Date: Sat, 16 Jan 93 05:00:05 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #052 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 16 Jan 93 Volume 16 : Issue 052 Today's Topics: Elementary Ballistics (3 msgs) Freedom's orbit (2 msgs) future space travel Handling Antimatter Helium How much? (was Re: Moon Dust Sold) In Memorium, RAH (was:needed: a real live space helmet) IP for pub/SPACE/GIF wanted!!!!! Retaining Goldin Satellites & Education Conference Saving Goldin/Saving NASA Solar Snails (was Re: Space Questions and more..) Temperature of space The Universy Bubble This is a test post. TPS Systems What's it like at the edge of the universe? (2 msgs) Who can launch antisats? (was Re: DoD launcher use) Znamya: Orbiting mirror. Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15 Jan 93 09:12:15 GMT From: "A.Lizard" Subject: Elementary Ballistics Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.physics,alt.pagan boylan@sltg04.ljo.dec.com (Steve Boylan) writes: > > Gee, this sounds like it ought to be a simple question . . . > > What speed (using the term to refer to the magnitude of the > velocity vector) must be imparted to a body at the surface of > the Earth to achieve low Earth orbit? I've seen estimates > bandied about that ranged from 2.2 km/sec. to 8 km/sec. > Naturally, I can't recall enough of basic mechanics to > figure it out for myself, and I can't find my mechanics > text . . . > > At the root of this question is a raging discussion on what > types of Earth-based launcher might be practical for different > payloads - which ought to explain the bizarre cross-posting. > Basically, if you're going to launch something using a railgun, > coilgun, gas gun, or some other accelerator, how fast will you > have to get it moving? That ought to be the basic design > constraint - from that you can choose your combination of length > versus acceleration. > > If I remember my ballistics correctly, in the absence of an > atmosphere, something launched by acceleration on the surface > can achieve an elliptical orbit . . . that is tangent to the > surface, which is probably not good on a body like the Moon > and decidedly a problem with an atmosphere around. What kind > of change in velocity is needed to round out the orbit so > it would stay outside the Earth's atmosphere? > > For that matter, how much extra work do you need to do to > get a payload out of the Earth's atmosphere? > > Any takers? > > - - Steve > > > -- > Don't miss the 49th New England Folk Festival, > April 23-25, 1993 in Natick, Massachusetts! 8 km/second is close enough, plus whatever extra velocity is required to compensate for deceleration caused by atmospheric friction, which is largely a function of the aerodynamic characteristics of the payload. Given this, the most important constraint on the length of the rail / coil gun is the acceleration used. (also the most important constraint on construction costs as well.) A.Lizard ------------------------------------------------------------------- A.Lizard Internet Addresses: alizard%tweekco%boo@PacBell.COM (preferred) [path]!pacbell.COM!boo!tweekco!alizard (bang path for above) alizard@gentoo.com (backup) alizard@Blue.Kludge.com (if all else fails) PGP2.0 public key available on request. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 13:13:20 GMT From: Brad Kepley Subject: Elementary Ballistics Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.physics,alt.pagan >boylan@sltg04.ljo.dec.com (Steve Boylan) writes: > >> >> Gee, this sounds like it ought to be a simple question . . . >> >> What speed (using the term to refer to the magnitude of the >> velocity vector) must be imparted to a body at the surface of >> the Earth to achieve low Earth orbit? I've seen estimates >> bandied about that ranged from 2.2 km/sec. to 8 km/sec. >> Naturally, I can't recall enough of basic mechanics to >> figure it out for myself, and I can't find my mechanics >> text . . . >> 8 km/s (27000 km/h) is what is needed to *maintain circular orbit. >> >> If I remember my ballistics correctly, in the absence of an >> atmosphere, something launched by acceleration on the surface >> can achieve an elliptical orbit . . . that is tangent to the >> surface, which is probably not good on a body like the Moon >> and decidedly a problem with an atmosphere around. What kind >> of change in velocity is needed to round out the orbit so >> it would stay outside the Earth's atmosphere? Actually, it takes *more* velocity for an eliptical orbit ( about 30000 km/h). >> >> For that matter, how much extra work do you need to do to >> get a payload out of the Earth's atmosphere? The work will depend on the payload and = delta KE or 1/2 mv^2 , I think. Escape velocity is about 40000 km/h. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 14:24:49 GMT From: John F Blanton Subject: Elementary Ballistics Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.physics,alt.pagan The problem of launching bodies into orbit from a planet's surface is one I have worked out for several scenarios. It's an interesting situation, relatively easy to solve and often with surprising results. However, I can't submit a lengthy post on this right now. If no one posts a valid response by the end of today I will try to recall some of my previous results. John Blanton blanton@lobby.ti.com ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jan 93 13:42:46 GMT From: Ken Sheppardson Subject: Freedom's orbit Newsgroups: sci.space In the studies we're doing looking at post-PMC station logistics requirements, we're using the baseline station reboost strategy of "180 to 150". That is, an orbit in which the minimum altitude is defined as the altitude from which it would take 180 days to decay to 150 nautical miles. This altitude varies over the 11 year solar cycle and on whether you plan for a nominal or a "2 sigma bad" solar cycle. The altitude tends to vary from 210-230 or so depending on where you are in the reboost and solar cycles. As an approximation, folks around here doing launch vehicle manifesting are using 220 nmi. 28.5 degrees is the baseline orbit, although there's a small radical fringe contingent of folks who continue to advocate/consider a higher inclination to allow for the use of Russian facilities and vehicles. Go figure. --- Ken Sheppardson kcs@freedom.larc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 15:46:15 -0500 (EST) From: JTRIMBLE@nhqvax.hq.nasa.gov Subject: Freedom's orbit Regarding the requests from Fifield and Ardalan: I checked with some of the Space Station engineers here in Reston, and the orbit for station is 220 nmi. The inclination is, as Ardalan stated, 28.5 degrees. Jeanne Trimble Space Station Library JTRIMBLE@NHQVAX.HQ.NASA.GOV ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jan 93 12:05:28 GMT From: Nick Szabo Subject: future space travel Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes: >...the dry valleys of >Antarctica. Conditions there are very reminiscent of Mars - bitter cold >much of the time, bare rock, high winds, and dryer than the Sahara Desert. >(There's even fairly intense UV, by Earth standards.) >Yet life is there - algae living under rocks, sheltered from the most >extreme cold, and getting light needed for photosynthesis from sunlight >shining *through* the rocks. Other algae are found *inside* rocks, located >between the component crystals of the rock. There are some _big_ differences. The most important is probably pressure. When water gets above freezing in Antartica from the sunlight, it melts into liquid. On Mars, it sublimates into vapor: there is no liquid state at that pressure. It's been over a billion years since any signficant part of Mars got above the triple point of water. Some other differences: the water content of Mars surface rock is, in most places, orders of magnitude lower than that in Antartic ice. The most basic living processes discriminate against C13, increasing the C12/C13 ratio; Mars' carbon has been untouched by such processes. The ratio of hope for life on Mars, to the actual probability of same, is nearly infinite. Boy do I wish there was a futures market on this! :-) -- Nick Szabo szabo@techboook.com ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jan 93 14:34:19 GMT From: Thomas Clarke Subject: Handling Antimatter Newsgroups: sci.space With all the discussion of antimatter, its time to bring up my pet scheme for handling the stuff. Imagine a molecular cage, say a buckminsterfullerene. The cage has a net positive charge (missing an electron). A negative antiproton could then be trapped in the center of the cage where it would only "contact" and be repelled by the orbital electrons. Since electrons and antiprotons don't annihilate, this arrangement should be stable as long as the cage is intact. Various molecular groups added to the outside of the cage could give this material useful properties such as solubility. To make a wonderful rocket fuel, disolve some of the caged antiprotons into a suitable working fluid such as water. When injected into a running rocket engine, the heat will disrupt the cage, releasing the anitproton which will annihilate releasing energy and running the rocket engine. It might be a little tricky to get the engine started, but it shouldn't be impossible. The charged fuel is also a potential (nuclear?) explosive, so one would have to take usual precautions. The caged antiprotons would also have military applications - what doesn't? A few milligrams of passivated antiprotions inserted into the tip of a rifle bullet would let the average infantryman totally destroy a main battle tank! -- Thomas Clarke Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central FL 12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826 (407)658-5030, FAX: (407)658-5059, clarke@acme.ucf.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 15:56:36 MET From: PHARABOD@FRCPN11.IN2P3.FR Subject: Helium > I just checked my CRC and, technically, you're right. The critical >point for He-4 is at 0.227 MPa (2.24 atmospheres) and 5.19 degrees >kelvin. Above that pressure the element forms a supercritical fluid, >not a liquid. (C. Neufeld, Thu, 14 Jan 1993 05:30:20 GMT) What I can read on the drawings reproduced in "Gas Encyclopaedia/ Encyclopedie des Gaz" about helium-4 at very low temperature (say less than 4 K) is the following (with K = degree kelvin): at 1 Atm, He is superfluid below 2.14 K, in liquid phase above; at 6 Atm, He is superfluid below 2.09 K, in liquid phase above. According to the "Encyclopaedia Britannica", "Strictly speaking, the term liquid should be applied only to the more dense of the two phases on the line TC, but it is generally extended to any dense fluid state at low temperature; that is, to the area lying within the angle CTM." (T = triple point, C = critical point, TM = melting curve). I sort of understand that it means you can speak of liquid when it is below the critical temperature (and, of course, between the curves TC and TM). J. Pharabod ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 08:48:41 GMT From: Hartmut Frommert Subject: How much? (was Re: Moon Dust Sold) Newsgroups: sci.space I wrote: >higgins@fnala.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: .. >>I can't find the article with results .. .. >It was on sci.space.shuttle if I remem right. Oops - of course I was wrong. - Hartmut Frommert Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany -- Eat whale killers, not whales -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 14:24:57 CST From: ssi!lfa@uunet.UU.NET (Louis F. Adornato) Subject: In Memorium, RAH (was:needed: a real live space helmet) In article <1993Jan13.172428.8009@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack) wrote: > > > You will win a spacesuit if you are the fifth? prize winner. Unless you > are fully prepared, don't fix it up and walk around in the back yard > calling "Junebug to Peewee!" "Yuk yuk yukkity yuk yuk" (another quote from HSWT). I assume we've all figured out the fact that the original post was from one of those idiots who think that all space enthusiasts are technogeeks who can't tell the difference between science fiction and reality (he's right, too; That's why the gap keeps closing). Mr. Cool playing a joke on the nerds that they aren't suave enough to detect. However, the number of responses brings up a valid point - there are an awful lot people in engineering and science today who first became attracted to those fields thanks to Robert Heinlien. Even though NASA gave him a medal (fortunately, before he passed on), I think we owe him a little more. I understand that there's a move afoot to see that the next time Americans reach the moon, they take along some water from the Pacific (where RAH's ashes where scattered). I think this is a nice gesture, and if anyone can supply me with more details, I'd appreciate it. What I'm wondering about is the possibility of naming some sort of geological feature after him. Something on Venus would be appropriate, as all the other features there are named for women. Actually, a permanently inhabited installation (perhaps a military one?) would be more appropriate. Any suggestions? Lou Adornato uunet!ssi!lfa | The secretary (and the rest of the company) Supercomputer Systems, Inc | have disavowed any knowledge of my actions. Eau Claire, WI | ** Space IS our future! ** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 12:49:55 GMT From: George Hastings Subject: IP for pub/SPACE/GIF wanted!!!!! Newsgroups: sci.space Irmgard Heeb (chris02@cat.de ) writes: > this is an urgent search for the IP-Address where all the gif's archived! > I've allready been at that host but I've lost the address now so I hope > there's someone able to give me the right information > > thank's a lot for any assistance... > rgds chris > > --- > Irmgard Heeb (chris02@cat.de) > C.A.T. Kommunikations-System, Frankfurt, Germany Try this: FTP ames.arc.nasa.gov logon: anonymous password: guest dir cd (change directory to whatever) ls (to list - usually there is a file named INDEX) then get (filename) that will get it to your local, where you'll have to DL it to your own computer --- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 09:37:00 From: Subject: Retaining Goldin As someone who seems to have come in on this thread in the middle of the discussion, could someone please explain to me what is wrong with replacing Administrator Goldin with someone of President-elect Clinton's choosing? No value judgements implied. I'm just trying to educate myself. Rick Kitchen kitchenrn@ssd0.laafb.af.mil ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 11:45:25 EST From: Deborah Economidis Subject: Satellites & Education Conference S A T E L L I T E S A N D E D U C A T I O N C O N F E R E N C E VI CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW -- MEETING THE CHALLENGE FOCUS: Introducing educators to the range of learning opportunities available through satellite technology. MARCH 17-19, 1993 Registration fee of $150 should be made payable to West Chester University and mailed to Nancy McIntyre Recitation Hall 304, School of Education, West Chester, PA 19383 MUST be received no later than March 1, 1993. For additional information, call 215-436-2393. (and registration forms) Plenary sessions pertaining to Environmental and Communications Satellites including: Successful Classroom Applications for Various Disciplines, Workshop sessions for Educators from Elementary Schools to Universities on innovative uses of Satellite Data - Beginner to Advanced Expertise. Speakers include: Congressman Robert S. Walker...U.S. House of Representatives (invited) Dr. Shelby Tilford...Dir., Earth Science and Application Division, NASA Dr. Wendell Mohling... President, National Science Teacher Association Ray Ban...Vice President of Operations, The Weather Channel (invited) Kathleen Sullivan...Former Astronaut (invited) Kathleen Beres...Teacher-in-Space Finalist/Dir., Business Development, Space Science Programs, Hughes-Danbury Optical Systems Bob Ryan...President-Elect, American Meteorological Society (invited) And the list goes on including speakers from: PA Public Television Network, Telonics, GE AstroSpace, Hughes-Danbury Optical Systems, American Meteorological Society, National Weather Service, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, Gettysburg College, PA Department of Education, Satellite Educators Association, NESDIS, NASA, Austin Area School District, IPS of California EXHIBITS DOOR PRIZES ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 17:00:21 -0600 From: pgf@srl01.cacs.usl.edu (Phil G. Fraering) Subject: Saving Goldin/Saving NASA \Would you prefer someone who will do a BETTER job than Goldin? Well, the /answer is obvious... YES. IF Goldin is replaced will he be replaced \with someone who will do a better job than him? Doubtful. If he is replaced it is because the administration feels a porkocrat would do a better job than Goldin. About the objections in the previous article: well, what do you expect him to do, he's a Democrat. He's a hell of a lot better than the person who would replace him. \I have heard bad things about the people who are proposed as a replacement. /Are there concrete examples out there on these guys from netland? Rep. Nelson is apparently hostile to the point of wanting to terminate with extreme prejudice private and/or non-shuttle forms of space launch. \Assuming that Goldin can not be saved, who then is the BEST person to run /NASA? If we can't save Goldin, it's time to consider getting rid of the agency altogether, which after four years of abyssmal one-party rule may be an option (or a neccesity; we may not be able to afford such frivolous things as a space program or a military capable of defeating Mexico). ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jan 93 16:37:01 GMT From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey Subject: Solar Snails (was Re: Space Questions and more..) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Jan7.062305.960@ke4zv.uucp>, gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes: > In article <1993Jan6.042912.1@acad3.alaska.edu> nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu writes: >> >>When DCX flys, why not use it as a way to lift a small payload such as the >>"solar Sail Race" contestants into space? That is if the contestants are >>unmanned.. > Large solar sails may someday be useful for carrying non-perishable cargo > about the solar system, and the race is a way of proving out the concept. > It should really be viewed as a race between snails, however. "Solar Snails!" I like that, Gary. Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey | "Enough marshmallows Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory | will kill you Bitnet: HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET | if properly placed." Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV | --John Alexander, leader of SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS | "disabling technologies" [*Aviation Week*, 7 Dec 1992, p. 50] | research, Los Alamos ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 18:13:59 EST From: Tom <18084TM@msu.edu> Subject: Temperature of space Jason Cooper asks: -Second thing that I've been thinking about... What's the average -temperature of space (just "empty" space, not including planets, etc)? For purposes of radiating heat into space, it is treated as a 3K sink, since that's the temperature of the microwave background radiation. I don't know if the temerature of interstellar (or intrplanetary) gas adds a significant amount. Presumably, since it's been there for a really long time, it has already reached equilibrium with the background. -Tommy Mac ------------------------------=========================================== Tom McWilliams |Is Faith a short ' ` ' *.; +% 18084tm@ibm.cl.msu.edu |cut for attaining + . ' (517) 355-2178 -or- 353-2986 | . knowledge? ;"' ,' . ' . a scrub Astronomy undergrad | * , or is it just . . at Michigan State University | '; ' * a short-circuit? , ------------------------------=========================================== ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 17:54:59 EST From: Tom <18084TM@msu.edu> Subject: The Universy Bubble Robert F Casey sez: >I remember reading in (I think) Sky & Telescope some years ago an >article about the universe, and some theories on it's origin (big >bang, and such). One theory said something to the effect that our >universe was expanding, and was surrounded by a larger area of some >sort of superdense material. As if the universe was a bubble of >mostly empty space expanding inside this superdense material. >Which leads to the question: Is there a boundry, where you can >stand right next to the "surface" of the universe bubble, and >touch with your spacesuited hand the wall of superdense material? >Would it be dark, or bright, perfectly smooth, or with irregularities >like mountians (microns high, miles high, lightyears high?)? >Could you walk on it, is there gravity (lots of gravity like millions of >G's, or none, what happens if a meteorite hits the surface (bounce off, >stick, big energy explosion, disappear?)? Good memory! The idea is that this bubble is filling up due to material created at the boundary by the hawking process. The whole shebang doesn't get crushed because there is less mass inside the bubble than out, and the boundary is unreachable because it's an event horizon (untouchable, anyway :-). I haven't seen this idea combined with curved space, making a boundary uneccesary. You might also be interested in the idea that the whole universe is filled with degenerate nuetrino gas, created by stars, the big bang, or other nuclear processes. Solves the dark-matter problem...maybe. >I suspect that I'm only half remembering an analogy in a description >of some theory of multiple universes. It ruins the 'multiple universe' idea, unless 'universe' means 'bubbles in degenarate material' instead of 'everything'. But you got the jist. >But is there even any connection with reality to this? Sure there's a connection. There are actual scientists with actual degrees carrying this idea around in their heads :-) Who knows if it's true? If it is, it predicts that you won't be able to prove it, since the evidence is beyond an event horizon. -Tommy Mac ------------------------------=========================================== Tom McWilliams |Is Faith a short ' ` ' *.; +% 18084tm@ibm.cl.msu.edu |cut for attaining + . ' (517) 355-2178 -or- 353-2986 | . knowledge? ;"' ,' . ' . a scrub Astronomy undergrad | * , or is it just . . at Michigan State University | '; ' * a short-circuit? , ------------------------------=========================================== ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 14:35:39 GMT From: Jerry Han Subject: This is a test post. Newsgroups: sci.space I'm just trying to see if we're hooked up to the outside world. Sorry to take up net space. -- Jerry Han-CRC-DOC-Dept. of Behavioural Research-"jhan@debra.dgbt.doc.ca" /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// / The opinions expressed are my own and do not reflect the opinions / / of the DOC or any branch of the Federal Government. / ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 04:43:55 GMT From: Tim McDaniel Subject: TPS Systems Newsgroups: sci.space Wasn't there at least one Chinese satellite that returned film (?) using a heat shield made of oak? -- Tim McDaniel Internet: mcdaniel@{grex,m-net}.ann-arbor.mi.us, mcdaniel@adi.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 14:10:31 EET From: flb@flb.optiplan.fi (F.Baube x554) Subject: What's it like at the edge of the universe? From: "robert.f.casey" > As if the universe was a bubble of > mostly empty space expanding inside this superdense material. > Which leads to the question: Is there a boundry, where you can > stand right next to the "surface" of the universe bubble, and > touch with your spacesuited hand the wall of superdense material? > [..] Could you walk on it ?, [..] More importantly, could you *surf* on the expanding boundary ? -- * Fred Baube ..when you think your Toys you hear Laughter * Optiplan O.Y. * have gone Berserk cracking through the Walls * baube@optiplan.fi * it's an illUsion you're sent Spinning * GU/MSFS * you Cannot Shirk you Have No Choice * #include * -- Sioux proverb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 15:52:36 GMT From: Richard Ottolini Subject: What's it like at the edge of the universe? Newsgroups: sci.space Some people think there is no edge to the universe, at least in the sense a human with 3D perception could see it. ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jan 93 18:33:49 GMT From: "Matt J. Martin" Subject: Who can launch antisats? (was Re: DoD launcher use) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Jan13.053404.14923@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes: > >> The above includes anything George Bush signs. > >No: It includes everything signed be the President _and_ ratified >by the Senate. If the Senate doesn't ratify it, it doesn't have >the force of supreme law. > Yes, yes. > >> Sovereignty is an illusion to begin with. It doesn't exist. > >It certainly exists, but it isn't usefull in considering American >government... > >Sovereignty simplty means that the United States isn't subject to >any outside controls or authorities (treaties don't count since >are limits we voluntarily assume, not ones we are automatically >subject to), along with all the powers that such autonomy implies. > I know what it means, but if you think that the U.S. has the luxury of doing whatever it whants without worrying about the opions of other nations or the U.N. you've got another thing coming. We do not exist in a political vacuum. All those nations are out there interacting with each other to the point where their behavior is reflexive. Sovereignty may be a nifty theoretical concept, but it has never existed in the real world. --- ########################################################################## ## / ## Progress Before Peace! ## / ## ## // ## Matt J. Martin, Technosociology and Space Politics ## // ## ## ///// ######################################################## ///// ## ## // ## Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN ## // ## ## / ## myempire@mentor.cc.purdue.edu ## / ## ########################################################################## ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jan 93 11:56:16 GMT From: N T Clifford Subject: Znamya: Orbiting mirror. Newsgroups: sci.space A report carried in `The Guardian' (Thursday January 14) detailed an upcoming Russian space event. Apparently a recent Progress cargo ship (1992-71A?) currently docked (or station keeping) with Mir is due (maybe next month) to unfurl a 65 foot 'space mirror' constructed from aluminium coated plastic film, in an experiment known as `Znamya' (Banner). Apparently this is an attempt to extend the daylight hours of the Siberian regions by reflecting sunlight to the required areas. It occurs to me (obviously?) that this may make an interesting object for observation. Does anyone have more details? Times and dates would be useful as a basis for formulating some observation predictions. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERNET: ntc@met.ed.ac.uk <> BITNET/EARN: ntc%uk.ac.ed.met@ukacrl JANET : N.Clifford@uk.ac.ed <> UUCP : ...!uunet!ed!met!ntc TEL : +44 31 229 3119 <> or UUCP : N.Clifford@ed.uucp SNAIL: N.Clifford, Meteorology Dept., Edinburgh Univ., Edinburgh, Scotland -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 15:50:30 GLT From: "Andreas Stalidis" Hello, I don't know if it is the right address to ask for the following info,but I would like you to send me ,if possible, a list of spaceship models and NASA's near-term projects (especially about space colonies). Andreas Stalidis CBDZ117E@OSSA.CCF.AUTH.GR -INTERNET CBDZ117E@GRTHEUN1.BITNET -BITNET ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 052 ------------------------------