Aucbvax.6208 fa.space utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!space Thu Feb 18 03:58:17 1982 SPACE Digest V2 #108 >From OTA@S1-A Thu Feb 18 03:27:49 1982 SPACE Digest Volume 2 : Issue 108 Today's Topics: Twisting of orbital platforms Lunar colony and SPS plan Long article on isolation life from comets Hauling cargo into orbit How 'bout a RING! Isolation Delivering the goods... Re-Ring More on upcoming L-5 conference ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CARLF@MIT-AI Date: 02/14/82 16:46:35 Subject: Twisting of orbital platforms CARLF@MIT-AI 02/14/82 16:46:35 Re: Twisting of orbital platforms To: Space-Enthusiasts at MIT-MC The idea of putting a weight out on a long boom to stabilize a thing in orbit is correct. Fortunately, it is not neccesary to have the counterweight be of comparable mass to the thing you want to stabilize. What is neccesary is that it have a greater moment of inertia about the center of gravity of the aggregate object. Thus the weight can be arbitrarily small if placed far enough away. Indeed, a long thin rope might be the ideal thing to use as a counterweight. -- Carl ------------------------------ Date: 15 February 1982 03:59-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Lunar colony and SPS plan To: REM at MIT-MC cc: SPACE at MIT-MC The L-5 Society, using member talent including Dr. David Criswell and other lunar experts, plus SUNSAT people, plus some architects, plus human fctors types, will begin a "Project Deadalus"-like design of a Lunar colony as part of the L-5 Space Citizens conference at teh Hyatt Los Angeles Airport over weeken of 2-4 April. We hope to get a practical and technically defensible Lunar colony design we can do real cost analyses on. Once we have a design we can try to sell it; but unti you have a horse, you have no horse race... ------------------------------ Date: 16 February 1982 03:48-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Long article on isolation To: TAW at SU-AI cc: SPACE at MIT-MC 1. Although Antarctic experience has many points of similarity to space colonizatin, and can profitably be studied, there ARE differences. 1.1 - A COLONY is not going to be so concerned with "life back home." Colonists are there to stay. 1.2 Colonies are more likely tohave a nearly equal ratio of sexes. 1.3 Space colonies (and bases for that matter) wil have excellent communications; not just radio, but access to commercial tv, telephone lines, etc. They will be able to get the latest TV shows and such like. 1.4 Colonists always have something to do: expanding the base, digging new tunnels (on the Moon) etc. 2. Space is not so actively hostile as Anarctica. Hostile, certainly, in the sense that it is passively hostile and you need special equipment to survive outside the domes; but it doesn't come after you malevolently, which is the impression many get of the big antarctic white... INcidentlaly, Phil Chapman, President of L-5 Society, was an Antarctic observer left alone or with one or two others for long periods; this was for Australia before he became a naturalized US citizen and went into the astronaut program. ------------------------------ Date: 16 February 1982 03:58-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: life from comets To: mclure at SRI-UNIX cc: SPACE at MIT-MC Strange. If the waters came from the comets, and the crust of the earth, and leter life... then the waters and the firmament were all mixed up in 100 billion comets until they got themselves straightened out.. Ye heavenly days, sound like the book of Genesis (divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament...) It also lets us SF writers have a good reason for similar biochemistries on different planets, which is very convenient... ------------------------------ Date: 16 February 1982 04:04-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Hauling cargo into orbit To: TAW at S1-A cc: SPACE at MIT-MC Just getting to some of my back mail. Th eidea of using Shuttle parts to come up with a new expendable kep tcropping up last spring in the first Council meeting, and Hugh Davis (now of Eagle Engineering, formerly of NASA Transportation Office) worked up a strong briefing on it. I am glad to see Boeing is now seriously studying it. The Shuttle technologies are very advanced; the one thing I have against Bruce Murray's notins of buying Titans is why bother with 30-year-old propulsoin technology when you have something a little more modern? ------------------------------ Date: 16 February 1982 04:10-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: How 'bout a RING! To: HAGERTY at RUTGERS cc: SPACE at MIT-MC As iot happens, Bob Salkeld has a patent on a ring! Tether SPS or communications satellites in a full ring and overspin it; the result is more stable than if it were simply orbiting, and makes station keeping easier. Or so he and a couple of other Space Council people tell me. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1982 1029-PST From: Tom Wadlow Subject: Isolation To: space at MIT-MC One can imagine that while the home colony will suffer few of the isolation problems of Antarctica, there will be smaller outposts (mining stations in the Belt or on the moon) where the Antarctic analogy will be applicable. In addition, it is (unfortunately) likely that colonists will not be amongst the first to go. The first few outposts will probably be inhabited by people who signed up with every intention of coming home at the end of their tours. (where home will be, after a long tour in Luna City is an interesting question. Heinlein wrote a marvelous story about precisely that, whose name I can't recall) Communications are a very important point. Space colonists will be the first colonists in history that can leave home without ever losing touch with the folks. This could be very important in terms of enticing new colonists. (''You'd love free-fall, Mom. We just saw this little place up by the spin axis that you and Dad could have for a song...'') But all of these points aside, if you can show a few years in an Artic/Antarctic research station on your resume, I certainly don't think it would disqualify you for a job in space. Rather the opposite... ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1982 1049-PST From: Tom Wadlow Subject: Delivering the goods... To: space at MIT-MC Date: 16 February 1982 04:04-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Hauling cargo into orbit The Shuttle technologies are very advanced; the one thing I have against Bruce Murray's notins of buying Titans is why bother with 30-year-old propulsoin technology when you have something a little more modern? Who was it that said ''Better is the enemy of Good Enough''??? Sorry, just couldn't resist that. I agree with your comments above entirely. The problem with using Titans *to the exclusion of the SRB-X concepts* is that thirty year technology gap. If, however, we could develop SRB-X *and* turn some of the Titan boosters into cargo ships (presumably as DOD decides to replace the siloed ICBMs with fresh Titans, or new technology) then we would be winning all around. The more launch capacity we have, the better. The nice thing about SRB class ships is that you are using the same technology all up and down the line. No more of this custom rocket jazz. Replaceable, reusable and mass produceable want to be the design philosophy of spacecraft. But I would hate to see all those lovely Titans go the way of the Saturn 5 sitting on the Kennedy Space Center lawn (When you think of all the millions of man-hours that went into producing a flyable bird, only to have it become the world's most expensive lawn ornament..... weep for Congress, they know not what they have done.) ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1982 2146-EST From: HAGERTY at RUTGERS Subject: Re-Ring To: space at MIT-MC Well, at last, for a change, someone agrees with me. I originally applied the ring idea when someone mentioned crowding around the equator with sattelites. Since then, REM and I have exchanged a couple of thoughts on the matter (COSMOS Ringed Planet...)- he feels that it would not be practical around a star for energy capturing reasons. Ok, so there is some risk that a RING of people on earth would be smashed...but as a port/repair/production 'center' it would be most practical. Then again, I am no expert-just a dreamer. /Greg: ------- ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 82 1:33-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX To: space at mc, sf-lovers at ai CC: geoff at csl Subject: More on upcoming L-5 conference >From Pournelle: L-5 CONFERENCE 2-4 april 1982 Los Angeles AIRPORT HYATT THEME: Citizens in space; space development. GUESTS OF HONOR: Robert A. Heinlein, author Fred Haise, VP Grumman (Apollo 13 Commander) KEYNOTE SPEAKER: Hans Mark, Deputy Director NASA Honored Guest: Representative Newt Gingrich Workshop to design lunar colony; space suit design; strategy and tactics of space politics; propulsion; asteroid mines. Most members of Citizens Advisory Council an Natonal Space Policy will attend. Membership: General, $35 ($25 L-5 or AAS members); Banquet $25 Professoinal Membership (includes banquet) $75 Professional membership includes reception for guests of honor etc. Friday evening. There will be an open party for all members Saturday night (poolside, weather permitting). Intention is to mix enthusiasts and professionals and politicians and citizens and everyone try to learn from the others. ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest ******************* ----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen 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.