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, 13 Jan 1991 02:08:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sun, 13 Jan 1991 02:07:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #039 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 39 Today's Topics: Re: US buys Soviet reactor NASA Headline News for 01/10/91 (Forwarded) Re: LOX/LH2 in the Shuttle Payload Bay Re: LOX/LH2 in Shuttle Payload Bay Re: Salyut Question Re: Interstellar Travel Re: Humankind's Second Off-world Colony NASA Authorization Act 1991? Salyut 7 burn-up What are the qualifications needed for astronauts Magellan Update - 01/10/91 Administrivia: Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to space+@andrew.cmu.edu. Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests, should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 10 Jan 91 00:34:07 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!reed!trost@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Bill Trost,Box 607,ext 640,) Subject: Re: US buys Soviet reactor A long time ago, in article <1913@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk>, sfleming@cs.hw.ac.uk (Stewart T. Fleming) writes: >WASHINGTON - In the first US-Soviet transfer of sensitive military >technology, the United States is buying an advanced nuclear reactor >from the Soviet Union. .... >I have some questions about this : > >It would appear that there is (strong ?) political opposition to the >use of nuclear reactors in space, at least on the US side.... In the last (January?) _Ad Astra_, it was reported that the lawsuit of the "Florida Coalition of Peace and Justice" (maybe not "Florida", and maybe a different group -- that wonderful name just stands out) attempting to block the launch of _Ulysses_ on the grounds of its RTG was thrown out of court "with extreme prejudice," meaning that the courts refuse to be bothered by something like this again. NSS is quick to point out the various documents and testimony they filed to help bring about this ruling. There was still a protest at the launch, and the NSS staged a counterprotest. I interpret this as meaning that the no-nukes-in-space folks are having "a tough time of it." >Is the power output of the Soviet reactor considerably greater than >any US one? As I understand it, most US satellites are >solar-powered.... I'm not certain about satellite uses, but nuclear power sources are used for long-distance probes (such as _Ulysses_), mostly because there ain't that much sun way out, and possibly for reliability reasons --- solar cells have to be exposed in order to function and are therefore subject to damage from debris, whereas an RTG can (and must be, for safety reasons) be encased. Bill Trost trost@reed.bitnet, but probably trost%reed@cse.ogi.edu ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jan 91 21:47:22 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: NASA Headline News for 01/10/91 (Forwarded) Headline News Internal Communications Branch (P-2) NASA Headquarters Thursday, January 10, 1991 Audio Service: 202 / 755-1788 This is NASA Headline News for Thursday, January 10, 1991 The National Space Council meets today. Adm. Truly will present the Council with NASA's Action Plan on the Future of the U.S. Space Program. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Preparation of Discovery, for the upcoming STS-39 flight, continues at Kennedy Space Center's Orbiter Processing Facility. Leak and functional tests of Discovery's three auxiliary power units are now planned for later this week. Tests of the onboard closed circuit television system have been completed. Tests of the recently-installed Remote Manipulator System in Atlantis' payload bay were completed and were successful. In the crew cabin area, window's 1 and 6 are to be replaced because of blemishes. Orbiter instrumentation system and power reactant storage and distribution system testing is still underway, and is expected to be completed by the end of the week. Tile replacement and inspection continues in the Vehicle Assembly Building on Columbia. Roll-around tires have been installed on Columbia's gear to enable landing gear doors to be cycled for tile inspection. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Magellan has now orbited over 50 percent of the Venus surface since its radar mapping mission began last fall. On Feb. 1, Magellan will have imaged fully one half of the planet with its radar system. Ninety percent of the planet is expected to be mapped by May 24, at the current mapping rate. Meanwhile, the B-side data tape recorder remains off while Jet Propulsion Laboratory engineers continue to analyze problems with that recorder. The use of a single data recorder causes small gaps in the radar data coverage. These gaps, each about a dozen miles in length, represent less than one percent of the area of a single mapping swath. Other than the tape recorder problem, the spacecraft is performing nominally and all star calibration and momentum wheel desaturation operations have been accomplished with no hitches. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NASA recently modified its contract with Rockwell Space Division, for the development of OV-105, Endeavour, to include the design, fabrication and installation of an orbiter drag chute system. The price of the modification is $33.3 million and brings the OV-105 contract value up to $1.8 billion. The drag chutes will be deployed upon orbiter touchdown, and are intended to supplement main gear braking to improve the landing capabilities of the orbiter on shorter runways. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A series of preflight briefings for the Discovery STS-39 mission will be held Jan. 23 and 24 at the Johnson Space Center. This is the first unclassified Department of Defense shuttle mission. The briefings will begin at 9:30 am on the 23rd and will be carried on NASA Select TV. Here's the broadcast schedule for Public Affairs events on NASA Select TV. All times are Eastern. **indicates a live program. Thursday, 1/10/91 11:30 am NASA Update will be transmitted. 12:00 pm Discovery Lecture Series features "The Infinite Voyage." 1:00 pm NASA Productions features "Sail on Voyager." All events and times may change without notice. This report is filed daily, Monday through Friday, at 12:00 pm, EST. It is a service of Internal Communications Branch at NASA Headquarters. Contact: CREDMOND on NASAmail or at 202/453- 8425. NASA Select TV: Satcom F2R, Transponder 13, C-Band, 72 degrees West Longitude, Audio 6.8, Frequency 3960 MHz. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jan 91 21:51:00 GMT From: bonnie.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@uunet.uu.net (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: LOX/LH2 in the Shuttle Payload Bay In article <1991Jan10.162954.9489@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> dbm0000@sei_4.lerc.nasa.gov (Dave McKissock) writes: >Shuttle Centaur would have had approximately 40,000 pounds of fuel on-board. >This load, in addition to the weight of the Centaur structure, >mounting support structure, and the payload, would have exceeded the >return-to-launch-site abort weight restrictrictions of the Shuttle (for >one example). So how did solid rockets -- which one would expect to weigh more, given their considerably lower specific impulse -- satisfy those weight limits for launching two out of the three original Shuttle-Centaur payloads? Both Ulysses and Magellan, originally both slated for S-C, flew their original flight plans, or close approximations thereto, with solids. How did those missions meet the weight limits if Shuttle-Centaur versions of those missions couldn't? Unless Centaur's dead weight is horrendous, which would surprise me greatly, offloading enough fuel to stay within the landing weight limits should still give an upper stage with considerably better performance than solids. It might not have been enough to launch Galileo on its original flight plan, since Galileo badly needed a trip to the fat farm :-), but I expect it could have done better than the VEEGA plan that had to be adopted for use with an IUS. And unless something is screwy somewhere, it should have been fine for Ulysses and Magellan. I *still* stick to my guns: there was no rational reason to kill Shuttle-Centaur. Staying within the weight limits, to eliminate the problematic propellant dumping, would certainly reduce its utility a little but should not have destroyed it. -- If the Space Shuttle was the answer, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology what was the question? | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jan 91 03:21:47 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!crg5!szabo@uunet.uu.net (Nick Szabo) Subject: Re: LOX/LH2 in Shuttle Payload Bay In article <19393@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: > >>Of course the real question is why put it on the Shuttle in the first >>place. After all, administration policy AND public law both mandate >>that this sort of payload go up on an expendable. Why is the Shuttle >>still in the satellite launch buisness? > >Why are you assuming satellites? Centaurs are nifty for launching >interplanetary probes; Galileo was scheduled to go up on one, until the >Challenger accident intervened. There is no reason interplanetary probes should be treated any differently than industrial satellites. The law covering industrial satellites should be extended to planetary probes and most DoD satellites, IMHO. -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com Embrace Change... Keep the Values... Hold Dear the Laughter... ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jan 91 17:14:08 GMT From: mojo!SYSMGR%KING.ENG.UMD.EDU@mimsy.umd.edu (Doug Mohney) Subject: Re: Salyut Question In article <1991Jan8.223708.537@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <211.27897269@casino.FIDONET.ORG> Leo.Wikholm@p0.f861.n515.z2.FIDONET.ORG (Leo Wikholm) writes: >> How big is the Salyut-7 Space Station? > >About the size of one Mir module. Rather smaller than Skylab. You could >more or less fit it into a shuttle payload bay, I think. Sovs. had plans to bring it back in Buran, nice piece of hardware to look at for long term exposure to space environment. Doug Mohney, Operations Manager, CAD Lab/ME, Univ. of Maryland College Park * Ray Kaplan was right * ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jan 91 20:57:43 GMT From: bfmny0!tneff@uunet.uu.net (Tom Neff) Subject: Re: Interstellar Travel >> Perhaps it can do a flyby, and do a 180 turn through the gravity well, >>and return to us... > >Not very likely at interstellar speeds, unless the star is a neutron star. >Getting close to a 180 -- you can't actually get 180 unless you pull some >other trick -- requires a very close approach to the center of mass, which >will take you straight into an ordinary star. But if you visit a binary, you might pull a couple of 90's. Or visit two or three neighbor stars (what else have you got to do out there) and concoct some fancier polygon. -- Thank God for atheism! 8=8=8=8 Tom Neff / tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jan 91 11:27:04 GMT From: bu.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!lth.se!newsuser@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Magnus Olsson) Subject: Re: Humankind's Second Off-world Colony In article <1991Jan9.175959.7207@cadence.com> jonmon@cadence.com (Jon Monsarrat x6227) writes: >Where should Man's first colony after a moon colony be? > OUR GUESS: Ganymede because of its water supply and proximity to Jupiter > which is a good source of gases possibly used in fusion. Also I read > about it in a very old Heinlein book! :) > >What would the motivations for having a colony be? > OUR GUESS: Less hostile environment than moon. But what about the radiation level? If I recall correctly, all the Galilean moons are essentially inside Jupiter's van Allen belts which means the radiation levels (mainly protons) on Ganymede would be lethal. And is there any special reason for skipping Mars - the "obvious" place for a second colony? Mars has a much more benign environment than Ganymede (even without radiation) - e.g., the temperature range, though a bit on the cold side, is still easier to handle than the temperature at Ganymede. And of course the cost of transporting people and equipment to mars is much lower, and it takes a much shorter time to get there (with today's technology, on the order of a year or so to Mars, five years to Jupiter). Magnus Olsson | \e+ /_ Dept. of Theoretical Physics | \ Z / q University of Lund, Sweden | >----< Internet: magnus@thep.lu.se | / \===== g Bitnet: THEPMO@SELDC52 | /e- \q ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jan 91 01:42:03 GMT From: munnari.oz.au!metro!cluster!ultima!phobos!dcorbett@uunet.uu.net (Dan Corbett) Subject: NASA Authorization Act 1991? aws@ITI.ORG ("Allen W. Sherzer") writes: >[Centaur on Shuttle stuff deleted] ALL payloads are covered under the NASA >Authorization Act of 1991 AND the administrations space policy from >the mid 80's. The only exception is for payloads which require a >human presence. I don't think Galileo qualifies. What is this Act? It must have been passed in the last week. I think many of us would appreciate a summary posted to the net by a knowledgable person. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dan Corbett University of Technology, Sydney ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Jan 91 07:27:04 PST From: trop@hls.com (Troy T. Pummill) Subject: Salyut 7 burn-up At what altitude will Salyut strike 'the upper atmosphere' and being to burn-up? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Troy T. Pummill | trop@hls.com | | Sr. Technical Instructor | ...uunet!lanslide.hls.com!trop | | Hughes LAN Systems | | | (415) 966-7915 | 1225 Charleston Rd., Silicon Gulch | | Mountain View, CA 94043 | The preceding drivel is entirely my own! | ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jan 91 20:03:18 GMT From: sdcc6!sdcc13!mbharrin@ucsd.edu (Matt Harrington) Subject: What are the qualifications needed for astronauts I know that to be a fighter pilot, one must meet rigorous physical and mental requirements. Does anyone know the requirements for astronauts? For example, do they need to have perfect vision? Do they need to be fighter pilots first? From where are the people chosen, an academy? -Matt Harrington -- Matthew B. Harrington Internet: matt@ucsd.edu University of California at San Diego Department of Biophysics Think! It's not illegal Ask me about my Mac SE for sale ! yet. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jan 91 21:09:27 GMT From: swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov!baalke@ucsd.edu (Ron Baalke) Subject: Magellan Update - 01/10/91 MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT January 10, 1991 The Magellan spacecraft is performing nominally. All STARCALS (star calibrations) and DESATS (desaturations of the reaction wheels) during the past 24 hours were successful. Magellan is presently completing its 754th mapping orbit on its 103rd day of radar mapping operations. It takes 243 days for Venus to turn once under the spacecraft orbit. Each day Magellan completes 7.3 orbits, so by the time we get back over the starting point of our mapping we will have almost 1800 image strips. Even now we have images of more Venus surface than the total land area of the Earth. The two planets are about the same size, but 75% of the Earth is covered by water. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| | | | | __ \ /| | | | Ron Baalke | baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |___ Jet Propulsion Lab | baalke@jems.jpl.nasa.gov /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| M/S 301-355 | |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ Pasadena, CA 91109 | ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #039 *******************