Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 05:00:00 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #077 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Mon, 25 Jan 93 Volume 16 : Issue 077 Today's Topics: "suicides" of SDI scientists Availability of SPOC Software Availability of SPOC Software (Was Hewlett Packard con in spac Handling Antimatter Making Orbit 93 - The Delta Clipper Program NASA Criticism and other...PART II Next unmanned missions to Venus Next unmanned missions to Venus * Organic heat shielding. ques about earlier "suicides" of SDI scientists (2 msgs) Repeating message Sabatier Reactors. (2 msgs) So what's happened to Henry Spencer? (2 msgs) Space based combat--the next frontier Space Sta.Freedom pics/gifs/sketches info? Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests 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: Sun, 24 Jan 93 20:01:22 EST From: John Roberts Subject: "suicides" of SDI scientists -From: dannyb@panix.com (Daniel Burstein) -Subject: ques about earlier "suicides" of SDI scientists -Date: 19 Jan 93 08:51:42 GMT -Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC -About five years ago, there were quite a few suicides by scientists in -Europe who were asociated with the US led "strategic defense initiative." -Quite a few of these seemed to be suspicious, and the gross numbers were -quite a bit higher than would be expected in a group of this size. -I haven't heard anything lately about this nor have I been able to track -down the results of any investigations. The only stuff I've found has -been news articles simply describing the venets. -Does anybody out there in greater NETLAND have any further info? Or can -you direct me to better sources? Since this corresponds extremely closely to the classic 1951 short story "Breeds there a Man...?", written by Isaac Asimov, and available in the collections "Nightfall and Other Stories" and "Nightfall One", I'd say there's a significant chance that you read either this story or a reference to this story, and now you remember it as an historical event. Or, maybe, [lowers voice to ominous tone] it...wasn't...just...a...story!!! [eerie music plays in background] :-) John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 23:31:22 GMT From: "T.X. Yuan" Subject: Availability of SPOC Software Newsgroups: sci.space In article <182310cf8@ofa123.fidonet.org> Wales.Larrison@ofa123.fidonet.org writes: >Hmmm.... you guys might check around some of the local sites for a >copy. I note a copy of SPOC is available with documentation in the >file archives on the site I post from. Never unloaded it, so I >don't know how it runs, but it appears to available to the general >public... > - Wales Larrison - > >--- Maximus 2.01wb Hey, great, Do you mean we can get SPOC from local fidonet sites? Can we get it from internet ftp sites also?(If we don't have access to local fidonet sites) -txy3340- ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jan 93 20:37:22 From: Wales.Larrison@ofa123.fidonet.org Subject: Availability of SPOC Software (Was Hewlett Packard con in spac Newsgroups: sci.space kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes: >Before you ask, the SPOC software is NOT available to the general >public. It includes a world map showing day/night and the current >position of the Orbiter, updated in real time. Doug Mohney responds: >Like, bogus. Do you realize how much money NASA could make by >selling it off to Space Junkies at $50 a pop? :) Hmmm.... you guys might check around some of the local sites for a copy. I note a copy of SPOC is available with documentation in the file archives on the site I post from. Never unloaded it, so I don't know how it runs, but it appears to available to the general public... - Wales Larrison - --- Maximus 2.01wb ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 05:23:44 GMT From: Hugh Emberson Subject: Handling Antimatter Newsgroups: sci.space >>>>> On Sat, 23 Jan 1993 16:30:01 EST, Graydon said: G> Neither antimatter nor nuke-thermal are very good for launching G> to orbit(not if we expect to use that part of the planet again), Why? I'm no expert, but I think there would be little or no radiation release from a Nerva-style nuclear thermal rocket. And the release from a Nerva-style antimatter fueled rocket would depend on how well you can stop gamma rays. The only mechanism I can see for release in the nuclear thermal case would be parts of the engine getting irradiated and then eroded away by the propellant stream. Nervas were tested, does anyone have any figures for the amount of radiation (or radioactive materials) released into the environment? Hugh -- Hugh Emberson -- CS Postgrad hugh@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 01:56:26 GMT From: Bruce Dunn Subject: Making Orbit 93 - The Delta Clipper Program Newsgroups: sci.space Regarding my posting in which I related the Delta Clipper landing sequence as: 1) start engines 2) flip to base-first attitude > Larry Wall writes: > How do they guarantee they don't get upside-down-spraycan syndrome? I checked my notes again, and the notes give the start engines, then flip sequence. It is possible that I misheard the speaker (Gaubatz from McDonnell Douglas). I expect the most likely explanation is that I have mis-interpreted the sequence. An alternate possibility is that the "engines" started are the RCS thrusters, which run on gaseous hydrogen and gaseous oxygen. -- Bruce Dunn Vancouver, Canada Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jan 93 14:50:26 From: Steinn Sigurdsson Subject: NASA Criticism and other...PART II Newsgroups: sci.space On the question of NASA spin-offs, I seem to recall that CCDs were originally developed at JPL in the 70's - can someone confirm/deny this - have I fallen victim to JPLs superb PR machine :-) (and can we say Sony successfully transferred the technology PROMPTLY to the benefit of all mankind?) | Steinn Sigurdsson |I saw two shooting stars last night | | Lick Observatory |I wished on them but they were only satellites | | steinly@lick.ucsc.edu |Is it wrong to wish on space hardware? | | "standard disclaimer" |I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care - B.B. 1983 | ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 22:35:35 EST From: John Roberts Subject: Next unmanned missions to Venus -From: rkornilo@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ryan Korniloff) -Subject: Re: Next unmanned missions to Venus * -Date: 24 Jan 93 06:39:04 GMT -Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. -Hmmm, well, I guess if we were to make any kind of serious exploration of -Venus's surface we would have to develop electronics componants that -operate comforably at 900f. And metals that can protect the inards of the -probe from terrential sulfuric acid down-poors.. -How WOULD we do that by the way? Anyone know?? Read the October 1992 Scientific American. If they pan out, diamond film semiconductors should be able to operate at up to 700 C (as compared to ~450 C Venus surface temperatures), and be smaller and 40-100 times faster than silicon semiconductors. John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 06:39:04 GMT From: Ryan Korniloff Subject: Next unmanned missions to Venus * Newsgroups: sci.space >Path: mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov!baalke >From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) >Newsgroups: sci.space >Subject: Re: Next unmanned missions to Venus? >Date: 20 Jan 1993 05:55 UT >Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory >Lines: 19 >Distribution: world >Message-ID: <20JAN199305554423@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov> >References: >NNTP-Posting-Host: kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov >News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41 > >In article , rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (rabjab) writes... >>Does anyone know of plans for future Venus exploration? Any >>leads would be appreciated. > >The only mission I'm aware of that will be going to Venus within the >next 10 years is Cassini. Cassini will be making two Venus flybys >in 1998 and 1999 as part of its gravity assisted trajectory to Saturn. >But other than that, it looks pretty bleak for Venus missions. I know >several members of the Magellan team would like to see another spacecraft >dedicated to Venus. The Soviets had tentative plans a couple of years >ago to send a Venera spacecraft to Venus in 2005, but as far as I know >those plans have been abandoned. Hmmm, well, I guess if we were to make any kind of serious exploration of Venus's surface we would have to develop electronics componants that operate comforably at 900f. And metals that can protect the inards of the probe from terrential sulfuric acid down-poors.. How WOULD we do that by the way? Anyone know?? --- Ryan Korniloff --- rkornilo@nyx.cs.du.edu ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jan 93 08:47:54 GMT From: Pat Subject: Organic heat shielding. Newsgroups: sci.space In article <19777@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn) writes: | | The liquid hydrogen tank of the DC-X currently being built is |insulated with balsa wood. I saw a photo over the weekend - the speaker |noted that they had to bring a worker out of retirement who had the necessary |skills for bonding it to the metal. Unless my eyes pulled a perspective |trick, the photo showed the balsa on the ***inside*** of the tank. I can believe that. I believe in the Saturn, The insualtionfor the liquid hydrogen tank was on the inside. Less heat loss that way, except on one stage, I think it was the S-IV where to save weight they put the insulation outside the tank, because the cold made the metal stronger, thus saving weight. Someone who has the saturn tech ref will be able to post for sure. pat ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 06:22:26 GMT From: David Fuzzy Wells Subject: ques about earlier "suicides" of SDI scientists Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.misc,sci.space >This is -kind of- reaching into ALT.CONSPIRACY stuff, but these deaths >certainly did occur, so I reached out to the SCI type nets because that's >where people who deal with scientists would hang out... > >dannyb@panix.com > Didn't know that Specially Compartmentalized Information (SCI) type places could have connections into the Internet. Sorry, couldn't resist... BTW, while be are on the subject of conspiracy...where is "panix.com"? Love the name...very apropos considering your article. Fuzzy. (who lives nearby the Falcon AFB unknown scientist gravesite) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 19:08:05 GMT From: Nick Maclaren Subject: ques about earlier "suicides" of SDI scientists Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.misc,sci.space In article dannyb@panix.com (Daniel Burstein) writes: >About five years ago, there were quite a few suicides by scientists in >Europe who were asociated with the US led "strategic defense initiative." > >Quite a few of these seemed to be suspicious, and the gross numbers were >quite a bit higher than would be expected in a group of this size. > >I haven't heard anything lately about this nor have I been able to track >down the results of any investigations. The only stuff I've found has >been news articles simply describing the venets. This is not just ALT.CONSPIRACY stuff, but is based on fact. One research laboratory in the West of England (GEC/Marconi?) had several news items about it and, on the limited evidence available, something stank. However, the newspapers failed to get enough data to justify any story beyond "something is being covered up." However, this whole area (including whether they were really working on SDI or just a new design of video game) comes under the Official Secrets Act (our reverse equivalent of the Freedom of Information Act). You won't get any more information, unless the USA government was involved and leaks it from that end. I suspect that SDI is irrelevant, because the rumours started before SDI had ever been heard of. Nick Maclaren University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory, New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG, England. Email: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk Tel.: +44 223 334761 Fax: +44 223 334679 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 09:31:07 EST From: John Roberts Subject: Repeating message -Path: cam!dove!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov -From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) -Newsgroups: sci.space -Subject: Re: lunar base/life-support on freedom -Message-ID: -Date: 23 Jan 93 22:25:11 GMT This message has appeared at least three times. However, I only posted it once, and my machine sent it to ISU only once. Apologies for any inconvenience. John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jan 93 10:21:52 GMT From: Pat Subject: Sabatier Reactors. Newsgroups: sci.space |From: redin@lysator.liu.se |-In sci.space you write: |Freedom decided not to use methane thrusters. so instead they are |-throwing out waste CO2 and importing hydrazine. failure oriented |-management wins again. someone thought methane thrusters were |-too risky. |Methane more risky then hydrazine? but, but, but, oh well :-( |I simply dont understand the US pork barrels. Couldent they have |launched 4-5 miniature stations with single shuttle flights to test |things out? The first 1-2 is junk and cannot be habitable and are |scuttled after the shuttle flight, next 3-4 can be manned between |two flights or more and number 5 - n can be bolted to a truss and |you have your tested, safe freedom with bells and whistles that _work_. |You will get at least as much pork and much more space station. |Why in hell are they stuck inside CAD simulations and paperbins? |Magnus Redin Lysator Academic Computer Society redin@lysator.liu.se |Mail: Magnus redin, Rydsv{gen 240C26, 582 51 LINK|PING, SWEDEN The problem is not that methane is risky. We have been using methane industrially for 150 years. but that SSF management said, no-one has ever space qualified a methane oxygen thruster so damn if we will. Failure oriented management. and as for the other idea, i guess that's what skylab was. of course now NASA is such an arthritic bureaucracy, i dont think they really want to fly packages so much as study them. actually who needs to build mini stations. for small items test them in the shuttle cargo bay, for longer duration, test them on MIR. but that would be too easy, i guess. pat ------------------------------ Date: 25 Jan 93 02:50:00 GMT From: wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov Subject: Sabatier Reactors. Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1jutp0INNacf@digex.digex.com>, prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes... > > >|From: redin@lysator.liu.se > >|-In sci.space you write: >|Freedom decided not to use methane thrusters. so instead they are >|-throwing out waste CO2 and importing hydrazine. failure oriented >|-management wins again. someone thought methane thrusters were >|-too risky. >|Methane more risky then hydrazine? but, but, but, oh well :-( >|I simply dont understand the US pork barrels. Couldent they have >|launched 4-5 miniature stations with single shuttle flights to test >|things out? The first 1-2 is junk and cannot be habitable and are >|scuttled after the shuttle flight, next 3-4 can be manned between >|two flights or more and number 5 - n can be bolted to a truss and >|you have your tested, safe freedom with bells and whistles that _work_. >|You will get at least as much pork and much more space station. >|Why in hell are they stuck inside CAD simulations and paperbins? >|Magnus Redin Lysator Academic Computer Society redin@lysator.liu.se >|Mail: Magnus redin, Rydsv{gen 240C26, 582 51 LINK|PING, SWEDEN > I wonder if people like this are just trying to provoke me? The last I heard was that SSF was going to use LOX/H2 thrusters for orbit maintainance. Am I wrong? If so, then they are MORE risky than hydrazine. Also for your information, NASA has been flying station precursors for over ten years now. They are called Spacelab. Also the new SpaceHab will be flying on STS-57 in April. These are dependent on Shuttle for utilities, but are doing the most important SSF precursor work, which is the experiments for microgravity. Also NASA has sponsored COMET, which will fly in March, which is a free flying microgravity laboratory with a return module for returning samples that have been through their process cycle. So NASA, who you think is stupid, IS doing what you are saying there, and for a lot more money than a full up program of throwing away hardware. All of the Spacelab and Spacehab experiments can be used again for very minimal costs, as well as the experiments returned from the COMET module. These experiments are all important as precursors to SSF because we can get all of the bugs out of the experiments and the experiment process before we fly them on SSF where they can be run in an effective manner, having all of t eh bugs worked out on less expensive platforms. See there NASA ain't half as dumb as the average poster to sci.space. >The problem is not that methane is risky. We have been using methane >industrially for 150 years. but that SSF management said, no-one has ever >space qualified a methane oxygen thruster so damn if we will. >Failure oriented management. > >and as for the other idea, i guess that's what skylab was. of course >now NASA is such an arthritic bureaucracy, i dont think they really want >to fly packages so much as study them. actually who needs to build >mini stations. for small items test them in the shuttle cargo bay, >for longer duration, test them on MIR. > >but that would be too easy, i guess. > >pat It is also easy to criticize before you find out the facts. I suggest that you might take the time to do a little research to find out exactly what is going on in NASA before you are so blith in your criticism. There are many problems at NASA, but there is also a lot of good things going on. Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville * ********* ********* ********* * 0 * * * * * * * * * * *** *** ************************************************************************** Delta II/Small Expendable (Tether) Deployer System (SEDS) flight configuration during deployment, circa March 1993. ************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 04:20:41 GMT From: "Richard A. Schumacher" Subject: So what's happened to Henry Spencer? Newsgroups: sci.space Does anyone know why Henry Spencer has not posted recently? His were consistently the most interesting, informative and terse posts. What a shame if the intemperate remark by that Harvard snotnose drove him away... ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jan 93 16:31:54 GMT From: Sean Michael Gallagher Subject: So what's happened to Henry Spencer? Newsgroups: sci.space Could be that the mystery people who got the SDI scientists got him... who's next? Sarcastically Yours, Sean ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:31:04 GMT From: Brian Lane Subject: Space based combat--the next frontier Newsgroups: sci.space > >ok....here's a question for all you space buffs out there... >This is actually for a story i'm writing but I figured that the >folks here could give me a good estimate... >If we consider combat in space in say...the next 50 years...there are three >limitations: the effectiveness of the weapon, the effectiveness of sensors >to detect the target , and the effectiveness of fire control to aim the >weapon so it can hit the detected target. >Let's say that two sides have somehing the size of a naval destroyer out in >deep space somewhere. how close would they have to be before radar could >pick the other ship up, how about passive sensors (what kind of sensors >would they be?)? How close would they have to be to get an adequate fire >control solution? (I assume the energy weapon they'r using (laser or some >other energy weapon) would have a longer range than the fire control.) > >I'd appreciate it if replies were sent in e-mail (and i'd post a edited >compendium of the results), as I don't get on here often enough to avoid >the reader's clearing of messages. > >thanx! >Brian >Netoprbl@ncsuvm.cc.ncsu.edu >Raleigh, NC > ------------------------------ Date: 25 Jan 93 05:02:12 GMT From: WBWQC@CUNYVM.BITNET Subject: Space Sta.Freedom pics/gifs/sketches info? Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.d,sci.space Greetings. In search of: Space Station Freedom maps/schematics as jpegs, gifs, tiffs, ascii line sketches/drawings; preferably with areas labeled. No technical details needed - just simple geometric shapes for educ.purposes; also general dimensions of modules/parts & whole. FTP info specially welcome. Simple lists of modules also welcome. Thanks in advance. If replying, e-mail to: (internet) wbwqc@cunyvm.cuny.edu (bitnet) wbwqc@cunyvm.bitnet ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 077 ------------------------------