Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V09_4/V9_489.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 18KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from corsica.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/4Ya:ZHy00UkVE8QE56>;
          Fri, 16 Jun 89 03:16:36 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 89 03:16:29 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #489

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 489

Today's Topics:
              Test - astro,space,physics
     NASA, Amroc agree to critical chemical exchange (Forwarded)
               Orbital queries
           Re: Kremlin reveals space budget

    Ozone depletion, atmospheric models, and public policy
            Don't mess with NASA?
              Re: Don't mess with NASA?
            Re: How Hubble will get there
          Re: comet strike in the carolinas?
            comet strike in the carolinas?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 13 Jun 89 18:36:34 GMT
From: dasys1![e-mail]  (Mohib)
Subject: Test - astro,space,physics

Test.

--
Mohib N Durrani
Big Electric Cat Public UNIX
..!cmcl2!{ccnysci,cucard,hombre}!dasys1!mohib

------------------------------

Date: 14 Jun 89 16:05:15 GMT
From: trident.arc.nasa.gov![e-mail]  (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: NASA, Amroc agree to critical chemical exchange (Forwarded)

Jim Cast
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                      June 14, 1989

RELEASE:  89-92

NASA, AMROC AGREE TO CRITICAL CHEMICAL EXCHANGE

     Under a recent agreement between NASA and the American
Rocket Company (AMROC), Camarillo, Calif., NASA has provided a
critical chemical to the company for its scheduled launch of a
commercial Single Module Launch Vehicle (SMLV) from Vandenberg
Air Force Base, Calif., in July.

     AMROC's supply of hydrogen peroxide, used in the reaction
control system of the SMLV, was found to be unusable upon
delivery.  Replacement by the overseas manufacturer could not be
delivered in time for the launch date.

     AMROC turned to NASA after exhausting attempts to acquire
the chemical from other commercial sources.  NASA uses hydrogen
peroxide in its Scout launch vehicle reaction control systems.
Within 2 weeks, after determining that its Scout vehicle supplies
were adequate to cover near-term demands, NASA provided two drums
(about 600 lbs.) of the chemical to AMROC.

     "NASA's quick response and positive commitment aided us in
holding our flight test schedules and target launch date for our
customers," said George Koopman, president of AMROC.  "This is
the kind of partnership, cooperation and support the commercial
expendable launch vehicle (ELV) industry wants and needs."

     The chemical was provided to AMROC on a reimbursable basis
from supplies at the Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops Island,
Va.  NASA will restore and expand its supply for Scout vehicles
this fall.  NASA is assisting the commercialization of the
nation's fledgling ELV industry by making available use of its
unique personal expertise, services and facilities that are not
available from the private sector.

     NASA also is purchasing its ELV launch services needs
directly from commercial operators, whenever possible, to support
its scientific and applications missions that are not assigned to
fly on the Space Shuttle.  Missions that do not require the
unique capabilities of the Space Shuttle are being placed on ELVs
in support of NASA's policy to use a mixed fleet of Shuttles and
ELVs to assure access to space for its programs.

------------------------------

Date: 14 Jun 89 21:20:46 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (R Timothy Smith)
Subject: Orbital queries


Two questions:

  1)  What activities would you use to convince students (say in the 4th-
    through 9th-grade range) that the motion of the moon around the
    earth and the earth around the sun (viewed from above the northern
    hemisphere in space) are both counter-clockwise?  What alternatives
    are there to noting times at which the moon or stars arrive at the
    same point in the sky on consecutive nights?

  2)  Why do most space launches orbit west-to-east relative to the earth's
    surface?  Obviously other possibilities exist (e.g., geosynchronous
    and polar).  Nonetheless, I don't know of any that go east-to-west.
    How come?

Thanks in advance for any insights -
                                - Tim

------------------------------

Date: 14 Jun 89 14:44:02 GMT
From: beowulf![e-mail]  (Bernd Stramm)
Subject: Re: Kremlin reveals space budget

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (d.l.skran) writes:
>
>My guess is that these figures are low by a factor of 2 or 3 for
>propaganda purposes. They are totally unbelievable.
>
>Dale not Amon Skran

Remember that their pricing is kind of artificial --- since they
don't have a market economy, the government basically sets the
prices of what they buy, so prices don't reflect "real" cost.

######################################################################
[e-mail]    ARPA (new)     |    Bernd Stramm
[e-mail] ARPA (old)     | CSE Department, UC San Diego
bstramm@ucsd        BITNET         | La Jolla, Ca 92093

------------------------------

Date:        WED 14 JUN 1989 09:03:00 EDT
From: "Allen Hinkle - TU Computing Center; [phone]"
             <HINKLE0@TRANSY>
To: <[e-mail]>
Subject:

   The TU computing center would greatly appreciate it if you would
remove FREE012@TRANSY from your mailing list.  The said person is a
student here and has gone home for the summer and will not return until
mid September.  Thank you.
                                             Allen Hinkle
                                             Programmer/Analyst
                                             TU Computing Center

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 15:36:00 EDT
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender
    and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement.
Subject: Ozone depletion, atmospheric models, and public policy


>From: ginosko!infinet!ulowell!tegra![e-mail]  (Johnathan Vail)
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
>>I suspected from the beginning that the so-called 'ozone hole' was just
>>part of a natural cycle that we would have been seeing all along if we
>>had had satellites for decades.  It makes no sense whatsoever that a
>>fluorocarbon-induced hole would first appear over the south pole.
>It makes no sense until you understand it.  Maybe to someone who does
>it makes perfect sense.

This is not an entirely reasonable argument, since the proposed "fix" is
to undertake a presumably expensive switch to alternate products, with us
as consumers or taxpayers expected to foot the bill. The scientific community
appears to be very hesitant to provide the "general public" with sufficient
information to make an informed decision on the matter.

I went to our technical library looked through some books on ozone
depletion written since 1980, and came to the following conclusions:

 - The main reason the scientists are so hesitant at giving out authoritative
   information is that they don't have much themselves. Most of their work
   involves the construction of atmospheric models, which disagree with
   one another at many points. Whenever a new piece of information comes in,
   several models are killed off, and new ones are created to take their place.

 - It is generally agreed that an increase in the short wavelength ultraviolet
   light reaching the surface is undesirable. This light can be blocked by O3
   (ozone) or by O2 (regular oxygen). (The books don't really go into the
   relative effectiveness of the two.) Ozone is generated by lower-atmospheric
   processes and in the upper atmosphere when high energy UV light blasts an
   O2 molecule apart. Ozone eventually breaks down by itself, but the process
   can be speeded by the presence of certain substances or other conditions.
   The rates of generation and breakdown determine the equilibrium level.

 - It has been determined that chlorine and certain other substances can speed
   the breakdown process in the upper atmosphere, lowering the equilibrium
   level of ozone. Chlorine can be released by the breakdown of CFCs from
   aerosol cans, refrigerators, etc. CFCs tend to break down very slowly,
   with an expected lifetime of 50-100 years. The free chlorine atoms last
   only a relatively short time, before combining with other substances and
   drifting back toward the troposphere. Thus any effects from CFCs build up
   only gradually, and take a long time to die out. This long-term effect is
   the main reason for concern.

 - Ozone depletion by chlorine is expected to be effective only in the upper
   atmosphere. If the current ozone layer were depleted, it is expected that
   more ozone would form lower down, but scientists basically have no idea
   on how much would form, and to what extent it would compensate for depletion
   of the upper layer. Ozone produced by humans at the surface would also
   block ultraviolet light to some extent.

 - There is very little interest in measuring the short wavelength ultraviolet
   light at the surface. Many (but not all) researchers seem to feel that
   depletion of the current ozone layer would be directly proportional to
   increase of ultraviolet at the surface.

 - I would assume that the winter holes in the ozone layer at the poles
   are caused by depletion of the ozone when there is not much sunlight
   present. The ozone builds back up in the spring when the sun reappears.
   Of course, the ozone layer isn't really *needed* at night. Again, not
   much apparent interest in measuring UV levels at the ground.

 - Most or all of the chlorine in the upper atmosphere is assumed to be a
   result of human activity. Not much on the speculation that the ocean
   could be the source of much of the chlorine. (The ocean contains huge
   quantities of chlorine in the form of salt, and salt particles are known
   to travel at least into the upper troposphere.)

 - Though the books don't really specify, I presume that the breakdown model
   for the CFCs would be a standard exponential decay. If this is the case,
   then any effects would start to diminish almost immediately if the release
   of CFCs were suddenly stopped.

I believe this is a fairly accurate representation of much of the information
in the books I looked through. Any more authoritative information would be
welcome. In any event, it appears that the current political climate will
cause CFCs to be phased out, though Soviet physicists remain unconvinced
that there is solid evidence of a hazard. In a few years, the scientists
involved will give a sigh of relief and exclaim, "See? We saved the world!"
                                 John Roberts
                                 [e-mail] (new address)

------------------------------

Date: 14 Jun 89 18:10:08 GMT
From: concertina![e-mail]  (Steve Hix)
Subject: Don't mess with NASA?

On my way into work this morning, as I passed Moffett Field,
I noticed a NASA helicopter hovering about the active runway.

What use could they have for a Bell HueyCobra (AH-1<mumble>)?

(I know, it's probably a testbed for some new rotor design,
but, on the other hand, perhaps someone is getting tired of
vocal critics... :} )

------------------------------

Date: 14 Jun 89 19:00:42 GMT
From: skipper![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Don't mess with NASA?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Hix) writes:

   On my way into work this morning, as I passed Moffett Field,
   I noticed a NASA helicopter hovering about the active runway.

   What use could they have for a Bell HueyCobra (AH-1<mumble>)?

   (I know, it's probably a testbed for some new rotor design,
   but, on the other hand, perhaps someone is getting tired of
   vocal critics... :} )

We have a B-52, fighters, and attack aircraft here at Ames-Dryden.
Be nice!

(Do I really have to add the smiley?)
--

M F Shafer                                |Ignore the reply-to address
NASA Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility |Use [e-mail]

NASA management doesn't know what I'm doing and I don't know what they're
doing, and everybody's happy this way.

------------------------------

Date: 13 Jun 89 21:31:10 GMT
From: stsci![e-mail]  (Jim Berry)
Subject: Re: How Hubble will get there

From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Steve Hosgood):
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim Sims) writes:
>>(and yes, I promise to be a good boy and _NOT_ post TLAs without translations
>>  from now on)
>>

> Ok, so - er - what's a TLA please?

> Steve

Three Letter Acronym.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Berry                         | UUCP:{arizona,decvax,hao}!noao!stsci!berry
Space Telescope Science Institute | ARPA:   [e-mail]
Baltimore, Md. 21218              | SPAM:   SCIVAX::BERRY, KEPLER::BERRY

------------------------------

Date: 14 Jun 89 19:19:10 GMT
From: skipper![e-mail]
Subject: Re: comet strike in the carolinas?


In NASA SP-486, "Geomorphology from Space", pp. 432-433, is a list
of 15 possible origins of the Carolina Bays, including meteor swarms
and spawning fish, and some nice photos showing the overlap and
alignment.

I'm not going to key in the whole thing, but they say that all
hypotheses except aeolian blowouts (deflation) are untenable.  They
say it happened in the Pleistocene, with wind and wave action
producing the alignment of the half million (!) lakes.  There are
references.

If the original poster will provide an address I will send a xerox
copy of the relevent pages.  Maybe s/he will key the whole thing in
for anyone else who's interested.

Incidently, this SP is really great.  Try to get a copy.
--

M F Shafer                                |Ignore the reply-to address
NASA Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility |Use [e-mail]

NASA management doesn't know what I'm doing and I don't know what they're
doing, and everybody's happy this way.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 13:46:52 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan Duester)
Subject: comet strike in the carolinas?


Stu Friedberg  ([e-mail]) replied:
>The need for a high water table accounts for the restriction to coastal
>areas (high confidence).  The large-scale orientation of geological
>strata of soluble mineral (e.g., limestone) accounts for the
>consistent orientation (moderate to low confidence).
>
>Of course, that's a hypothesis made in the absence of evidence.  I would
>expect both of your hypotheses could be easily falsified by cursory
>examination.  If location of soluble stone doesn't coincide with the
>Carolina Bays, mine can be discarded.  If evidence of splashing, fusion,
>and foreign minerals is lacking, yours can be discarded.  (If we are
>talking tens or hundreds of thousands of grazing impacts there should
>be some remnant of the impacting meteors, wouldn't you agree?)

First, I agree emphaticaly that cursory examination could shoot down
either hypothesis.  I am amazed that no one seems able to do so instantly
by refering to some serious studies of the Bays.

Second, these features *do* overlap as craters should.  You can see little
ones overlapping big ones and the other way around, as well as small
ones completely contained within big ones. Some sort of soluble strata
causing these features seems difficult to explain.

Third, if the features were created by a mostly-ice comet, I doubt if you'd
see any direct remains (specifically no magnetic anomoly).  You should see
some signs of shock structures in cores around the area however.  If all
the nearby strata were undisturbed, no meteors for sure.

>Re: Carolina bays.... Are you sure they're not glaciation features?

No, of course I'm not sure! I'm looking for hard evidence and am amazed
there isn't much around.  Science doesn't move by evidence alone however.
Suspicion and hunches about what is a productive avenue to follow are
always important. I *suspect* that anything left by glaciers would be more
erratic in shape.  I also have a hunch these might actually be craters in
which case the ramifications re extinction events and environmental trauma
should be interesting.

>..It seems to me that common geological processes can create
>parallel, linear features that run considerable distances.
>I'm picturing parallel, linear folding and thrusting along
>a subduction zone, for example; followed by weathering, leaving you
>with a lot of aligned features such as lakes.
>
>What would be most telling would be if you could show that the
>common axis of these features was *contradictory* to some
>detectable geographical axis ... "the mountains go thisaway
>and these here bays all run cross-grain to 'em" .. that would
>be striking.

Yeah, I'd like to know what the strata around there really are.  Aligned
near-linear geological structures are common, but perfect ellipses (lots
of 'em) sure look odd. Hence my interest.

If anyone is interested, send me a SASE and I'll send you xerox copies of
some of the photo mosaics I have. Snail mail address is Al Bradley, Woods
Hole Oceanographic, Woods Hole, Mass, 02543.  If anyone can find some hard
info on these things, I'd sure like to know.

Email c/o: [e-mail]

===============================================================================
Al Duester, Ocean Engineer, MS S201   #  SPAN: 6308::capnal or [e-mail]
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution  #  INTERNET:  [e-mail]
Woods Hole, MA  02543                 #  GEnie:  A.DUESTER
[phone] x2474 (ans. Machine, voice messages,
[phone] auto-receptionist for touch tone phones
===============================================================================

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V9 #489
*******************