Message-ID: <YZdN4g200VcJM7LU5v@andrew.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
Date: Sat,  6 Jan 90 01:33:17 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #379

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 379

Today's Topics:
		    Re: Scientific value of Apollo
		Primary Strategic Reform Target:  JSC
	      Progress M-2 docks with Mir space station
			1999 and all that ....
	       Payload Status for 12/22/89 (Forwarded)
			  MUSES-A Launch Set
	 Re: Planetary position software: summary of replies.
	     NASA Headline News for 12/22/89 (Forwarded)
		   Re: Air to orbit launch in 1985?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 20 Dec 89 21:04:16 GMT
From: mailrus!shadooby!umich!dip.eecs.umich.edu!kamidon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu  (Keith Amidon)
Subject: Re: Scientific value of Apollo


I have avoided the manned vs unmanned debate now for a long time, but
I've decided to get my two cents in since it looks like this thread is
never EVER going to die.  In my opinion neither one is better than the
other because they both have their good and bad points.  There are
situations in which manned is better and situations in which unmanned
is better.  If the mission matches the approach used everything is
great.  The problem arises when the wrong approach is used.  Examples
of where I feel each approach is appropriate follow:

     Unmanned: Survey/Photographic Mission
               Simple sampling missions (this could include returns)
       Manned: Complex sampling missions
             
With advanced enough robotics and AI, everything could be done with
unmanned missions.  However, I feel that there is a fundamental problem
with this.  Scientific knowledge gained through space exploration is
extremely important.  However, I believe that we need to develop a
permanent manned presence in space.  The earth is simply too small a
basket to keep all our fragile eggs in.  Therefore, we need missions
with a manned component to develop these capabilities.  Besides, 
the life-science researchers I'm sure would like to have data on how
humans and other organisms live/function in space, and this data could
be just as important to us as the composition of Mars rock etc.

      Flame me if you want, but this is my position on the matter.

            Keith Amidon -- kamidon@caen.engin.umich.edu

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Dec 89 15:26:31 PST
From: mordor!lll-tis!ames!scubed!pnet01.cts.com!jim@angband.s1.gov (Jim Bowery)
To: crash!space@angband.s1.gov
Subject: Primary Strategic Reform Target:  JSC

Johnson Space Center has defined itself as the primary strategic
target in any attempt to reform NASA.  We should all (PARTICULARLY
THOSE OF US AT THE GRASSROOTS) seek ways in which we can dismantle
JSC's power to engage in monumental waste and corruption, rather than 
propping up its ponderous bureaucratic weight long enough for it to 
take the "next logical step" in establishing total suppression of 
progress in space.

In NASA funding priorities, the pecking order goes:

1) Johnson Space Center
2) Other Southern Centers
3) The contractors for the above two
4) Other Centers
5) The contractors for other Centers 
6) Outside investigators

The difference between this and real government funded research 
organizations is most apparent if one looks at the way NSF
worked so successfully over the last 20 years:

1) Outside investigators
2) Administration of the NSF peer-review process

>From its inception, JSC has embodied the triumph of politics 
over progress.  JSC culture, showing itself capable of suppressing 
genuine research in favor of centralizing cashflows in the hands of 
a very few, has "taught" others in the pecking order that one can 
either spend all of one's time begging for a few dollars from the 
hands of those who have "learned to play the game", being rewarded 
with the ability to do the world some good if one succeeds, or one 
can "learn to play the game" better than others, being rewarded 
directly with personal power and prestige if one succeeds.  

This dramatically favors those who are leaders in demonstrating they are 
short-sighted, selfish and lack character or technical competence.  They 
turned their backs on progress and began to "learn the game" earlier and 
are therefore the very people who are least able, ethically and technically, 
to make appropriate judgements as to how to structure the cashflows, and 
most likely to be as corrupt as they can get away with inside the labyrinths 
of the government and aerospace industry.

Therefore, JSC as the political leader in the suppression of scientific
and technical progress in the United States is the primary target 
for energies aimed to recovering United States preeminence in space, 
science and technology.

JSC's political power is based on the perception by elected officials
that the grassroots opinion of JSC's manned program ranges from mild
annoyance at the high cost to unbridled enthusiasm for the heroic
flights of astronauts and images of a new frontier in space.  Also,
there is the belief that the grassroots sees JSC, as it exists today, 
as the primary force behind the success of the Apollo program -- one of
the last moments of great national pride.

Therefore, it is the GRASSROOTS who have power over the reform of JSC
and, indirectly, the pathological structure of our space program and 
research institutions.  That's right -- people like YOU AND ME!

In fact, our power to REFORM the space program is far greater than
is our power to increase its budget.  Think
about it -- all Congressman EXPECT to hear from the grassroots about
the space program is how wonderful it is and how we should give NASA
as much money as it wants for whatever it wants.  The only CRITICS of
the space program they hear from are those who have a vested interest
in grabbing NASA's funding or playing political turf wars.  

WE CAN REALLY GET THEIR ATTENTION BY GOING IN AS GRASSROOTS SPACE
ENTHUSIASTS (including manned space) FOR REFORM OF THE SPACE PROGRAM.

If WE THE PEONS simply make it clear that we are very unhappy
with JSC spoon-feeding us morsels of Apollo's rotting carrion, we
can demand that JSC be eliminated as the top of the destructive
pecking order and insist that measures be taken which will discourage
those with weak character from "taking the bait" when presented
with similar opportunities in the future.  That way, whether or
not there is a shift of government funds from military to space,
we can achieve the kind of progress NASA always promises and
will never deliver.  

The simplest, most direct route to do this is to auction off (privatize)
the STS (Shuttle system) using the revenue to pay for the costs of voluntary 
early retirement around JSC, divide up JSC's (and STS's) budget among the 
other NASA centers and convert the remaining facilities around JSC into an 
Apollo Museum containing relics of the Apollo era (perhaps a Houston branch
of the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum, with the moon-rocks in its care and 
keeping).  

If even a SMALL group AT THE GRASSROOTS (no one with a direct interest in
funding for space activities) started getting organized behind something 
like this, some Congressmen are willing to fight for appropriate
legislation.

I know which direction I'd rather go.

Send me private E-Mail if you want to be a "peon" who makes a real
difference.
---
Typical RESEARCH grant:
$
Typical DEVELOPMENT contract:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 Dec 89 12:19:38 EST
From: Glenn Chapman <glenn@ll-vlsi.arpa>
To: biro%hydra.enet.dec.com@decwrl.dec.com, klaes%wrksys.dec@decwrl.dec.com,
        space-editors-new@andrew.cmu.edu, yaron@astro.as.utexas.edu
Subject: Progress M-2 docks with Mir space station

     The Soviet Union's Progress M-2 cargo craft successfully docked with the 
Mir orbital complex today (Dec. 22) according to Radio Moscow.  The Progress, 
which was launched on Dec. 20th at 6:31 am Moscow Time (10:31 pm EST), carries 
about 2.5 Tonnes of food/water/fuel and equipment to the station.  It is also 
the first craft to dock with Mir in the new mode with the Kvant 2 module 
positioned to the side of the station.  This should make the combined mass of 
the station complex at about 70.5 Tonnes.
     One of the main events of this Progress launch is the addition of a 
protein crystal growth experiment which is paid for Payload Systems, a 
Cambridge, MA based space materials processing company.  These experiments 
take several weeks of zero G growth to crystallize samples for materials 
processing (hence the need for Mir space station processing).  The cosmonauts 
will bring the samples back with them on Feb. 19th when they return from Mir.
     Meanwhile cosmonauts Alexander Viktorenko and Alexander Serebrov have 
finished successfully activating the Kvant 2 module.  The last task was to 
degrease the VIKA (called electron in the west) system which generates oxygen 
by electrolysis of water.  This should enhance their life support system and 
reduce some of the supply needs.  TV pictures from within the module show it 
to be spacious but with a large number of boxes floating around. These must 
contain equipment for future experiments. Photos out the port hole showed the 
solar panels of Kvant 2. The cosmonauts have also started a new series of      
X-ray telescope observations upon supernova remnants from the Kvant 1 
astrophysical module.  Viktorenko and Serebrov have now been up there for 108 
days.  By the way the most experienced US astronaut is currently in 25th place 
on the list of time spent in zero G.  (TASS Dec.19,20, Radio Moscow and Vremya 
- Moscow TV news of several days).
    So the first real commercial activity on board Mir has begun.  In a few 
months we shall see if Payload Systems is getting the results that make it 
worth while to seek a steady commercial contract with the Russians.

                                                       Glenn Chapman
                                                       MIT Lincoln Lab

------------------------------

Date: 22 Dec 89 17:43:46 GMT
From: mcsun!ukc!reading!minster!murray@uunet.uu.net
Subject: 1999 and all that ....

A decade is a period of ten years, a millenia one of a thousand.
The end of a decade means that ten years have elapsed, so any time
at all is the end of the decade.  Likewise a millenia.  So please
stop arguing about when decades finish and start - some people just
think they started at a different time.

And if you really must avoid the problems do what the BBC programs
are doing: say that you are celebrating the end of the 80's.

		Kevin

------------------------------

Date: 26 Dec 89 18:26:01 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Payload Status for 12/22/89 (Forwarded)

Daily Status/KSC Payload Management and Operations 12-22-89
       
         
- STS-31R HST (at VPF) -
      
Auxiliary support fixture disassembly is complete.  No other 
HST activity planned until January 2nd.  Facility HVAC and 
systems to be monitored through the holidays.

        
- STS-32R SYNCOM (at Pad A) -
       
Battery conditioning will continue through 23 December and will
pick back up again on 29 December. 
       
- STS-35 ASTRO-1/BBXRT (at O&C) -
        
MUE installation at the aft flight deck continues.  Software 
validation in work.  BBXRT MLI installation also continuing.  UIT 
early access demo test worked yesterday and will continue today.  
HUT and AST vacuum pump reconnects/pump down, HUT GSE checkout, 
BBXRT liquid argon servicing preps and mechanical ASTRO-1 
closeout are all complete.  The problem on experiment heater mat 
has been isolated to the IPS cable and is being repaired.

- STS-40 SLS-1 (at O&C) -
        
Rack 3 modification in work.  Completed rack 7 upper mods.  
Pyrell foam replacement continues on the module.

- STS-42 IML (at O&C) -
      
No activity yesterday.  Will pick back up today with modification 
to rack 9.

------------------------------

Date: 27 Dec 89 17:11:37 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: MUSES-A Launch Set

Yoshiro Yamada of the Yokohama Science Center, Yokohoma, Japan informs me
that the Japanese have set 20:50 JST (=UT+9h) January 23, 1990 as the launch
time for MUSES-A.

(source: ISAS NEWS, No. 105, December issue 1989)

------------------------------

Date: 27 Dec 89 18:02:25 GMT
From: mcsun!unido!tub!fauern!tumuc!guug!pcsbst!horst@uunet.uu.net  (horst)
Subject: Re: Planetary position software: summary of replies.


Some remarks on ephem: The Man pages do not mention that for "watch"
mode (solar) it is convenient to switch off the display of the outer planets
if you are interested in the inner ones. You can only switch off the
display before you select watch mode. (Only to avoid the
disappointment that I felt.)

Horst     horst@pcs.com

------------------------------

Date: 26 Dec 89 18:35:37 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA Headline News for 12/22/89 (Forwarded)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, December 22, 1989                     Audio: 202/755/1788
-----------------------------------------------------------------


This is NASA Headline News for Friday, December 22....


Two major NASA offices will be merged to insure tight 
coordination in the creation of plans for human exploration of 
the solar system and the development of new technologies needed 
to accomplish the goal.  The Office of Aeronautics and Space 
Technology and the Office of Exploration will operate as a single 
entity under the direction of Associate Administrator Arnold 
Aldrich.  Formal consolidation of the offices will come after the 
new year.


The Washington Post reports that scientists have scaled back 
predictions of a significant sea level rise in the next 100 years 
because of global warming.  The latest prediction is based on a 
noticeable accumulation of snow and ice in Greenland and 
Antarctica.  Data from Greenland was gathered by scientists at 
NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center using satellites.  A 
University of Wisconsin polar research center study indicated 
similar snow and ice accumulation in Antarctica.


Four more universities and consortia have been designated space 
grant colleges in the national space grant college and fellowship 
program.   The addition of the University of Hawaii at Manoa, 
Iowa Space Grant College Consortium, New Mexico Space Grant 
Consortium and Tennessee Valley Aerospace Consortium bring the 
total to 21.  


Sears Roebuck has pulled a space toy off their shelves that 
simulates a space rocket countdown that goes awry.  The New York 
Times says the rocket and launch pad destruction toy is part of a 
Kenner products "Building Blaster" series whose slogan is, "build 
'em up, then blow'em up".  An Idaho family wrote to both Sears 
and President Bush complaining about it.  Kenner says they had no 
intention of recalling the Challenger loss.     


Aerospace Daily reports that the Department of Defense may call 
for a third captive flight of Orbital Science Corporation's 
Pegaus air launched booster.  The story says there were 
"significant" anomalies during the December 15 flight test over 
the Pacific Ocean.  


                      *          *             *


-----------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the broadcast schedule for public affairs events on NASA 
Select TV.  All times are Eastern.


There are no scheduled events on NASA Select television during 
the holiday week.  NASA Update will be transmitted at 11:30 A.M. 
on Thursday, January 4.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
These reports are filed daily, Monday through Friday at 12 noon, 
Eastern time.  There will be no Headline News on Monday, December 
25. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Have a happy holiday season!!!

------------------------------

Date: 29 Dec 89 12:50:21 GMT
From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!caesar.cs.montana.edu!milton!dancey@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu  (Mikel Stromberg)
Subject: Re: Air to orbit launch in 1985?

If you want to read a fictionalized account of this weapon, it is
mentioned in Tom Clancy's 'Red Storm Rising'.  A young, woman, Airforce
pilot uses the system to shoot down five Sov sats, thus becoming America's
first Female Ace.
 
I think there was another ASAT test in '86, invloving a truly orbital weapon.
The Air Force shot a fake ICBM out over the pacific, and it was intercepted
in orbit by a payload from a second rocket.  The payload was a large mesh
'spiderweb' which unfurled in orbit.  The surface area was quite large, and
a complete destruction of the target ICBM 'bus' was achieved....

Ryan, The Tall Guy

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V10 #379
*******************