Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Sat, 21 Oct 89 16:37:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sat, 21 Oct 89 16:36:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #151 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 151 Today's Topics: Re: RICO to combat Christic Institute Re: More whining about Galileo Re: Interplanetary Contamination Christics and Smells Enterprise Utilization Re: An Idea Threat to delay Shuttle launch Re: NASA Headline News for 10/04/89 (Forwarded) Re: Asteroids Re: Trying to build a fluxgate magnetometer -- help! Re: An Idea Computer Virus ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 16 Oct 89 07:05:03 GMT From: crash!orbit!pnet51!schaper@nosc.mil (S Schaper) Subject: Re: RICO to combat Christic Institute I opposed to the highly improper use of the RICO laws to combat free speech and its effects. Let them speak, but let us speak also. But then I think it was wrong to dump the Fairness Doctrine, too. Just some hangup I have about the Constitution and Freedom. Silly me. Just to clarify, I am also opposed to the Christic Institute and their attempts to stop the launch of RTG powered vehicles. I just prefer rational debate - inasfar possible - to police-state actions. UUCP: {amdahl!bungia, uunet!rosevax, chinet, killer}!orbit!pnet51!schaper ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!schaper@nosc.mil INET: schaper@pnet51.cts.com ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 89 13:03:06 GMT From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu!l.cc.purdue.edu!cik@ee.ecn.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) Subject: Re: More whining about Galileo In article <23103@cup.portal.com>, mmm@cup.portal.com (Mark Robert Thorson) writes: > pat@leadsv.UUCP (Pat Wimmer) says: > < > Dear Flatlander, < > < > Your outburst proves my observation of the mental powers and < > sense of vision of your ilk. To paraphrase a quote from RFK, who < > borrowed the original quote, "Some people look at a new challenge < > and say WHY. I look at the same challenge and say WHY NOT?" < > < > If you are more worried about risk, which is a downward spiral < > into mental midget mentality, than you are with risk management, < > than you deserve the country you get! But you won't have to < > worry too long about controlling your own fate, because your < > country won't be yours much longer! < > < > Pat > > Spoken like a true Stalinist. Bleed the people today so we can build the > great Utopia tomorrow. If you really believe a tiny minority has a right > to loot the nation to achieve your own private goals, why don't you join > your space-faring friends in Commie Russia. It is clear you have no understanding of the philosophy of Wimmer or Stalin. Wimmer is not interested in bleeding the people, nor was Stalin interested in building a Utopia. The USSR has no interest in space per se, as you seem to imply. > Remember we still live in a democracy, even if Joe Sixpack doesn't know how > to spell "democracy". Our Congress cut funds for the last few flights of > Apollo because the American people lost interest in it. Without the keen > foresight of Congress, we wouldn't have that neat display of an authentic > Saturn V booster in the National Air & Space Museum. > > If you want American consumers to support your expensive hobby, you gotta > give them a consumer reason for it. You gotta let'em know that Galileo > will provide the same improvement in astrological prediction that weather > satellites provided to weather prediction. Educastion is the solution! We will never have reasonable progress in anything as long as it depends on government funding or allows government control. The display of a Saturn V booster in the National Air & Space Museum is the waste of money. Our general research program is suffering from government funding! If it were clear that government funding was going to be inadequate, other sources would be maintained by the universities. But now the administration says that if it is should be funded, the appropriate government agency must provide the money. Szilard gave this scenario as a means of stifling research before 1950.\ Government funding is generally the way to mess things up. Significant progress in space can only come when those of us who believe in it can invest in operations which Congress can not stop. Fortunately we do not live in a democracy; our Constitution blocks that. I would have no interest in trying to persuade Joe Sixpack to vote for tax moneys to support space if our government would free those of us who believe in it to put our money where our mouths are. -- Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907 Phone: (317)494-6054 hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet, UUCP) ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 89 16:24:26 GMT From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@ucsd.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Interplanetary Contamination In article <140@salt.UUCP> dan@china.uu.net (Dan Williams) writes: >So how hard was Mars hit to eject material to Earth? Any search for a >recent crater? One of the biggest uncertainties about the possibly-Martian meteorites is that nobody can figure out a entirely plausible mechanism for ejecting them. It's difficult to get rock up to Mars's escape velocity without melting it. -- A bit of tolerance is worth a | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology megabyte of flaming. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 89 19:12:21 GMT From: jumbo!ayers@decwrl.dec.com (Bob Ayers) Subject: Christics and Smells My involvement with the Christic Institute started with the reading of a graphic-docunovel entitled Brought to Light. It dealt with questionable American activity in central america and the role of the CIA in subversive and covert operations thoughout the world. Really good peice of work. Read it if you can. Gives an interesting (not nessecarily the last) viewpoint on what we've been doing. Right off the bat, we see that the writer confuses fiction with fact. He states he read a work of fiction and learned about the world. They [Christics] played an important part in uncovering much of the information about the Iran-Contra connection. The Christics made a lot of statements. Their novel "information" turned out to be just plain made up. That's why the judge told them that they had no legal case, had invented the "facts" in their deposition, had named many "witnesses" who did not exist or who had nothing to do with the "facts", and invited the defendants (various memebers of the government) to sue the Christics for legal expenses -- which they did and won. plutonium (which is the most poisonous substance known to man ...) As has been posted many times, this is simply not true. (Facts and more-poisonous listings are in back messages on sci.space.) Even if only 2 pound of plutonium escape into the atmosphere (only 5%) how many people will this kill over the next 20 years? First, we are discussing _solid_ Pu oxide here. If the RTG "escapes into the atmosphere" it will just be another rock. If you mean a long chain of very unlikely events that causes a cloud of Pu gas or atoms, consider that in the 60s the US government took kilos of Pu, placed it in tall towers in Nevada, deliberately vaporized it, and let it drift downwind across the USA -- many times. We cannot dismiss everyone that wants more careful thinking done as an obstructionist. Quite true. I don't dismiss everyone. There have been some reasonable "careful thinking" messages on sci.space. The Christics are not reasonable, and I do dismiss them. I mean how many of you people actually knew about the Christis Institute before this? Any of you. I knew about the Christic Institute long before this recent flap. They've been hanging out on the fringes of left-wing politics for years. I don't know why they got into the Galileo flap, it's not their normal style. My guess is that they saw how well they NDRC did with their Alar-in-apples flap, and decided to latch onto their own "environmental" scare and see if they could make some bucks. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 89 06:25:20 GMT From: hubcap!ncrcae!ncr-sd!crash!orbit!pnet51!schaper@gatech.edu (S Schaper) Subject: Enterprise Utilization Previously wrongly sent. Could the Orbiter Enterprise be refurbished as the Emergency Crew Return Vehicle for the Space Station? Just dock it and plug it in. Would the tile material hold up? APU's even though not in use? How about the core for a manned space tug? UUCP: {amdahl!bungia, uunet!rosevax, chinet, killer}!orbit!pnet51!schaper ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!schaper@nosc.mil INET: schaper@pnet51.cts.com ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 89 23:15:35 GMT From: uhccux!goldader@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Jeff Goldader) Subject: Re: An Idea In article <1989Oct13.211832.12967@agate.berkeley.edu> gwh@typhoon.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) writes: > >The plane that had the drone impact wasn't destroyed. The drone operator was >killed, but the plane flew back to base and landed. (detail) > Thanks; I knew one of the launches was a bust, but USnail seems to have lost all of my books somewhere near the bottom of the Pacific... There's a really good one by (I think) AEROFAX which details the history of each Blackbird- type, and I remembered reading about the drone there. Do you know how many M-12 launches were successful before they switched to using B-52s, or how many B-52 launches there were? Jeff Goldader University of Hawaii uhifa.ifa.hawaii.edu Institute for Astronomy "So, Lonestar, now you see that Evil will always win- because Good is stupid." -The Dark Lord Dark Helmet, _SPACEBALLS_ Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are my responsibility alone. The University of Hawaii and the Institute for Astronomy neither support nor are in *any way* responsible for these opinions. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 89 04:25:23 GMT From: f.gp.cs.cmu.edu!bjm@PT.CS.CMU.EDU (Bret Musser) Subject: Threat to delay Shuttle launch The Christics are supposed to be attempting to break into the Cape and delay the launch by blocking the pad. I assume NASA is taking addition security measures? What is the normal launch pad security anyways? Personally, I say if they get too close, fry 'em, but that is just my opinion. (Oh, don't forget :-) bjm .sig ahead! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Bret J. Musser --- Carnegie-Mellon University | Why bother with dis- Pittsburgh, Pa | claimers on rec.arts.- Internet: bjm@f.gp.cs.cmu.edu | startrek? Do companies Bitnet: bjm%f.gp.cs.cmu.edu@cmccvb | hold official policies Work Phone: (412) 268-8751 | on TOS vs. TNG? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 89 03:25:44 GMT From: uceng!dmocsny@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (daniel mocsny) Subject: Re: NASA Headline News for 10/04/89 (Forwarded) In article <505@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>, buck@drax.gsfc.nasa.gov (Loren (Buck) Buchanan) writes: > In article <1005@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: > >If you were the launch officer and there was a Luddite on the pad... > > I think that launching with a Luddite on the pad would set the Space > Program back a whole lot. ... Please, folks, let's get our terminology straight. A "luddite" is a person who opposes JOB-THREATENING technological advance...for example, a manned-space-flight advocate. :-) A "technophobe," on the other hand, is a person who fears technology. This term is not very meaningful, of course, because everyone I have ever met fears some technologies while embracing others. Generally, when you hear the term "technophobe," the speaker refers to another person who dislikes some technologies the speaker likes. The members of the Christic Institute do not appear to be opposing the launch of Galileo because it will increase industrial productivity enough to put them out of work. (What is their product, BTW?) So to call them "luddites" is erroneous, and (dare I say this) it reflects unfavorably on the speaker's grasp of technological history. Dan Mocsny dmocsny@uceng.uc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Oct 89 01:12 EDT From: NUTSY FAGEN Subject: Re: Asteroids I can understand how some asteroids would be cheaper to get to than the moon. However, is this true all the time, or just when a specific asteroid is in the 'right spot'. What I'm getting at is this - would an asteroid-base allow emergency escape to Earth all the time (as I assume the moon would), or would they be faced with certain windows through which an escape would have to be made? ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 89 13:52:00 GMT From: epicb!david@uunet.uu.net (David Cook) Subject: Re: Trying to build a fluxgate magnetometer -- help! >From article <1914@sactoh0.UUCP>, by mahaun@sactoh0.UUCP (Mark A. Haun): >> >> I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has built any sort of >> fluxgate magnetometer, anyone who has seen a construction article >> for one, or anybody with suggestions/ideas/etc. on the feasibility >> of this project. >> > Mark... The very latest issue of Radio Electronics has an article on connecting the Radio Shack Electronic COmpass to a computer system. To make a long story short, they have an excellent discussion on fluxgate magnetometers as a part of the article, including a description as to how the windings are made (a control winding goes totally around the core [ring] and a sine and cosine winding exist at 90 degree angles to each other). Check out this article for at least a "feel" as to how these devices are constructed. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 89 15:44:52 GMT From: gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: An Idea In article <1989Oct12.220445.14557@agate.berkeley.edu> gwh@typhoon.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) writes: > Take a Pegasus rocket, being developed now, and mount it on top >of a surplus A-12 (variant of SR-71, the ones outfitted to carry a drone >on top). It can get probably a thoudand MPH and fifty thousand feet >better launch position over the current B-52 platform... I suspect it wouldn't win that much. The big advantage Pegasus gets from air launch is not velocity, but being above the thickest air. Thinning out the air still further probably doesn't help too much, and in fact it might hurt, since Pegasus needs enough air for its wings to work. The higher velocity would be useful, but I'd expect gains to be modest. There would probably be some tricky problems with separation, and with clearing Pegasus for sustained Mach 3 flight before launch. Not to mention a small problem with trying to convince the USAF to rent you a Blackbird... -- A bit of tolerance is worth a | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology megabyte of flaming. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 89 22:13:39 GMT From: usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov!baalke@ucsd.edu (Ron Baalke) Subject: Computer Virus I just hope the new computer that they are replacing on the Space Shuttle is not infected with the "Friday the 13th" computer virus...... ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #151 *******************