Aucbvax.4201
fa.space
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!space
Sat Oct 3 19:29:33 1981
SPACE Digest V2 #3
>From OTA@SU-AI Sat Oct 3 02:22:19 1981
SPACE Digest Volume 2 : Issue 3
Today's Topics:
Total Nuclear War => Global Extinction?
Against the Halley Probe
New Shuttle director named
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2 Oct 1981 17:59:27-PDT
From: jef at LBL-UNIX (Jef Poskanzer [rtsg])
To: SPACE at MC
Subject: Total Nuclear War => Global Extinction?
This is getting a little off the subject of this list, but that is
nothing new...
A one megaton nuclear blast releases 4.2E22 ergs. The asteroid impact
that formed the Manicouagan Astrobleme released approximately 7E29 ergs,
or about 10 million megatons, which is far more than a total nuclear
war would release. Manicouagan happened on the order of 100 million years
ago, so it obviously didn't cause global extinction. Therefore, to a first
approximation, total nuclear war will not cause global extinction, on this
planet or any other.
Now, whether it would cause the permanent end of human or alien civilization
is another question. There is no known data on this subject, so I think we
will have to do an experiment...
---
Jef
[For those of you who don't keep close track of these things, and were
wondering, Manicouagan appears to be in Quebec about 150 miles north
of the St. Lawrence. -ota]
[I would like to urge people not to start discussing total nuclear war on
this mailing list. ARMS-D at MIT-MC is a mailing list devoted to
discussing, among other things, nuclear weapons and their effects and is
probably a more appropriate forum. Send mail to ARMS-D-REQUEST@MC for
inquiries about this list.
Ted Anderson]
------------------------------
Date: 2 October 1981 23:08 edt
From: Tavares.Multics at MIT-Multics
Subject: Against the Halley Probe
To: Space-Enthusiasts at MIT-MC
In-Reply-To: Message of 2 October 1981 07:01 edt from Ted Anderson
Pardon my ignorance. What is so important about whether or not there is
ice at the Moon's poles? All you basic-science folks, don't get on me. I
mean, given a choice between the ice in Halley's comet and the ice on the
Moon, why is the latter so much more important?
------------------------------
Date: 03 Oct 1981 0154-PDT
From: Ted Anderson <OTA SU-AI AT>
Subject: New Shuttle director named
To: space at MIT-MC
n084 1850 02 Oct 81
AM-SHUTTLE
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
c. 1981 N.Y. Times News Service
NEW YORK - An Air Force general was named Friday to head the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration's shuttle project. He
is Maj. Gen. James A. Abrahamson, a former test pilot and manager of
the F-16 fighter development program.
. . . .
Abrahamson, a deputy chief of staff at the Air Force Systems
Command, at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, is to become
associate administrator in charge of the Office of Space
Transportation Systems in November. He succeeds John F. Yardley, who
resigned the post in May to become president of McDonnell
Astronautics Co. in St. Louis. Abrahamson's primary responsibility
will be the completion of the troubled space shuttle's tests and its
transition to full operations.
In announcing the appointment, James M. Beggs, the space agency
administrator, said, ''General Abrahamson's close acquaintance with
the shuttle and his excellent program management record make him
uniquely qualified to head shuttle development.''
In 1979, when technical and cost problems were besetting the shuttle
development, Abrahamson was brought in by the space agency as a
member of a five-person board to assess the program's management and
recommend changes. Before that the 48-year-old general was a test
pilot and an astronaut with the Air Force's Manned Orbiting
Laboratory program in the 1960s.
The appointment of an Air Force general to the post, however, is
expected to raise questions about the possibly growing military
influence over the shuttle program. At least one-third of the
shuttle's flights are expected to have military missions. Pentagon
support of the program is generally credited with having saved it
from cancellation in the 1970s.
nyt-10-02-81 2151edt
***************
. . . . .
Abrahamson, a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
and a combat pilot in Vietnam, was the spacecraft project officer for
the Vela nuclear detection satellite program in the early 1960s.
The instrumented satellites were designed as orbiting watchdogs to
police adherence to the 1963 nuclear test ban treaty, which forbids
nuclear testing in the atmosphere or outer space.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Oct 1981 0300-PDT
From: Stuart McLure Cracraft <MCLURE AT SRI-AI>
To: space at MIT-MC
!n534 0206 03 Oct 81
BC-SPACE-3takes-10-03
By Albert Sehlstedt Jr.
(c) 1981 The Baltimore Sun (Field News Service)
WASHINGTON - Let's not repeat the Ming Dynasty's mistake, Congress
was advised during a recent hearing on the future of the space
program.
The Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) may seem far removed from space
shuttles, Saturn's rings, balanced budgets or Social Security
payments, but testimony at a congressional hearing touched upon a
potential parallel between the American present and the Chinese past.
Some 500 years ago, the House subcommittee on space sciences and
applications was told, China's Ming Dynasty abruptly restricted the
operations of its superb maritime fleet that had tapped the wealth of
the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
''Within a century, China was being picked apart by Europeans, who
found a backward, ignorant nation that was already fragmenting into
petty principalities,'' a witness testified.
So much for history.
Is the United States, beset by a host of domestic and foreign
problems, ready to eliminate the space program, which has shrunk to
less than 1 percent of the total national budget?
''I don't want this history to repeat itself, and the hearings are
one effort toward rejuvenating our nation's space effort,'' said Rep.
Ronnie G. Flippo (D-Ala.), citing China's mistake in a statement that
set the tone for the three days of testimony on America's future in
space.
Flippo, who was chairman of the sessions, may have diminished his
position as an unbiased observer with that partisan view, but his
panel's hearings did provide Congress with a reasoned commentary on
the virtues of the space program which, as a consequence of equally
reasoned decisions in the future, may shrink even further in the
1980s.
Missing from the witness list was a well-known critic of the space
program, Sen. William Proxmire (D-Wis.), who has cut from the
national budget a program to search for radio signals from space that
would be indicative of intelligent life beyond this solar system.
Also missing was George A. Keyworth II, who is on the record as
saying that future space policy will demand ''perceptive judgments.''
Dr. Keyworth's views are pertinent because he is the president's
science adviser.
The adviser, expressing his views in a prepared speech in June, was
not denigrating the space program and, indeed, commented that the
initial success of the space shuttle in its April flight had
''stimulated the administration to embark on an interagency review of
questions involving its operational future, plus a number of other
vital matters concerning the direction of our space program.''
However, Dr. Keyworth's comments hardly conveyed the enthusiasm
expressed by many of the witnesses who testified before the House
panel and who spoke of such things as ''virtually unlimited future
possibilities in space.''
Much of the congressional testimony, from an historian, a futurist,
a banker, businessmen and scientists, followed the line that the
space program not only would pay for itself in benefits to mankind,
but would excite the minds of today's youth - the engineers and
scientists of the 21st century - and bring that generation the
lasting gratitude of history.
''Although we might quarrel with one another about the program's
benefits, our descendants will look back upon our times and our
generation with respect and awe,'' said Melvin Kranzberg, professor
of history at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
''For future generations men will recall with fascination and
admiration their 20th century ancestors who possessed the will, the
courage and the means to make the giant leap into extraterrestrial
adventures,'' Dr. Kranzberg said.
While good reviews in history books may not enthrall citizens who
need food stamps and day-care centers, the immediate benefits of the
space program were cited as a persuasive argument by other witnesses.
Not the least of those benefits are food, water and minerals to
support an expanding world population that is expected to double by
2015.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has been
developing for years spacecraft instruments designed to detect such
resources as mineral deposits, large schools of fish at sea, and
fresh water that could help people of the poorer nations.
In the field of medicine, Dr. Donlin M. Long, chairman of the
department of neurological surgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, said
his work has benefited from advances in the space program.
As an example, Dr. Long mentioned an intercranial pressure monitor
that can be implanted in the human skull through a minor operation to
record the critical changes in pressure that follow serious head
injuries.
Another witness, Marvin J. Cetron, conceded that the space program
will not pay for itself in the short run, but he was more optimistic
about the future, meaning the next century.
''It will not pay for itself, let alone yield a profit,'' said
Cetron, who is president of Forecasting International, Ltd., of
Arlington, Va.
''Therefore,'' he continued, ''the principal reasons for continuing
the space program in the short run will be defense, prestige and
knowledge, with emphasis on the first.
(MORE)
nyt-10-03-81 0507edt
**********
!n535 0217 03 Oct 81
BC-SPACE-1stadd-10-03
X X X ON THE FIRST.
''Military uses will continue to predominate, although in certain
instances prestige may become very important, such as a possible
visit by Halley's Comet when it reappears in 1986.''
(Many space enthusiasts have decried the United States' failure to
launch a spacecraft for a close look at the comet, particularly in
light of the fact that other nations, including the Soviet Union, are
thinking in those terms.)
Cetron's reference to prestige is no small matter in space
exploration, just as a fleet of jet airliners is a cherished asset of
some small nations who, it has been argued, could spend their money
more humanely on agriculture or water purification.
As another witness pointed out, this nation's decision to land men
on the moon was based, to a large extent, on the fact that the Soviet
Union had reaped unimagined propaganda value from its ''firsts'' in
space, such as orbiting the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1,
and putting the first man in space.
Looking 20 years ahead, Cetron saw the space program becoming
self-supporting and bringing ''significant benefits to the civilian
economy.''
Even more optimistic was David Hannah, Jr., leader of a Houston
company, Space Services, Inc., that hopes to launch its own rocket
next year, despite the initial failure of an engine in a ground test
last month.
''In my opinion,'' Hannah told the House committee, ''now is the
time for the private sector to take advantage of the tremendous
accomplishment of NASA by efficiently and responsibly developing the
resources of space for the benefit of society.
''Government has fulfilled its responsibility to open the new
frontier, and it is now incumbent upon Space Services and all the
companies which will follow to make the frontier accessible for
industrialization and commercialization,'' he said.
A step in this direction has been taken by one of the giants of the
industry, Boeing Aerospace Company, which has signed an agreement
with a European corporation to market and launch low-cost satellites.
The satellites can be used for scientific experiments, and for
communications and agricultural surveys of the Earth, Boeing has said.
Japan, an acknowledged whiz at building automobiles and TV sets,
also is looking for ''space bucks,'' Hannah said.
He quoted an article from Japan Times which stated that Japan's
Ministry of International Trade and Industry ''has begun taking steps
to transform Japan's space program from a loosely organized network
of research projects into an industry.
''Space,'' the article continued, ''will be a $4.5 billion industry
for Japanese manufacturers by the mid-1990s, comparable in size to
today's radio and television manufacturing industry.''
An American banker was of similar mind.
''The movement to space will require great investment, but the
payoffs will return many times the outlay in ways both numerous and
unforeseen,'' said Hank E. Koehn, a vice president of Security
Pacific National Bank of Los Angeles.
In this connection, Koehn reminded the House panel that the study of
chlorine reactions in the atmosphere of Venus led to the discovery
that fluorocarbons were capable of deteriorating the protective ozone
layer in Earth's upper atmosphere.
''Space does not represent an area of endeavor that should be
undertaken only after the problems here on Earth are solved - it may
well be the solution to those problems,'' Koehn testified.
He told the Flippo committee that ''a new alliance of government and
business is now required for the new world of space, one that is more
commercially oriented in the granting of proprietary rights, for
example, or clearly the Soviets, Japanese and Europeans will leave us
behind.''
It was Koehn who made the historical reference to the Chinese navy
in the Ming dynasty, then added: ''This is clearly one past we must
not allow to become prologue to our own future.''
John D. Young, professor of public management at American University
here, spoke about the future of the space program in a political
context.
''Very few political leaders, regardless of party or other
convictions, will want to clearly stake themselves out for a specific
future space program that costs much more than the current one, if
that much,'' he said.
(NASA's budget for the current fiscal year is $5.5 billion.)
''There is no effective constituency for such a future program when
you come face-to-face with such trade-offs as changes in Social
Security, further reductions in student assistance for middle-class
families and similar federal programs,'' Dr. Young said.
''The general tendency of the American electorate is to support many
things, such as the space program, until it comes to trade-offs where
the individual sees his or her self-interest at risk.''
Banking and politics aside, another committee witness spoke of
bringing the space program to Main Street by establishing
''neighborhood space centers'' in cities and towns.
These retail establishments would be financed with the sales of
pictures, books, slides and other space paraphernalia to acquaint the
public with some of the things beyond the atmosphere they breathe.
(MORE)
nyt-10-03-81 0518edt
**********
!n536 0220 03 Oct 81
BC-SPACE-2ndadd-10-03
X X X ATMOSPHERE THEY BREATHE.
''These space centers would be similar to ... 7-Eleven stores where,
readily available on the street corners and in the shopping centers,
are all the glories of the space program,'' said Stan Kent, president
of a group of space buffs called Delta Vee, Inc.
Kent, an aeronautical engineer and graduate of Stanford University,
said one such neighborhood store already has opened in Los Gatos,
Calif., and plans are under way for similar centers - ''a sort of
McDonald's in space'' - in other communities.
''Plain and simply,'' he said of his organization, ''we want to
increase the speed with which we explore space.''
He explained to the congressmen that the name of his corporation,
Delta Vee, is taken from the technical shorthand of space scientists
and engineers. The Greek letter delta, and the Roman letter ''v,''
when written together, denote a change in velocity.
Kent said his nonprofit company represents 15,000 people who make
small contributions to support space projects. He brought to the
hearing 2,000 letters ''representing a sample of our constituency.''
He spread the letters out on the witness table in front of him,
commenting that the mail convinced him that ''the public desperately
wants to be a part of the space program.'' It was apparent that
Kent's group was, indeed, ready for a change in velocity of the space
program.
END
nyt-10-03-81 0521edt
**********
-------
------------------------------
End of SPACE Digest
*******************
-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <
[email protected]>
of
http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/
This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:
1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.
2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.
