Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 05:00:58 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #014 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sun, 19 Jul 92 Volume 15 : Issue 014 Today's Topics: Chemical unit operations in space ESA Future How to find limiting magnitude? (was Re: Solar Power Satellites) Manned/Unmanned Space Transportation Infrastructure Costs Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu". Please do **NOT** send (un)subscription requests to that address! Instead, send a message of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), RICE::BOYLE (SPAN/NSInet), UTADNX::UTSPAN::RICE::BOYLE (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 18 Jul 92 23:22:43 GMT From: Richard Bell Subject: Chemical unit operations in space Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space The point of building a chemical plant in space is not to make the things that chemical plants make on Earth, but to make things that cannot be made in the Earth's gravity field, things like perfect crystals and foamed steel. ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 1992 04:08:18 GMT From: George William Herbert Subject: ESA Future Newsgroups: sci.space Background: About a year ago (very roughly; correct me on the date) the ESA council of ministers rejected the ambitious ESA long term plan that called for Columbus, Hermes, and the ESA Freedom module as primary long-term projects. ESA had been searching for a replacement plan that they could get approved; the solution was to junk Columbus, reduce Hermes to an experimental program with a flight "indefinitely delayed" (Certain high ESA officials who have been to Kitakyushu remarked that "indefinitely" should be replaced by "infinitely"). Thus, they were about giving up on their previous goal of European seperate manned access to space. More Recent: Late last month, the revised long term plan was rejected. The mood inside ESA is best described as "depressed". Analysis: Chaos. There is continuing confusion over wether ESA will continue to exist as the organization it is today. The EC has some fundamental problems with ESA being a policy and technology group (it wants to mucle in on the policy sector), and one of ESA's keystone funding sources (Germany) is looking for ways to back out as it copes with integrating East Germany. ESA has _no_ long term plan that its members have approved, and the future status of everything it's doing must be seen as questionable. outlook: Poor. If you think NASA is in deep do-do over Freedom, take a closer look at ESA. Our space agencies globally may need our help just to survive much longer, at this rate. 8-( -george william herbert gwh@soda.berkeley.edu gwh@lurnix.com gwh@uchu.isu92.ac.jp until 28 aug ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 22:42:30 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: How to find limiting magnitude? (was Re: Solar Power Satellites) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Jul18.171611.17214@lut.ac.uk> M.L.Cook3@lut.ac.uk (Vaxaholics Anonymous) writes: >... The William Herschel telescope is >kitted out with software to stop astronomers accidentally pointing the >telescope at the moon and thus wrecking the detectors, but imagine a scenario >where scores of bright satellites were swimming about the sky with much >faster and unpredictable orbits than the moon... Fortunately, this isn't an issue for powersats, which are (in the classical concept, anyway) even more predictable than the Moon, because they're in Clarke orbit. They're motionless in the sky (relative to the Earth, not the stars). -- There is nothing wrong with making | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 92 03:58:34 GMT From: George William Herbert Subject: Manned/Unmanned Newsgroups: sci.space In article henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >CRAF was cut from the NASA budget because CRAF/Cassini appeared to be >firmly on track to overrun its budget cap, and Congress had already >warned NASA that CRAF was the more expendable of the two. Cassini is >still in danger, despite semi-protected status as an international >program, precisely because its funding requirements continue to skyrocket. People inside Cassini are saying that it looks like it's safe. Golden apparently likes Cassini as an idea quite a bit, and once he got what he wanted in scalebacks (removed the platform, but all the instruments are still there) he's put his weight behind it. It has been pushed back 18 months or so, from latest peeks at schedules. Which isn't bad, since someone here who's working on Huygens said that they're having deadline problems which the slip solved. -george william herbert gwh@soda.berkeley.edu gwh@lurnix.com gwh@uchu.isu92.ac.jp until 28 aug ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 03:42:42 GMT From: Henry Spencer Subject: Space Transportation Infrastructure Costs Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Jul17.162622.13291@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov writes: >>Cassini being shrunk to fit on a Titan IV without the new SRBs... > >You left out a few pertinent details about the SRMs. To date, the SRMs >has had only one successful test firing which occurred just a month ago, >and they still have to undergo several more test firings before they can >be declared flight ready. The first test firing resulted in a spectacular >explosion... This is why one does test firings. The early record of any of the major expendables makes the upgraded Titan SRMs look like paragons of good behavior. Actually, I agree that the SRM-upgrade program is a bit worrisome, but *not* because of that explosion. The organizational aspects, like Hercules's unwisely low bid on the contract, would concern me more. >... considering the track record of >the SRM development, NASA decided that using the SRMs was too risky. Not quite right, actually. The Cassini people are still hoping to use them. The decision was only that a backup strategy -- plain Titan IV -- was in order. (Note that it was a secondary aspect of the redesign, which was mainly directed at lowering Cassini's pricetag.) If one has been so stupid as to commit oneself to a program which can be destroyed by a single launch failure -- and even plain old Titans do still fail, as witness the Titan explosion that followed Challenger -- then there is reason for some caution. However, there is also a point where this is being carried too far, and the mission is being badly compromised by the refusal to take risks. I haven't studied Cassini closely enough to say whether it's reached that point, but I'd guess it's close. Both the Neptune/Pluto proposal and the various Titan- launched Mars-sample-return proposals are well past it. -- There is nothing wrong with making | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 03:47:22 EDT From: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU  Return-Path: Received: from a.gp.cs.cmu.edu by VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU id aa00191; 18 Jul 92 3:16:28 EDT Received: from po5.andrew.cmu.edu by A.GP.CS.CMU.EDU id aa16003; 18 Jul 92 2:54:06 EDT Received: by po5.andrew.cmu.edu (5.54/3.15) id for mwm+space@a.gp.cs.cmu.edu; Sat, 18 Jul 92 02:53:58 EDT Received: via switchmail for space+@andrew.cmu.edu; Sat, 18 Jul 1992 02:53:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU by po5.andrew.cmu.edu (5.54/3.15) id for SPACE+; Sat, 18 Jul 92 02:53:53 EDT Received: from ALASKA.BITNET (MAILER@ALASKA) by BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU (PMDF #12078) id <01GMIBEQE1MOBW9PI1@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU>; Sat, 18 Jul 1992 02:53 EDT Date: Fri, 17 Jul 92 22:43:23 -0900 From: "ACAD3A::FSRRC" Sender: "ACAD3A::FSRRC" To: SPACE+@andrew.cmu.edu Message-Id: <01GMIBEQE1MOBW9PI1@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU> Source-Info: Sender is really mwm@A.GP.CS.CMU.EDU Status: RO ISECCo Update: An extract of the 1991 annual newsletter--a little late, but we did better than last year!!! International Space Exploration and Colonization Company I.S.E.C.Co. P.O. Box 60885 Annual Newsletter Fairbanks, Ak. 99706 Issue #5: 1991 (907)457-2674 July 1, 1992 Comments and Credits This is the International Space Exploration and Colonization Company's fourth annual newsletter. ISECCo is a certified 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization, incorporated in Alaska. We are a co-operative devoted to space oriented research and development. Except as noted this newsletter was written by Ray R. Collins. Other people who contributed to its writing, editing and distribution are: Debi Wilkinson, Florence Collins, Chandra Schaffer, Terry Fike and Kraig Smyth; ISECCo extends its thanks to their generous donation of time to this effort. To become an ISECCo member write to the address above for an information package and membership form. We also have a corporate membership status; if your business wishes to join please request the corporate forms. CONTENTS: Comments and Credits........................Page 1, Column 1 Contents....................................Page 1, Column 1 Overview....................................Page 1, Column 1 The Basement Biosphere .....................Page 1, Column 2 The 1991 Garden.............................Page 2, Column 2 The Biosphere Diet..........................Page 3, Column 1 Everything Else We Did......................Page 3, Column 2 Sealing..................................Page 3, Column 2 Photography..............................Page 4, Column 1 Fish.....................................Page 4, Column 1 IDEEA One Conference.....................Page 5, Column 1 To Design a Biosphere ......................Page 5, Column 1 The ISECCo Biosphere........................Page 5, Column 2 1992 Projects ..............................Page 6, Column 2 That Boring Office Stuff....................Page 7, Column 1 Donations...................................Page 7, Column 2 The Last Line...............................Page 8, Column 1 Overview This newsletter primarily reflects the accomplishments of the last year (1991). However it also shows the accomplishments of the last four years. It proves that we successfully created an organization that will produce results. We haven't been sitting around discussing and wondering what it would be like to colonize space or wishing something would happen, we have rolled up our sleeves and set to work on it. We (literally) got our hands dirty planting gardens, building greenhouses, raising earthworms and cleaning fish tanks. This work needs to be done if we are to know how to support humans in space colonies. We have given little consideration as to colony construction or location since that is a long way off, but we are bent on finding what is necessary for human life support in a colony. This research field is called biospherics. Our biosphere project was taken as our first project both because it is within our means and due to the huge research gap in biospherics. In November 1991, the University of Houston Architecture department sponsored a conference called the International Design for Extreme Environments Association - One (IDEEA One). Our president, Ray Collins, attended this conference and made contacts with other professionals working in fields related to ours. This was a valuable learning experience both for Ray and ISECCo. As well as reporting on the latest progress of our biosphere experiment we have included pictures of some of the work that we did over the last four years. We have included a brief explanation of biospheres and ecosystems in general and how our biosphere will be assembled. A few final comments on this newsletter: This newsletter shows where our members' valuable donations of time and money were spent. If you'd like a copy of the entire newsletter please feel free to get in touch. If you'd like to join we'd be happy to welcome you. ON OTHER MATTERS: Excavation is progressing. We hope to be pouring the floor by the end of this summer. Unfortunately our ASTF grant was not awarded (the decision was 7/15/92 so we haven't heard why we were turned down yet). So progress after that may be limited. We planted a small garden this year, as well upgraded the berry patch. Work at the hanger site is progressing, but it too is limited by finances. Over this last winter we ran the basement biosphere (successfully), but this spring it began to overheat (due to all the lights) so we had to shut most of it down. If any of you would like to be on our computer mailing list just send me a note. --Ray::President, ISECCo FSRRC@ALASKA.BITNET (bitnet) or 74010,3722 (Compuserve) or R.Collins36 (Genie) :::The International Space Exploration and Colonization Company::: :::P.O. Box 60885::Fairbanks::Alaska::99706::: Researching and Developing space oriented technology for the betterment of mankind. * * * * * * * * * * * * {end} ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 014 ------------------------------