SPACE Digest V10 #331

 



From:   WINS%"space+@andrew.cmu.edu" 10-DEC-1989 02:00:09.87

To:     23BMSDO

CC:     

Subj:   SPACE Digest V10 #331


Return-Path: <@po3.andrew.cmu.edu:ota+space.mail-errors@andrew.cmu.edu>

Received: from po3.andrew.cmu.edu by sacemnet.af.mil with SMTP ; 

          Sun, 10 Dec 89 00:59:43 CDT

Received: by po3.andrew.cmu.edu (5.54/3.15) id <AA09694>; Sun, 10 Dec 89 01:35:5


6 EST

Received: via switchmail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl


@andrew.cmu.edu;

 Sun, 10 Dec 89 01:35:47 -0500 (EST)

Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail

          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/q003/QF.cZUTVAG00VcJ4Io04J>;

          Sun, 10 Dec 89 01:31:42 -0500 (EST)

Message-Id: <AZUTUEy00VcJMImU5K@andrew.cmu.edu>

Reply-To: space+@andrew.cmu.edu

From: space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu

To: space+@andrew.cmu.edu

Date: Sun, 10 Dec 89 01:30:41 -0500 (EST)

Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #331


SPACE Digest                                     Volume 10 : Issue 331


Today's Topics:

                  The National Science Trust (long)

               Re: Multi-national (MANNED) Mars Mission

                           Re: Mars rovers

                Re: Manned vs Unmanned Mission to Mars

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


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 89 16:41:51 PST

From: mordor!lll-tis!ames!scubed!pnet01.cts.com!jim@angband.s1.gov (Jim Bowery)

To: crash!space@angband.s1.gov

Subject: The National Science Trust (long)


The recent talk about "prizes" and "subsidies" and the consequent

enthusiasm it has generated, motivated me to publicly release the

following white paper which has been in circulation among some of

the people involved with HR2674.  As this paper will make clear,

it is better to give money for value received than it is to award

"prizes" or provide "subsidies."  


Of course, the approach described here won't work for everything,

but it will work for a surprising range of science and technology

areas.


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



                    The National Science Trust



             A Science and Technology Policy White Paper



                       By James A. Bowery



                        (Copyright 1989)

   (The public may copy and excerpt, but not modify this document.)

                    


Policy Statement



For the enhancement of scientific knowlege and the required development 

of advanced technology, A National Science Trust shall be established, 

with funding authorized by Congress, for the purchase of information 

about the natural world from Eligible Parties (private entities owned 

and controlled by other such entities in the U.S. or its unified free-

trade partners).  No less than 2/3 of the components and services used 

by the Eligible Parties to acquire this information must be obtained 

from other Eligible Parties.


The National Academy of Sciences shall identify areas of scientific 

interest in which the quality of research results are quantifiable -- 

primarily in terms of information content.  Examples of these

kinds of research results are:  DNA sequencing (human genome project),

digital imaging of various phenomena (astronomical, planetary, 

 terrestrial ozone-layer monitoring), quantitative behavior of systems

in microgravity, quantitative mineral assay of various sites 

(terrestrial and nonterrestrial), etc.  


A dollar amount, to be established in conjunction with Congress, shall

be associated with each informative item and with varying degrees

of accuracy of the information.  That dollar amount will then be

appropriated to The Trust to be paid out only in the event that

an Eligible Party has delivered new information on the associated item of 

interest to a designated recipient.  When a measurement has already

been made, payout will be limited to information value corresponding

to the increased confidence level of the measurement (e.g. additional

significant bits or fractions thereof).  In areas where an information

flow is required (periodic sampling) the value of various sampling

frequencies at the various degrees of accuracy (significant bits) will 

be included in the valuation of the measurement.  Duplicate information 

flows will share the cash flow evenly.  For superior information flows, 

the incremental increase in accuracy will enjoy less diluted access to

funding flows allocated to those incremental increases in accuracy.


Income on The Trust will be used to adjust The Trust for inflation.

Additional income from The Trust may be used to fund items within

The Trust.  In the event that an item is measured by a Party which 

is not an Eligible Party, and that information is available to the

designated recipient -- the corresponding funding will be redistributed

within The Trust.  After-inflation losses will be redistributed within

The Trust, deactivating items which are not currently being pursued by 

any Eligible Party.



Lunar Mapping Corporation:  A Plausible Scenario


Here is a plausible scenario as an illustration of how The Fund might 

work with private industry to provide scientific results and also to 

enable commercial technology development:


Among many other items of interest, NAS examines the idea of 

a Lunar Hydrogen Map.  It generates a function mapping spatial 

and grey-scale resolutions to relative scientific value.  In conjunction 

with Congress, total scientific value is translated to dollar value of 

$150 million.  There being reason to believe Eligible Parties can pursue 

the acquisition of a Lunar Hydrogen Map based on available funding and 

other related items, Congress appropriates the corresponding funds to 

The Trust.  The recipient is designated to be the NASA Space Engineering 

Research Center for Utilization of Local Planetary Resources.  NAS, 

having gone through a similar exercise for a large number of other 

measurements, has also succeeded in convincing Congress to fund optical, 

infrared and ultraviolet maps (along with a myriad of other measurements 

in space and on Earth).  The Trust, in its first year, contains $3 billion 

with a total of $250 million allocated to lunar mapping items.


Some young engineers, dissatisfied with the slow pace of activity at JPL,

realize they can obtain a map of hydrogen and also higher resolution maps 

of the moon in infrared, optical and UV wavelengths than previously acquired,

all in one mission.  Plugging their accuracies into the corresponding value 

functions, they calculate a total value for their potential mission at $200 

million.  Comparing this value to the cost of flying the mission (including 

the development of some new imaging technologies) and the estimated time until 

they get paid, adjusting for interest rates, they believe they can provide, 

a profit of $75 million on an investment of $125 million within one year.

They also project that with the probable addition of future Trust items

such as similar Mars maps and more specialized follow-up Lunar mapping,

there will be even higher profits within 5 years.


Some major potential investors, being suspicious of the new imaging 

technologies that would be required, ask that the engineers demonstrate the 

imaging technologies prior to entering a business venture based on them.  

Other investors, including Space Studies Institute, are willing to 

bet the engineers can solve the technology problem and go ahead with the 

formation of Lunar Imaging Corporation whose first task is to demonstrate 

the feasibility of the imaging systems.  These investors enjoy the acquisition 

of a large share in the corporation with a low-cost, high-risk buy in.  The 

technology is demonstrated and patents applied for within 2 months.  LIC's 

stock doubles in value as the more cautious, larger investors chip in, buying 

out some of the high-risk investors who have a number of similar technology 

development opportunities to go after.  One of the imaging patents is 

licensed to a firm that sells manufacturing inspection systems for quality 

control.  The cautious investors capitalize LIC at $140 million even though 

the technology is demonstrated and it is already making sales.


LIC makes a public announcement that it is planning to acquire the

4 Lunar maps funded by the Trust, within 10 months based on a patented 

imaging technology.  Lockheed, Rockwell and TRW drop their competing 

feasibility studies after looking into the patent disclosures and the 

backgrounds of LIC's founders and investors.


The space transportation requirements of the mission are put out to bid 

and a number of Eligible Parties respond.  Some aerospace consultants

are hired to evaluate the credibility of the bids.  They discard the

one by Gary Hudson, Inc., even though it was the lowest, because it

would probably explode on the pad and thus could not be insured.  Art

Dula's company provides the most credible bid, but being based on

the Soviet Proton, his company is declared Ineligible.  Mr. Dula considers

a law suit but finds other business with a Canadian firm.  LIC's consultants

settle on a proposal from Launch Integrators, Inc.  LII uses an Orbital 

Sciences upper stage and a booster from Trump Space Services Inc. (which 

 bought AMROC at the auction block when it went bankrupt, replacing all

 management) contingent on 3 successful flights of the hybrid booster

within the next 6 months.  Since LII adheres to the ANSI Payload Mounting 

Standard, LIC can fall back on a higher bid by General Dynamics using its 

Centaur upper stage, upon which the Standard was based.


Fabrication of the Lunar Multispectral Mapper begins as Trump Space

Services, being under the same 6 month deadline from several other

customers, hires back Jim French and a number of other AMROC old-timers

with compensation for the inconvenience of immediately quitting their 

current jobs and relocating (most of the best people left AMROC before 

 it went belly-up and hold jobs in other parts of the country).  Some

bureaucrats from Johnson Space Center, continuing NASA's old habits, attempt

to intimidate some of TSSI's vendors by questioning "the feasibility of 

awarding your company follow-on contracts."  Donald Trump and investment 

partners, hearing of this subtrifuge, pull some strings in Washington and 

the FBI initiates an investigation.  Suddenly, products are flowing from 

TSSI's vendors and the first booster test firing takes place within 3 

months -- only one month late.  It fails, but 4 other boosters are 

already in winding with one going through final check out.  The problem

with the first system is analyzed and found to be a faulty pump from

one of the intimidated vendors.  TSSI's engineers discover the original

blueprints unnecessarily used an aerospace pump that could be replaced 

by a standard industrial LOX pump from a company with no aerospace

connections.  They do an appropriate engineering modification on the 

remaining boosters.   They are delayed another month.


LIC takes delivery on the last of the LMSM components and is 

far enough along in fabrication that integrated subsystem testing begins 

in earnest.  The new-technology gamma-ray spectrometer, experiences some 

reliability problems due to tricks used to lower its high power requirements.

One of the major investors ($25 million) gets antsy and withdraws.  Jim 

French, familiar with the engineers from his JPL days and their patent, is 

confident they can resolve the reliability problem in short order and talks 

the Board of Directors of TSSI into pulling together a stop-gap purchase of 

LIC stock at a low price.  The engineers determine they can increase 

reliability if they have more electrical storage capacity.  They replace the

light-weight storage system with a reliable automotive lead-acid battery 

system which weighs a lot more -- but there will be excess payload capacity

on either launch service anyway.  The reliability problem is resolved and the 

skitish investor wants back in.  The other LIC investors, concerned about a 

potential conflict of interest with TSSI representatives on the Board, buy 

back TSSI's holding at a higher price, reselling it to the conservative 

investor.  TSSI walks off with a viable customer and a 25% return on $25 

million in 2 months.


TSSI has its first successful test.


LIC completes system integration and starts system testing.  No major

problems.


TSSI has its second successful test.


LIC's CEO decides that TSSI's two month delay will not allow them to

meet the 6 month deadline and contacts Ed Bock at General Dynamics

about the possibility of a fall back launch on an Atlas-Centaur.  It 

turns out that a NASA TDRS is behind in fabrication and an Atlas-Centaur

is available from their production stream within LIC's calendar 

requirements.  LIC's CEO negotiates a $5 million reduction on GD's

bid and places a $1 million retainer on the launch opportunity in

case TSSI fails to meet the 6 month deadline.  


The 6 month deadline passes.  TSSI doesn't launch on time.


Being unwilling to incur the additional interest expenses imposed by

further delays, LIC's CEO exercises his cancellation clause with LII and

his retainer on GD's launch slot.  GD's integration people begin 

modifying the Centaur's upper stage back to the ANSI Standard (it had been 

modified from the Standard for TDRS because NASA could not adhere to the 

Standard).  The more conservative investors are relieved.  Fortunately for 

LII and TSSI, as a result of the passage of the Space Transportation 

Services Act, they have several payloads contracted with DoD and SDIO, 

which are not sensitive to amortization schedules.  TSSI and LII stay in 

business.


The experienced GD ops people have no trouble pulling off a successful

launch.  The LMSM maps the lunar surface in all 4 spectra within 2

months.  However, upon presentation of the maps to SERC, a fourier

analysis of the the hydrogen map finds that it contains a more noise 

than was expected.  Instead of acquiring to an accuracy of 3 bits per 

pixel, it has acquired only 2 good bits per pixel.  After putting this 

accuracy into the valuation function established by the NAS, LIC is 

awarded only $150 million of the expected $200 million for the whole 

mission.


The noise LIC engineers determine it is gaussian in nature and therefore

they can recover the third bit (and the profitability of the venture) 

by gathering 4 more samples of their hydrogen map -- averaging 

out the noise.  They acquire additional samples and deliver them

to SERC which then authorizes the release of additional funds from 

the Trust.  Over the next 8 months, the remaining $50 million is 

awarded to LIC.  At the same time, additional quality is averaged into

the other maps resulting in a $5 million bonus.  LIC determines that the 

cost of continued operation of LMSM will more than pay for itself by the 

acquisition of an additional fractional bit in the hydrogen map, and

continues gathering data.  However, the flakey gamma-ray spectrometer

gives out before they have acquired the next quantum in the valuation

function, and they have to write off those additional operation expenses 

as a loss.  They store the additional data in a vault on the unlikely

chance that another firm may find it valuable in achieving the next

quantum in the Lunar Hydrogen Map valuation function.


End of Scenario



Summary


As illustrated in the above scenario, a National Science Trust

could not only provide timely and valuable scientific data at a 

reasonable and predictable cost to the U.S. government, but it

would spur the development of new, commercially useful, technologies 

under the disciplines of the private sector, rather than the

environment of government contracting, which has proven itself

to be less efficient.


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


---

Typical RESEARCH grant:

$

Typical DEVELOPMENT contract:

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


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


Date: 10 Dec 89 03:15:33 GMT

From: cs.utexas.edu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state


.edu  (Henry Spencer)

Subject: Re: Multi-national (MANNED) Mars Mission


In article <1989Dec9.233516.13216@Solbourne.COM> stevem@Solbourne.COM writes:

> I'm surprised that in the discussion over manned vs. unmanned the 

> subject of a multi-national mars mission has not come up yet (or

> did I miss it ?).


It's an occasional topic of discussion.  (Almost no obvious topic is new.)


> Personally I *like* the idea. I think the formation of a W.S.A. is

> inevitable, its just a matter of when.


The two big problems with a World Space Agency right now are both to be

found in Washington, DC, USA:


1. The US is not prepared to trust the USSR with a vital role in a major

        US project, and indeed is reluctant to trust any nation with

        such a role, although it's worked out okay when they've tried it.


2. No other nation is prepared to trust the US to keep its promises on

        a major space project, since it has a history of breaking them.

-- 

1755 EST, Dec 14, 1972:  human |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology

exploration of space terminates| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu


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


Date: 9 Dec 89 23:43:27 GMT

From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!dietz@t


ut.cis.ohio-state.edu  (Paul Dietz)

Subject: Re: Mars rovers


Jorge Stolfi points out that a teleoperated rover can go much farther

than a manned rover.  This is undoubtedly true.  However, it isn't of

much comfort to those wanting an entirely unmanned program, because a

teleoperated rover controlled by people on or near Mars (probably on

Phobos or Deimos, the "PhD" mission) will be superior to a rover

operated from Earth, since the time delay will be more than two orders

of magnitude smaller.


        Paul F. Dietz

        dietz@cs.rochester.edu


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


Date: 7 Dec 89 16:53:12 GMT

From: eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!icdoc!syma!nickw@BLOOM-BEACON.MIT.EDU  (Nick Watk


ins)

Subject: Re: Manned vs Unmanned Mission to Mars


In article <1989Dec5.232559.7236@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)

writes:

>In article <49077@bbn.COM> ncramer@labs-n.bbn.com (Nichael Cramer) writes:


>You're still making the mistake of comparing small, unambitious unmanned

>missions to big, ambitious manned ones.  There were unmanned missions,

>notably the original Voyager project (whose shrunken remnants became

>Viking), that were planning to use the Saturn V because nothing else was

>big enough.  For that matter, the Mars sample-return/rover mission people

>today clearly are badly cramped by the limitations of Titan/Centaur.


Well. To quote from "Journey into Space" by Bruce Murray (pp.50-51):

"...But NASA was not motivated to explore the planets systematically.

This was because the Saturn 5 production line, then running full blast

producing Apollo Moon rockets, would soon need new orders. What NASA

really wanted, we at Caltech were dismayed to realise, was Mars missions

that would require giant Saturn rockets. Never mind that Mariner 4 had

just revealed a Moon-like Mars with a distressingly thin atmosphere that

greatly complicated any landing there. Never mind that much basic

knowledge of Mars's atmosphere and surface was needed before really

ambitious new efforts to explore Mars should proceed. NASA instead

promoted Saturn 5 to Mars as the next giant step. In one wild leap,

Mariner 4's 575 pound spacecraft would be succeeded in NASA's plan by

50000 pound spaceships launched with the Saturn 5."


 Murray then explains how NASA declared the Atlas Centaur unavailable for

planetary missions. Thus was born Voyager mark one, in order to sell the

"Saturn 5 to Mars with automated biological laboratories" plan to the

Space Science Board of the National Academy of Sciences. Later OMB

killed the Saturn 5 Mars project in one of its more enlightened moves,

allowing the missions which became Mariners 6 to 10 and Pioneer Venus to

proceed on Centaurs. The "shrunken remnants" are described by Murray as

"the most sophisticated and expensive automated spacecraft ever flown,

down to the present." 


 Interesting, I thought ...


 Nick


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in

the dog"

-- 

Nick Watkins, Space & Plasma Physics Group, School of Mathematical

& Physical Sciences, Univ. of Sussex, Brighton, E.Sussex, BN1 9QH, ENGLAND

JANET: nickw@syma.sussex.ac.uk   BITNET: nickw%syma.sussex.ac.uk@uk.ac


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


End of SPACE Digest V10 #331

*******************


$  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

BOTTOM LIVE script

Evidence supporting quantum information processing in animals

ARMIES OF CHAOS