Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V13_7/V13_798.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-07 | 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/kcReqsu00WBwIMdk40>;
          Sun,  7 Jul 91 01:59:21 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: junk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun,  7 Jul 91 01:59:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #798

SPACE Digest                                     Volume 13 : Issue 798

Today's Topics:
             Re: Mining El Dorado
           Tommy Mac lonesome fro reactors
          EJASA Volume 2 - August 1990 to July 1991
              Re: SPACE Digest V13 #639
            Re:  Business in space

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 Jun 91 14:52:05 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!yale.edu!ox.com!fmsrl7![e-mail]  (Ron Carter)
Subject: Re: Mining El Dorado

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Frank Radley) writes:
>Sorry you would not like to have me as a mining engineer !
>I have gotten abosolutely contradicotry responses from various
>epeople.   Some say that a nuke would totally destroy the asteroid.
>Some say it would have absoultely no effect.

Both groups are wrong.

>I would like to completely retract the idea of using nukes
>for mining purposes.   Several people have pointed out to me that
>it would make the ore radioactive, so the materials would become
>unsafe to use in manned space applications.

This is only partially true.  The only material which would be
rendered radioactive is a thin layer of the surface which is
in line-of-sight of the explosion itself.  It receives neutrons,
gammas and fission products which will activate or contaminate
the asteroid.  However, this material would simultaneously
absorb the energy of the gammas, X-rays and fission products,
which will vaporize a substantial thickness and send it off
into space at high speed.  (This is the reaction mass for the
pulsed-fission rocket.)  The activated nuclei and fission
products will fly off with it.  The only residual radioactivity
will be from neutron-activated material from the last few
explosions, which lies below the layer removed by those final
blasts.  This could be removed in other ways, or just never
mined at all.

Radioactive dirt could still have uses, as reaction mass for
example.

>   Similarly, nukes should not be used within the atmosphere of
>Mars since it may make that planet uninhabitable for future
>colonists or explorers.

Agreed that nuclear explosives should not be used on the Martian
surface or in the atmosphere without compelling reasons.  Nuclear
reactors are another matter.

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

Date:     Wed, 26 Jun 1991 21:16 CDT
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Tommy Mac lonesome fro reactors
Original_To:  SPACE,jnet%"18084TM@MSU"

Tommy Mac {[e-mail]) writes:

>I don't even have a nuclear reactor in my STATE, becuase of environmentalists.
>Do you think that dark and evil force will just go away?

Tommy, unless things have greatly changed since I taught the radiochemistry lab
at Michigan State, you have a nuclear reactor on your CAMPUS.

It's a little General Atomics TRIGA teaching reactor, a few kilowatts, suitable
as a source for neutron-activation analysis, among other things.  Over in some
engineering building-- I don't remember the name anymore.  Snoop around the
nuclear engineering faculty and students if you want to find out about it. Yes,
It gives off a blue glow from Cherenkov radiation.

Submarines, flying boats, robots, talking         Bill Higgins
pictures, radio, television, bouncing radar       Fermilab
vibrations off the moon, rocket ships, and        [e-mail]
atom-splitting-- all in our time.  But nobody     [e-mail]
has yet been able to figure out a music           SPAN:  43011::HIGGINS
holder for a marching piccolo player.
                     --Meredith Willson, 1948

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

Date: 26 Jun 91 17:06:46 GMT
From: pa.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!rburns.enet.dec.com![e-mail]  (Larry Klaes)
Subject: EJASA Volume 2 - August 1990 to July 1991


                         THE ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF
                 THE ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY OF THE ATLANTIC

                    VOLUME 2 - August 1990 to July 1991


                        ASA MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION

        The Electronic Journal of the Astronomical Society of the
    Atlantic (EJASA) is published monthly by the Astronomical Society
    of the Atlantic, Incorporated.  The ASA is a non-profit organization
    dedicated to the advancement of amateur and professional astronomy
    and space exploration, and to the social and educational needs of
    its members.

        ASA membership application is open to all with an interest in
    astronomy and space exploration.  Members receive the Journal of the
    ASA (hardcopy sent through United States Mail), the Astronomical
    League's REFLECTOR magazine, and may additionally purchase discount
    subscriptions to ASTRONOMY, DEEP SKY, ODYSSEY, SKY & TELESCOPE, and
    TELESCOPE MAKING magazines.

        For information on membership, you may contact the Society at
    any of the following addresses:

         Astronomical Society of the Atlantic (ASA)
         c/o Center for High Angular Resolution Astronomy (CHARA)
         Georgia State University (GSU)
         Atlanta, Georgia  30303
         U.S.A.

         [e-mail]

         ASA BBS: [phone], 300/1200 Baud.

        or telephone the Society Recording at [phone] to leave
    your address and/or receive the latest Society news.

        ASA Officers and Council -

         President - Don Barry
         Vice President - Nils Turner
         Secretary - Ken Poshedly
         Treasurer - Alan Fleming
         Board of Advisors - Edward Albin, Bill Bagnuolo, Jim Bitsko
         Council - Jim Bitsko, Bill Crane, Toni Douglas, Eric Greene,
                   Larry Klaes, Tano Scigliano, Bob Vickers,
                   Michael Wiggs, Rob Williams


        ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS -

        Article submissions to the EJASA on astronomy and space exploration
    are most welcome.  Please send your on-line articles in ASCII format to
    Larry Klaes, EJASA Editor, at the following net addresses or the above
    Society addresses:

        [e-mail]
        or - ...!decwrl!rburns.enet.dec.com!klaes
        or - [e-mail]
        or - [e-mail]

        You may also use the above net addresses for EJASA backissue
    requests, letters to the editor, and ASA membership information.

        When sending your article submissions, please be certain to include
    either a network or regular mail address where you can be reached, a
    telephone number, and a brief biographical sketch.

        DISCLAIMER -

        Submissions are welcome for consideration.  Articles submitted,
    unless otherwise stated, become the property of the Astronomical
    Society of the Atlantic, Inc.  Though the articles will not be used for
    profit, they are subject to editing, abridgment, and other changes.
    Copying or reprinting of the EJASA, in part or in whole, is encouraged,
    provided clear attribution is made to the Astronomical Society of the
    Atlantic, the Electronic Journal, and the author(s).  This Journal is
    Copyright (c) 1991 by the Astronomical Society of the Atlantic, Inc.

     ##################################################################

                   EJASA Volume 2 - August 1990 to July 1991


        Volume 2, Number 1 - August 1990

          * A Southern Travel Diary: An Observer's Tale - Don Barry


        Volume 2, Number 2 - September 1990

          * Stellafane 1990: A First-Timer's View - Lawrence M. Geary

          * Pegasus: Winged Horse of Autumn - Brian Mason


        Volume 2, Number 3 - October 1990

          * Kitt Peak and McDonald Observatories: Impressions - Russell Whigham

          * Low-Budget Astronomy - Tony Murray


        Volume 2, Number 4 - November 1990

          * Mad for the Stars: Visions of Astroutopiae, Part One

               - Craig M. Levin

          * Andromeda, Lady of Fall - Brian Mason


        Volume 2, Number 5 - December 1990

          * The Great Moon Race: The Soviet Story, Part One

               - Andrew J. LePage

          * Mad for the Stars: Visions of Astroutopiae, Part Two

               - Craig M. Levin


        Volume 2, Number 6 - January 1991

          * The Great Moon Race: The Soviet Story, Part Two

               - Andrew J. LePage


        Volume 2, Number 7 - February 1991

          * Saturn's Great White Spot - Don Barry

          * When the Light Gets in Your Eyes, You Shouldn't Have to
             Drive to the Country - James Smith and Ken Poshedly

          * Stephan's Quintet - Bob Bunge


        Volume 2, Number 8 - March 1991

          * 1990 Georgia Star Party Retrospective

               - Compiled from comments of GSP participants

          * Aperture Arrogance - Eric Greene


        Volume 2, Number 9 - April 1991

          * The Mystery of ZOND 2 - Andrew J. LePage

          * In Search of the Horsehead Nebula - Eric Greene


        Volume 2, Number 10 - May 1991

          * The Great Moon Race: New Findings - Andrew J. LePage

          * Astronomy and the Family - Larry Klaes


        Volume 2, Number 11 - June 1991

          * Sir William Herschel and the Natural History of the Heavens

               - Keith M. Parsons

          * Curbing Light Pollution in Ohio - Robert Bunge


        Volume 2, Number 12 - July 1991

          * Theory and Fact in the Cosmological Dark Matter Debate

               - Keith M. Parsons

          * Solar Eclipses in History - Ken Poshedly


     THE ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF THE ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY OF THE ATLANTIC

                          Copyright (c) 1991 - ASA

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

Date: 26 Jun 91 14:09:17 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!aplcomm![e-mail]  (Edwards Thomas G S1A x8297)
Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #639

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Re: The Un-Plan
>Nevertheless, you've left out on important point;
>SPS _is_ fusion.
>It does have some VERY attractive advantages to the planet-bould fusion
>that you are thinking of.
>2) You don't have to worry about the pile's stability (for a few G-Years)

But just wait until the sun begins to nova and we experience the
biggest nuclear accident ever :)!

(Oh no, I see vision of NIMBY anti-nuke activists trying to sabotage the
sun...)

-Tom

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

Date: 25 Jun 91 19:13:28 GMT
From: ssc-vax!bcsaic!hsvaic![e-mail]  (Dani Eder)
Subject: Re:  Business in space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>This is simply ideology talking. There is no evidence that large scale
>capital is available for space investment. There is no plausible scheme
>that starts from where we are and bootstraps us to large scale industrial
>use of space based solely on private capital. As Nick is fond of pointing
>out, the comsats are the only commercially viable industry that is space
>based and primarily privately funded. And that industry depends in large
>part on infrastructure developed and paid for by government funds in it's
>previous generation. Without infrastructure and technical demonstration
>projects, private capital in the large quanities needed for industrial
>development of space is simply not going to be risked by the private sector.
>

I speak from personal experience here.  Boeing's Board of Directors was
willing to invest $1 billion to develop the Jarvis launch vehicle for
use by Hughes and other satellite builders.  I know this because my
boss at the time was one of the people who made the presentation to the
BOD.  The program did not go ahead because (1) we needed to get all
three satellite builders (Ford, Hughes, and RCA) to commit as customers,
which would have given us a monopoly on comsat launch, which would
violate anti-trust laws, and (2) the only other customer with lots
of payloads, the US Air Force, was not interested in a commercial
rocket over which they had no control of the design requirements (even
though it was 50% cheaper that way).  There was every reason to
believe that given the customers, the capital was available.

My second example from personal experience was the ISF.
Westinghouse was the prime contractor for Space Industries.  Space
Industries was able to raise $400 million in capital, part of it
from contractors, part from the financial markets.  Boeing was
a subcontractor for the docking equipment and the equipment racks.
We proposed to develop them for the ISF by 1992, and later use the
same design for the Space Station.  This way the hardware would
have had a space test before Freedom used it.  A massively useful
thing to do with the ISF would be to launch the life support
system along with a couple of racks of animals, to give it a
real test in space BEFORE the manned crew rely on it to breathe.
Again, NASA saw it as a competitor to Freedom, and refused to
sign up as the 'anchor tenant', so the ISF died for lack of
customer.

I suspect that if the ISF was done internally by NASA, and had
a name like 'Space Station Life Support System Orbital Test-Bed',
it could probably have been sold and be flying in a couple of years,
even with Space Industries as the builder.

Plausible Scheme:

Phase I:    Small Mach 2-3 mechanical catapult with liquid-air
        augmented fixed ramjet "X-40" spaceplane.
        Seats pilot and 1 passenger. Vehicle mass about
        6000 lb max takeoff wt.  Funded with commercial
        sponsors (like Coors 'Silver Bullet'), and
        private sponsors that want to fly faster than
        an SR-71 (Mach 3.5), and perhaps get 'astronaut'
        status (requires 50 miles altitude).  Cost in
        The few millions, using mostly aircraft components
        except for ramjet and liquid air injector system.
        Function is to demonstrate catapult & spaceplane
        work.

Phase II:    Delete people and substitute autopilot and off-the
        shelf missile (military) to achieve sub-orbital
        sounding rocket capability.  The missile is fired
        at the peak of the spaceplane trajectory.  This
        should undercut regular sounding rockets (0.5-2 M$)
        since the spaceplane and catapult are reuseable.
        The missile should be in the 0.1M$ range each

Phase III:    Replace off-the shelf missile with rugged, reuseable
        liquid propellant projectile (using e.g. Nitric Acid
        Kerosine propellants).  Lowers cost because now entire
        system is reuseable.  Sell copies of system to
        University research centers and small countries that
        want low-cost per launch sounding rocket flights.
        Market launch slots for smaller customers.

Phase IV:    Replace small catapult and spaceplane with a light
        gas gun and fire the projectile to higher speeds than
        the Mach 6-7 that the catapult/spaceplane can reach.
        Put solid kick motor plus payload on top of projectile
        and get ~10 kg to low orbit.  Deliver fuel to Freedom,
        worth on order of 200M$/yr by replacing 1 shuttle
        launch.

Phase V:    Upgrade gas gun (extend barrel, add 2nd chamber).
        Projectile now can get to orbit with little or no
        kick motor, increases payload to 50-100kg.  Deliver
        small robots to orbit which collect payloads and
        via teleoperation start constructing useful things
        like:

Pahse VI:    Orbital tether capable of reaching partway down from
        orbit.  Electric propulsion system to maintain tether
        orbit.  Projectile does not have to get to orbit any
        more, only to the bottom of the tether, further
        increasing payload capacity.

Rough business numbers:
Phase        Capital required    Revenue Generated
I        a few M$        a few M$ from sponsors
II        $2M to modify for missile  $3M/yr @ 10 launches/yr
III        $6M for projectile    $50M for 5 systems (2 Univ,
                      3 small countries)
IV        $10-20M            $100M station refuel
V        $40M            $500M station refuel +
                     comsat upper stage fuel
VI        $100M            300 t/yr @ $3M/t=$900M/yr

Dani Eder
Boeing Advanced Civil Space Systems

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

End of SPACE Digest V13 #798
*******************