Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V13_2/V13_209.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-06-28 | 17KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
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/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/Mbn:Nze00WBw04lk4n>;
          Thu, 28 Feb 91 01:43:11 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 91 01:43:07 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #209

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 13 : Issue 209

Today's Topics:
            Re: Japanese Space Effort, II
             Re: Terraforming, sun shield
          Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D
           Ulysses and the Little Engine that Could
               Re: Celestron Telescopes
 Re: The Moon => Existance of God...? (was Re: SPACE Digest V13 #102)
            Flight control systems etc...
      Re: Terraforming, sun shield (Why in sci.optics?)
          Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D
           Re: space news from Jan 7 AW&ST
    Re: UN Moon Treaty (was Re: Commercially-funded Space Probes)

Administrivia:

    Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to
  [e-mail].  Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests,
  should be sent to [e-mail], or, if urgent, to
             [e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 17:22:57 GMT
From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Japanese Space Effort, II

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nick Szabo) writes:
>>  *Autonomous Japanese space station....
>
>"Automomous" -- that's certainly not the traditional Western conception
>of a "space station".    Sounds more like the Fairchild concept which
>NASA killed in the early 80's for automated microgravity research and
>production.

Uh, Nick, I think you are letting your prejudices get in your way. :-)
Almost certainly they are using "autonomous" to mean not "unmanned" but
"all-Japanese", i.e. not dependent on US launchers.

>They have shrugged off the obsessions with "manned" projects and
>mis-scaled technology...

Again, I think your prejudices are getting in the way.  The Japanese are
very interested in manned projects.  NASDA's Christmas card this year
featured the impending (although not as impending as they thought!) Japanese
Spacelab mission.

>... NASDA's main strategy is to
>develop and deploy technology incrementally and quickly -- their motto
>is "quick is beautiful"...

???  Evidence?  They're certainly not doing that for the H-2, which is
a radical and very non-incremental step and is giving them lots of trouble
with lots of schedule slips.

Are you perhaps confusing NASDA and ISAS?
--
"But this *is* the simplified version   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for the general public."     -S. Harris |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Tue, 26 Feb 91 13:45:30 -0500
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Terraforming, sun shield
Newsgroups: sci.optics,sci.space,sci.physics
Cc:

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Fuller) writes:

>I find the concept that humans find "uninhabited" planets fertile ground
>for cultivation repulsive, ignorant and a propulsion of the status quo.

I'll second that. After all, it took us three million years to climb
out of this gravity well. Why go to all that effort just to slide
down into another?

   Allen
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Allen Sherzer |A MESSAGE FROM THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT TO THE PEOPLE OF KUWAIT: |
|[e-mail]   |       "If rape is inevitable, enjoy it!"                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 19:47:44 GMT
From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!csa2.lbl.gov![e-mail]  (JOSEPH T CHEW)
Subject: Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D

Participants in this debate may wish to have a look at "Roundtable:  New
Challenges for the National Labs," Physics Today, February 1991, p. 24.
Basically, five heavyweight administrators (Gen. Lew Allen, Sig Hecker,
Solomon Buchsbaum, John Gibbons, Edward Knapp, and Gerold Yonas) argue
about the nature and future of Federally-sponsored research institutions.
It's a readily available magazine, and further details would spoil the fun.

--Joe
"Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"

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

Date:     Tue, 26 Feb 91 10:29 CST
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Ulysses and the Little Engine that Could
Original_To:  SPACE

>                     ULYSSES STATUS REPORT
>                        February 19, 1991
>...On February 4, all commands were being rejected by the spacecraft.  The
>reason for the command rejection was traced to doppler shifts in the command
>subcarrier channel.

>Doppler shifts are commonly illustrated by the whistle of a passing
>locomotive.  In Ulysses' case, the spacecraft is moving away from the Earth at
>a relative speed of nearly 80,000 miles per hour, lowering the frequency of
>the signal Ulysses receives from the ground...

Huh? Ulysses is being passed by a locomotive?  At 80,000 mph?

======================          Bill Higgins
        CNN:                    Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
                                Bitnet:     [e-mail]
The Iraqi War Picture Show.     Internet:  [e-mail]
======================          SPAN/Hepnet:      43011::HIGGINS

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 23:46:45 GMT
From: usc!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!mcdphx!phx.mcd.mot.com![e-mail]  (Michael Collins)
Subject: Re: Celestron Telescopes

> Are celestron telescopes any good?

  Define "any" in this context?  Are they junk?  No.  Are they
useful?  Yes.  Are they perfect?  No.
  Celestron markets several types of telescopes.  Some are
manufactured in the U.S. by Celestron, others are imported
from Japan under the Celestron brand name.  The most common
Celestron telescope is the C-8, which is a domestically-
produced 8" (20 cm) f/10 Schmidt-Cassegrain.  As a general
purpose telescope, it is an excellent choice.  While it won't
provdide the wide-field views of a "faster" instrument, nor
the high-magnification image quality of a long, unobstructed
refractor, it does reasonably well for most applications in
between.  The field is fairly flat, and off-axis distortions
aren't a big problem.  You can buy a C-8 on a German equatorial
mounting, though most come in the more compact and intuitive
fork.  This makes for an easily portable instrument which
will show you more sky than you can learn in a lifetime,
at a price most can afford if they're willing to save their
pennies for a while or settle for a used instrument.
  Some people buy something like a C-8 and are happy with it
forever.  Others, after learning the sky and being tantalized
by mere glimpses of objects which other telescopes reveal (or
perhaps after becoming disenchanted with the effort to transport
large amounts of equipment to a remote site), desire more
specialized telescopes.  That can be a never-ending quest.
My advice is to learn your way around the sky with binoculars
and naked eyes until you know what you _want_ to look at with
a telescope.
  More advice (hey, you asked): Read some introductory astronomy
books, especially those which cover the topic of amateur
observing.  The net is a good forum for discussion, or specific
questions, but the library is the place to look for in-depth
information.

> Are these the rigth (sic) newsgroups to ask?

Sci.astro, yes (although this question is answered so often
that the regular readers are getting a bit tired of it.)  This
is not a good topic for discussion in sci.space -- not enough
potential for political diatribes and personal attacks :-)

                    -- MC --

--
Michael P. Collins                  | [e-mail]
Technical Systems Division          | ...!asuvax!mcdphx!mikec
Motorola Computer Group             | These are not Motorola's official
2900 S. Diablo Way                  | views or policies.
Tempe, AZ  85282     [phone] |

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

Date: 27 Feb 91 01:15:47 GMT
From: dweasel![e-mail]  (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: The Moon => Existance of God...? (was Re: SPACE Digest V13 #102)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Harold G. Andrews II) writes:
>
>There was an individual (who shall for now remain nameless, if for no other
>reason than I forgot his name) who seemed to think that the existance of
>the moon was at the very least "suggestive" of the existance of God.  I offer
>my response to his thoughts unto you.

    [a lot of stuff deleted...]

    You people have it all wrong.

    The reason the Moon is so conveniently sized is because the
Moon is a Goddess and she enjoys entertaining us with eclipses.

    What could be simpler?

>God always was and always will be.  He is the one thing that will never change.

    Will it someday happen that 2 + 2 != 4?


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster: [e-mail]

Since this nodename is not widely known, you may have to try:

[e-mail]

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

Date: 27 Feb 91 15:31:22 GMT
From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!xanth![e-mail]  (The Forgotten One.....)
Subject: Flight control systems etc...

From: [e-mail] (The Forgotten One.....)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Flight Systems And Navigation Systems
References:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution: world
Organization: Old Dominion University, Norfolk Virginia
Keywords:

I am currently doing a research project on flight systems and
navigation systems, I have not been able to find much information
on these subjects, If anybody has any information or knows where
to write to get it could someone please let me know..

I would greatly appreciate any information,

Thank you,


Brian

mail to [e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Feb 91 09:08:44 GMT
From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!sics.se!sics.se![e-mail]  (Roland Karlsson)
Subject: Re: Terraforming, sun shield (Why in sci.optics?)


I insist.  Why do you send this to sci.optics?  Please STOP.

( I do send this notice to sci.space because those that send the
  articles only read sci.space.  That's maybe the reason for them
  not knowing that they send it to another unrelated newsgroup )




--
Roland Karlsson
SICS, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN    Internet: [e-mail]
Tel: [phone]    Ttx: 812 61 54 SICS S    Fax: [phone]

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

Date: 25 Feb 91 05:09:10 GMT
From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!crg5![e-mail]  (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: Government vs. Commercial R&D

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Nick Szabo) writes...

>... With rocketry though, if I
>remember the history, we know what happened until the (German)
>government got interested: nothing.

This is false, since modern liquid-fuel rockets developed by
Goddard and the German Rocket Society predate the V-1 and German
military funding.  It could be argued that nothing happened _after_
the late 30's except a massive but technologically trivial scaling-up
(but that would also be an over-simplification).


--
Nick Szabo            [e-mail]
"What are the _facts_, and to how many decimal places?"  -- RAH

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

Date: 25 Feb 91 05:45:03 GMT
From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!crg5![e-mail]  (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: space news from Jan 7 AW&ST

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:

>NASA to establish a Nuclear Propulsion Systems Office at Lewis, as a
>joint project with DoE and DoD, to resume work in advanced propulsion.
>[About %$#$%#$%ing time!!!]  The official goal is a functional test
>engine by 2005 to support Moon/Mars efforts.  Both nuclear-thermal
>[classical nuclear rockets] and nuclear-electric [nuclear-powered
>ion thrusters] are being considered....

I agree, this is great news!  This is another step NASA can take
to get back into the technology development instead of technology
operation business. (For some other worthwhile items to pursue, see
the Japanese Space Program thread).   Nuclear rockets are of course not
tied to the Moon or Mars; they would be especially useful for visiting
asteroids, comets, and Jupiter.  They might even replace chemical rockets
as GEO comsat upper stages.


>Pictures of Earth and Moon from the Galileo flyby Dec 8.  Nothing remarkable.

Some interesting new angles, though.  Also, think about the resolution,
and compare it to Voyager.... if Galileo makes it out there, we're going
to have some _incredible_ pictures of Io (volcanoes and the most
differentiated geology in the solar system) and Europa (complex patterns
of melting ice and dirt and  ????? <- we could find out!) and many of the
other moons (I hope they get a shot at Metis.... :-)

Here's another item for NASA -- how about a Galileo follow-on?  After
Galileo runs out of steam, it would be good to have something at Jupiter
to look closer at all the new things Galileo has found and new questions
it has raised.  Nothing ambitious -- just a small Jupiter orbiter to
be launched by a Delta or Atlas/Centaur, containing a smaller, more modern
bus and instruments (I would guess that we can fit instruments with a
resolution similar to Galileo's on a Delta if we try).  If we start now
it could get there by the time Galileo poops out.  Whadya think?


--
Nick Szabo            [e-mail]
"What are the _facts_, and to how many decimal places?"  -- RAH

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

Date: 27 Feb 91 00:08:12 GMT
From: voder!pyramid!ctnews!tsnews![e-mail]  (Ward Griffiths)
Subject: Re: UN Moon Treaty (was Re: Commercially-funded Space Probes)

[e-mail] (Charles Frank Radley) writes:

>  That is exactly my point.   There are plenty of members of the
>Security Council, China, USSR, Third World countries, who would
>undoubtedly tout the Moon Treaty in order to appropraite as much
>$$$ from lunar operations as they could.   Using this
>legitimate complaint, they could make life somewhat unpleasant
>for the USA, imposing economic sanctions, seizing assets,
>cancelling contracts, etc, etc.

Basically, the only things the United States NEEDS from
most of the Third World are energy and mineral resources.
The last time I checked, anyway.  With reasonable space
exploitation, those requirements are taken care of.  The
Third World, on the other hand, is dependant on the US
for manufactured goods, food and military equipment
(technically manufactured goods, but I'm going to count
it as separate anyway).  The USSR is unlikely at this
point to object to the commercialization of space, and
they'd be major players.  China is a complete nonentity
in this situation and can be safely ignored.

Oh yeah, the Third World provides us with cheap labor
both at home and in the form of illegal aliens.  Not a
controlling issue.

Personally, since the Third World countries are the
ones in the General Assembly, and the five nations in
the Security Council outvote the General Assembly, I'm
not really worried about complaints by countries that
aren't in the real competition.  Once we've got the
industry up there, let'em bitch.  They bitch too loud
and somebody might get a little "sloppy" maneuvering
an asteroid into orbit.

--
          Ward Griffiths, Unisys NCG aka Convergent Technologies                The people that make Unisys' official opinions get paid more.  A LOT more.
===========================================================================          To Hell with "Only One Earth"!  Try "At Least One Solar System"!

If I say love, I'll sound sentimental, and if I say sex, I'll sound cynical.    I'll call it pair bonding and sound scientific.         The Golden Apple

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #209
*******************