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 ; Mon, 9 Apr 90 01:28:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Mon, 9 Apr 90 01:28:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #236 SPACE Digest Volume 11 : Issue 236 Today's Topics: Re: THREAT OF PEACE Re: HST Image Status for 04/01/90 (Forwarded) Re: Velikovsky's Theory Re: HST Image Status for 04/01/90 (Forwarded) Re: SPACE Digest V11 #231 Skylab Re: South Atlantic Anomaly Re: Need info on Space Stations Re: Pegasus Stats Repost Re: orbit definitions Re: Pegasus Stats Repost ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 6 Apr 90 18:09:33 GMT From: newstop!jethro!norge.Sun.COM!jmck@sun.com (John McKernan) Subject: Re: THREAT OF PEACE In article <1990Apr6.031236.25870@csusac.csus.edu> cs060217@csusac.csus.edu (Doug Martin) writes: > Recently I read an article in the september issue of >IEEE's Spectrum titled The Threat Of Peace. The article was >very interesting to me because, as an EE major attending CSUS >, the cuts in defense spending could greatly decrease the >number of available jobs for EEs. I plan to give a speech on >the subject, and would appreciate any information relating to >the following questions: I don't have any specific numbers on this question, but my general understanding is that due to trends in education, population and business, there will be a shortage of engineers to some degree in virtually all of the engineering diciplines. John L. McKernan. jmck@sun.com Disclaimer: These are my opinions but, shockingly enough, not necessarily Sun's ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There is no such thing as Cyberpunk, but there are alot of imitations." - William Gibson ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 22:32:21 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lakesys!joe@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Joe Pantuso) Subject: Re: HST Image Status for 04/01/90 (Forwarded) In article <452@helens.Stanford.EDU> joe@hanauma.stanford.edu (Joe Dellinger) writes: >In article <1990Apr4.203419.13932@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes: >Last year I digitized some of Voyager II's raw pictures of Neptune off the TV [Things deleted about how after attempting to get somone at JPL to release their internal digial pics to public in a digital format that could be made available throught things such as ftp sites...] >Anyway, I tried. I really did. >>>> Forget it. <<<< >As near as I can tell, NASA and JPL have NO interest in releasing digital >images of anything except for the official complete data sets intended for >strictly scientific use. Those they will only release after the data is a >year old. The JPL public relations guy said if I wanted to add more images >to my archive the only way would be to digitize them myself off public- >relations photos. This sort of thing about NASA/JPL/Research labs in general really bugs me. I understand that there is pressure to publish and to be first with the research results from the work you have done... I thought only programmers stood on each others feet... It is also dissapointing that the pictures from the time of the different groups that use HST will be their private property for the first 18 or 24 months (I forget). Once again...I do understand the reasoning behind this but it will be difficult to be patient to see results from the people using our Most Important Toy Ever. Perhaps the groups that have the time available in this first year (wasnt' there a team at Berkely?) could be convinced to let some of their images go on the net. One thing that I and other net readers should keep in mind is that a good percentage of the images coming from HST will be totally unspectacular to look at and without meaning until the time has gone by for the teams to do their work and tell us what we are looking at... -- Joe Pantuso joe@lakesys.lakesys.com Home(414)259-1897 ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 21:25:38 GMT From: ogicse!zephyr.ens.tek.com!wrgate!mrloog!dant@decwrl.dec.com (Dan Tilque) Subject: Re: Velikovsky's Theory Normally, I avoid discussing Velikovskyism on the net. However, Mr. van der Griendt seems to be a non-native English speaker who is taking Mr. Neff's article a little too literally. I'm cross-posting to sci.skeptic and directing followups there (I hope sci.skeptic is availiable in Europe) since this topic really belongs there. henk@spex1.uucp (Henk van der Griendt) writes: }tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes: } }>The burden of proof is on Velikovsky, not the rest of the world. Until }>conventional explanations prove incapable of explaining conditions on }>Mars, Jupiter and Venus -- something that ain't happened yet -- we don't }>need to adduce comets emitting themselves from Jupiter and careening all }>over the Solar System to explain things. } }1st: Velikovsky died some time ago. So his burden is over. The burden of proof is on those who seriously advocate Velikovsky's ideas, of course. In this case, "Velikovsky" is used as short hand for those people. }2nd: Since when do conventional explanations exist for the conditions on } the planets ( or am I ignorant ?). You are ignorant. Velikovsky's ideas contradict some well established theories of celestial mechanics as well as the results of the various space probes and observations from Earth. }>Velikovsy's "theories" belong more to the sociocultural history of }>Russian mysticism than to cosmogeny or physics. Their enduring }>popularity among the Fort-and-Fuller crowd is a monument to the tenacity }>of good old American trailer park know-nothing-ism. Personally I'm a }>*real* big fan. } }3rd: How do you come to your conclusion about Russian mysticism? }4th: What is a Fort-and-Fuller crowd (remember, I am a european) ? } What has that to do with trailers? Fort is Charles Fort, a man who collected reports of unusual phenomena. He seemed to gather his data from popular accounts and did little investigation of their veracity (much like many of the UFOlogists do today). I assume Fuller is Buckminster Fuller, but I'm not sure why he's lumped in with Fort. The "trailer park know-nothing-ism" refers to a tendency among certain classes of Americans to believe in all sorts of pseudo-scientific theories (pyramid power, for example) which sound neat and offer a quick and easy way to learn the secrets of the universe. }5th: Of what are you a fan? That was sarcasm. }>I note in passing that VELIKOVSKY is a clever anagram for ELVIS YVOKK, }>which well-read para-students will recognize as The King's Atlantean }>name before he was lowered to Earth from a Crystal UFO in the Tennessee }>backwoods back in 1951. What does the Air Force know about this???? and }>why won't so called scientists admit it???! :-) } }6th: If they are anagrams, it could be the other way round: } Velikovsky was born in the 19th century under that name if I am well } informed, and started to publish long before 1951. }So why did you write that ? This was parody, although probably not of Velikovsky. There are those writers in this genre (pseudo-science) who dig up obscure coincidences or make their own peculiar interprtation of archeological objects and then accuse scientists of ignoring or suppressing the "Truth" about UFO's or whatever. Blaming the military of being in on the conspiracy is also quite popular. --- Dan Tilque -- dant@mrloog.WR.TEK.COM ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 19:51:49 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!haven!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU!gsh7w@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Greg S. Hennessy) Subject: Re: HST Image Status for 04/01/90 (Forwarded) In article <1990Apr7.184400.2108@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> mcdonald@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Doug McDonald) writes: #I tried also. These people are completely uninterested in getting stuff to #the people who pay for their operations. I suggest that you do what I #am going #to do: call your congressperson and request that they make it a #legel requirement that they make available promptly (i.e. within #a few weeks) samples of all images they get. If this works it will have the effect of not being able to get talented scientists to create new instruments. It takes YEARS of a scientists career to design and build a new instruments. The scientist do it to get new data. If the data is available to everone as soon as it comes in, they will figure, "Why should I give years of my life working on this instrumetn. I will just wait untill it is launched, and then glom onto the data. and Publish first, while the project scientists are still trying to collect data." The best thing is to convince NASA (perhaps we should all write to them) that there exhists a large number of people who could use digtal data, and so the PR photos could be released digitally. Trying to get ALL the photos released instantly would be a big mistake. -Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia USPS Mail: Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA Internet: gsh7w@virginia.edu UUCP: ...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 11:33:40 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu!v071pzp4@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Craig L Cole) Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V11 #231 In article <639517776.amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU>, Dale.Amon@H.GP.CS.CMU.EDU writes... >Initial offering off OSC stock was withdrawn at the last possible >moment due to some negative publicity. I do not known the precise >nature of the news that caused the withdrawal, but it was evidentaly >some investment news letter and OSC took it seriously enough to make >sure they answered the critique first (so I have heard from an Merrill >Lynch broker who checked into for me) > >I wish I'd had stock BEFORE the launch. sigh. > > from the Emerald Isle, > Dale Amon I tried. They sent me back my letter of interest with a little note on it that said the stock was all privately owned! Until reading the Net, I had no idea they were ever even +planning+ to sell it publicly. I +did+ get a bunch of nice PR pamphlets... I hope I have a little better luck with them next time around. Craig Cole University at Buffalo ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Apr 90 22:35 EST From: Subject: Skylab was there ever any real chance of saving Skylab? I read once taht if the space shuttle had been a bit more advanced a little sooner, then they would have gone up to repair Skylab. Wouldn't it have been worth it? And, on a related note, are the Soviets simply going to de-orbit Salyut 7 like they do all the progress modules? Jeffrey ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 04:58:22 GMT From: cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: South Atlantic Anomaly In article <7596@goofy.Apple.COM> miker@Apple.COM (Michael P. Radovancevich) writes: >I seem to remember hearing something about the SAA being the result of >high altitude nuclear weapons testing in the 50's... >I think I heard that much of the radiation is due to the by-products of these >tests being trapped in the magnetic fields of the Earth. No, the SAA is an entirely natural phenomenon. The high-altitude bomb tests, in the early 60s I think, did pump a lot of particles into the Van Allen belts, to the point of shortening the lives of some satellites, but that was a transient thing and the belts are long since back to normal. -- Apollo @ 8yrs: one small step.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology Space station @ 8yrs: .| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 14:43:55 GMT From: cs.utexas.edu!texbell!sugar!garym@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Gary Morris) Subject: Re: Need info on Space Stations In article <20849@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>, v071pzp4@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Craig L Cole) writes: > > I need the interior volume and orbital height of the following space > stations: > Skylab > Freedom Skylab Workshop Module alone had a habitable volume of 275 cubic meters, the entire complex (Orbital workshop, Apollo Command Module, Airlock, Multiple docking Adaptor) had a habitable volume of 360 cubic meters. Orbital height was 269 miles for Skylab.. > A breakdown of the size of each module in Mir and Freedom would be > greatly appreciated. Also, the interior volume of the shuttle and The habitable volume of the Shuttle Orbiter is 71.508 cubic meters. I think the rest has already been answered. --GaryM -- Gary Morris Internet: garym@sugar.hackercorp.com Lockheed, Houston, Texas UUCP: {texbell|uunet}!sugar!garym Space Station Freedom Project Phone: +1-713-283-5195 ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 22:46:47 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lakesys!joe@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Joe Pantuso) Subject: Re: Pegasus Stats Repost In article <27726@ut-emx.UUCP> grads@emx.UUCP (Feulner ... Matt Feulner) writes: >In article <1990Apr6.223440.18681@agate.berkeley.edu> gwh@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) writes: >> >>The vehicle itself is 49.2 feet long, with a diameter of 48 inches and a >>wingspan of 22 feet. It weighs 40,000 pounds at launch and is about the >>same shape and size as X-15 rocketplane, which was also launched from the >>B-52. The payload fairing is 46" diameter by 72" long. > >If it's about the same size as the X-15, is the payload high enough to support >a person and all the life support equipment? Would this be a worthwile >concept for the future? I realize that now we have no need to get one person >up at a time, but maybe later? I guess it would have to have some sort of >space lock which would eat up payload. I think you could avoid having an airlock on it... What about building a big version of the emergency EVA bubble that was designed for the shuttle? You could have this big bubble that could be placed around the "pod" and pressurized onto the lock, then the passenger could just crack the seal and float on in. (It should really only take about 100lbs to add somthing like that to the shuttle or freedom, if you assume titanium or some such lock and use of existing atmosphere equipment you should be able to bring it down to half that) I can't think of any particular reason why you would want to send somone up on a joyride like that... can anyone think of an emergency situation where you have to get somone *up* to the shuttle/freedom station? Pegasus should be a good short notice launcher if there is ever a stockpile of them. I would guess that it is faster and simpler to prepare a Peg launch than say, a titan launch. -- Joe Pantuso joe@lakesys.lakesys.com Home(414)259-1897 ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 04:55:47 GMT From: mailrus!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: orbit definitions In article <15334@bfmny0.UU.NET> tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes: >... Geostationary coverage in the Arctic and Antarctic, for >instance, is very difficult: the dishes have to aim horizontally >through all kinds of clutter... It can be worse than that. At the poles themselves, Clarke orbit is *below* the horizon. Not far below, but below. The problems with polar coverage are one reason why the Soviets used Molniya orbits rather than Clarke orbit for their comsats for a long time. (They now have some Clarke-orbit birds, but the Molniyas are still in service too.) -- Apollo @ 8yrs: one small step.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology Space station @ 8yrs: .| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 90 18:50:30 GMT From: mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!texbell!nuchat!steve@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Steve Nuchia) Subject: Re: Pegasus Stats Repost In article <27726@ut-emx.UUCP> grads@emx.UUCP (Feulner ... Matt Feulner) writes: >>B-52. The payload fairing is 46" diameter by 72" long. > >If it's about the same size as the X-15, is the payload high enough to support >a person and all the life support equipment? ... > I guess it would have to have some sort of space lock ... A suited human plus acceleration support would fit in the space and 1000 lb weight limits with a little engineering work. Several hours oxygen wouldn't be a problem. Launching in a suit means you don't need a lock, you just get off the bus and walk in the front door of the station. The when you're ready to go home, you walk out the door and open your parachute :-) Seriously, it would be a challenge to make the capsule gizmo capable of reentry, but if you did then you'd have a $6 million two-way commuter vehicle. Then all you have to do is come up with a scenario in which getting a single individual to orbit and back with *very* little equipment on short notice is important. You'd probably want it to be capable of reentry anyway, for safety in case it misses the rendezvous. How about satellite repair, without a shuttle? :-) How much does an MMU weigh, anyway? ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V11 #236 *******************