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 ; Mon, 24 Jun 91 03:55:16 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Mon, 24 Jun 91 03:55:01 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #698 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 698 Today's Topics: Re: RFD: talk.politics.space Re: Crary's Quick Debunkings Re: Self-sustaining infrastructures Re: Self-sustaining infrastructures student space experiments Re: Microgravity? Re: RFD: talk.politics.space Chapman/Lowery Amendment LOW LATITUDE AURORAL ACTIVITY WARNING Northern Lights sightings in Ohio? Re: INFO: Clandestine Mars Observer Launch?? Re: INFO: Clandestine Mars Observer Launch?? 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: 5 Jun 91 13:26:39 GMT From: mcsun!tuvie!rcvie!se_taylo@uunet.uu.net (Ian Taylor) Subject: Re: RFD: talk.politics.space In article <13108@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes: >In article <1991Jun2.160327.27599@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, randall@Virginia.EDU (Randall Atkinson) writes: >> The proposal for talk.politics.space appears to be well-done >> in charter, rationale, and naming. >> >> I fully support it. I stopped reading sci.space some time back >> precisely because of the flood of "political" postings. > >I agree with the first paragraph. However, I do not see that it is >possible to separate the political from the scientific. How would one >class the recent arguments about manned space which hinge on what is >scientifically true or technologically possible? >-- I concur, given the current impact of politics on the future of space science, I think that *full* discussion about the subject is essential. BTW I think that it not a good basis to start a new newsgroup simply because some people are not interested in certain aspects of the discussion. eg I am not particularly interested in NASA prediction bulletins, so why not sci.space.nasa.prediction.bulletins? +-- I -------- ian@rcvie.at ------------------------- voice +43 1 391621 169 --+ | T a y l o r Alcatel Austria-ELIN Research Centre, Vienna, Austria A-1210 | +-- n -------- fax +43 1 391452 ---------------- PSI%023226191002::SE_TAYLOR --+ Any resemblance to opinions, alive or dead, is purely coincidental. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 91 09:17:43 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!percy!littlei!intelhf!agora!trifid@uunet.uu.net (Roadster Racewerks) Subject: Re: Crary's Quick Debunkings I would remind those discussing the "face" on Mars that there are quite a few perfectly natural features here on Earth that coincidentally resemble human faces (such as the famous "Old Man of the Mountains") or other parts (the "Paps of Ainu"). I've never been able to figure out why the Martian formation should be considered of an "occult" or "alien intelligence" origin, while the local ones are not. Anybody care to list other terran formations that resemble faces, etc.? I know they exist all over the planet... Suze Hammond trifid@agora.rain.com ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 91 17:29:42 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Self-sustaining infrastructures In article <136271@unix.cis.pitt.edu> sheaf@helios (Sheaf) writes: >>... No more need for VEEGA orbits -- just launch >>the probe, propulsion and fuel separately, assemble in orbit, run a >>systems check, then launch for Mars, Jupiter, etc. > > In theory, this is a nice idea, but I think you're forgetting >that the whole reason for the Galileo VEEGA orbit is that liquid >boosters were deemed too volitile to be carried in the shuttle's cargo >bay. If this continues to be the case, having a space station is sort >of pointless if you can't lift the proper components up to it. Why do you assume that nothing but the shuttle could ever be used to launch such things? A Titan IV should be able to launch a fully-fueled Centaur G', the upper stage that Galileo (for example) was designed for. If you launch stage and fuel separately, the problems become even less significant. If you *really* want to get clever, there is a place on the shuttle where cryogenic fuels (the only ones banned from the payload bay -- liquid fuels in general are not) can safely be carried up: in the External Tank. I saw a serious proposal to haul Galileo+Centaur up *unfuelled*, take the ET all the way to a (low) orbit, and fuel the Centaur in orbit using the leftover contents of the ET. A little tricky, and I'm not surprised that NASA decided it was too complex (depressed, maybe, but not surprised), but it should be possible. -- "We're thinking about upgrading from | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology SunOS 4.1.1 to SunOS 3.5." | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 91 20:18:10 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utzoo!henry@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Self-sustaining infrastructures In article <1991Jun5.184922.11154@agate.berkeley.edu> gwh@tornado.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) writes: >>Why do you assume that nothing but the shuttle could ever be used to >>launch such things? A Titan IV should be able to launch a fully-fueled >>Centaur G', the upper stage that Galileo (for example) was designed for. > >The Titan IV isn't a civillian or even NASA launch option now and won't >be for a while... besides which, it's _really_ margainal for lifting a >Centaur+Galileo sized payload... But that's not what I suggested using it for. Please read what I wrote: I suggested launching the *Centaur* on the Titan. Just the Centaur. That's what this discussion is about: on-orbit assembly. Titan IVs, while not in abundant supply, are available to NASA if it asks far enough in advance and coughs up the cash. There is no good reason why they couldn't be available on the civilian market if you found enough customers and maybe lobbied Congress a bit to lean on the USAF. In any case, a Commercial Titan just might suffice; I haven't got numbers handy. >>I saw a serious proposal to haul Galileo+Centaur up *unfuelled*, take the >>ET all the way to a (low) orbit, and fuel the Centaur in orbit using the >>leftover contents of the ET. A little tricky... > >Gee, Henry, shouldn't we test an on-orbit LOX/LH2 refueling before we assume >we can do it? 8-) It would be embarrasing if something failed... So test it first. -- "We're thinking about upgrading from | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology SunOS 4.1.1 to SunOS 3.5." | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 91 19:10:40 GMT From: eagle!data.nas.nasa.gov!mustang!nntp-server.caltech.edu!iago.caltech.edu!irwin@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Horowitz, Irwin Kenneth) Subject: student space experiments I am posting this for a friend... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attention Student Space Researchers! A database of student designed/engineered/assisted space flight experiments is being compiled by The Bionetics Corporation (TBC), for use by TBC and NASA. This database will contain detailed descriptions of the flight experiments, how students were involved, how funding was accomplished, and what successes, failures, and difficulties were encountered during the project. Information from students or people working with students on completed, ongoing, or planned experiments is needed as soon as possible. All serious responses to this inquiry will be placed on a mailing list to receive future Research Announcements from NASA (if so desired). Please direct responses to Lisa Weigel at: Email: alweigel@athena.mit.edu Phone: (202) 863-1223 Fax: (202) 863-1954 USMail: The Bionetics Corporation 600 Maryland Avenue, SW Suite 880 Washington, DC 20024 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Irwin Horowitz |"Suppose they went nowhere?"-McCoy Astronomy Department |"Then this will be your big chance California Institute of Technology | to get away from it all!"-Kirk irwin@romeo.caltech.edu | from STII:TWOK ih@deimos.caltech.edu | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 91 14:19:18 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!pop.stat.purdue.edu!hrubin@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Herman Rubin) Subject: Re: Microgravity? In article <1991Jun4.205819.12889@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > In article <13163@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes: > >... is this better than taking to > >a substantial height (we do have ways to get drops of well over 7000 meters) > > The problem with substantial heights is air resistance. As any skydiver will > tell you, an object released from an aircraft at any normal altitude is not > in free fall for more than a fraction of a second. The drop-tube microgravity > facilities typically evacuate their tubes to a vacuum before drop. I was thinking of taking the objects to be released to well over 20000 meters, then releasing them, and using parachutes when they got low enough. This would give the more than 7000 meters of low-pressure drop, and also a gradual deceleration at the end. In addition, cameras can be used to observe objects not encased in containers. -- Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399 Phone: (317)494-6054 hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet) {purdue,pur-ee}!l.cc!hrubin(UUCP) ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 91 21:03:52 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!waikato.ac.nz!pjs1@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Subject: Re: RFD: talk.politics.space In article <1991Jun5.132639.7488@rcvie.co.at>, se_taylo@rcvie.co.at (Ian Taylor) writes: > I concur, given the current impact of politics on the future of space > science, I think that *full* discussion about the subject is essential. > > BTW I think that it not a good basis to start a new newsgroup simply > because some people are not interested in certain aspects of the discussion. > eg I am not particularly interested in NASA prediction bulletins, so why not > sci.space.nasa.prediction.bulletins? > I think the idea of this new group is not to stop talk on political issues as such, but rather to seperate (when possible, cross posting otherwise) them from the technical discussions. Most current sci.space readers will probably end up reading both (I know I will) but for those who don't want to wade through hundreds of postings (sci.space is approx the 25th most profilic group on this system) there is a choice. As easily as creating a political subgroup, we might of created a more technical subgroup (as has been suggested). I personally think this is a good first step in improving the readability of this group. However sci.space.political would be a better name IMHO. My final coment is on futher subgroups (eg sci.space.launchsystems) which I think are a good idea as well. If rushed you can read through only the subgroups you are realy interested in, while if you are going to read everything, the seperation of seperate topics improves readability. About time I got a signiture Pete Smith Uni of Waikato (Y-cat-O) NZ. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 16:27:17 PDT From: jim@pnet01.cts.com (Jim Bowery) To: crash!space+@andrew.cmu.edu Subject: Chapman/Lowery Amendment The best information I've been able to get out of Lowery's office is that the space science missions will be stretched out but not cancelled. When asked whether any analysis had been conducted as to the impact of delay on the missions, they indicated they would get back to me after consulting with NASA. I brought up the possibility of reintroducing the penetrator to CRAF if it is delayed. Again, no committment was made, but the possibility will be looked into. I'm waiting for call-back. I'm sorry this hasn't been more helpful, but not even the staffers of congressmen on the science, space and technology committee I talked to have a copy of the amendment, nor are they sure of the consequences. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jim Bowery 619/295-3164 The Coalition for PO Box 1981 Science and La Jolla, CA 92038 Commerce ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 16:01:41 MDT From: oler <@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU:oler@HG.ULeth.CA> (CARY OLER) Subject: LOW LATITUDE AURORAL ACTIVITY WARNING X-St-Vmsmail-To: st%"space+@andrew.cmu.edu" /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ LOW LATITUDE AURORAL ACTIVITY WARNING ISSUED: 04 JUNE, 1991 VALID: 04 - 05 JUNE /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ ATTENTION: A minor to major geomagnetic storm is presently in progress. Conditions could become favorable for low-latitude auroral activity observations during the local evening hours of 04 and 05 June. Lunar phase will not be a source of interference until the early morning hours. Dark skies are expected until the moon rises, and should provide optimum conditions for observing auroral activity. Please note that as Region 6659 continues to produce very powerful major flares, and as it continues to rotate into a more sensitive and influential position, auroral and geomagnetic storming could become very high later this week and into next week. There is a distinct risk for low latitude auroral activity becoming visible over the low latitude zones, as far south as Florida and southern Texas sometime during the next 7 to 10 days. For the southern hemisphere observers, auroral activity could become very visible throughout all of New Zealand and Australia. Daily solar terrestrial event updates will be presented effective immediately. ** End of Watch ** ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 91 03:23:23 GMT From: agate!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!malgudi!uoft02.utoledo.edu!csrag@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Subject: Northern Lights sightings in Ohio? Anyone seen any northern lights in the Ohio area on June 4th or tonight June 5th? There were reports but I just wondered if anyone else saw it? Thanks. Rob ---------------------------------------------------------------- Rob Gasser * CSRAG@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU "Hey, save that broom, from the S W E E P of the A's" WORLD CHAMPION CINCINNATI REDS!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 91 15:47:59 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jpl-devvax!jenkins@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Steve Jenkins) Subject: Re: INFO: Clandestine Mars Observer Launch?? In article <1991May31.022927.35@bilver.uucp> dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen) writes: >WWCR's radio broadcast "For The People" on 03-May-91 carried a >report by Richard C. Hoagland, who believes the United States >might have a spacecraft on its way to the planet Mars in order to >investigate the "Cydonia Message" first discovered in photos >taken by Viking 1 in 1976. Hoagland believes the Mars observer >spacecraft was deployed by the Space Shuttle "Atlantis" on >mission STS-38. Wow! I guess we better get busy with the Mars Observer telemetry system. It's not scheduled for ground testing until later this year. :-) to keep from :-( -- Steve Jenkins N6UNI jenkins@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov Caltech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (818) 354-0162 ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 91 01:53:49 GMT From: agate!spool.mu.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu!chuck@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (charles bridgeland) Subject: Re: INFO: Clandestine Mars Observer Launch?? jburnes@swbatl.sbc.com (Jim Burnes - 235-7444) writes: >be recognized as such. Really...if someone wanted to send us a >message why didnt they just encode it in symbology like we did >on voyager. >Jim ....................... indeed. a big city, laid out in a nice rectangular grid, would signal the presence of intelligent life just as well as a face, and be useful to boot -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- chuck bridgeland---anarchoRepublican "one thing about a police state, you can always find the police" l. neil smith chuck@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu hire me so I can quit this pit. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #698 *******************