HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent)
Subject: Re: RL-10
Summary: Not all rockets go boom.
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:02:03 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.145556.21649@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>Since 1960, 12 Delta boosters have gone boom. 
>These 30 year old designs have not had stellar success records.

And in the 14 Sep 92 issue of Toward 2001:

[Satcom-C4] is...in geostationary orbit, following a
successful launch 31 August aboard a Delta 2 rocket. It is the 35th 
consecutive Delta success since 1986.
                           
-----

When I joined MCAIR I was told, "You may have heard the saying 'If it works,
don't fix it.'  Well, here we've changed that to 'If it works, improve it."

Propaganda or not, they're good words to design by.

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
All facts in this post are based on publicly available information.  All
opinions expressed are solely those of the author.    Apple II Forever !!
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: World Space Congress
Date: 6 Sep 92 22:10:05 GMT
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology
	formerly National Bureau of Standards


I hadn't been planning to go to the World Space Congress because I couldn't
get enough time off work to justify the $300 expense. However, on Wednesday
I found out that it was possible to register for the exhibit hall only free
of charge, so I visited it Thursday evening. Very impressive - there were
plenty of pieces of hardware and models, including the NASP mockup (you can
tell a lot about how scramjets are supposed to work by looking at it), a
Canadian RMS robot arm (very large), an RL-10 engine (the type to be used
on DCX), and so on. There were also representatives from the many
organizations available to discuss their products and services (most of them
were very busy, and I didn't have time to talk to more than a few), and
videotapes. There were displays by US government organizations, US companies,
and foreign governments and companies. Foreign participation was very high -
perhaps about 50%. [Those of you who have attended technical conferences
in the past are probably aware that there are often "local tours" available
at extra cost as an incentive to attendance. The WSC "local tours" included
the Washington area, but also Walt Disney World plus a cruise to the Bahamas,
white-water rafting and charter planes in Utah and Colorado, and an Alaska
cruise! I guess "local" is defined by by how far you've traveled to get
there. :-) ]

I got about 30 pounds of literature - I'll try to post interesting items
as I come across them. (It will probably be at least a month before
everything's organized and reviewed.)

It will be interesting when the big spenders who attended the lectures
get back and can post the details. I got about 12 hours of the NASA Select
coverage taped. I think many of the readers would be pleased by the content
of most of the speeches - they emphasized international cooperation, and
ways to make space exploration more cost effective, such as reducing launch
costs, small quick turnaround missions, and trying new techniques.
Administrator Goldin was among those who made these comments.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Is NASA really planning to Terraform Mars?
Date: 9 Sep 92 05:44:28 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <_5rn2kb.tomk@netcom.com> tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich) writes:
>>Not that we know of, just water ice and permafrost. There is some,
>>distant theoretical possibility of sub-surface water (liquid). But 
>>the evidence for this isn't too substantial...

>Frank, I seem to remember clouds at the atmospheric boundary
>on Olympus Monds (sp?). Certainly that indicates that there is
>some water vapor there.

There is water vapor (most of Mars is very near the dew point,
so condensation is common, even though the aboslute humidity is
extremely low.) Unfortunately, the martian atmospheric pressure is
below the triple point: Water in the liquid phase doesn't exist
(the vapor condenses out directly into ice, and ice sublimates
into a vapor instead of melting.)

There are a few spots with average atmospheric pressure _just_ 
above the triple point (Hellas Basin, fro example). Here, there
is a five degree difference between the melting and freezing points.
While it is _theoretically_ possible for liquid water to exist
here, the conditions required would be fairly rare (liquid water
might exist less than one day out of each year, and even then
not in any real quantity: Hellas isn't near the polar caps...)

                                              Frank Crary
                                              CU Boulder
From: pgf@srl01.cacs.usl.edu ("Phil G. Fraering")
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Is nasa really planning to waste money making a habitable planet?
Date: 7 Sep 92 03:57:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bu6wDK.LxA.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

\two days ago I read an article on the topic of Mars in the german
/magazine 'GEO'; they talked about some of the planned missions to
\our neighbour planet and mentioned that there were still some
/dreamers at NASA that actually intended to transform Mars.

\I'd say, forget about that. Even a manned mission to Mars would cost
/*at least* 500 billion dollars (according to a NASA researcher).
\Terraforming is a nice SF idea and sounds like an easy thing to
/do, but IMHO we don't know enough about the involved systems
\to even think about changing a planet. It's stupid, will cost
/too much (NASA will not be given the money for 'Big Tickets' in the
\next years) and belongs to SF.

So do computers. They were in SF long before IC's came
along...

I hope the heck you don't think the $500 billion is 
an accurate figure; it probably isn't. 

Heck, one of the people looking at terraforming Mars is considering
doing it as a matter of course during one of his ~70
billion dollar manned missions, or so I've heard... more
later when I have a terminal that works.

-- 
Phil Fraering pgf@srl0x.cacs.usl.edu where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: 318/365-5418 SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
If seven maids with seven brooms swept for half a year,
do you think, the Walrus asked, that they could make it clear?
I doubt it, said the Carpenter, and shed a bitter tear.
---------
"NOAH!"                        \           \ Lewis Carrol
"Yes lord?"                     > Bill Cosby, The Story of Noah
"HOW LONG CAN YOU TREAD WATER?"/
Xref: sparky sci.space:12473 sci.astro:9492
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 23:15:12 EDT
From: Gerry Santoro - CAC/PSU <GMS@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: Fireball over The Netherlands Wasn't
 <1992Aug31.133651.18863@samba.oit.unc.edu>
 <1992Sep1.134056.25842@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>

In article <1992Sep1.134056.25842@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu
(Dean Adams) says:
>
>NO, it is to "protect" us from being ignorant about the world around us.
>Intelligence gathering is something that will always have considerable
>value, with or without any "evil empire" to be worried about.

I realize this is not the place for political discussion -- so I'll make
my comment and then shut up.

Who is to protect us from the zealots who control the intelligence gathering
operations -- and who have shown themselves time and time again more than
willing to break our laws and violate our trust in pursuit of their
supposedly honorable values.  Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts
absolutely, and secret power corrupts in secrecy.

Frankly, I'm just as afraid of our own military as I was of the 'evil
empire'.

gerry

ps - i'm proud to be American and I believe in the human rights of ALL
      peoples -- everywhere!  If you want to flame me, send me mail.
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: aweder@iiic.ethz.ch (Andreas Michael Weder)
Subject: Re: Is NASA really planning to Terraform Mars?
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
Distribution: local, ch, eunet, uk, na 
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:17:58 GMT


In article <BuC4nt.3B3@zoo.toronto.edu> you write:
>In article <1992Sep4.143843.18127@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> aweder@iiic.ethz.ch (Andreas Michael Weder) writes:
>>I'd say, forget about that. Even a manned mission to Mars would cost
>>*at least* 500 billion dollars (according to a NASA researcher).
>
>According to a NASA politician, you mean.
>
>There is no technical reason why it has to cost that much.  See Bob Zubrin's

I do believe that the figure would probably around 500 billion dollars.
Remember: the whole mission would take more than 2 years to accomplish. You'd
have to build a fairly big space ship to provide all the stuff needed to do
such a flight (life support, food, recycling of water and waste,...).

BTW, the figure's from a researcher at JPL.

Nevertheless, I would appreciate a short summary of Bob Zubrin's idea.


Andrew
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Is NASA really planning to Terraform Mars?
Date: 8 Sep 92 06:52:32 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp) enquires:

> Thomas, would you expound on which bacteria or fungi can exist in a hot
> sulfuric acid/sulfur dioxide environment [Venus' upper atmosphere]?

I don't know if there are any microorganisms that can survive those conditions
(I don't know that there aren't, either).  However, Perhaps advances in
understanding enzymes and other building blocks of life will lead to engineered
life forms that can survive--even thrive--in that environment.  These new
building blocks needn't be based on Terran life; they need only meet the
requirements for life on Venus (survival and replication, and possibly
mutation).  They could even be wild & weird, such as buckyballs stuffed with
sulfur and/or some metal available as dust in the upper atmosphere, and with
chlorine or fluorine inside or out.

Of course, the real problem with Venus is the lack of hydrogen, or the excess
of oxygen.  Might Venus lose oxygen at a significant rate if there was free
oxygen in the upper atmosphere?  Might free metal in the crust take in some of
the excess oxygen?  The possibilities are interesting to think about, if
nothing else.  :)

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Terraforming Mars
Keywords: Martian water lots of water
Date: 13 Sep 92 16:59:51 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <mqX1qB1w164w@arghouse.UUCP> kfree@arghouse.UUCP (Kenneth Freeman) writes:
>Water has mass. How much water would have to be poured on to
>Mars for it to stay there? (Or how many comets... Mars an
>ocean world? :)

That's one of the major questions about Mars: There are lots of 
erossion features on the surface, and good reasons to think the
northern hemisphere was once a shallow ocean (during the first billion
years of the planet's history.)

You can also calculate the rate of water loss (e.g. from dissociation and
escape in the upper atmosphere), and the amount of water in the polar
caps and in permafrost. 

Unfortunately, these estimates don't even come close to adding up: The
loss rate is fairly low compared to the amount of water that must once
have been there, but the polar caps and permafrost can't account for
this much water either. There are two possibilities: That there is
some (unspecified) additional loss mechanism (and Mars did, in fact, 
loose most of it's primordial water) or there is _alot_ more water
on Mars than we currently observe (subsurface water tables?)

It's at least possible that _no_ additional water is required to
terraform Mars: Given a warmer and thicker atmosphere, enough water
might come out of the permafrost, polar caps and whereever else it is.

                                                   Frank Crary
                                                   CU Boulder
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: tholen@hale.ifa.hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
Subject: Re: QUERY Re: Pluto Direct/ options
Organization: Institute for Astronomy, Hawaii
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 20:18:15 GMT

Joshua Bell writes:

> I can imagine a slingshot (ignoring the fact that you're going against
> the orbit - can you slingshot that way?)

Sure.

> Question for the real experts:
> 
> A few years back I remember seeing tentative 'maps' of Pluto,
> based on observing the spectrum of the Pluto-Charon system during
> the eclipse cycle. The maps were rather simple - large white ice
> caps, a redish-brown surface, a large black/brown spot on one
> side, and a smaller white spot on the other. Is there any
> planning of the probe's to take advantage of what little we know
> about Pluto and 'aiming' for these spots, as the probe will
> likely shoot past, not wait around 6 days (?) for Pluto to
> revolve?

We've just published the next generation of Pluto-Charon surface albedo
maps.  Check a recent issue of Icarus.  The actual imaging sequence would
be determined by the imaging science team, and there's no guarantee that
the actual team would be composed of any members of the Outer Planets
Science Working Group, which is the group currently working on the flyby
mission plans.  I can say that it would be crazy to NOT take advantage
of what we know about the location of surface features.  Furthermore, the
second spacecraft would be delayed to allow knowledge of the first flyby
to be used to influence the detailed imaging sequence of the second.  Both
spacecraft will image the entire surface, though one shouldn't think of
it as "waiting around" for six days.  The resolution of the hemisphere
opposite the one seen at closest approach would not be all that great,
but useful enough to influence the decision-making process for the second
spacecraft.
Xref: sparky sci.space:12464 rec.travel:12957 soc.misc:980
From: mattb@ssc-vax (Matt Baney)
Newsgroups: sci.space,rec.travel,soc.misc
Subject: Business Travel?
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:53:22 GMT
Reply-To: mattb@ssc-vax.boeing.com (Matt Baney)
Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics


I'm trying to get some information about how other companies treat
employees traveling on company business; so I have a couple
questions:

Does the Frequent-Flyer mileage earned for company travel go to the
employee for his/her private use or is it retained by the company??

What type of rental car do you get?
  Cheapest possible (  )
  What ever the traveler desires (  )
  ??


What is the policy for eating/living expenses when travelling??

  (  ) Flat rate per diem and you can spend it however you like 
       How much per day $(_____)

  (  ) Actuals, company pays whatever amounts the employee acrues during
  the business trip.  receipts required yes( )  no( ),
  daily maximum no( )   yes( )-how much $( )

  Any restrictions on what is allowed/ paid for, etc??

Are there any restrictions/policies about when trips should be
scheduled, ie. do you have to fly on your own time, or is travel
done on company time, or whenever is convienient??

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

  Just a few questions I was curious about??  Anyone out there have
  any thoughts/comments



-- 
|  Matt Baney         |     Boeing Defense and Space Group   |
| "I can't tolerate   | UUCP:     ..!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!mattb |        
| intolerant people!" | Internet:   mattb@ssc-vax.boeing.com |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher)
Subject: Re: PUTTING VENUS IN AN ORBIT SIMILAR TO THE ORBIT OF THE EARTH
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 01:05:14 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

This is the same guy who wanted to blow up the Moon to improve 
Earth's climate, right?

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: gkm@cc.uow.edu.au (Glen K Moore)
Subject: Arstrong's Boots
Summary: Material of Neil Armstrong's Boots
Keywords: Materials Moon
Organization: University Of Wollongong
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 07:55:11 GMT

I was aked today a question by someone who hadn't even thought of all of the useful things I know about the moon. A typical non scientist! He asked me "What material was used to make Neil Armstron's boots?" He needed the answer for a lecture on ?? and was serious in his request.

I don't know where on earth to look. Does anyone out there know the answer?

gkm@cc.uow.edu.au
Science Centre
Fax: 61-42-213151
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu ("Phil G. Fraering")
Subject: Re: Clinton, Gore, Space
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: [via International Space University]
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 18:31:57 GMT

Charles Pooley writes:

\First, in the article (58 or 59 atr. back), it said something about
/...spending 1/2 billion to study reprocuction of wasps in space...

\I'm a wasp, and I will volunteer to reproduce in space for MUCH less.

/Seriously, gov't spending has become a zero sum business, and ANY spending
\only cannibalizes something else.   I think nothing can be done in this
/environment.   The only hope for progress in space in the future is via
\private ventures.....

In fact, private ventures will be very important in the future
because they aren't subject to the extreme short-term thinking
of the government...

I know this stands the statist arguments about how the
government is needed to do all the long term stuff on
its head, but it doesn't make sense now anyway, or won't
once Clinton/Gore eliminate the non-jobs-project aspects
of the space program...


-- 
Phil Fraering pgf@srl0x.cacs.usl.edu where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: 318/365-5418 SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
"NOAH!"
"Yes Lord?"                          - Bill Cosby
"HOW LONG CAN YOU TREAD WATER?"
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: Maximum Interplanetary Launch Velocity?
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 220-0636
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 21:15:40 GMT

In article <65698@cup.portal.com> lordSnooty@cup.portal.com (Andrew - Palfreyman) writes:
>Relative to the Earth, what is the highest velocity we
>can currently boost to for interplanetary missions? 

Titan IV/Centaur can do about 10 km/s for a small payload before
it craps out.  With a good electric plasma rocket (eg the famous
Russian Hall-effect rocket to be used for comsat upper stages)
we could get that beyond 20 km/s, which is enough to get to and return 
from Jupiter-family comets, the asteroid belt, Jupiter, etc. on direct 
trajectory.  Due to the incredibly bad allocation of NASA funds in
the current political climate, JPL doesn't have enough resources to
turn the Russian engine into an operational deep-space stage.

>Would a gravity assist from the Moon make much differenc
>even if repeated?

The Moon can give up to  a 1.5 km/s boost on both outbound and inbound
trajectories, but the windows are so rare that this is typically not
considered as an option.  A variant of this was used to get ICE from 
its LaGrange point to a comet flyby back in the mid-80's.


-- 
szabo@techbook.COM  	  Tuesday, November third  ##  Libertarian  $$  vote
Tuesday  ^^ Libertarian  --  change  **  choice && November 3rd @@Libertarian
From: pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu ("Phil G. Fraering")
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Pluto Direct Propulsion Options
Date: 12 Sep 92 17:15:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BuH6nK.C65.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU


In article <BuDKLJ.KKw.1@cs.cmu.edu> pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu ("Phil G. Fraering") writes:
>
>Just out of curiosity, is there a way to convince them to use post-early-
>1960's technology, like an ion drive of some sort?

And Henry replies:

\Not until somebody space-qualifies modern hardware of that sort, so it can
/be done without major risk of cost or schedule overrun.  This particular
\mission is time-critical because of the impending freezeout of Pluto's
/atmosphere, so the fewer unknowns the better.

But they apparently intend to use very new modern hardware for
the sensors. Why is this not "risky" but propulsion is?

\There is also a serious technical problem with using electrical propulsion
/for this particular mission:  what's your power supply?  RTGs are too heavy
\for major power outputs, and solar doesn't work so well in that neighborhood.
/It would have to be a nuclear reactor.  A sound idea, but not something that
\can be done in a hurry.

Use solar. I'm currently thinking along the lines of a Pluto flyby,
but with ion drives instead of solid rockets for the final kick,
so maybe, _maybe_, they could have a higher instrument payload than
5 kg.

\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

Using advanced propulsion, instead of just another set of solid
rockets, would, if it turned out to be a mistake, at least be
a _new_ mistake. 

Well?

-- 
Phil Fraering pgf@srl0x.cacs.usl.edu where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: 318/365-5418 SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560

           --> Support UN military force against Doug Mohney <--
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Is NASA really planning to Terraform Mars?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:05:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.192140.21365@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes:
>The "excess" of oxygen is that if the CO2 is converted to biomass
>and oxygen, we now have 100x more oxygen that in Earth's atmosphere.

I'm not sure the terraforming ideas for Venus involve such a conversion:
I remember one paper (in JBIPS about two years ago) that suggested
(somehow) cooling the atmosphere enough to precipitate water. This
would (according to the paper) remove the sulphuric acid (quickly) and 
the carbon dioxide (slowly) by disolving them in water. 

If surface water were to be established (somehow) carbon dioxide
removal would occur the same way it did in the early Earth's 
atmosphere: Disolving on carbon dioxide into the water, which then
reacts with calcium (also disolved in the water, assuming a
salt water sea, or similar) to form insoluable calcium carbonate
(sedimentary rock).

                                            Frank Crary
                                            CU Boulder

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Hartmut Frommert)
Subject: Re: RL-10
Organization: Dept. of Physics, University of Constance
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 11:25:53 GMT

gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:

>On Atlas' first flight, June 11, 1957, it went boom. On Atlas-Centaur's
>first flight, May 8, 1962 the Centaur went boom. The next to last Centaur
>went boom on a March 26, 1987 launch attempt. 
[..]
>Titan first flew February 6, 1959 and they still go boom occasionally.
>Three of five 34D's failed. Since 1960, 12 Delta boosters have gone boom. 
>These 30 year old designs have not had stellar success records.

But of the 32 Saturn's, ZERO went boom.
--
 Hartmut Frommert                 <phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de>
 Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany
                                           -- Eat whale killers, not whales --
Newsgroups: sci.space