.edu" Information from Herb Royden here which may be useful to you folk with ephemeris programs, or super-accurate system clocks: ---------------------------------------------------------------- The International Earth Rotation Service (IERS) has announced that a positive leap second will occur at the end of December 1989. Details are given in IERS Bulletin C (11 September 1989), as follows: UTC TIME STEP on the 1st of January 1990 A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of December 1989. The sequence of dates of the UTC second markers will be : 1989 December 31, 23h 59m 59s 1989 December 31, 23h 59m 60s 1990 January 1, 0h 0m 0s The difference between UTC and the International Atomic Time TAI is : from 1988 January 1, 0h UTC, to 1990 January 1, 0h UTC : UTC-TAI = - 24s from 1990 January 1, 0h UTC, until further notice : UTC-TAI = - 25s This UTC step will be incorporated into future STOIC output files (UniSys elements) starting with last Monday's, having TIMPOL='STOIC.LD890929/PT891023 .LAST DATUM 890929 PREDICTS TO 891023. ', as the first record. The value of TAI - UTC will increase from exactly 24 sec (88/01/0189/12/31) to exactly 25 sec (90/01/01). The value of UT1 - UTC will jump from roughly -0.7 to +0.3 sec. The value of ET - UTC will increase from approximately 56.184 to 57.184 sec. Peter Scott (pjs@grouch.jpl.nasa.gov) ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 89 03:27:13 GMT From: tramp!serre@boulder.colorado.edu (SERRE GLENN) Subject: Re: Plutonium in space (was Risk of NOT launching Galileo) Milstar uses solar panels. Disclaimer: I don't represent anyone, even myself. --Glenn Serre serre@tramp.colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: 11 Oct 89 18:34:26 GMT From: hp-pcd!hpcvlx!gvg@hplabs.hp.com (Greg Goebel) Subject: MARS OBSERVER INSTRUMENTS AVIATION WEEK -- just broke down and finally got a subscription, since I like aircraft too IT'S ALL GRAVY! -- in their latest issue did some closeups on future American space probes; great article on Mars observer, which however leaves me with some questions about the instrumentation payload: * Gamma ray spectrometer: No problem there, detects elemental composition and distribution of planetary surface by sensing gamma rays due to fluorescence of the surface under cosmic-ray bombardment. (Operating principles unkown.) * Laser altimeter: Probably uses radar-like action, using laser light instead of radio waves. * Pressure modulator infrared radiometer: Huh? * Thermal emission spectrometer: An IR spectrometer? * Camera. * Electron reflectometer: Say what? * Magnetometers: Magnetic field sensors, probably using an inductive pickup. Anybody who can elaborate on, clarify, correct, or otherwise enlighten me on these nice toys would have my appreciation. Please email unless you feel your response would be of general interest ... -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Greg Goebel | | Hewlett-Packard CWO / 1000 NE Circle Boulevard / Corvallis OR 97330 | | (503) 750-3969 | | INTERNET: gvg@hp-pcd | | HP DESK: GREG GOEBEL / HP3900 / 20 | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Oct 89 11:36:46 ADT Cc: LANG@UNB.CA Subject: Re: astrodynamic software From: LANG@UNB.CA In article <126022@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> kenobi%lightsabre@Sun.COM (Rick Kwan) asks about recent books on astrodynamics. Below I list a few books which I have found useful in the study of the orbits of earth satellites; they are either in my personal library or that of UNB. Additions to the list would be much appreciated. A short bibliography of selected books dealing in whole or in part with orbital mechanics. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Astronautics for Science Teachers by J.G. Meitner (ed.). 1965. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 605 Third Ave., New York, NY 10158. Celestial Mechanics, a Computational Guide for the Practitioner by L.G. Taff. 1985. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 605 Third Ave., New York, NY 10158. ISBN 0-471-89316-1. Dynamics of Satellites by M. Roy (ed.). 1963. Academic Press Inc., Publishers, 111 5th Ave., New York, NY. Fundamentals of Astrodynamics by R.R. Bate, D.D. Mueller and J.E. White. 1971. Dover Publications, Inc., 180 Varick St., New York, NY 10014. ISBN 0-486-60061-0. Fundamentals of Celestial Mechanics by J.M.A. Danby. 2nd edition. 1988. Willmann-Bell, Inc., P.O. Box 35025, Richmond, VA 23235. Guide to GPS Positioning by D. Wells and 10 other authors. 1987. Canadian GPS Associates, Box 3184, Postal Station B, Fredericton, N.B. E3A 5GP, Canada. ISBN 0-920-114-73-3. Introduction to Geostationary Orbits by E.M. Soop. 1983. European Space Agency, ESA Scientific and Technical Publications Branch, ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands. ISSN 0379-6566. Introductory Orbit Mechanics by F.P.J. Rimrott. 1989. Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, Braunschweig, Federal Republic of Germany. ISBN 3-528-06344-0. Methods of Orbit Determination by P.R. Escobal. 1965. Reprinted 1985. Robert E. Krieger Publishing Comp., Inc., Krieger Drive, Malabar, FL 32950. ISBN 0-88275-319-3. Non-gravitational Perturbations and Satellite Geodesy by A. Milani, A.M. Nobili and P. Farinella. 1987. Adam Hilger, IOP Publishing Ltd., Techno House, Redcliffe Way, Bristol BS1 6NX, England. ISBN 0-85274-538-9. Observing Earth Satellites by D. King-Hele. 1983. Van Nostrand Reinhold Comp., 135 West 50th St., New York, NY 10020. ISBN 0-442-24877-6 Satellite Communications Systems by G. Maral and M. Bousquet. 1986. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 605 Third Ave., New York, NY 10158. ISBN 0-471-90220-9. Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control by J.R. Wertz (ed.). 1978. D. Reidel Publishing Comp., Inc., Lincoln Bldg., 160 Old Derby St., Hingham, MA 02043, U.S.A. ISBN 90-277-0959-9. The Satellite Experimenter's Handbook by M.R. Davidoff. 1984. The American Radio Relay League, Inc., 225 Main St., Newington, CT 06111. ISBN 0-87259-004-6. The Theory of Satellite Orbits in an Atmosphere by D. King-Hele. 1964. Butterworth and Co. (Publishers) Ltd., London. Richard B. Langley E-mail: LANG@UNB.CA or SE@UNB.CA Assoc. Prof. Phone: (506) 453-5142 Geodetic Research Laboratory Telex: 014-46202 Dept. of Surveying Engineering FAX: (506) 453-4943 University of New Brunswick Fredericton, N.B., Canada E3B 5A3 ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #148 *******************