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 01:59:54 -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 01:59:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #427 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 427 Today's Topics: Atlas Centaur bites the big one, 4/18 SPACE Digest V13 #422 Re: Proposals requested for Technology Transfer Centers (Forwarded) SSF Micro-g (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: 19 Apr 91 03:28:04 GMT From: noc.arc.nasa.gov!ranma@icarus.riacs.edu (Robert Gutierrez) Subject: Atlas Centaur bites the big one, 4/18 Aside from the usual news reports, does anybody have any better details on the Atlas Centuar KSC self-destructed??? I know the payload was a Japanese satellite, but I'd like to know if anybody knows which one it was? CNN said the 2nd stage misfired, causing only 1 rocket to fire, not both, hence, KSC sent the termination signal. $100 million was the reported price tag. Ouch! The fallout from the Japanese satellite and the Japanese government should keep NASA HQ busy for awhile... robert gutierrez repeat after me: my opinions are my own ... my opinions are my own ... my opinions are my own ... my opinions are my own ... (etc...etc...etc) ------------------------------ ReSent-Message-ID: Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 91 12:06:26 EDT Resent-From: Tommy Mac <18084TM@msu.edu> Resent-To: space+@andrew.cmu.edu Date: Thu, 18 Apr 91 02:14:36 EDT Reply-To: space+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@msu.edu From: space-request+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU%CARNEGIE.BITNET@msu.edu Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #422 Comments: To: space+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU To: david polito <15432DJP@MSU.BITNET>, Tom McWilliams <18084TM@MSU.BITNET> Subject: Re: "Bussard Ramjets" AKA duct space drives >>Questions: >>1) How big would the scoop have to be? ... >>2) ... Is it possible to make a scoop out of an E-M field to >>gather the fuel so as to avoid this obstacle? >I can't give you any "real" answers, but if I remember my Niven >correctly, he was saying the scoops were on the order of hundreds >of kilometers. Also, I'm pretty sure his spaceships used electromagnetic >scoops, or more precisely, lage static magnetic fields. I presume >this implies the hydrogen being scooped up is in ionized form... I don't remember the source (wasn't Niven), but some of the energy that is produced by the drive would go into a mechanism for stripping electons from the incoming hydrogen, so that the field could gather it. This not only makes it possible to get the energy from the material, but can be used to keep the protons from not only punching through the ship's skin, but through yours as well. At significant fractions of C, protons become alpha waves and cosmic rays. I beleive that this danger was the major challenge in creating ramjets. (besides gov. papaerwork and shuttle launch costs) P.S. the electrons are put back on the material in the exhaust so as to avoid losing all your speed by being drawn back toward the reaction mass like a big refrigerator magnet. Tommy Mac If a velocipede a pint, and a centipede a quart, 18084tm@msu how much does a precipice? Acknowledge-To: <18084TM@MSU> ------------------------------ Date: 18 Apr 91 06:57:57 GMT From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ccut!wnoc-tyo-news!astemgw!kuis!rins!will@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (will) Subject: Re: Proposals requested for Technology Transfer Centers (Forwarded) In article <1991Apr17.173249.23256@news.arc.nasa.gov>, yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) writes: > NASA has issued a request for proposals to establish six >Regional Technology Transfer Centers (RTTC), each funded at about >$1 million annually, to replace 10 Industrial Applications Centers >(IAC), whose contracts expire this year. Transfer technology where? To Japan, like all the other government labs. > * Inclusion of all federal laboratories within the FLC in the >agency's technology transfer effort; No, dout about it, NASA's selling out to Japan and other countries that still take a free ride on America. > * Encouraging partnerships or consortia of universities and >state organizations within a designated region to represent that >region as one of the new RTTCs. Well, the Japanese already own most of the Univ. in the States, so I guess one way or another thier going to get America's hard work. Good going NASA, keep selling out America. It would have been nice if you could have put in some kind of frame work to keep our knowledge out of the hands of foreign competitors. Will...... ------------------------------ Date: 16 Apr 91 14:46:17 GMT From: pasteur!agate!bionet!uwm.edu!caen!news@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Ken Sheppardson) Subject: SSF Micro-g (Re: comsat cancellations and lawsuits aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: >In article <21541@crg5.UUCP> szabo@crg5.UUCP (Nick Szabo) writes: >>* NASA does not care about their customers. > >>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. > >Actually, this was a pretty gutsy move by NASA. Freedom would have long term >utility as a life science lab but not much as a microgravity facility. The >appropriations people in Congress however wanted microgravity done first. >NASA is telling the people who sign the checks to go to hell which is not >good politics. I think I missed something here. For what 'politically unpopular design changes' did the micro-g community ask? In what way did NASA tell the people who sign the checks to go to hell? As I understand it, as a result of restructuring -- in direct response to congressional requests -- MTC will serve as a mirco-g platform, while PMC, follow-on (EMCC) and growth phases are intended to serve as life science labs with some capability to accommodate SEI steady state vehicle processing (we hope). I don't have the traffic models in front of me, but I had been led to believe that by the PMC/EMCC time frame, it's expected that most of the micro-g community will have moved off to free flyers (which will provide an environment more suitable to micro-g work than any manned station design EVER did.) =============================================================================== 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 #427 *******************