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, 8 Apr 90 01:45:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sun, 8 Apr 90 01:44:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #234 SPACE Digest Volume 11 : Issue 234 Today's Topics: Re: Quick launches Re: Pegasus Stats Repost The Threat of Peace Re: Pegasus Stats Repost Re: Pegasus Re: orbit definitions Re: HST Image Status for 04/01/90 (Forwarded) Re: The Threat of Peace Re: SPACE Digest V11 #231 Re: South Atlantic Anomaly Re: Quick launches ( was: Intelsat Launch of 7th Block II GPS Satellite Re: orbit definitions Re: HST Image Status for 04/01/90 (Forwarded) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 7 Apr 90 21:16:54 GMT From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!qucdn!gilla@ucsd.edu (Arnold G. Gill) Subject: Re: Quick launches In article <45600007@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>, sfn20715@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu says: > >/* Written 8:00 am Apr 5, 1990 by jdnicoll@watyew.waterloo.edu in >uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:sci.space */ > >a series of launches in the seventies in which the only Minuteman >that actually left its silo malfunctioned in the first kilometer >of the boost phase. I have no idea what the problem was or if it >got fixed [If you don't plan to actually use it, who cares if it >works, right?, but if the problem was with the missile rather than > ^^^^^^^^ >This is silly. Our strategic deterrence relies on the ability to use >our Minutemen and the desire to do so. I had a very good laugh when I read that line, because there is so little meaning in it. The way I would answer that statement is by saying that the defense relies rather on the ability to con the so-called enemy into believing the propaganda that is disemminated to the masses. By the way, don't take this as me actually believing that the silly missiles are incapable of being used as designed. I am sure that they are quite capable of exploding wherever they are aimed. Personally, I think that the original poster is probably correct. They test launched the missiles, then exploded them shortly afterwards so that they wouldn't appear on too many radar screens and spy-sats. The explosions were planned, not because the missiles themselves were defective (other than in concept). ------- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | Arnold Gill | | | Queen's University at Kingston | If I hadn't wanted it heard, | | BITNET : gilla@qucdn | I wouldn't have said it. | | X-400 : Arnold.Gill@QueensU.CA | | | INTERNET : gilla@qucdn.queensu.ca | | -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 90 21:58:20 GMT From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@decwrl.dec.com (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Pegasus Stats Repost In article <27726@ut-emx.UUCP> grads@emx.UUCP (Feulner ... Matt Feulner) writes: >If it's about the same size as the X-15, is the payload high enough to support >a person and all the life support equipment? Would this be a worthwile >concept for the future? ... Pegasus might be able to fly manned, although I believe there are no plans to man-rate it. The payload shroud is awfully small and the accelerations near stage burnout looked kind of high, based on some rough calculations I did when it was first announced, but it's not fundamentally impossible. Nobody has ever built a manned capsule small enough and light enough, but I suspect it's possible if you try hard. Certainly it would be a good deal easier with a somewhat larger launcher. -- Apollo @ 8yrs: one small step.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology Space station @ 8yrs: .| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 90 23:52:03 PLT From: Wayne Fellows <90717459%WSUVM1.BITNET@vma.cc.cmu.edu> Subject: The Threat of Peace Can't all these poor unemployed engineers go do something useful instead of try ing to find better ways to nuke the planet? Maybe start their own companies an d design new and innovative products? ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 90 16:23:30 GMT From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!grads@ucsd.edu (Feulner ... Matt Feulner) Subject: Re: Pegasus Stats Repost In article <1990Apr6.223440.18681@agate.berkeley.edu> gwh@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) writes: > >The vehicle itself is 49.2 feet long, with a diameter of 48 inches and a >wingspan of 22 feet. It weighs 40,000 pounds at launch and is about the >same shape and size as X-15 rocketplane, which was also launched from the >B-52. The payload fairing is 46" diameter by 72" long. If it's about the same size as the X-15, is the payload high enough to support a person and all the life support equipment? Would this be a worthwile concept for the future? I realize that now we have no need to get one person up at a time, but maybe later? I guess it would have to have some sort of space lock which would eat up payload. Matthew Feulner ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 90 16:47:40 GMT From: nuchat!steve@uunet.uu.net (Steve Nuchia) Subject: Re: Pegasus In article <8775@pt.cs.cmu.edu> vac@sam.cs.cmu.edu (Vincent Cate) writes: >Anyway, the Pegasus $6,000 is really only good in comparison to other small >payload launch vehicles. They are able to keep the price per lb down >while doing a small payload. According to friday's Wall Street Journal, that price is a sweetheart deal with DoD and others who made long-lead-time deposits. The spot price is expected to be 30% higher or more. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 90 21:46:06 GMT From: samsung!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@think.com (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: orbit definitions In article <2195@wrgate.WR.TEK.COM> dant@mrloog.WR.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque) writes: >The orbit is 24-hour but has a non-zero inclination. From the ground >it would appear to move up and down on a daily basis while staying over >the same meridian. Unfortunately, this destroys the major advantage of Clarke orbit: the ability to point an antenna at the satellite *once* and just leave it pointed there. If you have to have continuous tracking, you might as well forget the 24-hour orbit entirely, avoiding collision risks and other complications (and, if you move further out, reducing radiation-hardening requirements and increasing solar-cell life substantially). -- Apollo @ 8yrs: one small step.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology Space station @ 8yrs: .| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 90 18:44:00 GMT From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!aries!mcdonald@ucsd.edu (Doug McDonald) Subject: Re: HST Image Status for 04/01/90 (Forwarded) In article <452@helens.Stanford.EDU> joe@hanauma.stanford.edu (Joe Dellinger) writes: > >Last year I digitized some of Voyager II's raw pictures of Neptune off the TV >as they came in real time on the Stanford Cable Network, and made the best >ones available via anonymous ftp. The response was incredible! Many thousands >of ftp connections in a few days! (Needless to say, my advisor wasn't too >happy when we momentarily hit a load of 15 due to ftpd.) And then I followed >the progress of the images across the net as they were converted into almost >every imaginable format over the next few days. > >Wow, I thought, there's really a big demand for these things. Here's my >chance to help JPL get a lot of free publicity at universities all over >the country, where publicity could really do them a lot of good! So I asked >Miya (of course!) whom at JPL to contact. He gave me a name and phone number, >and I called.... Well, THAT person had been dead for three years, but there >was somebody at the number still, and they got me through to the correct >person. > >So I told them how there was this tremendous demand for space program >pictures in digital form, they could get all this wonderful free publicity, >etc, etc. They didn't believe me. I talked with them for about half an hour, >explained how they could do it very easily, we'd just want a very few pictures >of the sort that their own people already had made for their own Sun >backgrounds internally, etc, how all they had to do was give me a few bitmaps >and the images would distribute themselves, how it would be such great >publicity for them at Universities, etc, etc... > >Result? > >Well, they weren't too happy that I had distributed the Neptune pictures, >although since they were no better than what people could have videotaped >off TV anyway they didn't mind _too_ much. > >Anyway, I tried. I really did. >>>> Forget it. <<<< > >As near as I can tell, NASA and JPL have NO interest in releasing digital >images of anything except for the official complete data sets intended for >strictly scientific use. Those they will only release after the data is a >year old. The JPL public relations guy said if I wanted to add more images >to my archive the only way would be to digitize them myself off public- >relations photos. > >This really boggles my mind. I guess I'm not surprised now that JPL couldn't >get money to send a probe to Halley, and it's hard to feel very sorry for them. > I tried also. These people are completely uninterested in getting stuff to the people who pay for their operations. I suggest that you do what I am going to do: call your congressperson and request that they make it a legel requirement that they make available promptly (i.e. within a few weeks) samples of all images they get. In the meantime, how does one file a Freedom on Information Act request? I think it time these folks get prodded a bit. Frankly, I think they are acting like jerks. Doug McDonald ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 90 21:49:12 GMT From: wuarchive!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@decwrl.dec.com (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: The Threat of Peace In article 90717459@WSUVM1.BITNET (Wayne Fellows) writes: >Can't all these poor unemployed engineers go do something useful instead of try >ing to find better ways to nuke the planet? Maybe start their own companies an >d design new and innovative products? Working for the government (or working for a company working for the government) rots the brain. :-) Making the transition from cost-is-no- object if-it-meets-specs-it-doesn't-have-to-work-well high-tech to something that will sell is not easy. -- Apollo @ 8yrs: one small step.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology Space station @ 8yrs: .| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Apr 1990 15:49-EDT From: Dale.Amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V11 #231 Initial offering off OSC stock was withdrawn at the last possible moment due to some negative publicity. I do not known the precise nature of the news that caused the withdrawal, but it was evidentaly some investment news letter and OSC took it seriously enough to make sure they answered the critique first (so I have heard from an Merrill Lynch broker who checked into for me) I wish I'd had stock BEFORE the launch. sigh. from the Emerald Isle, Dale Amon ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 90 19:56:49 GMT From: palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu (David Palmer) Subject: Re: South Atlantic Anomaly Mark.Perew@ofa123.FIDONET.ORG (Mark Perew) writes: >The press release for the Hubble Space Telescope mentions something >called the "South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA)". > >What is this? The South Atlantic Anomaly is the place where the Van Allen Belts, regions of high radiation trapped by the magnetosphere, come closest to Earth. The Van Allen Belts are rotationally symetric about Earth's magnetic axis, which is tilted and offset from Earth's rotational axis. The offset is in the direction away from the South Atlantic. This means that the circular belt reaches down to the thicker parts of Earth's atmosphere at the SAA, but is high above Low Earth Orbit elsewhere. -- David Palmer palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu ...rutgers!cit-vax!tybalt.caltech.edu!palmer Meanwhile, on eng.string.floss, the waxed vs. unwaxed flamewar continues. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Apr 90 16:39:37 GMT From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!sfn20715@ucsd.edu Subject: Re: Quick launches ( was: Intelsat /* Written 8:00 am Apr 5, 1990 by jdnicoll@watyew.waterloo.edu in uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:sci.space */ I don't know if MX missiles suffer from this, but isn't there a problem with launching minutemen from silos? I recall there was ^^^^^^^^ I refuse to believe that the Air Force would not quickly correct any problem with their Minutemen. Any program that receives every dollar it requests surely would not have the problems that uninformed people might speculate. vvvvvvvv a series of launches in the seventies in which the only Minuteman that actually left its silo malfunctioned in the first kilometer of the boost phase. I have no idea what the problem was or if it got fixed [If you don't plan to actually use it, who cares if it works, right?, but if the problem was with the missile rather than ^^^^^^^^ This is silly. Our strategic deterrence relies on the ability to use our Minutemen and the desire to do so. I assure you that military planners did not build the MM for the purpose of not using it. vvvvvvvv the launch site, ICBMs might not be reliable launch vehicles. I believe tests of the Minutemen worked OK out west [At Vandenburg?], so perhaps the difficulty is easily fixed by only launching under the proper conditions. JDN /* End of text from uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:sci.space */ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Apr 90 10:32:37 ADT From: LANG%UNB.CA@vma.cc.cmu.edu Subject: Launch of 7th Block II GPS Satellite 7th Block II Global Positioning System Satellite Launched --------------------------------------------------------- The 7th Block II GPS satellite was launched on 26 March 1990 at 02:45 UT. PRN and SVN numbers are both 20. The international identifier for the satellite is 1990-25A and the NASA/NORAD catalogue number is 20533. Preliminary orbital elements for the satellite in NASA 2-line format are as follows: GPS BII-07 1 20533U 90 92.14180368 -.00000032 0 90 2 20533 55.0584 18.9949 0027907 68.4700 291.8780 2.01118258 72 Note that the orbit has probably been adjusted slightly with respect to these initial elements. Nevertheless, the satellite does appear to be in the B-plane. (Sources: NASA Headline News; USNO; TS Kelso, AFIT; J. McDowell, CfA) ======================================================================== Richard B. Langley BITnet: LANG@UNB.CA or SE@UNB.CA Geodetic Research Laboratory Phone: (506) 453-5142 Dept. of Surveying Engineering Telex: 014-46202 University of New Brunswick FAX: (506) 453-4943 Fredericton, N.B., Canada E3B 5A3 ======================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 00:26:56 GMT From: bfmny0!tneff@uunet.uu.net (Tom Neff) Subject: Re: orbit definitions [ Talking about nonzero inclination geosynch orbits, so that the ground track is a figure 8 centered on the equator ] In article <1990Apr7.214606.13459@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >Unfortunately, this destroys the major advantage of Clarke orbit: the >ability to point an antenna at the satellite *once* and just leave it >pointed there. You lose that, but you gain something new: the ability to reach higher latitudes (N and S) with a reasonable apparent altitude above the horizon -- and using a usably narrow beam -- on a predictable daily basis. Geostationary coverage in the Arctic and Antarctic, for instance, is very difficult: the dishes have to aim horizontally through all kinds of clutter and most transponders aren't aimed up there. One strategy is to use an inclined Clarke orbit for a once-daily downlink at the "end of the 8." You can get maybe an hour or two of coverage this way. I know the Russians did this for a while. For some reason I remember the Japanese trying it too. Someone can probably fill in the details. Of course if your job is weather or other observation, rather than comsatting, inclined geosynch is terrific because your total coverage area is bigger while downlink times stay regular. -- "Take off your engineering hat = "The filter has | Tom Neff and put on your management hat." = discreting sources." | tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 01:21:29 GMT From: shelby!helens!hanauma!joe@decwrl.dec.com (Joe Dellinger) Subject: Re: HST Image Status for 04/01/90 (Forwarded) In article <1990Apr7.184400.2108@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> mcdonald@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Doug McDonald) writes: >In article <452@helens.Stanford.EDU> joe@hanauma.stanford.edu (Joe Dellinger) writes: >... call your congressperson and request that they make it a >legal requirement that they [JPL] make available promptly (i.e. within >a few weeks) samples of all images they get. > >Doug McDonald Well, I can understand a year of exclusive use of the raw data for the principal researchers. These guys often sacrifice most of their professional lives to get that data; they deserve something for that. However, it seems rather ridiculous to extend that reasonable limitation to PR-type photos, especially since it is against their own interests! \ /\ /\ /\/\/\/\/\/\/\.-.-.-.-.......___________ \ / \ / \ /Dept of Geophysics, Stanford University \/\/\.-.-....___ \/ \/ \/Joe Dellinger joe@hanauma.stanford.edu apple!hanauma!joe\/\.-._ ************** Drive Friendly, Y'all! ****************************************** ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V11 #234 *******************