Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from hogtown.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 ; Tue, 5 Feb 91 02:16:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Tue, 5 Feb 91 02:16:02 -0500 (EST) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #113 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 113 Today's Topics: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #091 Fire in Space Re: Fire in Space Re: Firm Fred Decisions Ulysses Update - 01/31/91 Re: Voyager CD-ROMs Re: Fire in Space Administrivia: Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to space+@andrew.cmu.edu. Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests, should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 91 12:24:51 -0800 From: nirvana@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (60351000) Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V13 #091 Please... Do NOT send me the Space Digest!! It's just cluttering up my mailbox. Thank you. ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jan 91 17:32:31 GMT From: usc!ucselx!crash!dang%crash.cts.com@ucsd.edu (Dan Gookin) Subject: Fire in Space I have this perverse curiosity about what fire--specifically a flame--would look like in space. If figure if you lit a match, it probably would lack the familiar conical shape the flame has here on earth. In fact, I think it would look like a point of light or perhaps a spherical flame. (And then my mind thought "Ooops, pure oxygen atmosphere--Whoosh!) But what would fire look like in space? or actually, zero-g? Would there be flames? Would it be spotty and amorphous? There is no scientific reason behind this; just curiosity (a mind-exercise, if you will). dang ------------------------------ Date: 1 Feb 91 03:53:51 GMT From: ubc-cs!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Fire in Space In article <10134@ncar.ucar.edu> strandwg@ncar.ucar.edu (Gary Strand) writes: > Why? What effect does gravity have on the burning particles, relative to > the forces they feel from the other heated particles around them? I would > think that since gravity plays such a small role in what a flame looks > like, it would look the same on the Shuttle (say) as here on earth. The dominant force in the shape of a flame is convection currents, which are driven by gravity. -- If the Space Shuttle was the answer, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology what was the question? | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jan 91 13:35:15 GMT From: eagle!news@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Ronald E. Graham) Subject: Re: Firm Fred Decisions In article <1991Jan25.135000.17350@engin.umich.edu>, sheppard@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ken Sheppardson) writes... >lvron@earth.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Graham) writes: >>Here is what's happening with Fred, as we have just heard it: >> >>o the budget is now for man-tended capability (MTC) only; >>o the Flight Telerobotic Servicer (FTS) is no longer in the program, >> and, therefore, Work Package (WP) 03 is also out; >>o First Element Launch (FEL) is now scheduled for 09/95, with four >> other launches (10/95, 03/96, 06/96, and 09/96) to get to MTC; >>o no more than four launches per year; >>o a lab module will exist only at MTC; >>o there will be no habitation module or nodes: the Shuttle will dock >> directly to the lab, serving as your hab module while docked; >>o 18.75 kW of power only; >>o command and control in the lab; >>o no permanently-manned capability (PMC) equipment or growth planned; >>o Delta PDR *may* be held in 08/91; >>o WP-04 (that's Lewis Research Center) will share an SDP (I'm sorry: I >> don't know that acronym) with WP-02. > Apparently your source misunderstood what s/he saw/heard. Although > some of the items on the list are _almost_ 'firm fred decision', e.g. > FTS has been reduced to 'technology development' status (see the most > recent Space News for more up to date info on FTS) the rest of your > list is for the most part 'bogus'...no offense. No offense taken. Also no proof given. I recognize, Mr. Sheppardson, that you are working in the SSF area at Langley, so you may be in the path of some good information. What I have posted, however, is exactly what we have been told at Lewis. I must ask you for sources. In the meantime, let me update just a couple things from the above list: o WP-02 (Johnson Space Center) is fighting to retain some of what we have been told has been taken away, particularly a section (I do not know how much) of truss; o while Mr. Sheppardson has correctly indicated that the FTS is in technology development status, for practical purposes that means it is not in the current baseline. Goddard Space Flight Center has been instructed, for the time being, not to work on it. Let me add that the Solar Dynamic power modules proposed for growth configurations of SSF are also in the technology development status, and at Lewis that means no money is to be spent working on them any more this fiscal year. Even if the field centers themselves don't know everything that's happening right now, never never never accept the word of a secondary source (e.g. Space News) over what HQ is telling you about programmatical decisions until all the information is in. Unhappily, with Fred the information is not all in yet. RG ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jan 91 21:44:21 GMT From: usc!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!mars.jpl.nasa.gov!baalke@ucsd.edu (Ron Baalke) Subject: Ulysses Update - 01/31/91 ULYSSES STATUS REPORT January 31, 1991 Today, Ulysses is about 153 million kilometers (95 million miles) from Earth, traveling at a heliocentric velocity of about 104,000 kilometers per hour (64,400 miles per hour). The Ulysses mission is in a routine operations phase as the spacecraft travels through the ecliptic plane on its way to Jupiter. Ulysses will reach Jupiter around Feb. 8, 1992, at which time the spacecraft will use the gravity of the giant planet to bend its trajectory and dive downward, out of the ecliptic plane. Mission operations teams have not detected any recurrence of the wobble which Ulysses experienced in December 1990. They are keeping a close watch on the situation and have operations procedures available to stabilize the spacecraft if the wobble recurs. The project office said the motion may resume at any time through March 1991. All science instruments are on and no anomalies or failures have been reported. Controllers are currently receiving real-time telemetry from Ulysses about eight to ten hours each day and using the spacecraft's tape recorder to acquire data during the remaining 16-hour intervals when Ulysses is out of view. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |___ M/S 301-355 | It's 10PM, do you know /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | where your spacecraft is? |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | We do! ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jan 91 17:54:47 GMT From: sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!msuinfo!sharkey!ramsay.UUCP!gavin@ucsd.edu (Gavin Eadie) Subject: Re: Voyager CD-ROMs In article <1991Jan30.231628.6707@oakhill.sps.mot.com>, hunter@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Hunter Scales) writes: > baalke@mars.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: > > > > I've received a number of inquiries about the Voyager images available > >on CD-ROMs. There are eight CD-ROMs that contain about 16,000 images taken > > Does anyone know if these CD-ROMs can be read on a Macinosh? > If so, does anyone have a mac decompression/viewing program or > failing that, is the compression and/or image file format spec > available so that I can write my own? I'm starting to feel that > I should buy a PC clone just so I dont have to feel left out > of things like this. > Yes they can be read by a Mac. There is a program called PixelPusher that will read the format of these files. The program was written at JPL and is quite nice (though unfinished in some details). If the original author doesn't mind (and I'll try to find that out), I can make it available via FTP from an internet host near you ... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Gavin Eadie Ramsay Consulting 507 Second Street (313) 665-2819 Ann Arbor, MI 48103 ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jan 91 21:47:59 GMT From: brahms.udel.edu!gdtltr@louie.udel.edu (root@research.bdi.com (Systems Research Supervisor)) Subject: Re: Fire in Space In article <7332@crash.cts.com> dang@crash.cts.com (Dan Gookin) writes: => =>I have this perverse curiosity about what fire--specifically a =>flame--would look like in space. => =>If figure if you lit a match, it probably would lack the familiar =>conical shape the flame has here on earth. In fact, I think it would =>look like a point of light or perhaps a spherical flame. (And =>then my mind thought "Ooops, pure oxygen atmosphere--Whoosh!) => I'm no expert, but I read that it would be spherical. Also, unless I am mistaken, no one would be stupid enough to use pure oxygen in a spacecraft again. =>But what would fire look like in space? or actually, zero-g? Would =>there be flames? Would it be spotty and amorphous? There is no =>scientific reason behind this; just curiosity (a mind-exercise, =>if you will). => The match would burn until the oxygen around it was exhausted and then just radiate heat. If some sort of draft gives it more oxygen, it will reignite. Gary Duzan Time Lord Third Regeneration -- gdtltr@brahms.udel.edu _o_ ---------------------- _o_ [|o o|] Two CPU's are better than one; N CPU's would be real nice. [|o o|] |_o_| Disclaimer: I AM Brain Dead Innovations, Inc. |_o_| ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #113 *******************