It will be interesting to see if this makes it through conference and,
if it does, how the various agencies will react to it.  There are a lot
of fiercely defended (and some quite expensive) rice bowls involved.

Also, I wonder what "Recent international events have only served to
highlight this problem" is talking about.

+++++++++++++++++

>From the FAS Secrecy News Extra for 26 May 2006:

The new Senate Intelligence Committee report on the Intelligence
Authorization Act for FY 2007 includes numerous other significant and
interesting provisions including:  a requirement for a DNI report on
treatment of detainees (section 313);  a requirement for a report on
alleged clandestine detention facilities (section 314); establishment
of a National Space Intelligence Center (section 410); and quite a bit
more.

See the Senate Intelligence Committee Report on the FY 2007
Intelligence Authorization Act, Senate Report 109-259, May 25, here:

     http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_rpt/srpt109-259.pdf

The underlying bill, S. 3237, is here:

     http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_cr/s3237.pdf

The intelligence bill has been referred to the Senate Armed Services
Committee for a ten day period.

+++++++++++++++++

>From http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_rpt/srpt109-259.pdf

Section 410. National Space Intelligence Center.

The United States maintains a very large investment in satellites, and
this investment has grown dramatically in recent years. These
satellites serve the commercial and national security needs of the
nation. As such, a loss of any or all of these assets could do
tremendous harm to our economy and security.

At the same time, our investment in intelligence collection concerning
threats to our interests in space has declined markedly as a function
of our overall investment in space systems.  Despite this significant
investment, some estimates indicate that we commit only 10 percent of
what we did nearly 25 years ago to the analysis of threats to space
systems. Recent international events have only served to highlight this
problem.

In an effort to better understand the future threats to our space
assets, as well as potential threats to the United States from space,
Section 410 establishes a National Space Intelligence Center (NSIC). It
is not the intent of the Committee that the NSIC be a physical
consolidation of existing intelligence entities with responsibilities
for various types of intelligence related to space.  Rather, the
Committee believes that the first function of the NSIC is to coordinate
all collection, analysis, and dissemination of intelligence related to
space, as well as participate in Intelligence Community analyses of
requirements for space systems. The NSIC augments the existing efforts
of the National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC) and Missile
and Space Intelligence Center (MSIC); it is not designed to replace
them. Indeed, the Committee intends that the NSIC work closely with
NASIC and MSIC to ensure a coordinated Intelligence Community response
to issues that intersect the responsibilities of all three
organizations.

The Director of the NSIC shall be the National Intelligence Officer for
Science and Technology, and the Committee encourages the appointment of
an Executive Director from the Senior Intelligence Service. Further
details related to the mission of the NSIC can be found in the
Classified Annex accompanying this Act.

+++++++++++++++++

From: http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/the_technical_and_economic_
feasibility_of_mining_the_near_earth_asteriods.shtml:

Application of celestial mechanics shows that (i) simple es-
timates of "global minimum" delta-v can be made; (ii) low-
energy opportunities occur at approx 2-yearly intervals, for
many NEAs; (iii) long synodic periods militate against mul-
tiple-return mining missions; (iv) Earth-return hyperbolic
velocity should be kept low; (v) high-eccentricity targets
require Hohmann transfers, and a short mining season at
aphelion; (vi) low-eccentricity targets may use continuous-
thrusting propulsion, and extended mining season. There is a
growing subset of targets that are intermittently accessible
for an outbound delta-v of under 6 km/s, and offering return
departure delta-v under 2 km/sec.

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

How to acquire the spectral data? SAR mapping "flybys" utiliz-
ing a data set similar to the Lunar Prospector Gamma Ray Spec-
trometer revealed that the spectrometer was expected to be 2.5
to 8 times better (w.r.t. peak intensity) than the NaI data
from the Apollos. A higher-Z Bismuth Germinate (BGO) crystal
increases the filtering, or stopping power of gamma rays, and
returns two sets of data for the GRS at 32 second intervals:

"… a BGO spectrum from 0.3 to 9 MeV in each coincidence
(rejected) and anticoincidence (accepted) with the plastic shell.
In principle the accepted spectrum is the cleanest, since all
full energy BGO photopeaks will deposit no energy in the plastic.
However, there is additional information in the rejected spectrum
which can be used to good advantage with respect to
background reduction.

The rejected data consists of gamma rays that had one or more
Compton scattering events in the plastic, in addition to the
partial peak energy deposited in the BGO. This scattering process
mimics the Compton scattering of the elemental spectral emission
lines from the lunar regolith before the gamma rays reach the
LP spacecraft, and so are similar to the continuum background
spectrum which rides below the elemental line spectrum. As such,
a properly scaled version of the rejected spectrum can be sub-
tracted spectrum to reduce continuum spectrum background from the
lunar surface. This second data set was not available in previous
measurements for use in such background reductions."

(From Monte Carlo Simulation of the Gamma Ray Spectrometer Per-
formance on Lunar Prospector, Robert E. McMurray, Jr., Marie C.
Grimmer, William C. Feldman, G. Scott Hubbard, and Steven D.
Zins, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, Naval
Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA 93943, Los Alamos National
Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, from the 1997 IEEE Nuclear
Science Synposium, Anaheim, CA p. 602)

For GAMS (Geosynchronous Asteroid Mapping Satellites, an orbital
period is established to yield a ground track in x km. per y
seconds (per 32 second data set). The data sets are binned into
square kilometer pixel bins over the maximum surface area. Dynamic
x-ray imaging provides the resources necessary for rapid processing
(on the order of 8 ms per 7936 pixel channels) for monochromatic
photons. Monochromatic photons are single frequency time-over-
threshold photons with uniform pulse intensity. The scintillation
detector is tuned for reception of single frequency emitted
photons. I have a list of detector specific properties for
transition frequencies of precious metals) that utilize PSPMT
(Position Sensi-tive Photomultiplier Tubes) yielding a hit (with
pulse height and frequency) perform geosynchronization of
coordinates transmission to an orbital or earth-based GAMS mapping
facility. The mapping facility then chooses a destination for the
mining vessel and transmits new programming instructions for
the rendezvous.

However, I do agree with the M.J. Sonter’s link describing the
types of propulsion available, utilizing a "steam rocket" with
"solar thermal power is advantageous for extracting metals other than
precious, however considering the time constraints for organizing
such a mission for this alone is not sufficient enough to pay for
the entire mission – the operation would have to require carefully
selecting a landing site to include both primary and precious metals
in order to justify the cost.

1860-65: American civil war (360,000)
1886-1908: Belgium-Congo Free State (3 million)
1899-02: British-Boer war (100,000)
1899-03: Colombian civil war (120,000)
1900-01: Boxer rebels (35,000)
1903: Ottomans vs Macedonian rebels (20,000)
1904: Germany vs Namibia (65,000)
1904-05: Japan vs Russia (150,000)
1910-20: Mexican revolution (250,000)
1911: Chinese Revolution (2.4 million)
1911-12: Italian-Ottoman war (20,000)
1912-13: Balkan wars (150,000)
1915: Ottoman empire Armenians (1.2 million)
1914-18: World War I                                            (8 million)
1916: Kyrgyz revolt against Russia (120,000)
1917-21: Soviet revolution (5 million)
1928-37: Chinese civil war (2 million)
1931: Japanese Manchurian War (1.1 million)
1932-33: Soviet Union vs Ukraine (7 million)
1934: Mao’s Long March (170,000)
1936: Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia (200,000)
1936-37: Stalin’s purges (13 million)
1936-39: Spanish civil war (600,000)
1939-45: World War II                                           (55million)
including holocaust and Chinese revolution
1946-49: Chinese civil war (1.2 million)
1946-49: Greek civil war (50,000)
1946-54: France-Vietnam war (600,000)
1947: Partition of India and Pakistan (1 million)
1947: Taiwan’s uprising against the Kuomintang (30,000)
1948-1958: Colombian civil war (250,000)
1948-1973: Arab-Israeli wars (70,000)
1949-: Indian Muslims vs Hindus (20,000)
1950-53: Korean war (4 million)
1952-59: Kenya’s Mau Mau insurrection (20,000)
1954-62: French-Algerian war (368,000)
1958-61: Mao’s "Great Leap Forward"                           (38 million)
1960-90: South Africa vs Africa National Congress (?)
1960-96: Guatemala’s civil war (200,000)
1961-2003: Kurds vs Iraq (180,000)
1962-75: Mozambique Frelimo vs Portugal (?)
1964-73: USA-Vietnam war (3 million)
1965: second India-Pakistan war over Kashmir
1965-66: Indonesian civil war (200,000)
1966-69: Mao’s "Cultural Revolution"                             (11million)
1966-: Colombia’s civil war (31,000)
1967-70: Nigeria-Biafra civil war (800,000)
1968-80: Rhodesia’s civil war (?)
1969-79: Idi Amin, Uganda (300,000)
1969-02: IRA – Norther Ireland’s civil war (2,000)
1969-79: Francisco Macias Nguema, Equatorial Guinea (50,000)
1971: Pakistan-Bangladesh civil war (500,000)
1972-: Philippines vs Muslim separatists (120,000)
1972: Burundi’s civil war (300,000)
1972-79: Rhodesia/Zimbabwe’s civil war (30,000)
1974-91: Ethiopian civil war (1,000,000)
1975-78: Menghitsu, Ethiopia (1.5 million)
1975-79: Khmer Rouge, Cambodia (1.7 million)
1975-89: Boat people, Vietnam (250,000)
1975-90: civil war in Lebanon (40,000)
1975-87: Laos’ civil war (184,000)
1975-2002: Angolan civil war (500,000)
1976-83: Argentina’s military regime (20,000)
1976-93: Mozambique’s civil war (900,000)
1976-98: Indonesia-East Timor civil war (600,000)
1976-2005: Indonesia-Aceh (GAM) civil war (12,000)
1979: Vietnam-China war (30,000)
1979-88: the Soviet Union invades Afghanistan (1.3 million)
1980-88: Iraq-Iran war (1 million)
1980-92: Sendero Luminoso – Peru’s civil war (69,000)
1980-92: El Salvador’s civil war (75,000)
1980-99: Kurds vs Turkey (35,000)
1981-90: Nicaragua vs Contras (60,000)
1982-90: Hissene Habre, Chad (40,000)
1983-2002: Sri Lanka’s civil war (64,000)
1983-2002: Sudanese civil war (2 million)
1986-: Indian Kashmir’s civil war (60,000)
1987-: Palestinian Intifada (4,500)
1988-2001: Afghanistan civil war (400,000)
1988-2004: Somalia’s civil war (550,000)
1989-: Liberian civil war (220,000)
1989-: Uganda vs Lord’s Resistance Army (30,000)
1991: Gulf War – large coalition against Iraq to liberate Kuwait (85,000)
1991-97: Congo’s civil war (800,000)
1991-2000: Sierra Leone’s civil war (200,000)
1991-: Russia-Chechnya civil war (200,000)
1991-94: Armenia-Azerbaijan war (35,000)
1992-96: Tajikstan’s civil war war (50,000)
1992-96: Yugoslavia’s civil war (260,000)
1992-99: Algerian civil war (150,000)
1993-97: Congo Brazzaville’s civil war (100,000)
1993-2005: Burundi’s civil war (200,000)
1994: Rwanda’s civil war (900,000)
1995-: Pakistani Sunnis vs Shiites (1,300)
1995-: Maoist rebellion in Nepal (12,000)
1998-: Congo/Zaire’s war – Rwanda and Uganda vs Zimbabwe  (3.8 million)
1998-2000: Ethiopia-Eritrea war (75,000)
1999: Kosovo’s liberation war – NATO vs Serbia (2,000)
2001: Afghanistan’s liberation war – USA & UK vs Taliban (25,000)
2002-: Cote d’Ivoire’s civil war (1,000)
2003: Iraq’s liberation war – USA, UK and Australia vs Saddam Hussein
(14,000)
2003-: Sudan vs JEM/Darfur (180,000)
2003-: Iraq’s civil war (50,000)
2004-: Sudan vs SPLM & Eritrea (?)
—————————————————————————-
—-
Arab-Israeli wars
I (1947-49): 6,373 Israeli and 15,000 Arabs die
II (1956): 231 Israeli and 3,000 Egyptians die
III (1967): 776 Israeli and 20,000 Arabs die
IV (1973): 2,688 Israeli and 18,000 Arabs die
Intifada I (1987-92): 170 Israelis and 1,000 Palestinians
Intifada II (2000-03): 700 Israelis and 2,000 Palestinians

—————————————————————————-
—-

W ramach przygotowań do powrotu na Księżyc (niech
co Krwawy Hegemon?) przetestowano najprostszą metodę
uwalniania tlenu z księżycowego gruntu – podgrzanie
go słoneczkiem przy pomocy soczewki.

Uwolniono ok. 20% masy (przypominam, że tlen stanowi
ponad 40% masy Księżyca). W artykule są też odsyłacze
do opisu alternatywnych badanych metod.

Przy dobrych wiatrach aparatura testowa poleci wraz
z lądownikiem ok. 2011 roku.

Pozdrawiam,
ŁB

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/05may_moonrocks.htm

http://www.stnews.org/News-528.htm
At last there is news that NASA is doing some serious robotics
research. I feel though that NASA is thinking in a far too
anthropomorphic way. If you are talking about LEO telepresence I
suppose that anthropomorphism is to a degree necessary. However where
the return light journey is a matter of minutes or hours I would
advocate something like a hub with manipulators and sensors attached. I
note that robot – robot communication is envisaged as is "speech and
gestures". Why not simply have the normal protocols of computer –
computer communication – Ethernet , WiFi,  Bluetooth, USB or Firewire?
gestures/speech. If telepresent one communicates by pressure on the
suit  If Mars (telepresence impossible) simply send something
resembling an E-mail.

BTW If the normal computer – computer protocols are used we can perform
a task using UNIX and PVM (Parallel Virtual Machine).

I note too that decision making and geometrical understanding is going
to be made a priority. I have said before that the basic step for a Von
Neumann machine was understanding CAD/CAM. The article did not mention
building and repairing robots, but this is implicit.

New Las Cruces Rocket Company X-Prize Competitor
Wednesday 17,2006, Newly relocated to Las Cruces, Lee Rush President of
Thrugate Aerospace told the X-Prize Foundation that Thrugate would be
competing for the Five Hundred Thousand dollar proposed NASA X-Prize
Re-usable Rocket competition at the X-Prize Cup in October.
 John Gedmark of the X-Prize Foundation called Thrugate Aerospace on
Tuesday May 9 2006 and asked if they were interested in the Re-usable
Rocket Competition to launch 50 lbs of payload to 5,000 feet.
 If the last X-prize competition is any example, there could also be a
multi-million dollar contract for the winner.
"The odds are long but for an outfit our size the stakes are high,"
said Lee.
 NASA is looking for a re-usable sounding rocket.
Last year the sounding rocket market in the U.S. grossed 100 million
dollars and employed 1,100 people. A re-usable rocket will allow more
work and jobs in a wide range of research from astronomy to medicine,
with the possibility of expanding the size of the market.
"Our current experimental rocket can be re-used many times. Scaled up
to competition size it could win the X-prize Cup and maybe take a piece
of the sounding rocket market," said Lee.
However, thrilled that such a prize is within their reach, Thrugate’s
President is sober about the task ahead. "It’s going to take lots
of work, lots of money, and more people. We’ll have to rely heavily
on money from local sponsors and support from local companies."
Please send money or donations to Thrugate Aerospace Po Box 1850
Mesilla Park NM 88047.
To learn more about Thrugate aerospace visit www.thrugateaerospace.com

Since the success of SS1, there has been greater interest in rockets
using N2O as an oxidizer.

The pluses of N2O seem to be:
1) Availability – You can buy a tanker truck full of rocket grade
nitrous without much trouble.
2) Self Pressurizing – simplifies pressure-fed systems.
3) Non-cryogenic – liquid at room temp. under high pressure or slightly
chilled at modest pressure.
4) Low toxicity/high safety

and the minuses appear to be:
1) Cost – not as cheap as LOX
2) Low density
3) Low performance – compared to LOX, H2O2, N2O4, etc. (under 250s with
hydrocarbons)

Recently, I noticed that nitrous oxide should make an IDEAL oxidizer
for Aluminum Borohydride AlB3H12.  The Aluminum reacts preferentially
with the oxygen, while the boron ends up reacting only with the
nitrogen.  The chamber temperature is 3000K, and the exhaust is
non-toxic.

As I understand it, BN is much less problematic in the exhaust than
B2O3 is, and handling Al2O3 is established engineering.

Running the numbers through ProPEP, I see that performance could rival
LOX/LH2 when using a VERY high expansion ratio – 1:5000 gives a
theoretical ISP of about 452. If a working engine using this
combination could be built with an ISP over 400, I imagine it would be
far better suited as a lunar lander engine than NASA’s current hope for
LOX/Methane.

The physical properties of N2O and Aluminum borohydride would also make
them very useful for an orbital fueling station.

So what do you all think?

Does anyone have news on the final config of the CEV? Also does anyone
know if they will really fly this, (Or will it be another paper rocket,
(i.e. Crew return, Venture STar, etc…)?

Thanks,

Carl

Star clusters contain hundreds to thousands of stars in a very small
volume.  The stellar density of open clusters averages 1.5star/ cubic
light years whereas in the region of our sun it is about .1 star/cubic
light year.  This means that interstellar travel within an open cluster
would be much easier than without.  Globular clusters have much higher
stellar densities but generally contain very old stars and they are so
close that stable planets might be difficult.  However, if a
civilization did arise in a globular cluster, you would expect it to
rapidly colonize the entire cluster, if there were any stable planets
worth doing so.
A civilization within a star cluster might have an entirely different
perspective on astronomy than we do because their sky would be filled
with so many stars that night would be nearly as bright as day.  They
could be expected to rapidly find planets around the other very close
stars.  However, once a civilization did fill such a cluster, it would
expand much more slowly because outside the cluster the stellar density
falls so that distances become extreme.  Even worse, many globular
clusters are outside the plane of the Milky Way so that distances to
stars outside the cluster are much greater than around our sun.
SETI might emphasize looking at star clusters rather than individual
stars.

Debate over politically-biased ‘Pentagon space spies watch Americans’
headline….

I invite you to observe and join in
on the debate over politically-biased headlines
regarding the ‘spy satellites snoop on Americans’
AP story of a few days ago.

Go to
http://www.livescience.com/blogs/2006/05/15/shooting-the-fake-messeng…
and you have to advance 4-5 comments until i bring the
subject up, and watch the sparks fly.