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, 25 Apr 91 01:38:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Thu, 25 Apr 91 01:38:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #455 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 455 Today's Topics: Returned mail: unknown mailer error 1 Re: Saturn V blueprints Re: Energia (was Re: Saturn V blueprints) 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: Wed, 24 Apr 91 02:05:14 -0400 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem Subject: Returned mail: unknown mailer error 1 Cc: moore@cs.utk.edu ----- Transcript of session follows ----- 554 "| /usr/local/lib/mh/slocal -user wrasman -verbose >> /yellow/homes/wrasman/slocal-log 2>&1"... unknown mailer error 1 ----- Unsent message follows ----- Received: from UTKVX.utk.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61++/2.5.1s-UTK) id AA20190; Wed, 24 Apr 91 02:05:14 -0400 Received: from UTKVX.utk.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with MAIL-11 (utk-mail11d v1.7); Wed, 24 Apr 91 02:05:29 EDT Message-Id: <9104240605.AA20182@CS.UTK.EDU> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 91 02:05:29 EDT From: space+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU X-To: 'Tarniku Kelos' Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #450 To: WRASMAN Return-path: Received: from JNET-DAEMON by utkvx.utk.edu with PMDF#10578; Wed, 24 Apr 1991 02:11 EDT Received: From UTKVM1(MAILER) by UTKVX1 with Jnet id 0250 for RAZRON@UTKVX; Wed, 24 Apr 91 02:11 EDT Received: by UTKVM1 (Mailer R2.05) id 0619; Wed, 24 Apr 91 02:09:33 LCL Date: Wed, 24 Apr 91 02:06:06 EDT From: space-request+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@CARNEGIE.BITNET Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #450 Sender: space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu To: 'Tarniku Kelos' Reply-to: space+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU Message-id: <6219F7C040205EC9@utkvx.utk.edu> X-Envelope-to: RAZRON Comments: To: space+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 450 Today's Topics: Polar to Rectangular Math Saturn V and the ALS Re: Energia (was Re: Saturn V blueprints) Re: Atlas Centaur bites the big one, 4/18 Geo-orbit information ?????? Next Weather Satelite 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: Tue, 23 Apr 1991 18:29 CDT From: RDBROWN@UALR.BITNET Subject: Polar to Rectangular Math >Could someone be kind enough to email me the formulas used to convert a stars >polar coordinates to their rectangular coordinates? I can do it on my [...] >I would like to be able to convert a stars RA, DEC and distance into a X Y and >Z coordinate system with the sun at 0,0,0. Can this be done? Has it been >done? I want to know because I'd like to write a program that'll plot the >stars from any 3d coordinate I care to choose. Yeah, I'm sure a lot of us have done that program. If you need references, dig up _Sky & Telescope_ magazine. Look in the 1974 or 1975 index for and article called "The Sky from Capella". The math is there, along with an explaination of how it works. As for myself, I did my port of the proceedures about 1976 in VAX Fortran then on the C64/C128 in BASIC and the Amiga in C. It can be quite an exercise in programming, math and astronomy. And the maps you make are pretty neat, too. Robert Brown RDBROWN@UALR.BITNET ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 91 20:06:19 GMT From: pasteur!agate!bionet!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!noose.ecn.p urdue.edu!en.ecn.purdue.edu!irvine@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (/dev/null) Subject: Saturn V and the ALS Okay, Saturn WAS a good rocket. It MAY be as good as the proposed ALS (though I seriously doubt it for numerous reasons). What I was trying to say is that the only costs of the Saturn is not the booster. The overall economic impact of stepping back 20+ years in technology because something might have had, at one time, a track record, might be devaststing in aerospace and other industries. (Also, much of the Saturn would have to be redesigned making it more of a Saturn VI than a Saturn V) We would lose the edge we have in Aerospace by making compromises of this sort. The Saturn was an excellent rocket for its time. We CAN do better. I KNOW we can do it cheaper (if we do or not is another story ...). The ALS is attempting to do this and I applaud. To go running under the banner of an older rocket is to be conservative to the point of stodgyness :). As I have said before, if ALS proves as great a technological albatross as the shuttle, then scrap it and try something else, but ALWAYS try to do better. The minute we start saying "good enough" (as it has been said of the Saturn V!) is when we die as an aerospace leader!! -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Brent L. Irvine | These are MY opinions | | Malt Beverage Analyst | As if they counted...:) | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 91 00:16:12 GMT From: hub.ucsb.edu!ucsbuxa!3001crad@ucsd.edu (Charles Frank Radley) Subject: Re: Energia (was Re: Saturn V blueprints) Federal law prohibits The Us Government ( including NASA ) from purchasing launches on foreign launch vehicles. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 91 15:32:52 GMT From: mips!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henr y@apple.com (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Atlas Centaur bites the big one, 4/18 In article <1991Apr23.144500.18235@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) write s: >Wasn't this the first failure of a Centaur upper stage? I have >been looking around but can't find another one which didn't work. Sounds like you didn't look back far enough. :-) Centaur's development was a memorable horror story, although it has been very reliable in recent times. -- And the bean-counter replied, | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology "beans are more important". | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 91 19:48:18 GMT From: csus.edu!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!uc!noc.MR.NET!gacvx2 .gac.edu!vax1.mankato.msus.edu!omne@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu Subject: Geo-orbit information ?????? Hello. The name's Omne, any hardcore trek type person should recognize the character, and I am looking for some information. I'm doing a paper on geosynchronous satellites for a course here, and am looking for relevant information on the topic. Two main things I need to find are 1) the number of objects in geosynchronous orbit, and 2) theories on how to get a burned out satellite out of geo-orbit. This isn't a joke; it's a term paper. Hope to get some responses from you soon. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 91 12:08:30 ADT From: LANG%unb.ca@UNBMVS1.csd.unb.ca To: "Space Digest" Subject: Next Weather Satelite Brian Dunbar NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C. April 22, 1991 (Phone: 202/453-1749) Frank Lepore NOAA National Environmental Satellite, Data & Information Service, Suitland, Md. (Phone: 301/763-4690) Bud Littin NOAA National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Md. (Phone: 301/427-7622) Jim Elliott NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. (Phone: 301/286-6256) RELEASE: 91-60 NASA TO LAUNCH NOAA-D METEOROLOGICAL SATELLITE NASA has scheduled the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's NOAA-D meteorological satellite for launch no earlier than May 14, officials from NOAA and NASA announced today. Like other NOAA satellites, NOAA-D will collect meteorological data and transmit the information free of charge directly to users around the world to enhance local weather analysis and forecasting. The users include more than 100 national governments. In addition to assisting local weather forecasting, the satellite data are used for agriculture, fishing, forest management, flood control, fire detection, volcano emission detection, vegetation mapping, oceanography and global climate change research. Launch time for the 3,127-pound spacecraft is planned for 11:52 a.m. EDT. The satellite will be launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. To be known as NOAA-12 once it is in orbit, the satellite will be launched on a U.S. Air Force Atlas-E launch vehicle into a 450-nautical-mile circular, near polar, sun-synchronous orbit with an inclination angle of 98.70 degrees to the Equator. Orbital period will be 101 minutes, with the spacecraft crossing the Equator at 7:30 p.m. northbound and 7:30 a.m. southbound, local solar time. NOAA-D will carry five primary instruments: the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer, a radiation detection instrument to determine cloud cover and surface temperature; the High Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder and the Microwave Sounding Unit, which combine to detect and measure energy from the troposphere to construct a temperature profile from the surface to an altitude of about 6 miles. Also onboard the spacecraft is the Space Environment Monitor to measure the population of the Earth's radiation belts and the particle precipitation phenomena resulting from solar activity, and the ARGOS/Data Collection System which receives signals from approximately 2,000 platforms (buoys, balloons and remote weather stations) and transmits the data to a central processing facility on the ground. Operational ground facilities include Command and Data Acquisition stations in Fairbanks, Alaska, and Wallops Island, Va.; the Satellite Operations Control Center and Data Processing Services Subsystem facilities in Suitland, Md.; and a data receiving station in Lannion, France. The NOAA-D is a TIROS-N (Television Infrared Observation Satellite) class spacecraft, built by the General Electric Astro Space Division. The world's first weather satellite was a TIROS, launched April 1, 1960. The TIROS program is a cooperative effort of NOAA, NASA, the United Kingdom, Canada and France for providing day and night environmental and associated data on a daily basis. NOAA is responsible for establishing the observational requirements and for operating the system, and NASA, through its Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., is responsible for procuring and developing the spacecraft and for conducting on-orbit checkout of the satellite before turning the system over to NOAA for operational control. The U.S. Air Force provides launch support with its Atlas-E launch vehicle, built by General Dynamics Space Systems Division. ============================================================================== 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 ============================================================================== ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #450 ******************* ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 91 06:06:16 GMT From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@ucsd.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Saturn V blueprints In article mvk@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) writes: >The main thrust (pardon the pun) of ALS is to reduce the cost and increase >the reliability of ELV's. ALS is not being designed to push the performance >envelopes but the cost and reliability envelopes instead... Ha ha ha ha ha. ALS is being designed to do *everything*, including pushing advanced launcher technology. Oh sure, it says in the book that high reliability and low cost are primary objectives... along with the 57 other primary objectives. Note that ALS isn't even officially *trying* to build a launcher right now -- it is a *technology* program only at present. ALS is suffering from the same disease as the shuttle: it is so expensive that it has to be all things to all customers. Really cheap for bulk payloads. Really reliable for irreplaceable one-of-a-kind payloads. Man-rateable. Capable of launch on a few hours' notice for immediate replacement of military satellites. Capable of successful launch under attack (!). Practical at launch volumes ranging from huge (for SDI) to near zero (for realistic scenarios with no new major programs for either NASA or the USAF). A major new high-tech program to maintain US launcher technology at competitive levels. An off-the-shelf program that avoids pushing technology. The next big program to keep the US launcher industry productively busy. An economical program to provide a new launcher at affordable development cost. A short-term effort to get a new launcher into service soon. A clean-slate design that avoids all the mistakes of the old designs. Compatible with existing launch facilities. Meant for high efficiency in new, totally redesigned launch facilities. And so on, and so on. Yes, I have seen *ALL* of these cited as ALS objectives. Some of them even make sense. But not all of them together. Not that I am worried. ALS is the one new launcher design that is utterly guaranteed never to fly. Its low costs are consistently linked to very high launch volumes. There is only one customer who can generate that kind of volume... and Congress does not want to face the all-out political war that would erupt over any SDI deployment decision. One simple way to postpone it indefinitely is to refuse to develop the launch capacity for it. *No* US big-launcher project aimed at high volume will be funded for full-scale development, ever. The only kind of heavylift launcher that Congress will fund will be one designed for maximum reliability and a modest launch rate. Civilian control of the program will be a bonus, as will unsuitability for military uses (no quick reaction, no polar orbit, no hardening, no bare-base launch, etc.). A proven design or simple derivative of one is a better bet than a clean-slate one, given Congress's memories of the shuttle experience. You know, that sounds an awful lot like the Saturn V. -- And the bean-counter replied, | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology "beans are more important". | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 91 06:08:03 GMT From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@ucsd.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Energia (was Re: Saturn V blueprints) In article <10797@hub.ucsb.edu> 3001crad@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Charles Frank Radley) writes: >Federal law prohibits The Us Government ( including NASA ) >from purchasing launches on foreign launch vehicles. Inconsequential. The same organization that would have to approve and fund such an effort -- Congress -- can change those laws any time it wants to. -- And the bean-counter replied, | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology "beans are more important". | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #455 *******************