Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://www.astrolib.ru/rsn/1998/07/02/
Дата изменения: Unknown
Дата индексирования: Sat Apr 9 23:23:23 2016
Кодировка: Windows-1251
Поисковые слова: п п п п р п п р п п р п п р п п р п п р п п р п t tauri
Электронная библиотека астронома-любителя. RU.SPACE.NEWS - архив за 02 июля 1998.
Электронная библиотека астронома-любителя. Книги по астрономии, телескопостроению, оптике.


Ru.Space.News:
Июль 1998
ПнВтСрЧтПтСбВс
 
12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031
 

год:



  • Обзоры оружия и снаряжения
  • m31.spb.ru


    • AstroTop-100

    Яндекс цитирования


    0.033
    YouTUBE NauchFilm Channel

    Архив RU.SPACE.NEWS за 02 июля 1998

    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: Super Resolution Mars Pathfinder Image Available Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... A newly processed super resolution image taken by the Mars Pathfinder lander is now available on the Mars Pathfinder website: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/parker/highresbigcrater.html Image caption is attached. Ron Baalke Super Resolution Image of "Big Crater" by Dr. Timothy Parker, JPL Super Resolution of Big Crater - Medium Resolution 850 KB Super Resolution of Big Crater - Full Resolution 2440 KB For Location of Big Crater See Map Below [Image] PIA01124_29418.jpg Mars Pathfinder Landing Site Catalog #: PIA01124 Mosaic of Viking orbiter images illustrating the location of the lander (19.17 degrees N, 33.21 degrees W in the USGS reference frame) with respect to surface features. Five prominent features on the horizon include North Knob, Southeast Knob, Far Knob, Twin Peaks, and Big Crater. Two small craters visible in the orbiter and lander views--Little Crater and Rimshot Crater--lie on the northwest outer flank of the rim of Big Crater. Because the lander is on the southeast-facing flank of a low ridge, very distant features to the south and east are in view, whereas relatively nearby features to the north are partially or completely obscured. Only the tip of North Knob, which appears larger in the Viking orbiter images than the Twin Peaks, projects above the local horizon, and a 300-m crater, 1.2 km to the northeast, is completely obscured. Viking stereo images 004A27 and 004A87 and 004A44 and 004A70. North is up; scale bar, 5 km. (Insets) (Upper right) Lander location. (Upper left) North Knob from lander. (Lower left) Far Knob from lander. (Lower right) Southeast Knob from lander. The location of the lander in inertial space (19.30 degrees N, 33.52degrees W) from the two- way ranging and Doppler tracking of the lander is coincident with Rimshot Crater. NOTE: original caption as published in Science Magazine Image Note: Science Magazine, Volume 278, Number 5344, 5 December 1997, 'Overview of the Mars Pathfinder Mission Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [1/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... This is the July 1998 "SpaceViews" (tm) newsletter, published by the Boston chapter of the National Space Society. For a description of related e-mail lists maintained by the Boston NSS, or to stop receiving this SpaceViews newsletter, see the instructions at the end of part 2 of this issue. The next Boston meetings are Saturday, July 11, 11am-4pm Boston NSS picnic, 102 Sanborn Lane, Reading, Mass. and Tuesday, July 14, 1998, 7:30pm 8th floor, 545 Main Street (Tech Square), Cambridge; Speakers: Vickie Kloeris, John Lewis, and Laura Supra "The Lunar-Mars Life Support Test Project Phase III 90-day Test: The Crew Perspective" See "Upcoming Boston NSS Events" later in this newsletter for more information. Future meetings are on the first Thursdays of each month: August TBD, September 3, October 1 SpaceViews is available on the WWW at http://www.spaceviews.com and by FTP from ftp.seds.org in directory /pub/info/newsletters/spaceviews See the very end for information on membership, reprinting, copyright, etc. Copyright (C) 1998 by Boston Chapter of National Space Society, a non-profit educational 501(c)3 organization. All articles in SpaceViews represent the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Editor, the National Space Society (NSS), or the Boston chapter of the NSS. S P A C E V I E W S Volume Year 1998, Issue 7 July 1998 http://www.spaceviews.com/1998/07/ *** News *** SOHO Spacecraft Tumbles, Feared Lost Energia Threatens to Abandon Mir Congress, Goldin Debate Space Station Nearby Extrasolar Planet Discovered Mars Pathfinder Science Work Continues Lewis Spacecraft Failure Report Released HALO Launch Attempt Fails Beal Aerospace Plans Larger Booster Third Ariane 5 Launch Delayed to October Atlas Launches Comsat, Zenit Delayed SpaceViews Event Horizon Other News *** Articles *** NOTSNIK: The Navy's Secret Satellite Program [continued in part 2] Doing Space: Making It Happen *** Book Reviews *** Comets Friend and Foe Filling in the Drake Equation *** NSS News *** Upcoming Boston NSS Events Boston NSS June Lecture Summary Philadelphia Area Space Alliance News *** Regular Features *** Jonathan's Space Report No. 364 Space Calendar Editor's Note: On our reader survey earlier this year, we asked if people would be interested in a weekly update version of SpaceViews. The response was overwhelmingly in favor of such a feature. So, I'm proud to announce that later this summer SpaceViews will be coming out approximately weekly (actually, four times a month: on the 1st, 8th, 15th, and 22nd of the month, at least initially, to maintain a regular schedule.) This change will take effect by September, and perhaps earlier in August. This change should also alleviate one of the problems people have had about the e-mail issues: their large size! Many mail programs, such as America Online's, have problems with large files, and either split them into smaller pieces or convert them into file attachments. By spreading the content out over four issues a month, instead of two, we hope to reduce or eliminiate this problem. If you have any questions, comments, suggestions, or concerns about this change, contact me at jeff@spaceviews.com. A couple of minor notes: We're experiencing some technical problems with the Web site right now, because of unannounced changes by the company that hosts the site. The site is up, but some features may be unavailable. We apologize for the problems and hope to have everything working by later today. Also, the July 15 issue of SpaceViews Update may be delayed a few days while the editor is traveling. Regards, Jeff Foust Editor, SpaceViews -- http://www.spaceviews.com/ jeff@spaceviews.com *** News *** SOHO Spacecraft Tumbles, Feared Lost Controllers lost contact with the NASA/ESA Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) spacecraft late Wednesday, June 24 as the spacecraft apparently lost control, and mission officials fear the spacecraft may be a total loss. Contact was lost with SOHO at 7:16pm EDT (2316 UT) June 24, during a routine maintainence period. The spacecraft entered an Emergency Sun Reacquisition (ESR) mode at that time, as it fired its thrusters in an effort to realign itself with the Sun. However, all telemetry was lost from the spacecraft and has not been regained. Efforts to raise the spacecraft using NASA's Deep Space Network over the last sveral days have not succeeded. Engineers have continuous access to a 34-meter (112-foot) antenna "for the next few days" to transmit commands to the spacecraft at 10 times the normal power, according to project officials. A 70-meter (230-foot) antenna is also being used to try and pick up telemetry from SOHO. Launchspace magazine reported that its sources within the SOHO project think it is likely contact will not be regained with SOHO, and the spacecraft will be a total loss. NASA was more optimistic, however, in a June 30 press release. Engineers believe the spacecraft is spinning such that the solar panels do not see the Sun. However, the angle of the spacecraft is changing as it goes around the Sun, increasing the amount of sunlight falling on the panels each day. Engineers believe that within a few weeks, the panels may be generating enough energy to power up the spacecraft's batteries and permit communications with Earth to be restored. A joint NASA/ESA inquiry board was announced June 30 to investiagate the incident. The board will be chaired by Prof. Massimo Trella, ESA Inspector General, and Dr. Michael Greenfield, Deputy Associate Administrator for the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance at NASA. SOHO was launched on an Atlas II rocket on December 2, 1995 from Cape Canaveral. It completed its nominal two-year science mission in April, although daily scientific operations jhave continued since then. The spacecraft is in a "halo orbit" around the Earth-Sun L-1 libration point, about 1.5 million kilometers (900,000 miles) sunward of Earth. Engineers believe they can successfully predict the location of SOHO for about five months, before orbital pertubations force SOHO out of its halo orbit. The spacecraft features twelve instruments, three from the U.S. and nine from Europe, dedicated to the study of the Sun. Findings made by scientists using SOHO data include an explanation for the extremely high temperatures of the solar corona, the discovery of "sunquakes" on the photosphere, and the discovery of more than 50 sungrazing comets. Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [2/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... Energia Threatens to Abandon Mir Energia, the Russian company that operates the space station Mir for the Russian Space Agency (RSA), said Friday, June 26 that it would abandon the station as early as August if the space agency does not pay any of the money it owes for station operations. Energia officials say RSA owes the company 440 million rubles (US$70 million) in station operations costs for this year. RSA has not paid any of the money it owes this year, Energia said. A decision to abandon Mir could come as soon as July, several weeks in advance of the scheduled launch date of the next crew. The current crew of Talgat Musabayev and Nikolai Budarin is due to return in August. Their stay cannot be extended because of the limited lifetime of the Soyuz return vehicle currently docked to Mir. Energia officials met with RSA leaders on Friday to discuss the status of the station and to consider "nonstandard solutions" to the problem, according to Itar-Tass. Those nonstandard solutions were not publicly discussed. Energia president Yuri Semyonov said the company wants to keep Mir operational, but believes it is the Russian government's responsibility to pay for it. "We are absolutely against abandoning the station, and if we do that it will be the government's responsibility," he said. RSA director Yuri Koptev agreed the situation is serious. "If we cannot act, there will be a situation when we will have to lift off the crew from the Mir in August and close the station," he said. If abandoned, Mir would likely lose attitude control and start tumbling after a short time. It could then reenter the Earth's atmosphere uncontrolled, with the danger of large pieces landing intact in urbanized areas. RSA currently plans to deorbit Mir in a series of controlled thruster burns, with the goal of reentering the station over the Pacific by the end of 1999. The first of four thruster burns was to take place earlier this month, but was postponed when budget problems prevented the timely launch of a replacement cargo vehicle that would have been used in the deorbiting procedure. Congress, Goldin Debate Space Station Projected cost overruns in the International Space Station project was the subject of considerable debate during Congressional hearings Wednesday, June 24, as NASA Administrator Dan Goldin defended the program, predicting dire consequences if the station was canceled. "If we cancel the space station, we will be canceling manned space flight," Goldin said at a meeting of the House Science Committee. "If we cancel the program, we will be a second-class power and there would be international repercussions." The hearing was convened after the release the previous week of NASA's response to the independent Chabrow report, which concluded earlier this year the station would need up to an additional $3 billion and three years before completion. NASA agreed with most of the conclusions in the Chabrow report, although claimed the additional costs could be held to a little over $1 billion with a delay of one year. Members of the committee asked Goldin what steps the agency was taking to deal with the station's problems, including a number of delays in the completion of the Russian-built Service Module. Goldin did not give specifics but said a number of plans were being evaluated. Goldin's assurances that NASA was working on the problem did not soothe members of the committee, who attacked NASA and the Clinton Administration for failing to do enough to support the station and deal with Russian delays. The program was likened to a "fine kettle of fish that are starting to smell," in the words of Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-MI), while Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) said that Goldin's optimistic opening statement "looked like Mary Poppins wrote it." While there is little the committee can do at the present time to affect the space station, committee chairman F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) said he and ranking minority member George Brown (D-CA) sent a letter to the White House, asking the Office of Management and the Budget to deliver a plan to Congress in 30 days to deal with the space station. "We need a plan, not a continuing series of ad hoc adjustments to the latest station funding or programmatic crisis," Brown said. Meanwhile, another person testifying before the committee said the station costs could grow even further. Allen Li of the General Accounting Office said more money may be needed to track orbital debris and protect the station from it. "NASA's requirements for space debris tracking will require the Defense Department to upgrade their capabilities," Li told the committee. Such upgrades and additional station shielding could cost up to $5 billion, he said. Nearby Extrasolar Planet Discovered Two astronomers who are among the world's leaders in the discovery of extrasolar planets reported this week they they have discovered another extrasolar planet orbiting a star near the Sun. Geoffrey W. Marcy of San Francisco State University and Paul Butler of the Anglo-Australian Observatory, and colleagues, reported at a conference Monday, June 22 that they had discovered a planet orbiting the star Gliese 876, just 15 light-years from Earth. The planet has a mass about 1.6 times that of Jupiter, our solar system's largest planet, and orbits the star about 0.2 astronomical units (30 million kilometers, 18.6 million miles) away. It takes 61 days for the planet to complete an orbit around Gliese 876. The discovery has been confirmed by a European team of astronomers led by Xavier Delfosse of Geneva Observatory in Switzerland. "It's very convincing that they have confirmed the finding," Marcy told Science News. Gliese 876 is a small star with only about one-third the mass of the Sun and one-fortieth its brightness. It's the smallest star yet around which planets have been discovered. the discovery hints that planetary systems "may be a common occurrence among stars that are quite different from the Sun," Marcy said. Calculations by Didier Saumon of Vanderbilt University show that the planet, presumed to be a gas giant like Jupiter, would have a temperature at its cloudtops of about -76 degrees Celsius (-105 degrees Fahrenheit). While far below the temperature of liquid water, it would be possible for it to exist in deeper, warmer layers of the planet. Marcy warned, though, that "we shouldn'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> go into a feeding frenzy about this," noting that liquid water could not aggregate together into an environment supportive of life. Any moons the planet might have, though, could be more hospitable to life. The discovery brings to 12 the number of extrasolar planets discovered, Marcy said. Astronomers in Geneva are expected to announce the discovery of additional extrasolar planets in the next few weeks. Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [3/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... Mars Pathfinder Science Work Continues Scientists are continuing to analyze the data returned by the Mars Pathfinder spacecraft, nearly a year after it landed on the Red Planet, and are coming up with some surprising conclusions about the history of the landing site. "Many of the things that we said last summer during the excitement of the landing have held up well," project scientist Matthew Golombek said at a press conference June 29. "But we have now had more time to study the data and are coming up with some new conclusions." Much of the work is focused on the nature and origin of the geology in the landing site, located in Ares Vallis. The area had been considered a likely site of flooding during Mars's warmer, wetter past, a conclusion supported by Pathfinder data. However, Golombek said little has changed in the landing site over the last two or more billion years, with the exception of some wind erosion. Golombek speculated that the flooding in Ares Vallis took place after a major climate change that made Mars cold and dry took place. The winds that are slowly stripping away the rocks at the Pathfinder landing site are likely depositing material elsewhere on the planet, Golombek said. "Amazonis Planitia, for example, probably has one to two meters [3.3 to 6.6 feet] of fine powdery dust that you would sink into if you stepped on it," he noted. Scientists are also trying to understand how rocks enriched with silicon that Pathfinder and its rover Sojourner found could have been formed. The rocks are similar to andesites found in Iceland and the Galapagos Islands on Earth, according to spectrometer scientist Joy Crisp. Crisp said the rocks could have been formed by volcanic processes, like on Earth, or through sedimentary processes driven by water. The rocks could also have been formed in a meteor impact, and may be more ordinary basaltic rocks with a high-silicon outer coating caused by weathering. Crisp said one way to determine how the rocks were formed is to study their textures. However, she noted, there isn'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> enough information in the Pathfinder images to come to any conclusions about their origin based on this technique. Other research has focused on dust devils, localized spiraling, gusting winds seen on Mars as well as Earth. Steven Metzger of the University of Nevada analyzed Pathfinder images downloaded from the Internet and applied special processing techniques to them to discover several more dust devils, including five seen on a single Martian day. Dust devils may be one way to explain how the Martian surface is covered with the same kind of magnetic iron- and silicon-rich soil, according to JPL planetary scientist Diana Blaney. Blaney also said meteor impacts into wet regolith early in Martian history may have helped form the soil, although she said the formation is a "very complicated story." Mars Pathfinder landed on Mars on July 4, 1997. It and its rover, Sojourner, returned data on the Martian surface and atmosphere until late September, when a battery on the lander apparently died. The mission was officially ended November 4, although a final, unsuccessful effort to contact the lander was made in March. Scientists are now turning their attention to the two 1998 Mars missions, scheduled for launch at the end of the year and early 1999. Mars Climate Orbiter will study Martian weather from orbit, while the Polar Lander will set down in the layered terrain near the south polar cap in an effort to understand and nature and composition of the layers of dust and ice there. Lewis Spacecraft Failure Report Released A combination of a flaw in an attitude control system and insufficient monitoring by ground personnel led to the failure of the Lewis spacecraft just days after launch last August, a review board reported Tuesday, June 23. The Lewis Spacecraft Mission Failure Review Board did conclude that NASA's new "faster, cheaper, better" management philosophy, of which Lewis was one of the first products, was sound, but not effectively applied for this program. The spacecraft, launched August 23, 1997, went into a flat spin three days after launch. The spin cut power and communications to the satellite, which were never restored. Unable to adjust its orbit, the spacecraft reentered the Earth's atmosphere a month later and was destroyed. The spacecraft used an attitude-control system adapted from one used on the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS) spacecraft. The board found that TRW, builders of both spacecraft, failed to properly test the attitude-control system on Lewis, which was stabilized differently that TOMS. After launch, the spacecraft started to spin up, perhaps by imbalances from thruster firings. The spin eventually overloaded the spacecraft's control system while it was in an autonomous "safehold mode", leading to the out-of-control spin. The board also concluded that project managers erred in believing the spacecraft could be adequately controlled in safehold mode with only a small ground crew to monitor the status of the spacecraft. These errors combined caused the failure of the mission. Lewis was a $65-million spacecraft designed to test advanced instruments and technologies useful for remote-sensing spacecraft. It and a companion spacecraft, Clark, were cornerstones of NASA's philosophy of "faster, cheaper, better" started by administrator Dan Goldin. The Clark spacecraft was canceled earlier this year because of cost overruns and concerns that the spacecraft would not be able to meet its intended goals. The failure of Lewis should not be construed as a failure of this philosophy, though, the board noted. "I do not think that this concept ["faster, cheaper, better"] is flawed," said Christine Anderson, chair of the failure board. "What was flawed in the Lewis program, beyond some engineering assumptions, was the lack of clear understanding between NASA and TRW about how to apply this philosophy effectively." "NASA's Office of the Chief Engineer is developing 'lessons learned' from this project and other 'faster, cheaper, better' efforts," said Dr. Ghassem Asrar, NASA associate administrator for Earth Science, "and we intend to apply them to all our future missions." Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [4/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... HALO Launch Attempt Fails In an event project officials called "embarrassing, but not disaster," an attempt to launch an amateur-built rocket into space failed Saturday, June 21 when the rocket slipped out of its launch cradle as its balloon lifted off. A helium-filled balloon lifted off from a NASA barge in the Gulf of Mexico southeast of New Orleans late Saturday morning. The balloon was to carry the Project HALO (High-Altitude Lift-Off) Sky Launch 2 rocket to 30,000 meters altitude (100,000 feet) before the rocket engine fired. However, a balloon tether snagged on the rocket as the balloon lifted off, lifting the rocket off its launch cradle unde the balloon. The rocket fell 1.5 meters (five feet) to the deck of the barge as the balloon floated skyward. The rocket suffered some minor damage in the fall, including a cracked nosecone, broken fin, and a dent in the oxidizer tank, but the rocket appeared to have escaped major damage. After the launch, HALO team members said a new launch may be attempted in late fall, provided about $5,000 can be raised to cover repair costs. Project officials said the NASA barge used for the June launch would not be available for future launches, requiring the team to find their own launch site, file with the FAA, and possibly purchase liability insurace, whose premium could far exceed the cost of the rocket. HALO team members had hoped a successful launch would make the rocket the first amateur-built rocket to fly into space. The suborbital rocket would have to have flown above an altitude of 91.6 km (56.8 mi, 50 nautical miles),the NASA and the U.S. Air Force definition of the boundary of space. The hybrid SL-2 rocket uses a combination of solid and liquid fuels. In this system, the solid fuel, pure asphalt, is safely kept away from the liquid propellant, nitrous oxide (better known as "laughing gas") until the rocket is ignited. The fuel combination provides about 85% of the efficiency of the best solid-propellant systems, HALO team members say. HALO, a project of the Huntsville, Alabama chapter of the National Space Society, has relied on volunteer labor and donations to develop their "rockoon" launch system. Saturday's launch did include support from NASA, as the space agency provided the launch barge and the helium for the balloon. Beal Aerospace Plans Larger Booster Beal Aerospace, a Texas-based startup launch firm, announced last week it was skipping plans for a smaller expendable booster in favor of moving directly ahead to a more powerful rocket capable of competing with the largest existing commercial offerings. The company is scrapping plans for the BA-1 booster in favor of the larger BA-2, according to a June 16 company announcement. The BA-2 will be able to place 5,000 kg (11,000 lbs.) -- two medium to large communications satellites -- in geostationary transfer orbit. The BA-2 would directly compete with such rockets as the Ariane-5. "The BA-2 has always been the ultimate goal," said company CEO Andrew Beal. "Given our past successes, I am extremely confident that we can develop the BA-2 and dramatically reduce the cost of space launch." The three-stage BA-2 will use what's billed as the world's largest rocket engine, a hydrogen peroxide-fueled engine capable of producing 13.4 million newtons (3 million pounds of thrust), twice that of the F-1 engine used in the Saturn V. "Hydrogen peroxide is key to the simplicity of our design," said program manager Scott Frazier. "It is safe, environmentally benign, and has fundamentally different combustion properties which bypass previous engine development problems associated with large thrust chambers." A scaled-down version of the engine was tested successfully in late May and early June, the company said. No date for the first launch of the BA-2 was announced. The company had planned to start launching the BA-1 by late 1997, using a launch site on Sombrero Island in the Caribbean. The company has an option to lease the launch site from the island nation of Anguilla. Third Ariane 5 Launch Delayed to October The European Space Agency announced Tuesday, June 16, that the third launch of the heavy-lift Ariane 5 booster has been delayed to October because of a change in payload. Ariane 503 was scheduled for a September launch, carrying the Eutelsat W2 communications satellite and the Atmospheric Reentry Demonstrator (ARD), a technology demonstration satellite. However, Eutelsat decided last week to fly its W2 satellite on an existing Ariane 4 booster after its W1 satellite was damaged during tests at an assembly facility in France. The W1 satellite was to fly on the Ariane 4 in July. ESA and Arianespace, builders of the Ariane rocket, were unable to find a commercial payload for the Ariane 503. "The search for a new passenger cannot be reconciled with the planning schedule leading to entry of Ariane-5 into operational service," ESA said in a press release. In place of the W2 satellite, ESA will fly a "representative mock-up" of the W2 satellite, making the ARD the only real payload for the launch. The time needed to build and test the mock-up will delay the launch from September to mid-October. The flight is the last of three qualification flights planned for the heavy-lift booster. The first flight, Ariane 501, ended in failure less than a minute after launch in June 1996 when the booster veered off course. Problems with the control software were blamed for the failure. Ariane 502 lifted off last October, carrying two test satellites. However, the main engine of the booster shut down early, placing the satellites in the wrong orbit. The error was traced to excessive roll torque in the engine, a problem since corrected. The ARD is a unmanned spacecraft designed to test critical reentry technologies. It will fly a suborbital mission, reentering over the Pacific Ocean and splashing down. Technologies tested in the ARD may later be used in plans for a European crew transfer vehicle launched by the Ariane 5, possibly based on the American X-38 vehicle being tested as a space station lifeboat. Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [5/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... Atlas Launches Comsat, Zenit Delayed An Atlas II booster launched an Intelsat communications satellite June 19 while the launch of a Ukrainian Zenit booster was delayed by at least a week June 24 by problems with its guidance system. The Atlas IIAS lifted off at 6:48pm EDT (2248 UT) from Cape Canaveral, Florida. The Intelsat 805 satellite separated from the booster about a half-hour after launch. The satellite, which will take up a position in geosynchronous orbit at approximately 60 degrees West, will be used to relay communications between the Americas and Europe. Those communications are planned to include video and electronic communications. The launch of the Zenit-2 from Baikonur, Kazakhstan, was scheduled for June 23 but delayed a day by problems with the booster's orientation system. The unit was repaired, but failed again before Wednesday's scheduled launch. The booster will be taken off the launch pad to an assembly shop for repairs, a spokesman for the Russian Space Agency told Itar-Tass. Repairs will take at least a week to complete, he said. The Zenit-2 will launch five satellites. The main payload is a Russian Resurs remote sensing satellite, designed to return environmental and weather data. Four smaller satellites, representing several nations including Chile, Thailand, and Israel, will perform a variety of experiments. The launch is the first for the Zenit since a May 1997 launch ended in an explosion shortly after liftoff. The Zenit has experienced other launch failures in the recent past as well. SpaceViews Event Horizon July 1: North American preimere of asteroid-impact movie "Armageddon" July 1: Launch of Zenit booster from Baikonur, Kazakhstan, carrying five satellites July 4: Launch of M-5 booster carrying Japanese Planet-B spacecraft (Mars mission) July 14: Launch of the Sinosat 1 communications satellite on a Long March 3B. July 21: Galileo flyby of Europa August 13-16: Mars Society Founding Convention, Boulder, Colorado Other News HGS-1 in Earth Orbit: The HGS-1 (formerly AsiaSat 3) satellite entered geosynchronous orbit June 17, after completing two flybys of the Moon. Launched on Christmas Day last year, the satellite was stranded in an inclined transfer orbit when the upper stage of its Proton booster failed. Engineers at Hughes, working with the satellite's insurers, guided the spacecraft on a trajectory that allowed the spacecraft to reach geosynchronous orbit using only the limited feul supplies onboard. Hughes Global Services is now looking for customers for the satellite, temporarily stationed over the Pacific. "The lunar recovery mission team did an outstanding job," HGS president Ronald Swanson said. "It really validates the viability of this technique for future missions." Comet Discovery Award: Amateur astronomers who discover new comets will now not only win fame, they'll win fortune, too -- up to $20,000 in prize money in an award announced by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) June 15. The Edgar Wilson Award, named after a late Kentucky businessman with an interest in astronomy, will provide prize money for comets discovered by amateur astronomers using amateur equipment. The prize money will be divided among all qualifying amateurs based on the number of comets each astronomer discovers. Prizes will be awarded on a yearly basis, with the first prizes to be announced around July 1, 1999. International Mars Collaboration: The United States and France may work together on a Mars sample return mission slated for a 2005 launch, officials from the two countried announced June 18. Under the proposed agreement CNES, the French space agency, would provide an Ariane-5 booster to launch the spacecraft and some spacecraft components, including an orbiter. NASA would provide the lander, rover, and other equipment, and retain overall management of the mission, with participation by American and French scientists. The announcement comes as the U.S. and Europe struggle to support future Mars missions: cost overruns and budget cutbacks have forced the Athena rover off a NASA 2001 lander, and the European Space Agency is struggling to fund its Mars Express mission, planned for 2003, at the same time as other space science projects. Hubble Discoveries: The Hubble Space Telescope has returned images of a giant dust disk, resembling the hubcap of a car tire, surrounding a suspected black hole in a distant galaxy. The dust disk, about 3,700 light years across in the galaxy NGC 7052, may have been formed by the collision of the galaxy with a smaller galaxy in the distant past. Astronomers have also used Hubble to uncover a warming trend on Triton, Neptune's largest moon. Triton's temperature has warmed by about five percent -- from 37 to 39 kelvins (-392 to -389 degrees Fahrenheit) -- since the Voyager 2 flyby in 1989. A team of astronomers led by Jim Elliot of MIT believe the warming trend is caused by seasonal changes, as Triton is approaching an "extreme southern summer" where much of the southern hemisphere of the moon is in constant sunlight. Commercial Radarsat Approved: A California company announced June 22 that it has received permission from the federal government to build and launch the world's first commercial radar satellite that can provide high-resolution images to government and private users. The Radar1 satellite, built by RDL Space Corporation, will provide 1-meter resolution images, day or night, in any kind of weather, starting in 2001. Such images are widely used by the Defense Department and have also been used, at much lower resolutions, for geological research. In Brief: Houston and Dolores Woods of Nashville, Tennessee, must be thankful they decided not to sleep in Saturday morning, June 13. A small lump of metal -- believed to be a meteorite -- struck their house and landed on their bed at around 9am. The Woods were not in bed at the time of impact. The meteorite was examined at a local science museum and turned over to the Smithsonian for further analysis... Cinescape OnLine reported last week that director James Cameron had approached NASA about flying on the shuttle to film a movie about the construction of the International Space Station. Both Cameron and NASA have denied those reports. NASA wouldn'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> want Cameron around the space station anyway, since Cameron directed "Titanic"... The world preimere of the asteroid-impact movie "Armageddon" was held June 29 at the Kennedy Space Center. As more than one person pointed out, it's a bit ironic that NASA, which has announced additional support for the detection of potentially hazardous near-Earth objects, has thrown its support behind a movie that is far less credible (or perhaps far more unbelievable) than Deep Impact, which got essentially no NASA support... Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [6/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... *** Articles *** NOTSNIK: The Navy's Secret Satellite Program by Andrew J. LePage Introduction Like the other branches of the United States military during the early years of the Space Age, the Navy's "space program" actually consisted of several, largely independent space projects run by different internal bureaus and laboratories. While the Navy Research Laboratory (NRL) ran the Vanguard program under the watchful gaze of the public, the Naval Ordnance Test Station (NOTS) at China Lake, California was secretly conducting an independent military satellite program whose existance was not acknowledged until 1994. NOTS, under the direction of the Navy's Bureau of Ordnance (BuOrd), had been responsible for the development rocket-based weapons for the Navy since its inception in 1943. During the years leading up to the Space Age, engineers and scientists at NOTS were already busy performing research on suborbital and satellite ocean surveillance systems. With the launch of Sputnik, a NOTS team proposed an all-solid-fuel launch vehicle based on the motors in the Army's Sargent missile. However, the Army turned down their request for the rocket motors. Undetered, NOTS engineers went back to the drawing board and by early 1958 came up with a remarkably innovative means of orbiting a payload with available hardware. The new NOTS satellite proposal, called "Project Pilot", used a six-stage air-launched system capable of orbiting a 1.05 kilogram (2.3 pound) satellite. This system would serve as a technological pathfinder for the Navy's future rapid response reconaissance systems. The technical director of BuOrd's new space program office, John Nicolaides, approved the project and development immeadiately proceeded with a $300,000 budget and a four month deadline. Subsequently Project Pilot received the nickname "NOTSNIK" based on a combination of NOTS and Nicolaides' name but also partly as a play on the "Sputnik" moniker. The NOTSNIK Launch Vehicle The "first stage" of NOTSNIK was a specially modified Douglas F4D-1 "Skyray" jet fighter supplied by BuAer. When the F4D-1 entered service in 1956, it was the Navy's first carrier-based delta-winged jet fighter. The 13.9 meter (45.67 foot) long F4D-1 to be used for NOTSNIK, serial number 130745, was a specially modified, stripped down version used for high speed trial flights. With its Pratt and Whitney J57-P-2 turbojet on full afterburner, this plane was capable of attaining speeds of Mach 1.05. The tight clearances and limited payload capability of the Skyray set the limits on the size and weight of the subsequent five stages of the NOTSNIK launch vehicle. This rocket had a total length of 4.38 meters (14.4 feet), a fin span of 1.65 meters (5.42 feet) and weighed only 950 kilograms (2,100 pounds). Even with the mass of the Skyray included, NOTSNIK is the smallest known system ever built to launch satellites. The rocket was mounted on a standard Aero 7A bomb rack under Skyray's port wing. A fuel tank of like mass was carried under the starboard wing to balance the load. During a launch, the Skyray would proceed at an altitude of 10.7 kilometers (35,000 feet) to the air-drop zone located in the Navy's test range over the Santa Barbara Channel in the Pacific Ocean just west of Los Angeles. Before release the pilot would start a 2-G pullup at Mach 0.9 to start a "bomb toss" manuever. At an altitude of 12.5 kilometers (41,000 feet), the rocket would be released at a speed of 742 kilometers (461 miles) per hour and an angle of 50 degrees to the horizon. Three seconds later the first of the solid rocket stages would ignite. The second and third "stages" of NOTSNIK made use of a common airframe. Each "stage" consisted of a pair of modified HOTROC motors like those used by the Navy's ASROC anti-submarine weapon and produced 126.4 kilonewtons (28,400 pounds) of thrust for 4.86 seconds. During ascent the burn of the second stage would be followed by a 12 second coast before the third stage ignited. After third stage burnout, the vehicle would coast for another 100 seconds. At an altitude of 79.4 kilometers (49.4 miles) the second/third stage structure was jettisoned and the fourth stage was ignited. This stage consisted of an X-241 rocket motor manufactured by the Allegheny Ballistic Laboratory. Based on the X-248 motor developed for the NRL Vangaurd rocket, the X-241 produced 12.11 kilonewtons (2,720 pounds) of thrust for 36 seconds. After another coast of three seconds, the fifth stage would come to life. This 14.9 kilogram (32.9 pound) motor was designed at NOTS and produced 5.14 kilonewtons (1,155 pounds) of thrust for 5.7 seconds. After this stage burned out, NOTSNIK was travelling at 8.44 kilometers (5.25 miles) per second in a near-polar orbit with a apogee of about 2,400 kilometers (1,500 miles). But with a perigee of about 60 kilometers (40 miles), this orbit would be very short-lived. A small 568 gram (1.25 pound) solid rocket sixth stage integrated with the satellite payload would be fired 53 minutes and 20 seconds after release. Also developed at NOTS, this tiny motor produced 765 Newtons (172 pounds) of thrust for one second and would raise the NOTSNIK satellite's perigee to a safe 2,250 kilometers (1,400 miles) allowing the mission to begin. The NOTSNIK Satellite With a mass of 1.05 kilograms (2.3 pounds) and a diameter of 20 centimeters (8 inches), the doughnut-shaped NOTSNIK satellite is among the smallest orbital payloads ever launched. This battery-powered satellite was constructed at NOTS China Lake facility and carried a single instrument - an infrared "television" scanner. Similar to the units supplied by the Navy for the USAF lunar orbiters, this simple imager was hardly a "television" in the usual sense. A small mirror focused light onto an infrared detector which would use the rotation of the satellite to scan a line in the scene. The forward motion of the satellite itself would then allow a picture to be built one line at a time. While the crude images produced by this system would have little intelligence value, the experienced gained would be valuable in developing more capable follow-on systems. The images produced by the satellite would be transmitted to a network of about a half dozen portable MINITRACK stations scattered around the globe. Because of the small size of the satellite, the system would only operate for about three orbits before the batteries were depleted, long enough to verify that orbit had been achieved and attempt to secure some images. Since orbital reconnaissance was a touchy subject at the time, NOTSNIK and its mission were kept top secret. Except for those with a need to know, NOTSNIK's "cover story" was that it was to conduct radiation measurements in support of Project Argus which would assess the effects of nuclear detonations in space. The satellite's small size and short lifetime made it unlikely that it would be detected by anyone outside the program. Hardware development proceeded at a rapid pace during the spring of 1958. But before actual flights of the system, a pair of ground-launched test flights were to be performed to assess the modifications made to the HOTROC motors. A NOTSNIK rocket mockup with two live HOTROC motors was prepared for launch from the G-2 test range at China Lake on July 4, 1958. In an unintended Independence Day fireworks display, the rocket exploded one second after launch. An investigation of the failure indicated that a crack in the solid rocket motor's grain was at fault. A second ground test firing two weeks later was even less successful. With eight seconds left in the countdown, a glitch in the electrical system caused the rocket to blow up on the test stand. Despite the two failures, project managers proceeded with an orbital attempt based on their engineers' past experience and their faith in this simple launch system. Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [7/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... NOTSNIK Launch Attempts On July 25, 1958, only a week after the last unsuccessful NOTSNIK ground test, Navy Pilot Commander William W. West climbed into the cockpit of the BuAer Skyray carrying a NOTSNIK rocket in the first all-up test flight. Once Commander West reached the the drop zone, he performed the required pullup maneuver and released the rocket. Because of the sudden loss of weight from his port wing, West's Skyray banked sharply to the right making further observations of the rocket difficult. With the sudden burst of smoke and flame from the ignition of the second stage, West and the pilot of the chase plane lost sight of the rocket and assumed it had failed. While most of the tracking network shutdown after the apparent failure, the station in Christchurch, New Zealand did not and reportedly detected the NOTSNIK satellite in orbit. While no useful images could be extracted from the weak signal, it did appear that the launch was successful afterall. NOTSNIK thus became the first air-launched satellite - almost 32 years before the first Pegasus launch. With a success under their belt, a second orbital attempt was made on August 8, 1958. The HOTROC motors blew up on ignition ending the mission. Another pair of ground tests were conducted on August 16 and 17 to once again verify the design. Both flights failed about three seconds after ignition when their stabilizing fins broke free. Obviously the structure had difficulties with the stresses of launch and required changes. With little time left before the end of the program, the remaining four NOTSNIK rockets were prepared for launch in rapid succession. The third orbital attempt on August 22, 1958 started well with the accelerating rocket observed disappearing over the horizon. Later signals were received by the New Zealand station during the scheduled first and third orbital passes apparently confirming that orbit had been achieved. As with the first mission, the signals were too weak to obtain usable images. The next mission flown on August 25 ended 3.75 seconds after release when one of the HOTROC motors exploded. The following day the fifth attempt ended when the rocket failed to ignite and fell into the Pacific. The final NOTSNIK orbital attempt on August 28 ended when the rocket broke up after a second stage HOTROC motor failed to ignite. With this last flight, the first phase of the NOTSNIK program drew to a close. Postscript Plans for additional NOTSNIK flights were not approved and development efforts instead shifted towards upgrading the existing rocket design. One project, called Caleb, sought to build an improved air-launch system but was eventually cancelled because of political pressure from the USAF who wanted to monopolize military space launches. While it would not launch payloads into orbit, Caleb did fly as part of the Navy's secret high altitude "Hi-Hoe" program with the last flight in 1962 reportedly reaching an altitude of 1,167.3 kilometers (725.5 miles). Another follow-on program, called NOTSNIK II, sought to develop an anti-satellite capability. This still-secret program is thought to have made at least two test flights during the early 1960s. The NOTSNIK rocket was not the only part of the program to continue development. The infrared scanner carried by the NOTSNIK satellite also flew on the ill fated USAF lunar probes as part of Operation Mona. After these failures to return usable data, the design was eventually flown as a secret secondary experiment on some early flights of the Navy's Transit experimental navigation satellite. The camera operated satisfactorily and returned usable images, thus vindicating its design and providing useful data for future imaging systems. Bibliography Peter Pesavento, "US Navy's Untold Story of Space-Related Firsts", Spaceflight, Vol. 38, No. 7, pp. 239-243, July 1996 Peter Pesavento, "Secret Revealed About the Early US Navy Space Programme", Spaceflight, Vol. 38, No. 7, pp. 243-245, July 1996 Joel W. Powell, "Rockets Red Glare", Quest, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 58-61, Spring 1994 Joel W. Powell, "The Nots Air-Launched Satellite Programme", Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 50, No. 11, pp. 433-440, November 1997 Keith J. Scala, "A History of Air-Launched Space Vehicles", Quest, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 34-41, Spring 1994 Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [8/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... Doing Space: Making It Happen by Timothy K. Roberts [Editor's Note: This is the third and final installment in the "Doing Space" series by Timothy K. Roberts. Part one, "Speedbumps on the Road to Space," was published in the May issue. Part two, "Why Do We Go?", was published in the June issue.] If you've been following along in this miniseries, you've already gotten rid of some serious misconceptions about our space programs. And you've begun to think about the basic reasons we want to go to space -- or, indeed, anywhere. True believers are frustrated at the slow pace of progress to any of these ends. Potential investors are impatient with the lack of development of this new arena. Three-Step Evolution How do we make these things happen? Actually, we already know how. I'm not speaking of the technical problems but of the strategic ones -- how do we as Americans, as humans, go about getting into space on a serious basis? The answer is surprisingly mundane -- do what we've already done in similar situations. Every time a culture or a nation has seen advantage in moving into a new environment to explore and exploit and has done so successfully, it has followed a three-step process: 1) The government (or ruling group) has funded development of methods of transportation, exploration, and exploitation of the new environment. This has taken the form of royal investment in new ships, government incentives for new canals, federal funding for railroads and airports, and of course, national space programs to date. The reason for this is, again, simple: a new environment always means unknown risks and rewards. Private investors of any ilk will not stake their treasure on such unknowns. Only a body with vast resources and a perceived immunity to risk will confront such an investment environment. 2) Once the initial way has been cleared and technical feasibility has been demonstrated, private investors will begin to take on clearly defined pieces of the new environment with an eye to relatively easy profits. They will only do so with significant government help. Royal charters in the Americas, private toll roads, railroad expansion, and airport development are all examples of this step. In space, this is seen in the use of space for telecommunications. This is an area that the federal government invested heavily in for its own reasons, demonstrated feasibility of, and then created a market for. Only when there was a guaranteed return on investment would private industry take the plunge. 3) The final step is full commercial participation in exploiting the new environment. We can see this today in the communications satellite industry. Hughes doesn'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> need government support to make money from comsats -- they do quite nicely on their own, thank you. This last phase is where we really want to be, in all potential areas of space exploitation. As has been shown in many industries, true innovation and market expansion occurs best without government direction or involvement. The free market really does work -- eventually. Air transport followed the three-step model outlined above fairly cleanly through step two. After the initial inventions (developed, I must note, entirely privately), further development of practical air transport was closely tied to government investment in military aircraft. Airliners followed from bombers. Aerial navigation was perfected to ensure fighters and bombers could reach their intended targets. Virtually all significant improvements in aircraft started with a governmental need. Only when the government had assumed the initial risks and showed the feasibility of air transport would private industry become involved. And their first and largest customer? The federal government. It is a fact that commercial aviation as a long-range transportation industry only emerged as serious competition to ships and railroads after World War II, when the US government (primarily) invested heavily in precisely those things that an airline would need to compete. The complication comes in arriving at step three. Virtually all airports of any commercial importance are owned and operated by a governmental agency. Air traffic control is a national government monopoly with strong world-wide overtones and implications. Private companies may perform specific services in airports and air traffic control but they do so under government direction. This is a common characteristic of most transportation systems. Government build highways, harbors, airports, and, yes, spaceports. Governments control how these facilities will be used and by whom. The underlying reason is that transportation is a critical public need and can'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> be left in private hands. We'll revisit this point later on. Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [9/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... Space Transportation's Three Steps So where are we in space? The answer is: all three steps. The federal government is very clearly deeply involved in research and development in virtually every phase of space exploration and exploitation, from basic transportation to data and telemetry transmission. There isn'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> a facet of "space" that the government isn'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> working on. However, there is, for example, a space transportation industry. It is clearly at step two -- it is dependent on government owned and operated spaceports and investors will only put private money into the most conservative rocket designs for production. There is virtually no significant private funding for new, innovative, cheap spacelift -- that's back at step one. There are step three segments as well. As noted earlier, the communications satellite industry acts as if it were a mature segment that isn'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> dependent on government support or investment. As a whole, however, "space" is between steps one and two. There really is no mature, self-sustaining "space industry." Too much still needs to happen. As a result, there aren'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> human beings "living and working in space on the eve of the 21st century" as NASA once touted for its goal. At best, we make brief forays into this new environment, maybe establish a primitive camp or two, and strive to learn more about it. We have a long way to go. We'll get to our goal of exploring and exploiting space on a routine basis if we consciously apply the three-step process to space. Here's what we need to do: First, we need to assess where we are in broad areas that characterize "going to space" -- transportation, structures, life support, power, etc. This is probably best done by the government with industry involvement. The output of this assessment will be an investment plan -- one that addresses the greatest risks and takes us to step two. Next, we need to spend taxpayers' dollars to reduce those risks to the point that private industry and investors will step up to the remaining share. This translates to investment in both technology development and use of the resulting capabilities to demonstrate its usefulness and low risk. Finally, we need to keep control of much of the basic infrastructure in government hands. This must be done for two reasons. The obvious one is public safety. Operating spacecraft, from launch to mission end, is a hazardous business. Fuels that are highly explosive, toxic materials, and high risks make for a dangerous business. The impact of a Chinese Long March 2 rocket into a village near the launch site and the estimated death toll of over 2,000 people highlights just how much we still don'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> know -- or can'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> do. A less obvious reason is that many missions performed in space are, in fact, public utilities. The NavStar Global Positioning System -- GPS -- is a clear example of this. Originally intended to guide cruise missiles to their targets, GPS is now far more widely used in civilian life than in the military. Even farm tractors use GPS! Public utilities must stay under some form of public control in order to ensure their availability to the entire population, not just an elite few. The ultimate end-state for space is, I believe, a situation where private industry does the vast majority of the exploiting, institutions like universities, NASA, and the National Science Foundation do the exploring, and the critical underlying infrastructure is at least regulated and, in some cases, operated by the federal government. The situation would resemble aviation in the late 20th century. This is a viable, self-sustaining state that maximizes innovation, discovery, and personal freedom while minimizing the avoidable risks. If the rate of progress of commercial aviation is any indicator, allowing for the potentially quicker development times now, we could reach this state by 2050. That may seem quite a long time, but it's really only 52 years from now. If one moves 52 years from 1925, when government did most of the work in aviation and the industry was tiny, one arrives at 1977 - certainly a time when commercial aviation was viable and self-sustaining. An Activist's Perspective This vision will require some disciplined investment, both publicly and privately. It will require a political will to stay the course for the long term. It will require broad-based public support over decades. In short, it will require us to address the US space program in an entirely new way, with a new set of stated objectives, and with a commitment rarely seen in American politics. We can do this. Will we? That, of course, remains to be seen. There are plenty of private organizations that would like to see this course of events unfold, perhaps more quickly or in a different sequence, but arriving at the same end state. Over the past couple of decades, groups like the National Space Society, the Planetary Society, and the L-5 Society, to name just a few, have striven to influence both the public's perception and public policy to these ends. Apparently, their impact is minimal because of the perceived low level of public and Congressional interest in exploring and exploiting space. The real job that lies ahead for space activists is to promote the entire agenda, not just a particular portion of it. One reason for the lack of success of many of these groups is that they are perceived as single-interest groups. They support specific projects -- SSTO, L-5 colonies, Return to the Moon, Mars Direct -- the unfamiliarity of some of these names indicates the problem. Certainly there are some investments that should precede others, but the key focus ought to be in general public awareness. Building public awareness and support for space can be translated into action for space, both politically and in business. The focus for space activists now is where the focus for aviation societies (they really did exist!) was in the 1910s and 1920s - advocacy of the entire agenda of creating a space-faring civilization. Convince the public that an American (or Canadian or French or . . .) goal is truly the conquest and settlement of the Solar System and that there is a believable timetable and the rest will follow. Lest you think I am overly optimistic in my view, recall what the environmental movement has done in the past twenty years. From a random collection of radicals, extremists, and well-meaning but unsophisticated common citizens, the United States grew a strong environmental civic ethic, a veritable raft of laws that are enforced nationwide, and the rescue from extinction of several species scientists once thought headed for history. We can do this for space but only if we can forge a nation-wide coalition of space activists that agree both on the basic goal and the strategy to get there. The object of these articles has not been to build the political base for space activism -- that is best left to those who know politics best. The object is to buttress your knowledge of what is and is not and what we can do. Without clear understanding of our history, our rationale, and our goal, we won'<b style="color:black;background-color:#ffff66">t</b> go to space. Someone else will -- and they might not even want to sell us a ticket. We can avoid this future. We must. So keep a clear head, keep your eyes on the grand goal and tell everyone you meet: We're going out! Lead, follow, or get out of the way! Timothy K. Roberts is a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force, currently stationed at Cheyenne Mountain Operations Center where he is both a Space Control Center Commander and the Deputy Chief of Training. He has served in both Air Force Space Command and United States Space Command headquarters working on next-generation spacelifters and space surveillance. Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [10/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... *** Book Reviews *** by Jeff Foust Comets Friend and Foe Comets: Creators and Destroyers by David H. Levy Touchstone, 1998 softcover, 256 pp., illus. ISBN 0-684-85255-1 US$12/C$17 The 1990s may be remembered as the decade of the comet. In this deacde we've witnessed two briliant naked-eye comets, Hyakutake and Hale-Bopp, and saw fragments of another comet, Shoemaker-Levy 9, pummel the planet Jupiter. Upcoming spacecraft missions, like Stardust, will yield more information about comtes in the coming years. It's in this context that astronomer David Levy provides us with a broadbased introduction to comets in "Comets: Creators and Destroyers" Comets, Levy reminds us, have helped the formation of life on Earth by supplying the young planets with volatiles like water and perhaps even amino acids and more complex chemicals. Comets have also wiped out much of the life they helped to start through cataclysmic impacts, such as the Chicxulub impact 65 million years ago. Long before their roles in creating and destroying life on Earth were understood, humans treated comets as omens, sometimes good, often bad. Levy's book provides a general introduction to comets, both from a scientific standpoint (their role in shaping life on Earth) and a historical one (how we have interpreted and understood comets through the ages.) He does stray from this topic later in the book, devoting a couple chapters to whether Mars, Europa, or other worlds in our solar system and beyond could support life -- a digression that's not uncommon in astronomy books these days, given in increasing interest in the subject. If you or someone you know is looking for a general introduction to comets that is quite readable and not overly technical, Levy's "Comets" is a good choice. Filling in the Drake Equation Other Worlds: The Search for Life in the Universe by Michael D. Lemonick Simon and Schuster, 1998 hardcover, 272pp., illus. ISBN 0-684-83294-1 US$25/C$35 Astronomy has been filled with a number of hot topics in recent years, including the search for, and discovery of, planets around other stars; evidence that primitive life once existed on Mars; the increasing likelihood of an ocean of liquid water under Europa's ice surface; and more. On the surface these topics may seem unrelated, but Michael Lemonick, a senior science writer at Time magazine, shows in "Other Worlds" that they are deeply connected as different factors in the search for life in the universe. Lemonick unifies these different fields of research through the Drake Equation: a series of factors put together by astronomer and SETI advicate Frank Drake nearly forty years ago, which attempts to estimate the number of intelligent species in the galaxy with whom we could communicate. Since Drake drafted this equation, the numbers people have plugged into it have been nothing more than wild guesses that reflect personal philosophies as much as hard science. What research like Mars life and extrasolar planets do, Lemonick notes, is help us nail down some of these Drake Equation values we have been guessing at, such as the fraction of stars that have planets and the fraction of planets that can support life. He takes us behind the scenes on several research projects, including the work of planet hunters Geoff Marcy and Paul Butler, SETI researchers Seth Shostak and Jill Tarter, and the team that found evidence of life in Martian meteorite ALH 84001. While perhaps prone to a bit of hyperbole (it would be tough to argue that the Drake equation is the second most important equation of the century after E=mc^2, given all the significant work in quantum mechanics and other fields), Lemonick has created a readable, enjoyable account of work in these areas in "Other Worlds". Those new to the field will find his descriptions of research enlightening; those familiar with the work will enjoy his personal accounts of the scientists. *** NSS News *** Boston NSS Upcoming Events Saturday, July 11, 11am-4pm Boston NSS Annual Picnic 102 Sanborn Lane, Reading, Mass. Come enjoy food, and a swimming pool, nerf rockets, badminton, other lawn games and children's games. And, find out what other NSS chapter members do outside the regular meetings. We may take a walk in the local town forest after 2 pm. Bring your children. Also, bring swimming suit, snacks, lunch food to share, and games. We will provide: barbeque grill, swimming pool, plates, cups. Please RSVP, leave message for Bruce Mackenzie, (617)258-2828 (10 am - 6 pm) or (781)944-7027 (8 - 9 pm) or BMackenzie@draper.com. Directions: Take I-93 or I-95 (rt. 128) to their interchange on the north side of Boston; Take I-93 4 miles north to the second exit, labeled "Concord St.", at the end of the exit ramp, reset your 'trip odometer' to zero, Turn right, going east on Concord St. at a mileage reading of 1.25, there is a stop sign, bear right onto Park St. take the next right turn, at mileage 1.5, onto Mill St. (the stop light is too far) immediately after "Old Mill Village" on the right, at mileage 2.0, turn right on Sanborn Lane. Continue SLOWLY, past the signs say "DO NOT ENTER", "NO TRESPASSING", etc. At mileage 2.4, our house is on your left. A white house with A-frame, set lower and way from the road. Try to park in driveway or on dirt along left side of driveway. Tuesday, July 14, 7:30pm "The Lunar-Mars Life Support Test Project Phase III 90-day Test: The Crew Perspective" Vickie Kloeris, John Lewis, and Laura Supra The Lunar Mars Life Support Project Phase III test was a 91 day test of air and water recycling systems conducted at the Johnson Space Center from Sept. 19, 1997 to Dec. 19, 1997. Vickie Kloeris of the Johnson Space Center, John Lewis of Lockheed Martin Corporation, and Laura Supra of AlliedSignal Aerospace will be giving this presentation, and will describe life inside the chamber through video and slides. Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [11/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... Boston NSS June Lecture Summary by Lynn Olson Can a small group build a launch vehicle to launch a small spacecraft into LEO (Low Earth Orbit)? Rainier Anacker was inspired to investigate this question by the February talk of Supriya Chakrabarti on the building of a satellite by students and young investigators at Boston University. Anacker wondered what it would take to build a launch vehicle capable of launching such a small satellite. At the June meeting of the Boston Chapter of the National Space Society he walked the audience through some of the design issues. The first task is to determine what "delta v" or velocity change the rocket must deliver. A spacecraft in LEO has a velocity of ~7.8 kilometers per second (km/s). After adding in velocity losses due to gravity and atmospheric drag and subtracting the boost given by the earth's rotation, a typical rocket will require 9.2 km/s (20,500 mph) to boost a satellite in to orbit. Given this velocity requirement, the rocket equation can be used to calculate other rocket parameters. The rocket equation says that the mass ratio (ratio of initial mass to final mass) is equal to the exponential of the ratio of the velocity requirement (9.2 km/s) to the rocket exhaust velocity. The final mass is the payload plus inert mass. Inert mass includes tanks, engines, guidance electronics, etc. The initial mass is the final mass plus the propellant. Low inert mass and high exhaust velocity are necessary to achieve high rocket performance. Exhaust velocity is usually quoted as specific impulse, which is the number of seconds a pound of rocket propellant can produce a pound of thrust, because it is easier to measure. Specific impulse and exhaust velocity are directly proportional to each other. Anacker first analyzed an SSTO (Single Stage To Orbit) launcher with a 100 kg payload. This turned out to be very tough. Using the rocket equation, he showed that either the initial mass had to be enormous or "unobtainium" must be used to reduce the inert mass, even using high performance hydrogen/oxygen rocket engines with average specific impulse of 400 or more seconds. This is currently a hot topic of research with the NASA/Lockheed Martin X-33 effort, but not realistic for a small university or other group. He then presented a two stage rocket using gasoline and nitric acid which could launch a small satellite with fairly low specific impulse (260, 290 seconds for first, second stages) and inert fraction within current state of the art. No advances would be required. The actual cost would depend on R&D, hardware, operations, and propellant costs, but the project appears to be doable on a relatively small scale. Universities are very interested in a small satellite launcher such as Anacker proposes. The Universities Space Research Association was the advocate of NASA's Bantam Launch Technologies program, which aims to put a 100 kilogram satellite in orbit for $1.5M. NASA administrator Dan Goldin pledged to meet this goal recently, even though initial studies awarded to four companies did not meet the cost target and follow up funds were redirected. (Space News, June 8-14, 1998). Philadelphia Area Space Alliance News by Jay Haines PASA regular business luncheon/formal meeting from 1-3 pm the 3rd Saturday of every month at Liberty One food court, 16th & Market. Go toward the windows, then to the left. Public parking in Liberty on 17th St. Scheduled PASA activities: regular monthly meetings: July 18th (special location), Aug. 15th, Sept. 19th. Other activities: Nov. 13th-15th: Philcon. Call Earl for details. June Meeting Report: Oscar Harris gave the Education report, covering the timetable for the Carver Science Fair for 1998-99 at Temple Univ. and the Academy of Natural Sciences, and our plans to judge and present an award for space-oriented projects. Earl Bennett mentioned a local middle-school project on the Mars rover, a 5/98 NASA Tech Briefs article on a Get Away Special project by the U Michigan SEDS group, and a Summer 98 Robotics World article on the For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) National Competition at WDW Epcot in April, and a NJ ex-astronaut who is associated with it. Hank Smith gave the Science Fiction report, covering the Aug. 5th-9th Bucconeer 56th Annual World Science Fiction Convention in Baltimore, the Nov. 13th- 15th Philadelphia Science Fiction Convention, and the Philadelphia 2001 World Science Fiction Convention bid. Mitch Gordon gave the NSS report, covering the 5-6/98 Ad Astra articles on space tourism, and the Public Relations report, covering his progress on next Spring's FutureFest, and discussions with Derrick Pitts of the Franklin Institute on plans for celebrating the 1999 30th anniversary of the lunar landing. Michelle Baker mentioned that we had received the Lockheed- Martin VentureStar poster. Michelle also gave the new ProSpace report, covering the Space Commercialization Act which is now in the Senate, having passed the House. Oscar reported on the 5/98 Architectural Record article by Robert Zubrin, 'Building on Mars and living off the land.' Jay Haines reported on our Web site (28 accesses from 5/21 to 6/20). Earl gave the Technology report, covering a 6/98 Photonic Spectrum article on measuring astronauts' motion sickness, a 6/98 Industrial Physicist article on using ion engines on geostationary satellites to save 400Kg of launch weight in fuel, and using aerogel to contain the heat of the ion engines. Earl also covered a 7-8/98 Analog Science Fiction and Fact Alternate View article by Jeffery Kooistra, 'The Golden Age of Rocketry,' wherein he gives an appreciation for G. Harry Stein. Our next meeting will be an outing to Atlantic City NJ: we meet on Sat., 7/18 at 6 p.m. at the Ocean One Mall food area on the 3rd floor. Go toward the windows, then to the right. Park at the Trump Plaza and walk north on the boardwalk to Ocean One. Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [12/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... *** Regular Features *** Jonathan's Space Report No. 364 by Jonathan McDowell [Ed. Note: Go to http://hea-www.harvard.edu/QEDT/jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html for back issues and other information about Jonathan's Space Report.] Shuttle and Mir The next Shuttle mission is STS-95, in October. On the Mir space station complex, the Progress M-39 cargo ship is docked to the Kvant module, and the Soyuz TM-27 transport is docked to the PKhO transfer module on the Mir base compartment. The EO-25 mission crew of Talgat Musabaev and Nikolai Budarin are scheduled to be replaced in August by EO-26 crew Gennadiy Padalka and Sergey Avdeev. Recent Launches HGS-1, following a second lunar flyby on Jun 6, successfully reached inclined geosynchronous orbit and is now drifting over the Pacific at 0.5 degree per day. On Jun 19 it was over 152W in a 35681 x 35963 km x 8.7 deg orbit. The Hughes team deserve to be congratulated on this spectacular and innovative rescue mission. Intelsat 805 was launched by an Atlas 2AS on Jun 18 into a standard geostationary transfer orbit. Intelsat 805 is an LM7000 series satellite built by Lockheed Martin/East Windsor. Launch mass is 3520 kg; the satellite has 28 C-band and 3 Ku-band transponders, and will initially serve the Atlantic Ocean region for INTELSAT. Two Minuteman III missiles were launched from Vandenberg to Kwajalein Atoll on Jun 24, one from silo LF-09 and the second from LF-10. Each carried three re-entry vehicles. Erratum: Thor 3 launch date was Jun 10, not Jun 11. Table of Recent Launches Date UT Name Launch Vehicle Site Mission INTL. DES. May 2 0916 Iridium 69 CZ-2C/SD Taiyuan Comsat 26A Iridium 71 Comsat 26B May 7 0853 Kosmos-2351 Molniya-M Plesetsk Early Warn 27A May 7 2345 Echostar 4 Proton-K/DM3 Baykonur Comsat 28A May 9 0138 USA 139 Titan Centaur Canaveral SLC40 Sigint 29A May 13 1552 NOAA 15 Titan 2 Vandenberg SLC4W Weather 30A May 14 2212 Progress M-39 Soyuz-U Baykonur LC1 Cargo 31A May 17 2116 Iridium 70) Delta 7920 Vandenberg SLC2W Comsat 32A Iridium 72) Comsat 32B Iridium 73) Comsat 32C Iridium 74) Comsat 32D Iridium 75) Comsat 32E May 30 1000 Zhongwei 1 CZ-3B Xichang Comsat 33A Jun 2 2206 Discovery ) Shuttle Kennedy LC39A Spaceship 34A Spacehab ) Jun 10 0035 Thor 3 Delta 7925 Canaveral LC17A Comsat 35A Jun 15 2258 Kosmos-2352 ) Tsiklon-3 Plesetsk LC32 Comsat 36A Kosmos-2353 ) Comsat 36B Kosmos-2354 ) Comsat 36C Kosmos-2355 ) Comsat 36D Kosmos-2356 ) Comsat 36E Kosmos-2357 ) Comsat 36F Jun 18 2248 Intelsat 805 Atlas 2AS Canaveral LC36A Comsat 37A Current Shuttle Processing Status __________________________________ Orbiters Location Mission Launch Due OV-102 Columbia OPF Bay 3 STS-93 Unknown OV-103 Discovery OPF Bay 2 STS-95 Oct 29 OV-104 Atlantis Palmdale OMDP OV-105 Endeavour OPF Bay 1 STS-88 Unknown MLP/SRB/ET/OV stacks MLP1/ MLP2/ MLP3/ Space Calendar by Ron Baalke [Ed. Note: visit http://newproducts.jpl.nasa.gov/calendar/ for the complete calendar] July 1998 Jul ?? - Celestis-03 Pegasus XL Launch * Jul ?? - ORBCOMM-2 Pegasus XL Launch * Jul ?? - Resurs Zenit Launch (Russia) Jul 01 - Asteroid 6748 (1995 UV30) Closest Approach to Earth (1.066 AU) * Jul 04 - Planet B M-5 Launch (Japan Mars Mission) Jul 04 - Earth at Aphelion (1.017 AU From Sun) Jul 04 - Henrietta Leavitt's 130th Birthday (1868) Jul 05 - Asteroid 4953 (1990 MU) Closest Approach to Earth (0.615 AU) Jul 05 - Asteroid 1992 JB Closest Approach to Earth (0.872 AU) Jul 06 - Asteroid 5672 Libby Closest Approach To Earth (1.477 AU) Jul 06 - Asteroid 5657 (1936 QE1) Closest Approach To Earth (1.569 AU) Jul 09 - Asteroid 1862 Apollo Near-Earth Flyby (0.339 AU) Jul 09 - Pluto Occults P42 (14.7 Magnitude Star) Jul 10 - Asteroid 7 Iris at Opposition (8.6 Magnitude) Jul 12 - Comet Arend-Rigaux Perihelion (1.371 AU) Jul 12 - Asteroid 1998 KM3 Near-Earth Flyby (0.253 AU) Jul 12 - 10th Anniversary (1988), Phobos 2 Launch (Soviet Mars Orbiter) * Jul 14 - Sinosat 1 Long March 3B Launch Jul 14 - Moon Occults Jupiter Jul 15 - Asteroid 1993 PB Closest Approach to Earth (0.590 AU) Jul 15 - Asteroid 3551 Verenia Closest Approach to Earth (0.794 AU) Jul 15 - Asteroid 6708 Bobbievaile Closest Approach To Earth (1.002 AU) Jul 16 - GPS IIR-3 Delta 2 Launch Jul 16 - Comet Arend-Rigaux Closest Approach to Earth (2.354 AU) Jul 16 - Asteroid 4973 Showa Closest Approach To Earth (2.726 AU) Jul 17 - Mercury at Greatest Eastern Elongation (27 Degrees) * Jul 17 - Comet C/1998 K5 (LINEAR) Perihelion (0.964 AU) Jul 17 - Asteroid 432 Pythia at Opposition (10.9 Magnitude) Jul 17 - Comet Russell 3 Closest Approach to Earth (1.941 AU) Jul 18 - Galileo, Orbital Trim Maneuver #50 (OTM-50) Jul 18 - Asteroid 6460 Bassano Closest Approach To Earth (1.481 AU) Jul 18 - Asteroid 6172 Prokofeana Closest Approach To Earth (1.888 AU) Jul 19 - Asteroid 6232 1985 SJ3 Closest Approach To Earth (0.963 AU) Jul 19 - Asteroid 4295 Wisse Closest Approach To Earth (1.165 AU) Jul 19 - Asteroid 6022 Jyuro Closest Approach To Earth (1.319 AU) * Jul 20 - Iridium Long March 2C/SD Launch Jul 20 - Asteroid 43 Ariadne at Opposition (9.1 Magnitude) Jul 20 - Comet Shoemaker 1 Closest Approach to Earth (1.897 AU) Jul 21 - Galileo, Europa 16 Flyby Jul 21 - Asteroid 59 Elpis Occults TAC -106880 (11.1 Magnitude) Jul 21 - Asteroid 4644 Oumu Closest Approach To Earth (1.375 AU) Jul 21 - 25th Anniversary (1973), Mars 4 Launch (USSR Mars Flyby Mission) Jul 23 - Neptune at Opposition Jul 23 - Asteroid 6682 (1973 ST3) Closest Approach To Earth (1.484 AU) Jul 25 - Galileo, Orbital Trim Maneuver #51 (OTM-51) Jul 25 - DOD US Air Force Titan 4 Launch Jul 25 - Asteroid 4021 Dancey Closest Approach To Earth (1.143 AU) Jul 25 - Asteroid 3553 Mera Closest Approach To Earth (1.407 AU) Jul 25 - 25th Anniversary (1973), Mars 5 Launch (USSR Mars Orbiter Mission) Jul 26 - Iridium 10 Delta 2 Launch * Jul 26 - Asteroid 1998 ME3 Near-Earth Flyby (0.120 AU) Jul 26 - Asteroid 6742 Biandepei Closest Approach To Earth (1.052 AU) Jul 26 - 35th Anniversary (1963), Syncom 2 Launch, 1st Geosynchronous Satellite * Jul 27 - Kuiper Belt Object 1998 KY61 At Opposition (44.803 AU - 24.1 Magnitude) Jul 28 - 25th Anniversary (1973), Skylab-3 Launch Jul 29 - South Delta-Aquarids Meteor Shower Peak Jul 29 - Asteroid 1998 HL3 Near-Earth Flyby (0.246 AU) Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=
    Дата: 02 июля 1998 (1998-07-02) От: Alexander Bondugin Тема: SpaceViews - July 1998 [13/13] Привет всем! Вот, свалилось из Internet... This is the current issue of "SpaceViews" (tm), published by the Boston Chapter, National Space Society (NSS), distributed in electronic form. It is also sent as a 8 to 12 page double column newsletter via US Mail. You may re-distribute this electronically for non-profit use as long as the entire contents (including this notice) are intact, and you send us the names of all recipients (include us in your distribution list). MAILING LIST INFORMATION: Subscribing and Unsubscribing: To stop receiving the large monthly 'SpaceViews' newsletter, send this e-mail message: To: MajorDomo@nss.org Subject: anything UNsubscribe SpaceViews To receive electronic copies of this SpaceViews newsletter and/or other information about space and NSS, send an e-mail message similar to the following. This example subscribes you to 4 separate mailing lists which are described below. Of course, fill in your own Internet address where is says "YourAddress@StateU.edu" and your real name inside the parenthesis. Try to send it from you own account on your own computer, so that the message appears to be from you. To: MajorDomo@nss.org Subject: anything subscribe SpaceViews YourAddress@StateU.edu (Full Name) which YourAddress@StateU.edu help These subscriptions requests are now handled automatically. The subject line is ignored. The body of the message should contain commands such as: help - send me more information about these commands, which <my_address> - which lists am I on, info <list_name> - mail me a description of a list, UNsubscribe <list_name> - remove me from a list, Subscribe <list_name> <my_address> <full name> - add me to a list, Although it is possible to omit your address and name, please include them when subscribing so that we know who you really are, and to avoid problems like having the name of a workstation inadvertently embedded in you address. Problems: To get a message to a real person, mail to: SpaceViews-Approval@ari.net ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS: Articles, letters to the editor, chapter updates, andother similar submissions for SpaceViews are always welcome. The deadline for each month's issue is the 20th of the month before (i.e. the August deadline is July 20). The preferred method of submission is ASCII text files by e-mail; send articles and other submissions to jeff@spaceviews.com. If you would like to submit articles in other formats, or would like to submit articles by another method than e-mail, contact the editor, Jeff Foust, at the above e-mail address. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION: Copyright (C) 1998 by Boston Chapter of National Space Society, a non-profit educational organization 501(c)3. Permission is hereby granted to redistribute for non-profit use, provided: 1. no modifications are made (except for e-mail delivery info.) 2. this copyright notice is included, 3. you inform Boston NSS of the names of all recipients This permission may be withdrawn at any time. All other rights reserved. Some articles are individually copyrighted (C) by their authors. Excerpts cannot be used, except for reviews and criticisms, without written permission of NSS, Boston Chapter. (We will try to respond by e-mail within four business days.) -Jeff Foust (editor, jeff@spaceviews.com), -Bruce Mackenzie (email distribution, bam@draper.com) -Roxanne Warniers (mailings, rwarnier@colybrand.com) ____ | "SpaceViews" (tm) -by Boston Chapter // \ // | of the National Space Society (NSS) // (O) // | Dedicated to the establishment // \___// | of a spacefaring civilization. President: Elaine Mullen Board of Directors: Michael Burch Vice President: Larry Klaes Jeff Foust Secretary: Lynn Olson Bruce Mackenzie Treasurer: Roxanne Warniers John Malloy Hа сегодня все, пока! =SANA=

    сайт служит астрономическому сообществу с 2005 года