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 ; Fri, 19 Apr 91 01:48:58 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Fri, 19 Apr 91 01:48:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #426 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 426 Today's Topics: Re: MAJOR SOLAR FLARE ALERT Re: Space research, teflon, etc, etc,.... Re: launch on Friday from the Cape Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits Re: Space Camp in Huntsville Re: Laser launchers Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits Galileo status reports Skydive from Space Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits Re: Cape York launch facility For Nick Janow Re: L-SURV Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits 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: 17 Apr 91 23:53:53 GMT From: van-bc!ubc-cs!alberta!herald.usask.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!bison!sys6626!draco!swrdpnt!ford@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Young ) Subject: Re: MAJOR SOLAR FLARE ALERT > Actually, I like the flare alerts. I've been watching the sun for the > last few weeks since reading them, and trying to correlate what I > read with what I see. If I really knew what I was doing, I would send in > reports. > > Michael How have you been watching the sun, with a telescope and a solar filter, or with an H-alpha filter, or what? I also have been watching the sun since I started reading the flare alerts, and (as far as I can tell), most of the alerts involve the very large sunspot groups I can see with my 8" SCT and a Mylar filter. I haven't yet seen any white-light flares (if such a thing exists), and since I don't have an H-alpha filter, I haven't seen a correlation between the alerts and prominances. Regarding "knowing what you're doing", there isn't really too much to know. If you are making anything more that casual peeks at the sun, by all means send your observations to people who will use them. I think the AAVSO has a Solar section, as do several other groups (I don't seem to remember their names right now...) Scott Young ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Reply to: ford%swrdpnt.bison.mb.ca@niven.cc.umanitoba.ca ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 14:15:07 GMT From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Coffman) Subject: Re: Space research, teflon, etc, etc,.... In article A20RFR1@MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU (Bob Rehak Ext. 3-9437, AIS Central Services - Swen Parson 146) writes: > >Now don't get me wrong, I believe in having a strong defense. I >beleive that necessity is the mother of invention. I just think >it's sad that in today's day and age, governments drive necessity >which in turn tends to be something of a military nature. Thomas >Edison, Henry Ford, and the Wright brothers suffered alone for >many years trying to perfect their inventions. Maybe we should >be finding modern day inventors like these and start funding their >research. Space research doesn't necessarily have to be done by >NASA. Being a part of the government, NASA is burdened by the >usual government mismanagement, waste, meddling, restriction of >scientific thought, and a 'just get the job done attitude'. The >Challenger is a good example of my last comment. > >There has to be a better way to promote scientific research. Well if there is, and I doubt it, any government funding will make it just as inefficient as the current system. Control always follows the money. The same waste, mismanagement, meddling, and restrictions on scientific thought would inevitably flow with the money. Backyard tinkerers are unlikely to deliver the complex transportation systems we all want. Like it or not, we are stuck with the government doing a job that's too big for anyone else. All we can hope to do is pressure the government to do the best possible job they can. Gary ------------------------------ Date: 16 Apr 91 04:03:00 GMT From: sgi!cdp!kdonow@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Subject: Re: launch on Friday from the Cape It's a Spacenet sat, but only by acquisition. The craft in question is ASC-2, which became Spacenet's by virtue of the GTE acquisition of Contel. If memory serves, it's being launched to 101, which is the prime piece of orbital real estate in the US arc. ASC-2 does have six Ku-band transponders, some of which are 54 MHz and others 72 MHz. Obviously, it could carry video, but ASC-1 was overwhelmingly a data sat with occassional business video. I think that GTE Spacenet's strategy differs a bit from that of Contel ASC in ways that might have consequences for use of the crfat, but I don't know. Ken Donow W. L. Pricthard & Co. 7315 Wisconsin Avenue Suite 500 E Bethesda, MD 20814 Voice: 301-654-1144 Fax: 301-654-1814 Email: cdp!kdonow@labrea.stanford.edu My employer has lots of his opinions, and I represent none of them here. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 18:05:33 GMT From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!rex!rouge!dlbres10@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Fraering Philip) Subject: Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits In article <1991Apr18.153216.2386@watdragon.waterloo.edu> jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes: >...Compare >and contrast the design and operational histories of R 100 and R 101, >for example. >James Nicoll I suggest everyone here read something on the R100 and the R101. I am continually struck by the resemblance to a _lot_ of things going on in the space program today. -- Phil Fraering dlbres10@pc.usl.edu "The reserve of modern assertions is sometimes pushed to extermes, in which the fear of being contradicted leads the writer to strip himself of almost all sense and meaning." - Winston Churchill, _The Birth of Britian_ "X-rays are a hoax." - Lord Kelvin ------------------------------ Date: 17 Apr 91 19:44:28 GMT From: mintaka!olivea!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!ducvax.auburn.edu!jraines@bloom-beacon.mit.edu Subject: Re: Space Camp in Huntsville Yes, I have been to Space Academy Levels I and II, and I have never had such a good time in my life! My group from Level II still gets together every summer. If you get the chance to go, do so! You will NOT regret it! ------------------------------ Date: 19 Apr 91 02:10:01 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!sol!yamauchi@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Brian Yamauchi) Subject: Re: Laser launchers In article <2753@ke4zv.UUCP> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes: >At the power levels required to loft real payloads >into orbit, atmospheric blooming is an intractable physical problem. >Once the air is ionized into a plasma, the plasma is optically opaque >cutting off further power transfer. Talk to the guys who have actually >fired high power lasers, the laser fusion folks, and see what they >say about the absolute necessity of having a hard vacuum to fire the >beam through. I've heard that the laser weapons people were trying to solve a similar problem using a pulsed laser beam, with each pulse lasting a small fraction (milli-? micro-?) of a second. In their case, the surface of the target was turning to plasma, preventing the beam from penetrating further. Has anyone looked into applying this technology to laser launchers? -- _______________________________________________________________________________ Brian Yamauchi University of Rochester yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu Department of Computer Science _______________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 03:24:53 GMT From: wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!ptimtc!rdmei!icspub!astemgw!kuis!rins!will@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (will) Subject: Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits In article <1991Apr16.124415.10632@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: In article <21541@crg5.UUCP> szabo@crg5.UUCP (Nick Szabo) writes: >Other examples include... the removal of microgravity scientists out of >the Fred plan when they asked for politically unpopular design changes they >require for their work. There is that phrase again "politically unpopular". I keep runing into this phrase only on this group. Who is building the space station anyway Scientist or those stupid no Brains politicians? Sounds to me like the no Brain politicians. In that case I suppose Fred will probably fall on another country somewhere. I really feal sorry for those poor scientist that look bad because of NASA's retarded administrators and congressman. Will........ ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 09:04:33 GMT From: theory.tn.cornell.edu!moersch@THEORY.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Jeff Moersch) Subject: Galileo status reports So how come the Galileo status reports stop just as soon as the spacecraft starts having problems? I would think this is a time people would be very interested in having up to date information on what's going on. The people who paid for the mission deserve to know what's up! Jeff Moersch moersch@theory.tn.cornell.edu ------------------------------ Date: 16 Apr 91 11:50:42 GMT From: unmvax!nmt.edu!nraoaoc@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Daniel Briggs) Subject: Skydive from Space Here's a fun little tidbit that I thought sci.space'ers might appreciate. It's from the "Maybe You've Heard" column in the April _Skydiving_ magazine. "Plans have been announced for an October attempt to set a high altitude freefall record. The project, dubbed "Skydive from Space" by its New York promoters, calls for British jumpers Harry Taylor and Nish Bruce to jump from a balloon floating 120,000 ft. over Texas. The world record freefall is from 80,630 ft. (Joe Kittinger's famous jump from 102,800 feet wasn't a real freefall since he was stabilized by a drogue during part of his descent.)" Sounds like fun, eh? BTW, that shot at Kittinger's record strikes me as a bit nitpicky. Certainly most skydivers refer to an ordinary tandem jump as "freefall", and that is also drogue stabilized. It's obviously just a matter of definition, though. Likewise, 23 miles may not fit normal definitions of "space", but it's certainly getting pretty close! -- This is a shared guest account, please send replies to dbriggs@nrao.edu (Internet) (505) 835-2974 Dan Briggs / NRAO / P.O. Box O / Socorro, NM / 87801 (U.S. Snail) ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 15:32:16 GMT From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watserv1!watdragon!watyew!jdnicoll@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (James Davis Nicoll) Subject: Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits In article <234@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp> will@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp (will) writes: >In article <1991Apr16.124415.10632@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: >In article <21541@crg5.UUCP> szabo@crg5.UUCP (Nick Szabo) writes: >>Other examples include... the removal of microgravity scientists out of >>the Fred plan when they asked for politically unpopular design changes they >>require for their work. > > There is that phrase again "politically unpopular". I keep runing >into this phrase only on this group. Who is building the space station anyway >Scientist or those stupid no Brains politicians? Sounds to me like the no Brain >politicians. In that case I suppose Fred will probably fall on another country >somewhere. I really feal sorry for those poor scientist that look bad because >of NASA's retarded administrators and congressman. The engineers are *building* it, but they have to do it to the specs the folks with the money 'want'. They aren't 'no-brain politicians' so much as 'technically ignorant, but talented at bureaucratic infighting, and hierarchical ascension policians'. The point *isn't* to build a working space-station, it is to control the funds and people involved in building a space-station. It'd be nice if one actually got built, but not if the building required massive changes in the way decisions get made. With that in mind, if a bureaucrat sees an opportunity to kick a non-bureaucrat out of the decision-making cabal, it is his (or her) duty as a bureaucrat to do so. The micro-gravity folks screwed up by forgetting the real purpose behind Fred, and asking for options based on what an operating space-station might usefully and uniquely provide, rather than protecting their hinies by remembering that Fred is just a way to justify moving money around within the US government. The policians have an obligation to their home-ridings to make sure as much of the money involved in making Fred gets spent *in* their home-ridings. Otherwise, someone who promised to make sure that the pork-barrel gets allocated in a more judicious manner (ie; in the riding) might beat them in the next election. Whether or not the means to live up to the government contract are found in that region really should have little or no bearing on the attempt to get the contract. This kind of thinking leads to (for example) having the headquarters of a nation's navy located inland, far from the nearest ocean, but that's the cost of democracy, I guess. No, I don't entirely believe the above. 'Who's paying' is a good guide to the types of design decisions that will get made. Compare and contrast the design and operational histories of R 100 and R 101, for example. James Nicoll ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 10:00:56 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!caen!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!brolga!covax.commerce.uq.oz.au!bellamy@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Subject: Re: Cape York launch facility In article <1991Apr18.103447.20497@bhpcpd.kembla.oz.au>, stvl@bhpcpd.kembla.oz.au (Steve Lechowicz) writes: > > > Does anyone know what the current situation is with the launch facility > proposed for the Cape York peninsula? If so I would appreciate any > information. Thanks in advance. > Last I heard was waiting for the environment impact studies. Queensland state govt. is still claiming the Space Port as an indication of their progressive thinking ! Expected first launch is still claimed at c1995. Anyone got a spare skyrocket :-) -- David E. Bellamy Email: bellamy@covax.commerce.uq.oz.au Dept. Commerce, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, AUSTRALIA ------------------------------ Date: 16 Apr 91 13:50:04 GMT From: ccncsu!longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU!jn190068@purdue.edu (Jay Nestle) Subject: For Nick Janow Re: L-SURV This is a message to Nick Janow: I was unable to get mail to you directly. I tried several different email addresses and all of them bounced. I want to thank you for your FRANGIBOLT suggestion! That is exactly what we were looking for, we made a copy of the article you suggested and actually changed our paper we presented on the topic only 2 days before, incorporating the FRANGIBOLT. Thanks again! Jay Nestle jn190068@longs.lance.colostate.edu "Save the earth, develop space." - Bumper Sticker ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 17:17:31 GMT From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!news.nd.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!dil@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Perry G Ramsey) Subject: Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits In article <1991Apr18.153216.2386@watdragon.waterloo.edu>, jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes: > In article <234@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp> will@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp (will) writes: > The policians have an obligation to their home-ridings to make sure > as much of the money involved in making Fred gets spent *in* their > home-ridings. Home-ridings??? I think that's what we call "Districts" south of the border. In any case, I think you have the essence of the problem in hand: > The point *isn't* to build a working > space-station, it is to control the funds and people involved in building > a space-station. -- Perry G. Ramsey Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences dil@mace.cc.purdue.edu Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN USA perryr@purccvm Sometimes history repeats itself; sometimes it doesn't. So get good odds. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 20:05:18 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!caen!news@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Ken Sheppardson) Subject: Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits In article <1991Apr18.153216.2386@watdragon.waterloo.edu> jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes: >The micro-gravity folks screwed up by forgetting the real purpose >behind Fred, and asking for options based on what an operating space-station >might usefully and uniquely provide, rather than protecting their hinies >by remembering that Fred is just a way to justify moving money around within >the US government. I'll ask again. If my question's already been answered, I'm sorry, but I didn't see the answer. What is it that SSF might 'usefully and uniquely provide'? Are we just talking about micro-g levels or are we talking about some other system or resource? =============================================================================== Ken Sheppardson Email: kcs@sso.larc.nasa.gov Space Station Freedom Advanced Programs Office Phone: (804) 864-7544 NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA FAX: (804) 864-1975 =============================================================================== ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #426 *******************