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 ; Sun, 22 Oct 89 18:53:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <8ZEYHP200VcJ4-7k4W@andrew.cmu.edu> Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sun, 22 Oct 89 18:53:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #157 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 157 Today's Topics: Re: potential fall of GALILEO Re: Try thinking before stinking Re: Plutonium in space (was Risk of NOT launching Galileo) NASA Headline News for 10/16/89 (Forwarded) toxic substances TDRS vs military Re: Re: Will NASA Contaminate Jupiter? Re: "The Plan" Re: A small voice, a small plan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 16 Oct 89 13:08:59 GMT From: gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!mailrus!sharkey!itivax!vax3!aws@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Allen W. Sherzer) Subject: Re: potential fall of GALILEO In article <1102@amethyst.math.arizona.edu> adrian@math.arizona.edu (Adrian Jones) writes: >Apparently, lot of folks are (or were) worrying about Galileo's launch. >... >Even more stupid, I heard there exists a plot of the CIA associated with >some Real Estate agents to blast Atlantis. Therefore, plutonium would be >spread all over Florida. A lot of fellows would quickly get away from the >(potentially) doomed zone. Hence, real estate prices would fall and >speculators would buy huge properties, then calm the panick and make a nice >profit. Ain't it nice ? Nah, He has the wrong CIA plot. The real estate scam was tried 10 years ago with the Voyager probe. The plot failed when the bomb in the Voyager probe failed to go off. This time it is related to the war on drugs. The government wants to kill all the drug users in the country. Plutonium is a good way to do it but you need to get the victim to inhale the PU for it to be effective. The solution was to rig the shuttle to explode over southern Florida. This will coat all the crack entering the country with plutonium. When the users inhale it they will die. You think it was a coincidence that the engine controller failed? HA! That is where the bomb is. Allen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Allen Sherzer | DETROIT: | | aws@iti.org | Where the weak are killed and eaten | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 89 13:40:02 GMT From: tank!eecae!netnews.upenn.edu!delany.cis.upenn.edu!santerel@handies.ucar.edu (Walter Santarelli) Subject: Re: Try thinking before stinking I would like to show some support for Christpher Rapier. I am an ardent supporter of space exploration myself, and I think that people are concerned because of the seemingly endless delays which have hampered the Galileo mission. The RTG's which everyone is arguing over have been slowly depleting over the past 4-6(?)years while the vehicle languishes waiting for shuttle time. If NASA had maintained any sort of expendable launch vehicle capability during the '70s Galileo could probably go up on a much more reliable vehicle. Let's face it, with so few launches the shuttle doesn't have a gleaming performance record when compared with the Atlas program for instance. The real culprit here is not people who have legitimate concerns about technological growth outstripping our ability to control it. It is the system that ignores the pleadings of engineers who warn that o-rings are unsafe and is unwilling to fund these programs to the extent that would ensure a higher degree of safety. I wouldn't want to be living in So. Florida if something does go wrong. Perhaps we should find a more isolated launch facility. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 89 01:05:00 GMT From: mirror!frog!john@CS.BU.EDU (John Woods) Subject: Re: Plutonium in space (was Risk of NOT launching Galileo) In article <1419@syma.sussex.ac.uk>, nickw@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Nick Watkins) writes: > In article <1989Sep26.224921.27317@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: > >Uh, if you're talking about the bird that was in Challenger's payload bay > >on January 28 1986, somebody has misinformed you. It wasn't nuclear > >powered and it wasn't military. It was the second Tracking and Data Relay > >Satellite, an entirely unclassified solar-array-powered NASA comsat. > TDRSS' military role in relaying Lacrosse data is well known. TDRSS Piffle. So the DOD buys a couple of Lincoln Town Cars for ferrying self-important bureaucrats around in -- suddenly the Lincoln Town Car is a MILITARY VEHICLE. The DOD probably buys GE light bulbs -- which means there are INSTRUMENTS OF DEATH SHOWERING RADIATION ON ME at this very moment. Excuse the intemperance, but the Luddites trying to stop Galileo ("again":-) have used up all my patience for the next decade. -- John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA 508-626-1101 ...!decvax!frog!john, john@frog.UUCP, ...!mit-eddie!jfw, jfw@eddie.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 89 20:28:51 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: NASA Headline News for 10/16/89 (Forwarded) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Monday, Oct. 16, 1989 Audio: 202/755-1788 ----------------------------------------------------------------- This is NASA Headline News for Monday, October 16th...... The countdown resumed this morning for launch of the space shuttle Atlantis and its cargo...the Galileo probe to Jupiter. Over the weekend technicians completed the replacement and testing of a new main engine controller on Atlantis...and launch is now scheduled for a 26-minute period beginning at 12:57 P.M., Eastern time Tuesday. Anti-nuclear activists who oppose the launch because of Galileo's nuclear power supply, have appealed a federal judge's refusal last week to halt the mission. A spokesman for one of three groups opposing the launch, said the Justice Department filed documents on the appeal Saturday and that the activists plan to file additional papers with the U.S. District Court of Appeals in Washington today. The spokesman said, quote, "We have had no indication as to when to expect a hearing and a verdict. Without a temporary restraining order they can proceed. They don't need a go ahead. We need a restraining order." End quote. NASA Administrator Richard Truly this morning announced two key appointments which will become effective following the successful completion of the upcoming STS-34 mission. Arnold Aldrich, currently Director of the National Space Transportation System, will become Associate Administrator for the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology. And Captain Robert Crippen, currently Deputy Director of NSTS, will become Director of the Space Shuttle program. In his new postion, Aldrich will be responsible for the direction of NASA's aeronautics and space technology programs as well as for the institutional management of NASA's Ames, Langley and Lewis Research Centers. Crippen will have full responsibility for the operation and conduct of the space shuttle program and will report directly to Dr. William Lenoir, Acting Associate Administrator for Space Flight. ************* ----------------------------------------------------------------- Here's the broadcast schedule for public affairs events on NASA Select television. All times are Eastern. Tuesday, Oct. 17..... 7:30 A.M. STS-34 launch day coverage begins. The launch window is open for 26 minutes beginning at 12:57 P.M. All events and times are subject to change without notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------- These reports are filed daily, Monday through Friday, at 12 noon, Eastern time. ----------------------------------------------------------------- A service of the Internal Communications Branch (LPC), NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 89 13:14:48 GMT From: sei!firth@pt.cs.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) Subject: toxic substances "Plutonium 238 is the most toxic substance known in the universe" On the contrary. The most toxic substance in the known universe is stupidity. One nanogram, suitably deployed (as, for instance, in the brain of an environmentalist lawyer), can bring to a halt the entire progress of human civilisation, to the immense detriment of ourselves and of billions yet unborn. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Oct 89 15:29:46 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@rutgers.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: TDRS vs military In article <1419@syma.sussex.ac.uk> nickw@syma.susx.ac.uk (Nick Watkins) writes: >>... It was the second Tracking and Data Relay >>Satellite, an entirely unclassified solar-array-powered NASA comsat. > >TDRSS' military role in relaying Lacrosse data is well known... As far as I know, the TDRS birds are like the shuttle itself: they are sometimes used for classified missions, but there is nothing secret about the hardware itself. > I find it hard to believe that DoD planners like solar cells. >Does anybody know if Milstar will carry them or RTG's? ... The problem with RTGs is that it is hard to get large power outputs out of them. Comsats would really like kilowatts, not hundreds of watts. As far as I know, DoD has no specific plans for RTG comsats at present. There *is* work in progress on hardened solar arrays. >TDRSS has large solar arrays and is in an invulnerable (at present) >orbit so I see no reason why it should have been nuclear powered. Well, before concluding that it's invulnerable, look at some of the work that's been done on using a lunar flyby to get substantial payloads into a retrograde orbit. A few tons of ice cubes in retrograde Clarke orbit will clean out all the comsats, early-warning satellites, etc. etc., and then go away. (One hears that when those lunar trajectories were discovered in the West, somebody noticed that there had been Soviet research interest in them for years...) -- 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: 12 Oct 89 15:20:03 GMT From: hp-pcd!hpcvlx!gvg@hplabs.hp.com (Greg Goebel) Subject: Re: Re: Will NASA Contaminate Jupiter? >> The government >> enjoys federal immunity and in most such cases is "safe" from prosecution. > > Give me a break. The judge ruled in favor of Galileo because the NASA > experts knew what they were talking about and the Christic Luddites > didn't. Right; I wasn't inclined to dismiss the Christics out-of-hand -- if there weren't folks like that around the powers-that-be might get complacent; and if there was a safety concern, it needed to be publicly aired -- but the final debate ended up like: NASA: There are 48 pounds of plutonium oxide in the RTGs. Each RTG is designed to withstand re-entry, and has been tested to withstand an explosion ten times greater than that which it would have experienced in the Challenger cargo bay. The fuel elements are coated with iridium to resist salt-water corrosion, and are formed of plutonium oxide, not raw plutonium, since the oxide form is biologically inert (though admittedly still radioactive). There is no alternative to the use of these devices on this type of mission since solar cells are not effective at the distances of the outer planets, and there are no batteries with the endurance or power density that could do the job. RTGs have been used on past outer-planet probes with no problems. There is a level of risk involved; but that is true of every jumbo jet that lifts off the runway, or of thousands of other common activities that are accepted as normal. Christics: We say it's unsafe because plutonium is radioactive and we don't believe NASA. Okay, you be the judge. * NASA, by the way, has shown remarkable public tact in handling the Christics, carefully maintaining their rights as citizens to make their objections known and being quick to make detailed public responses to their allegations. This seems the best way to handle such a situation, since "ad hominem" on the Christics would have made NASA look bureacratic and childish -- and if the concerns of the Christics were exaggerated, NASA should be -- and was -- able to provide persuasive answers to show the extent of their exaggeration. -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | 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: 14 Oct 89 13:58:41 GMT From: rochester!dietz@pt.cs.cmu.edu (Paul Dietz) Subject: Re: "The Plan" In article <9972@thorin.cs.unc.edu> leech@alanine.cs.unc.edu (Jonathan Leech) writes: >In article <2441@ibmpa.UUCP> szabonj@ibmpa.UUCP (Nick Szabo) writes: >>...BTW, there is nothing on the Moon that justifies spending even $15 billion, >>much less $150 billion... > > I'm impressed. I didn't know Nick would post anti-Moon articles >which didn't mention the infamous "ore-forming processes". >-- > Jon Leech (leech@cs.unc.edu) __@/ > ``Nuclear fusion, the promise of limitless energy from sea water > or something, has been just around the corner ever since World War > II and is still just around the corner.'' - David Goodstein Funny that Jon should include this bit in his signature... There is one potentially valuable resource that is present on the Moon that may not be present on the near earth asteroids. This is the element helium-3. Implanted into the lunar regolith by the solar wind, and present in some ilmenite samples at concentrations of up to 100 ppb, helium-3 has many advantages as a fusion reactor fuel. Studies have found that extracting He-3 from lunar regolith and transporting it back to earth, even with chemical rockets, will cost about .07 MeV/atom, vs. 18.3 MeV/atom released upon fusion with deuterium. Of course, a large amount of machinery would be required on the lunar surface, and the size of the mines would be enormous if fusion were to supply a significant fraction of US energy demand. NEAs have spent less time near the sun than the moon. Also, they should not be covered with powdery regolith, since they have insufficient surface gravity to retain ejecta from impacts. Earth has almost no natural He-3; the atoms that hit the earth from the solar wind go into the atmosphere and are lost to space again soon afterwards. The same is true of Mars or Venus. Ultimately, we could extract helium-3 from the outer planets. Perhaps some of the element has escaped from those planets, perhaps as ions, and, after some time in their magnetospheres, has implanted itself into the colder moons. Then there is always mining the gas giants' atmospheres themselves. It would be a bit absurd to spend $100 B on a moonbase while spending $300M/year on fusion, though. Paul F. Dietz dietz@cs.rochester.edu ------------------------------ Date: 14 Oct 89 22:23:52 GMT From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@rutgers.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: A small voice, a small plan In article <5056@omepd.UUCP> snidely@inteloa.UUCP (David P. Schneider) writes: > I've had wild pictures of plugging the Spacelab module into > an ET, then filling the tank with water for shielding > (cosmic rays). But what could be done realistically to > shield Spacelab to a reasonable level? Also, why would one bother? Cosmic-ray shielding is a serious issue if you are planning to spend a lifetime in space, especially outside Earth's magnetosphere, but is not worth worrying about for a year or two in low orbit. > Question: could the current shuttle be adapted to a hor- > izontal launch system, or is better lift required than is > available? Considerably better. The shuttle can more or less lift its own weight, but it hasn't a prayer of carrying a useful amount of fuel. To build a horizontal-takeoff system, you'd need to build a winged first stage to carry a shuttle orbiter and a (smaller?) external tank. -- 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 ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #157 *******************