Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from hogtown.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 ; Thu, 7 Feb 91 01:42:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Thu, 7 Feb 91 01:42:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #124 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 124 Today's Topics: More Exciting Space News From WWN! * SpaceNews 04-Feb-91 * Re: SPACE Digest V13 #082 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 3 Feb 91 23:34:48 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!jimcat@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jim Kasprzak) Organization: The Big Wedge Subject: More Exciting Space News From WWN! Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu Those of you who enjoyed the Weekly World News transcripts of the purported last conversation of the Challenger crew may want to check out this week's issue. The headline story: "FACE ON MARS IS TRYING TO TALK! The lips are moving, say stunned scientists!" I didn't check to see if it had any sidebars or graphs. -- Jim Kasprzak kasprzak@mts.rpi.edu (internet) RPI, Troy, NY userfe0u@rpitsmts.bitnet "A spirit with a vision is a dream with a mission." -Rush ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 2 Feb 91 02:07:49 GMT From: ka2qhd!kd2bd@rutgers.edu (John Magliacane) Organization: KA2QHD - OCEAN NJ Subject: * SpaceNews 04-Feb-91 * Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu SB SPACE @ ALLBBS < KD2BD $SPC0204 * SpaceNews 04-Feb-91 * Bulletin ID: $SPC0204 ========= SpaceNews ========= MONDAY FEBRUARY 4, 1991 SpaceNews originates at KD2BD in Wall Township, New Jersey, USA. It is published every week and is made available for unlimited distribution. * U2MIR-1 NEWS * ================ Packet Radio (AX.25) communications from Mir appear to be taking place on a regular basis over a frequency of 145.550 MHz. A brief connection with U2MIR-1 was made by KD2BD on 28-Jan-91 at 16:59:25 UTC using an indoor 4-element quagi and 7 watts of transmitter power. Signals from Mir are STRONG. U2MIR is probably running at a power level of 20 watts. A large number of stations have been able to connect with Mir. The TNC in use on Mir can be said to have a very short "fuse". Packets are sent very rapidly, and if acknowlegements are not received within a short period of time, U2MIR-1 sends disconnect frames and clears its buffers through its unprotocol address (CQ). Groundstations can also digipeat through either U2MIR or U2MIR-1. Once connected to U2MIR-1, the BBS responds as follows: Logged on to U2MIR's Personal Message System CMD(B/H/J/K/KM/L/M/R/S/SR/V/?)> Successful mail sessions are ended with a response such as: Message saved as Msg # 78 The U2MIR-1 BBS also keeps a journal of all stations heard and connected to, but the clock and calendar of this function does not yet seem to be set. For example, log listings are given as: KA9NMD 00/00/00 00:00 KD2BD 00/00/00 00:00 Stations wishing to connect with U2MIR-1 should bear in mind that Musa may come on voice at any time, so it is considered a BAD practice to send connect packets until packet signals from U2MIR are first heard. There also seems to be a very large variation in downlink signals from Mir. It is sometimes helpful to open your receiver squelch during weak signal periods to prevent your TNC from sending packets and exceeding its retry count without having a chance of being heard by U2MIR due to changes in spacecraft attitude and the resulting QSB. Programmable transceivers should be used to transmit 5 KHz lower and receive 5 KHz higher than 145.550 MHz at the time of AOS, move to 145.550 MHz at TCA, and receive low and transmit high until LOS, in order to compensate for doppler effect. * NOAA SATELLITES * =================== NOAA weather satellites transmit weather images taken in both visible and infra-red light from low-Earth orbit on a regular basis. NOAA-12 is expected to be launched on 14-May-91 at 1552 UTC. The current series of NOAA satellites transmit APT on the following VHF frequencies: NOAA- 9: 137.620 MHz NOAA-10: 137.500 MHz NOAA-11: 137.620 MHz Odd numbered NOAA satellites can be copied during the mid-afternoon and early morning hours. Even numbered NOAAs can be copied during the mid- morning and mid-evening hours, local time. * NOAA NEWS * ============= NOAA is developing a directory of resources for earth observation in education. The directory is one of several educational projects NOAA is undertaking as part of International Space Year (ISY) - 1992. The directory will serve as a resource on how imagery from environmental satellites is being used in schools to enhance learning. The core of the directory will consist of a listing of schools worldwide that use real time satellite imagery with a brief description of how the imagery is used in classroom instruction. In addition, the directory will contain a section on curriculum materials developed by teachers, a listing of current manufacturers of hardware and software for receiving and processing satellite images, and a bibliography on educational applications of environmental satellites. Any information that the users of NOAA satellite data, can provide in support of this effort would be greatly appreciated. If you know of any schools or teachers who are using environmental satellite data in their curriculum, please let NOAA know. Drop a letter or postcard to NOAA Educational Affairs Office, Federal Building #4 Room 0158, Washington, DC 20233; or call 301-763-4690 (24 hours a day) and leave a message with Ms. Arlette Washington. * TNX QSL! * ============ A special thanks to all those who sent QSLs and letters to SpaceNews: PA0HTR : Henk Kanon, Den Helder, Netherlands WA1STO : Rosalie White, ARRL, Newington, Connecticut, USA ...and e-mail messages: KZ1Z, KA2SZO, K3ORC, KC6GWQ * FEEDBACK WELCOMED * ===================== Feedback regarding SpaceNews can be directed to the editor (John) via any of the following paths: INTERNET : kd2bd@ka2qhd.de.com PACKET : KD2BD @ NN2Z.NJ.USA.NA UUCP : ...uunet!rutgers!ka2qhd!kd2bd MAIL : John A. Magliacane, KD2BD Department of Electronics Technology Advanced Technology Center Brookdale Community College 765 Newman Springs Road Lincroft, New Jersey 07738 U.S.A. /EX -- John A. Magliacane FAX : (908) 747-7107 Electronics Technology Department AMPR : KD2BD @ NN2Z.NJ.USA.NA Brookdale Community College UUCP : ...!rutgers!ka2qhd!kd2bd Lincroft, NJ 07738 USA VOICE: (908) 842-1900 ext 607 ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 2 Feb 91 08:33:01 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!crg5!szabo@uunet.uu.net (Nick Szabo) Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #082 References: <9101310338.AA09099@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu In article <9101310338.AA09099@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> space+@andrew.cmu.edu writes: >In SPACE Digest V13 #050 > Nick Szabo: writes : >....While I >will not argue the value of communications and sensing ability in orbit, I am a >little slow to understand the benefits civilization will reap using only robot >probes..... "Benefits" roughly equate to "value", last time I checked Webster's. >As far as I understand, no one has evolved to withstand vacuum and >gamma radiation. This would suggest to me the *necessity* of a MANNED SPACE >STATION. I.e., a place in space that humans live. (more than a few minutes) OK, let's define terms: Space Station: Small: crew of 1-20; structure launched from Earth. In need of continual resupply from Earth. Space Colony/Settlement: Large; inhabitants (not crew) of 100+. Probably made from indigenous space resources rather than launched from Earth. To the extent that it is dependent on Earth, it is capable of producing export goods for sale on Earth. What I am saying: * Space stations are over 1 million times the cost of equivalent Earth-based living quarters; * Space stations are not efficient (compared to the alternatives) for microgravity research, life science research, planetary exploration, or any other conceived use, separately or combined; * In particular space stations, because they are 6 orders of magnitude away from the economic scale needed for space settlements, and because life science research can be done more effectively on free-flying platforms like LDEF, are not a prerequisite for the building of space settlements; * Space stations are diverting funds from more worthwhile projects and causing planetary exploration initiatives to be misdesigned; * The concept of a space station, an idea dreamed up before computers, lasers, nuclear power, and even before liquid-fuel rockets were developed, should be laid to a peaceful rest. >Perhaps you envision a planetary station, yet in terms of energy (sunlight >availability, mostly) a planet costs more than open space to live on, and, it >costs more to move to/from. A colony in space must import/export large amounts materials for construction/maintenence/supply, so there are gravity costs with either choice. The time has not yet come to decide between space vs. planetary habitats. That is a choice for the settlers themselves to make based on the knowledge and technology of their era. They should no more follow our advice, than we should follow the advice of early-20th-century SF writers with their space stations. >Ignoring the fact that there is no way to judge the cost of previous moves >to new environmnets (fish-ampibian, or tree-savanna), let's try the next best >thing. Fish did not make a conscious choice to become amphibians, and this is probably true also of our chimp/human common ancestor. They certainly did not spend any money to do so. :-) >How much did it cost for a 4-wheel horse-driven carrige in the 1450's >(luxury travel) when magellan set out across the sea? And how much did he pay >for his fleet (pioneering a new environment) most of which did not return, and >none of which was 'economical'? OK, crack open the history books. The major voyages (in terms of $$$ spent) of that period were not those of Columbus or Magellan, but De Gama. De Gama sailed around Africa, trading spices from India. He replaced a tortuous, friction- and bandit- filled land route to the Orient with a sea route. By 1500, the price of spices in Lisbon was 1/5 that in Venice (which dominated European access to the land route). In other words, 400% gross profit margins for the Portugese on a good which, in the days before refrigeration, was a significant fraction of the cost of eating, which in the days before industrialization was the dominant factor in GNP. The voyages of Columbus and Magellan were spinoffs of De Gama. All were trying to find routes to the Orient. De Gama made most of the money and got most of the boats. Columbus underestimated the circumference of the Earth and missed out on the spice trade (the gold & silver trade did not become significant until 20 years later, and was not the motivation of the original voyages). Even small nations such as Portugal fielded dozens to hundreds of large ships, each with crews of up to 100. Each ship cost, in %GNP terms, about 1/100 of what a space station costs a modern nation. In other words, space stations are several orders of magnitude more costly to our society than Renassaince ships were to theirs. >Mir has produced the BEST data on long-term effects on humans of the space >environment, which data will be quite necessary for the proper design of both >habitats and transportation systems (not to mention group interaction, effects >of isolation, etc...) Given the inefficiencies of human habitiation in space with current technology paradigms, there is little need for human study at this moment. Nevertheless, because of the man-in-space bias we have much more data than we need. LDEF and other free-flyers have produced much long-term life-sciences data, at a much lower cost than a space station. Human biology in space at this stage is near the bottom of the priority list of knowledge and skills needed for humans to develop space settlements. First develop a capability to mine and manufacture materials in space, so we can lower than cost of human habitation in space 4-6 orders of magnitude, then let's talk about the details of human biology in space. >>Conclusions are not "innocent" until proven so. >...Not Innocent? > What, we all have a conspiracy to waste money on something that > you don't like because of your lack of vision? Look, you are jumping on me for voicing my opinions. You think me guilty for coming to conclusions that differ from some other's. For simply following the conclusions of others, take your own medicine. >And yes, it is lack of vision. Who between us is mimicking what we have been told without thinking about it? Who between us is repeating the same old tired failed nostrums? Did you ever stop to think that vision involves _seeing_, in other words _observation_ and _thought_: not mimicry, which when repeated often enough becomes the opossite of vision; the blind leading the blind. >....Sorry nick, but I can't accept the assumptions that you use to reach >your conclusions. You haven't even addressed my assumptions. >I think your assumptions are a little early in the program. Maybe >if we didn't have a Space program run by tired congressionals. I'm learning >Japanese. Nihongo de hanasanakereba narimasen ka? -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com Embrace Change... Keep the Values... Hold Dear the Laughter... ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #124 *******************