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 ; Wed, 15 May 91 02:01:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Wed, 15 May 91 02:01:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #551 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 551 Today's Topics: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #517 14 Astronauts have died for space exploration? Re: Honking at cyclists... Re: 14 Astronauts have died for space exploration? Payload Summary for 05/13/91 (Forwarded) Re: Pegasus/SMEX - Alive and Well Re: SPACE Digest V13 #516 SPACE Digest V13 #516 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: 14 May 91 03:45:09 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!rex!rouge!dlbres10@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Fraering Philip) Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #517 Re: my comments about terraforming one of Jupiter's satellites: Can't any of you guys see the humor in a post without the smiley for once? -- Phil Fraering || Usenet (?):dlbres10@pc.usl.edu || YellNet: 318/365-5418 ''It hardly mattered now; it was, in fact, a fine and enviable madness, this delusion that all questions have answers, and nothing is beyond the reach of a strong left arm.`` - Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, _The Mote in God's Eye_ ------------------------------ X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender. Date: Mon, 13 May 91 11:08 CDT From: Bob Rehak Ext. 3-9437 (AIS Central Services - Swen Parson 146) Subject: 14 Astronauts have died for space exploration? > > Headline News >Internal Communications Branch (P-2) NASA Headquarters > > Wednesday, May 8, 1991 Audio Service: 202 / 755-1788 > >This is NASA Headline News for Wednesday, May 8, 1991 . . . > >The Astronauts Memorial, honoring the 14 U.S. astronauts who >have given their lives in the exploration of space, will be unveiled 14 astronauts? Last time I counted there were only 10. Apollo I: Grissom, White, and Chaffee. STS-61L Challenger: Scobee, Smith, Resnik, Onizuka, McNair, Jarvis, and McAuliffe. A couple have did flight testing aircraft that was not related to space exploration and a couple have did in car accidents...I think. Could someone correct me on this and tell me who the other 4 were who died for space exploration...or am I just being a jerk and NASA is counting the other guys as honorable mention? |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | Bob Rehak, DBA At Large, BITNET: A20RFR1@NIU | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| ------------------------------ Date: 13 May 91 18:09:09 GMT From: att!news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!watmath!watdragon!watyew!jdnicoll@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (James Davis Nicoll) Subject: Re: Honking at cyclists... In article <1991May13.161336.25777@cs.mcgill.ca> msdos@cs.mcgill.ca (Mark SOKOLOWSKI) writes: > >Given all the flames that my article has, I want to simply add this: > >My point is that we'll have to expand our energy consumption and our >vital space NO MATTER WHAT goes on. Of course we can improve >our efficiency to use this or that source of energy and matter, but >sonner or later we'll have to use the minerals of Antarctica, the >deuterium in the Earth's oceans, and go to the moon in order to >build a plateform there for Mars, Marcury and the asteroids. >Our ever increasing population will need more and more, and each individual >will need more and more of everything. And sooner or later even the >entire solar system won't be sufficient, so we'll have the rest of the galaxy... So, what happens at the core of human settlement when the core regions have been stripped of useable resources, and new resources from the outlying regions can't be shipped back fast enough to suit demand? There is that nasty speed of light restriction on travel, not to mention how expensive shipping objects is likely to be over interstellar distances. I suppose it'd be like fungus; colonise a region, breed like hell until the local resources are gone, and send out spores to repeat the process. Ignoring C, what do you do when you've 'eaten' the universe? It only takes millenia of growth at our current rate to convert the universe into human flesh, and while I think there's a good case our birth rate will drop, if our industrial growth continues at the current rate, we'll 'eat' the Universe industrially in a few millenia. As far as I know, the Universe is finite, so there are limits (which can be very large, depending on your assumptions about how efficiently we can use the Universe) to growth. I suspect that the current conditions are akin to a phase change, and population after the current industrial revolution will be somewhat steady, but much higher than prior to the IR. James Nicoll ------------------------------ Date: 13 May 91 18:34:00 GMT From: mintaka!think.com!spool.mu.edu!news.nd.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!dil@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Perry G Ramsey) Subject: Re: 14 Astronauts have died for space exploration? In article , A20RFR1@MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU (Bob Rehak Ext. 3-9437, AIS Central Services - Swen Parson 146) writes: > >The Astronauts Memorial, honoring the 14 U.S. astronauts who > >have given their lives in the exploration of space, will be unveiled > > 14 astronauts? Last time I counted there were only 10. > > Apollo I: Grissom, White, and Chaffee. > STS-61L Challenger: Scobee, Smith, Resnik, Onizuka, McNair, > Jarvis, and McAuliffe. Elliot See and Charlie Basett, the Gemini 9 prime crew, crashed their T-38 into the McDonnell plant in St. Louis while arriving to inspect their flight vehicle. Is that sufficiently 'in the exploration of space'? I can't recall who the other two were, but at least one also died in a T-38 accident (bird impact), leading to the 'goose rule' that nobody could fly alone. -- Perry G. Ramsey Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences dil@mace.cc.purdue.edu Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN USA perryr@purccvm He's Here! Ariel Gilbert Ramsey, b. 24 APR 91, 8 lb 7 oz., 21". Stoic. ------------------------------ Date: 13 May 91 20:01:28 GMT From: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Payload Summary for 05/13/91 (Forwarded) PAYLOAD TEST AND ACTIVITY SHEET KENNEDY SPACE CENTER TDRS-E/IUS-15 STS-43/DISCOVERY May 13, 1991 George H. Diller Kennedy Space Center 407/867-2468 FTS 823-2468 Upcoming Activity IUS/checkout station communications (cos wrap) test 5/9-5/13 TDRS State of Health Checks 5/10-5/14 White Sand Compatability Testing 5/15 IUS/TDRS Electrical Mates 5/16 CITE Testing/Interface Verification Test 5/20 Astronaut payload inspection 5/20 End-to-End TDRS communications test 5/29 CITE disconnects 6/3 IUS ordnance installation 6/4 IUS/TDRS Installation into payload canister 6/14 Move to Pad B/Install in PCR 6/17 TDRS propellant loading 6/24-6/25 Install IUS/TDRS into Atlantis 6/30 Establish payload electrical connections 7/1 Interface Verication Test (IVT) 7/5 End-to-End Test (ETE) 7/7 IUS Flight Ready Checks 7/12 IUS Simulated Countdown 7/16 TDRS Battery Charging and Reconditioning 7/11-7/23 IUS ordnance installation 7/19 Close payload bay doors 7/22 Activity Completed TDRS arrival at KSC 3/5 IUS Arrival 4/26 IUS Test Cell Installation 4/29 TDRS removal from shipping container 4/30 IUS/TDRS Mate 5/8 ------------------------------ Date: 13 May 91 21:32:55 GMT From: mintaka!ogicse!sequent!muncher.sequent.com!szabo@bloom-beacon.mit.edu Subject: Re: Pegasus/SMEX - Alive and Well In article dpalace@sunland.gsfc.nasa.gov (Dick Palace) writes: >Fast Auroral Snapshot Explorer >.... >Submillimeter Wave Astronomy Satellite >... >Solar Anomalous and Magnetospheric Particle Explorer >... _Excellent_ projects. And at a very low cost. Keep up the good work, Goddard SMEX folks! -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com "If you understand something the first time you see it, you probably knew it already. The more bewildered you are, the more successful the mission was." -- Ed Stone, Voyager space explorer ------------------------------ Date: 13 May 91 17:48:59 GMT From: prism!ccoprmd@gatech.edu (Matthew DeLuca) Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #516 In article <9105131722.AA28958@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> space+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@msu.edu writes: (In reply to me, ccoprmd@hydra.gatech.edu): >(we could send Gailieo to get data from 'Stroids) >>Only if you are going to get some valuable data in the process. Below, you >>mention that the only data we have on asteroids is spectroscopic. What do >>you think you are going to get from Galileo? It doesn't have any way of >Except that the limitation from Earth is angular resolution. That would be >the improvement that would make it worth while. We are *already* going to get info on asteriods from Galileo...they've got two flybys planned. Making *more* flybys probably won't yield any information that wasn't obtained on the two flybys done, but *will* preclude information on Jupiter. Remember, you are just theorizing that we might find enough materials on the asteriods to make industrial exploitation practical. Perhaps the moons of Jupiter have something valuable (water springs to mind, as one of the most potentially valuable substances in the solar system) that can be used. We need to find out. >Point taken, but it still stands that only with the 'stroids can we >>>recover all the heavy metals (i.e. gold, iron, lead, copper) >>>that are forever hidden at the center of the other planets. Assuming there are any. Galileo will already give us an idea of whether or not it is worthwhile. Diverting it will probably not give us any new information. [Arguments deleted] >Conclusion; yes, it could significantly alter the timetable for space >development / commercialization. I don't see how your conclusion follows, myself. We do not have the booster capacity, booster reliability, manned spaceflight experience, or telerobotic capability to start exploiting asteroids in the next few years, and I doubt it will be all ready to go by the end of the decade, either. We really aren't in *that* big of a rush to get the information. >>If it's not going to make a good probe, then it's not worth diverting it from >>a mission it was designed to do. >What's your measure of 'good'? You mean 'best'? I mean 'good enough'. I'm betting that it won't even be good enough. It will give some very limited information on the surface composition of the asteroids it encounters. You will *still* have to have an analysis done by a penetrator mission before you send anyone or anything out there to exploit them, so why waste our time now? Do it right. >My point, which I hardly expect anyone else to share, is that Jupiter can >take a flying f__k at a rolling donught, (IMHO). The 'stroids are a much >better resource. And if our concern is resources, we should do something >to find them (or find the lack of them). You have absolutely no basis for deciding which is a better resource, since we have no idea what is available at either place. Let Galileo go its planned mission, to both asteroids and Jupiter, and we'll talk after the data gets back. >Galileo would be good enough to tell us if the 'stroids are a resource or >not. I feel that information is more important than ANYTHING we could >learn about the Jove's. Like I said, it will *already* tell us some information. Not enough to determine whether or not we want to mine, since we have to have some idea about the internal composition. You don't want to set up a ten billion dollar space-based mining and refining center, only to find out that that gold and platinum on your asteroid was only a surface phenomenon. Remember, we have no real clue how the asteroids were formed and how they have evolved since then, so there's a lot of work that has to be done, more than Galileo can do. >I'll cross my fingers that [CRAF] gets out of the planning stages. You and me both. -- Matthew DeLuca Georgia Institute of Technology "I'd hire the Dorsai, if I knew their Office of Information Technology P.O. box." - Zebadiah Carter, Internet: ccoprmd@prism.gatech.edu _The Number of the Beast_ ------------------------------ ReSent-Message-ID: Resent-Date: Mon, 13 May 91 12:49:57 EDT Resent-From: Tom <18084TM@msu.edu> Resent-To: space+@andrew.cmu.edu Date: Fri, 10 May 91 01:52:48 EDT Reply-To: space+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@msu.edu From: space-request+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU%CARNEGIE.BITNET@msu.edu Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #516 Comments: To: space+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU To: david polito <15432DJP@MSU.BITNET>, Tom McWilliams <18084TM@MSU.BITNET> Subject: Saturn V DDT&E costs (was: SPACE Digest V13 #494) >>If anyone does know of more solid figures, please, post them. (Mary?) >According to a NASA presentation to the House Science Committee we spent >$13.81 billion on the stages, engines, and vehicle integration. An >additional 2.37 was spent for facilities for a total of $16.19B. This >estimate is in 1991 dollars. > Allen I fear this is not much more information than we already had. Does 'vehicle integration' mean R&D? Does it include the cost of the LM + CSM? is 13.81G$ for one vehicle? All of them? Even the ones never launched? I was hoping someone might have figures that could boil down to cost/rocket, not including the landers. Tommy Mac Acknowledge-To: <18084TM@MSU> ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #551 *******************