Conference 7.286::space

    Yup, SSI launched it and the upper stage was a Black Brant. The news
    coverage did not specify the booster other than to say it was built by
    Thiokol. They didn't give any closeups, so I couldn't see what it was.
    For some reason, I got the impression that the booster was something
    new. They called the thing 'Starfire'.
    
    The flight looked like an F100/F7 staged, grown very big :-)
    
    gary

    This is the National Space Society's Space Hotline for the week ending
March 31, 1989.
 
    Thursday the nation's first privately owned spacecraft was launched
by Space Services Inc.  The Starfire 1-Model rocket carried the
Consort-1 payload on a ride for a total of 15 minutes.  The rocket
climbed to an altitude of 198 miles above Earth, and the payload of
experiments experienced about 7 minutes of near zero gravity.  Space
Services executives were very satisfied with the launch and stated
that this was the first of many. 
  
    This has been Jordan Katz reporting for the National Space Society's 
Space Hotline.  This message will next be updated April 7, 1989. 
                                                     
       "We are all tired of being stuck on this cosmical speck with its 
   monotonous ocean, leaden sky, and single moon that is half useless....
   so it seems to me that the future glory of the human race lies in the 
   exploration of at least the solar system!" - John Jacob Astor, 1894 
 

A brief article in the Globe indicated that there was another SSI launch 
(Wednesday?) which failed.  It started tipping over near the end of the
first stage burn.  The staging was successful, but by the time the 2nd stage
fired up, the attitude was too screwed up, and it was destroyed.

Burns

    Yes, I taped the launch. The second stage coned severely at ignition.
    At that point I remember thinking that if one of my models did that,
    I'd be rechecking the stability calculations.
    
    There appeared to be a small lateral flame near the end of first stage
    burn (had to slo-mo to notice it) which may have been the emergency
    thrust cutoff on the TX-644 booster. I noticed a similar flame on
    during the second stage burn, but I don't know if the Black Brant VC
    has any kind of thrust cutoff.
    
    Much later on the audio from the blockhouse, I heard that range safety
    had commanded a flight abort. This included seperating the payload
    section which landed safely about 1 mile away so it may be possible to
    refly the mission. It was very apparent that the SSI people in their
    blockhouse did not have complete control of the mission. Range safety
    and tracking were clearly under the control of whoever normally runs
    White Sands. All of the event callouts from the blockhouse were several
    seconds late.
    
    gary

Was this stuff on NASA select, or CNN or other?

Burns

    Launch coveragewas on NASA Select. Background info from SpaceFlight
    News (British monthly).
    
    gary

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Amroc bows out of commercial launchers
Date: 25 Mar 90 02:31:34 GMT
Reply-To: [email protected] (Allen W. Sherzer)
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
 
    Amroc had decided to back out of the commercial launch business
according to the March 19 issue of Space News.  Instead they have
decided to become a supplier of rocket engines.  They believe that 
the greater safety and reliability will give them an advantage. 
 
    After the launch failure last year, company officials considered
building a sounding rocket.  Later they reviewed their long term
buisness plan and decided to concentrate on their strong points which
is propultion technology.  So far, no major US expendable firms have
immediate plans to buy from Amroc. 
 
    Let's hope they make it.
 
    Allen
 
PS. Space News is a new publication put out by the same people who 
    publish Defense News. It's focus is on the buisness end of space
    and not the technical end. If there is interest, I could post
    summaries like Henry's Avation Week summaries.
 
        ----------------------------
        | Allen W. Sherzer         |         
        |   [email protected]            |         
        ----------------------------

    Yes, it would be interesting to see how the bussiness end is
    doing. How are the satellite builders, lunchers, users doing.
    
    What plans do they have for the future? 
    Does any company out there have plans to build more economic 
    satellite lunchers, I hear things but so far all the smoke
    leads to really small fires.
    
    Gil

    Re:.8
    	The only commercial venture that IMHO has a snowball's chance of
    literally "making it off the ground" is the Pegasus air launched launch
    vehicle being jointly developed by Orbital Science Corp. and Hercules.
    The tests to date have been highly promising and the first (often
    delayed) launch is expected in April last I heard.
    
    				Drew
    

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Amroc bows out of commercial launchers
Date: 26 Mar 90 20:18:19 GMT
Sender: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected] (Allen W. Sherzer)
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
 
    A friend of mine just spoke with Amroc on the Space News article.
They said that bowing out of commercial launchers was only a temporary
measure.  After they get back on their feet they plan to offer
commercial launches. 
 
    Allen
 
    ----------------------------
    | Allen W. Sherzer         |         
    |   [email protected]            |         
    ----------------------------

From: [email protected] (ROB STEIN, UPI Science Editor)
Newsgroups: clari.tw.space,clari.news.aviation,clari.biz.top
Subject: White House encourages space commercialization
Date: 12 Feb 91 17:41:55 GMT
  
	WASHINGTON (UPI) -- The White House Tuesday issued guidelines
aimed at encouraging private companies to become more involved in
space technology, such as satellites and rockets. 

	In a statement issued by the White House press office,
President Bush said he had approved the new U.S. Commercial Space
Policy Guidelines, which are ``aimed at expanding private sector
investment in space by the market-driven commercial space sector.'' 

	The guidelines, resulting from a nine-month review by Vice
President Dan Quayle and the National Space Council, ``recognize that
a robust commerical space sector has the potential to generate new
technologies, markets, jobs and other important economic benefits for
the nation,'' Bush said. 

	The guidelines cite five areas of potential commercial
development, including satellite communications, space transportation
services, ``remote sensing,'' materials processing and support services. 

	``A robust commercial space sector has the potential to
generate new technologies, products, markets, jobs and other economic
benefits for the nation, as well as indirect benefits for national
security,'' the statement said. 

	Government agencies affected by the guidelines must report by
Oct. 1, 1991, to the National Space Council ``on their activites
related'' to their implementation. 

	The guidelines call for government agencies to:

	--use commercially available space products and services ``to
the fullest extent feasible.'' 

	--``promote the transfer of U.S. government-developed
technology to the private sector.'' 

	--make unused ``space assets, services and infrastructure
available for commercial space sector use.'' 

	--avoid ``regulating domestic space activities in a manner
that precludes or deters commercial space sector activities.'' 

	--work with companies to ``promote establishment of technical
standards for commercial space products and services.'' 

	--enter into agreements that would encourage and advance
private sector basic research, development and operations. 

	--work towards ``establishment of an international trading
environment that encourages market-oriented competition by working
with its trading partners.'' 

Article: 3823
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
From: [email protected] (Marcus Lindroos)
Subject: Is the future brighter than we think? (NEW SCIENTIST article)
Sender: [email protected] (Usenet NEWS)
Organization: �bo Akademi University
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 17:25:18 GMT
 
Among all the doom and gloom surrounding the Apollo anniversary, I
finally got hold of a positive view of man's future in space. NEW
SCIENTIST journalist Vincent Kiernan ("Plundering the Final Frontier",
23 July) lists several reasons why the private sector will replace
governments as the main driving force behind space exploration. The
end of the Cold War means governments refuse to spend the large
quantities of taxpayers' money needed to support the massive programs
of the past. NASA commissioner Dan Goldin thinks the space agency
needs a simple goal that will generate public support. A possible
goal: finding another habitable planet orbiting a nearby star!! (and
we thought manned Mars missions were ambitious:-). He believes finding
extraterrestial life would grab the public's imagination, and give
them a reason to support the program. 
---
Others think the promise of space will persuade entrepreneurs to pick
up where NASA left.There is Teledesic, which will launch 840
satellites in 700km orbits by 2001. Its goal: provide instant links
between any two points on the globe with portable telephones. The
Global Positioning System (GPS) is already in place, and fishermen and
surveyors are already buying its services. Other projects: 
 
-Power satellites:electricity generated at one spot on the Earth could
be converted into microwaves and beamed towards an orbiting mirror
which would reflect it to a receiving station. 
 
-Launching nuclear waste into space. This would be done from Greenland
or Antarctica to reduce the risks in case of launch failure. The waste
would stay in orbit until it ceased to be radioactive.The main problem
is political:anti-nuclear activists almost managed to prevent NASA
from launch the nuclear-powered Galileo space probe. Another problem:
heavy protective containers which would weight 20 times more than the
payload itself. 
 
-Entertainment on the Moon. Virginia-based Luna Corp plans to build a
robotic rover at a cost of $90-$120 million. The rover will land in
1997 and be based on virtual reality concepts - Luna Corp will sell
opportunities to take the machine's controls and organize a worldwide
competition to find the first driver!! 
 
- Hotels and sports centers in Earth orbit(!). A Japanese plan. The
former might cost only $250 million and the latter about $800 million.
The secret: simple modular structures requiring little new technology.
Reusable rockets might reduce the cost of launching materials from
$40,000 per kg to $200. Sources of income include selling the rights
to televise such events and by charging fans $2000 a week to stay. 
 
-Space tourism: In 1990, the Tokyo Broadcasting Service paid RKA $12
million to send a journalist to the Mir space station. Surveys in
Britain and the US show that up to 45% of adults would like to travel
in space. Tourism could be a viable proposition within 25 years.
McDAC's Delta Clipper could be taking passengers into space at a cost
of $50,000 per person. 
 
-Helium-3 mining on the Moon. Apollo 17 astronaut Harrison Schmitt says
25 tons of this rare isotope could supply electricity to the entire
United States for a year. It could also be used to power fusion
rockets to other planets and, eventually, nearby stars. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the future of the Space Shuttle is also discussed. Dan Goldin
says the Shuttle isn't the world's most perfect vehicle,but that it is
the only machine capable of "putting 40 tonnes into orbit and bringing
40 tonnes back" (I thought it was more like 25 tons and 15 tons,
though?). But the risk to the astronauts is still there, and budget
cutbacks might cause another Challenger sooner or later. Goldin says
they would rather ground the Shuttle if they can't afford to fly it
safely. By the end of the decade, NASA will decide whether to replace
it altogether, but can't do so now as it would ground the
International Space Station as well. The most likely successor is a
reusable single-stage-to-orbit rocket. These would make space travel
as routine as commercial flight is today. 
---
Unmanned space probes could use better launchers too. Costs have
skyrocketed in recent years. NASA's/ESA's Cassini mission to Saturn
(probably the last of its kind) will weight 5,634kg (a record for a
Western space probe?) and cost $3.7 billion. Its successor will be a
series of small, lighweight, simple and cheap Discovery probes. The
first mission (to a near-Earth asteroid) will leave in 1998 and cost
just $150 million. Future Discovery missions will bring SAMPLES from
throughout the solar system back to Earth! (This is all news to me...)
---
The conclusion: costs are the key issue. Better rockets, more launch
pads and more companies building satellites will be required. Building
a space infrastructure could have the same boost on the world's
economy as did the construction of major road networks this century...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
MARCU$

    re .12

>The end of the Cold War means governments refuse to spend the large
>quantities of taxpayers' money needed to support the massive programs
>of the past.

    That's a joke. Last I looked, the government was still spending even
    larger quantities of taxpayers' money!
    (Sadly less and less on the future...)
    
    Negatively yours