Date: Fri, 7 May 93 05:11:02 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #538 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Fri, 7 May 93 Volume 16 : Issue 538 Today's Topics: BBS in Space? Boeing TSTO (Was: Words from Chairman of Boeing) ESA orbit elements Galileo Update - 05/06/93 HST Servicing Mission HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days Level 5? LLV??? NASA budget and STS costs Shuttle Landings in Florida U.S. Government and Science and Technolgy Investment (2 msgs) Vandalizing the sky (3 msgs) Vandalizing the sky. Visas for astronauts after an abort (4 msgs) 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: 6 May 93 16:41:39 From: Bob McGwier Subject: BBS in Space? Newsgroups: sci.space >>n4hy@growler.ccr-p.ida.org (Bob McGwier) writes: >>Mir already has a packet radio BBS on 145.55 Mhz (amateur radio service). >>It regularly has bulletins posted by the Cosmonauts. I used to practice Dave says: >Note also several 'microsats' are digital transponders or BBS's. FO-20 Oops, since I integrated the AMSAT microsats, built parts for them, helped design them, wrote some of the software for them, etc. I should not have left them out ;-). BMc -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Robert W. McGwier | n4hy@ccr-p.ida.org Center for Communications Research | Interests: amateur radio, astronomy,golf Princeton, N.J. 08520 | Asst Scoutmaster Troop 5700, Hightstown ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 20:11:11 GMT From: Dave Stephenson Subject: Boeing TSTO (Was: Words from Chairman of Boeing) Newsgroups: sci.space henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article stephens@geod.emr.ca (Dave Stephenson) writes: >>>... "You can build an aircraft with less paperwork >>>than it takes to build a house." >> >>The most important precident (or is it deja vu) being reestablished by >>the DCX is the X program management style. i.e. Minimum paper work... >Actually, Hudson wasn't talking about how much paperwork the project >generates *internally*. He was talking about how much government hassle >you have to put up with to get permission to fly a private project. >Experimental aircraft are easy. Large rockets are not. Agreed, but one problem with NASA is knowing where "external" stops and "internal" begins. A lot of internal paper work is usually a sign that there are too many formal structures between parts of a project that are communicating up, over the top, and down the other side, when the links should be lateral. Of course there has to be agreed and down in black and white documentation for a project like a large rocket. Active communication during a research program is another matter. Hunter's theme with DCX has always been that it is not a form of ammunition, but just another steam locomotive that flys. (Its Back to the Future with DCX). -- Dave Stephenson Geological Survey of Canada Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Internet: stephens@geod.emr.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thr, 6 May 1993 21:32 CST From: MARTIN@swri.space.swri.edu (Martin Wuest) Subject: ESA orbit elements I would like to know what the European Space Agency uses to predict their satellite orbits. Do they also use NORAD/NASA 2-line elements? If not where do I find such information? Thank you for your information M. Wuest ***************************************************************************** Dr. Martin Wuest Space Science Dept. phone (210) 522 5832 Southwest Research Institute fax (210) 647 4325 P.O. Drawer 28510 San Antonio, TX 78228-0510 internet: martin@swri.space.swri.edu USA SPAN : SWRI::MARTIN ***************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1993 18:21 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Galileo Update - 05/06/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary Forwarded from Neal Ausman, Galileo Mission Director GALILEO MISSION DIRECTOR STATUS REPORT POST-LAUNCH April 30 - May 6, 1993 SPACECRAFT 1. On April 30, a cruise science Memory Readout (MRO) was performed for the Magnetometer (MAG) instrument. Analysis indicates the data was received properly. 2. On April 30, a command threshold test and a Radio Frequency Subsystem Tracking Loop Capacitor (RFSTLC) test were performed over DSS-63 (Madrid 70 meter antenna). Data analysis is in progress. These tests are periodically performed to provide detailed information relative to the telecom command hardware integrity. 3. On May 3, a NO-OP command was sent to reset the command loss timer to 264 hours, its planned value for this mission phase. 4. On May 3, cruise science Memory Readouts (MROs) were performed for the Magnetometer (MAG) and Dust Detector (DDS) instruments. Preliminary analysis indicates the data was received properly. 5. On May 3, an Ultra-Stable Oscillator (USO) test was performed to verify the health status of the USO and to collect gravitational red shift experiment data; long term trend analysis is continuing. 6. On May 4, a periodic RPM (Retro-Propulsion Module) 10-Newton thruster flushing maintenance activity was performed; all 12 thrusters were flushed during the activity. Thruster performance throughout the activity was nominal. 7. On May 4, the spacecraft under stored sequence control performed about a six-degree unbalanced SITURN for the purpose of attitude maintenance. The Z thrusters were used during the activity. 8. On May 4, a cruise science Memory Readout (MRO) was performed for the Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrometer (EUV) instrument. Analysis indicates the data was received properly. 9. The AC/DC bus imbalance measurements have not exhibited significant change (greater than 25 DN) throughout this period. The AC measurement reads 18 DN (4.1 volts). The DC measurement reads 144 DN (16.9 volts). These measurements are consistent with the model developed by the AC/DC special anomaly team. 10. The Spacecraft status as of May 6, 1993, is as follows: a) System Power Margin - 73 watts b) Spin Configuration - Dual-Spin c) Spin Rate/Sensor - 3.15rpm/Star Scanner d) Spacecraft Attitude is approximately 20 degrees off-sun (lagging) and 6 degrees off-earth (leading) e) Downlink telemetry rate/antenna- 40bps(coded)/LGA-1 f) General Thermal Control - all temperatures within acceptable range g) RPM Tank Pressures - all within acceptable range h) Orbiter Science- Instruments powered on are the PWS, EUV, UVS, EPD, MAG, HIC, and DDS i) Probe/RRH - powered off, temperatures within acceptable range j) CMD Loss Timer Setting - 264 hours Time To Initiation - 184 hours GDS (Ground Data Systems): 1. Two Galileo GDS tests of MGDS V18.0 CMD took place May 1, 1993, with DSS-61 (Madrid 34 meter antenna) and May 3, 1993, with CTA-21 (Compatibility Test Area lab at JPL). The test with DSS-15 (Goldstone 34 meter antenna) was canceled due to configuration problems on the MOSO test string. The second test with CTA-21 was unsuccessful due to GCF (Ground Communications Facility) or CTA-21 problems causing command files to have checksum errors upon transmission to the CPA (Command Processor Assembly). Resolution of the CTA-21 test problem is expected during the Friday, May 7 retest with CTA-21. The next GDS tests for V18.0 CMD will be May 7, 1993 with DSS-42 (Canberra 34 meter antenna) and CTA-21. TRAJECTORY As of noon Thursday, May 6, 1993, the Galileo Spacecraft trajectory status was as follows: Distance from Earth 206,494,200 km (1.38 AU) Distance from Sun 305,613,600 km (2.04 AU) Heliocentric Speed 87,100 kour Distance from Jupiter 511,783,400 km Round Trip Light Time 23 minutes, 4 seconds SPECIAL TOPIC 1. As of May 6, 1993, a total of 70260 real-time commands have been transmitted to Galileo since Launch. Of these, 65151 were initiated in the sequence design process and 5109 initiated in the real-time command process. In the past week, one real time command was transmitted and was initiated in the sequence design process. Major command activities included a command to reset the command loss timer. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Once a year, go someplace /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you've never been before. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 18:50:03 GMT From: "Steve Wissler,G10,xxx" Subject: HST Servicing Mission Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro From article <1993May6.135726.22844@head-cfa.harvard.edu>, by willner@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner): > > In article <1s2rpc$khq@techbook.techbook.com>, > dant@techbook.techbook.com (Dan Tilque) writes: >> Has anyone looked at the cost of taking the second mirror, building >> another Hubble around it (with modifications for things that weren't >> right on Hubble I such as the solar panel supports) and launching >> that? > > This is quite an interesting question. I have it on good authority > that the cost of Hubble servicing is roughly $250 million per year. > It doesn't take many years at that rate to add up to the cost of a > new telescope. Or the cost of another major mission. > > For comparison, the cost of operating the telescope, including > running the Institute, generating commands, and supporting the > scientists, is $80 million per year. > However, how much would it cost per year to service this new telescope, probably $250 million per year Steve Wissler wissler@stsci.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 23:00:44 GMT From: hathaway@stsci.edu Subject: HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro In article <1993May6.161121.12487@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: > In <1s60eg$68b@access.digex.net> prb@access.digex.net (Pat) writes: > >>In article <1993May3.154229.20543@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: .. > Except, of course, that you've now wasted a flight plus all that > development money when you have a perfectly good way to do the reboost > in hand already. > WHAT reboost???? How did anyone get the idea that the servicing mission involves a reboost???? Please, some facts here - otherwise this thread is whistling into a vacuum. .. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. Wm. Hathaway Baltimore MD ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 93 09:41:09 CDT From: Bret Wingert Subject: Level 5? Newsgroups: sci.space <19930504.074507.244@almaden.ibm.com> In <19930504.074507.244@almaden.ibm.com> Greg Stewart-Nicholls writes: > How does this structure deal with those capable of producing working >software on time, within budget, but don't have a 'process' ???? > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Typically, a case such as yours is a small group of folks with strong domain expertise. There is a "process" but it is just understood by the group. Loss of a team member can affect the performance of the team. Bret Wingert Wingert@VNET.IBM.COM (713)-282-7534 FAX: (713)-282-8077 ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 93 13:14:23 From: Steinn Sigurdsson Subject: LLV??? Newsgroups: sci.space Any one have any info on the recently announced Lockheed Launch Vehicle? Are they serious? How much and when? (all I've seen is a short in the SJMN stating they're going to make a 2-8000 pound payload launcher, no other details). | Steinn Sigurdsson |I saw two shooting stars last night | | Lick Observatory |I wished on them but they were only satellites | | steinly@lick.ucsc.edu |Is it wrong to wish on space hardware? | | "standard disclaimer" |I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care - B.B. 1983 | ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 18:35:51 GMT From: kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov Subject: NASA budget and STS costs Newsgroups: sci.space Steinn Sigurdsson (steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu) wrote: : What fraction of the NASA workforce is civil servant : as opposed to contractor About 80% contractor and 20% civil service, but a handful are active duty military and fall into neither category. : [...] and what are the rules on : reduction in work force for civil servants? : eg, if say the shuttle program is terminated, how : much is payroll reduced and how? Civil servants are hard to kill, but we at NASA had a large Reduction in Force (RIF) just after the Skylab days. The rules change annually, but if the job goes away, the civil servant is out on the street within two weeks. Some may be able to transfer to other NASA programs (that happened during the Skylab RIF); others may be able to transfer to other U.S. Government installations. Some will be canned. Hopefully, we'll keep the good ones and can the incompetent, but that rarely works out. The Shuttle program will terminate eventually. I've heard various dates, but I'd guess around 2005 we'll stop flying the old girls. -- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (713) 483-4368 "Better. Faster. Cheaper." -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1993 21:03:36 GMT From: Claudio Oliveira Egalon Subject: Shuttle Landings in Florida Newsgroups: sci.space When the Shuttle returned to flight, there was some talk that landing the Shuttle in Florida was not as safe as landing in California so, I am wondering if NASA has already ironed out these safety concerns since the last few missions have landed in FL or is NASA just compromising safety to save money??? C.O.Egalon@larcn.nasa.gov Claudio Oliveira Egalon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 18:14:48 GMT From: Brad Whitehurst Subject: U.S. Government and Science and Technolgy Investment Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space,sci.research,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian,misc.education In article jhart@agora.rain.com (Jim Hart) writes: >>In article <1993Apr30.151033.13776@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes: >>>People who criticize "big Government" and its projects rarely seem to >>>have a consistent view of the role of Government in science and >>>technology. ...[idiocy about government going into R&D to help >>> U.S. economic competitiveness] > >Your view, on the other hand, is perfectly consistent -- I want my >pork, and I want it now. You have the gall to use our tax money >to sit here and lecture us on how stupid you think we are, >and you can't even even tell the difference between your fetid >bureaucracy's propaganda and history. In actual history, the the ...[lots'o vitriol deleted] > >Jim Hart >jhart@agora.rain.com My goodness. Heat and no light. My momma always did say, "If you can't say anything good...etc.". C'mon folks, the vitriol belongs over in the talk.* fora, not the sci.* fora. Spare the rest of us! -- Brad Whitehurst | Aerospace Research Lab rbw3q@Virginia.EDU | We like it hot...and fast. ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1993 20:12:18 GMT From: Steve Lamont Subject: U.S. Government and Science and Technolgy Investment Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space,sci.research,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian,misc.education In article jhart@agora.rain.com (Jim Hart) writes: > ... In fact, countries that concentrated >their R&D in the private sector (eg Japan) kicked our ass economically >in the latter half of the Cold War as rigor mortis set in. ... Whereas the US concentrated on hare-brained schemes like Star Warts... Followups to where they'll be appreciated... spl -- Steve Lamont, SciViGuy -- (619) 534-7968 -- spl@szechuan.ucsd.edu San Diego Microscopy and Imaging Resource/UC San Diego/La Jolla, CA 92093-0608 "Until I meet you, then, in Upper Hell Convulsed, foaming immortal blood: farewell" - J. Berryman, "A Professor's Song" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 16:50:01 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: Vandalizing the sky Newsgroups: sci.space In 18084TM@msu.edu (Tom) writes: >I wrote >>>I would guess that the best legal and moral basis for protest would >>>be violation of private property. "I bought this house, out in >>>the boondocks, specifically to enjoy my hobby, amateur astronomy. Now >>>this billboard has made that investment worthless, so I want the >>>price of the property, in damages." It wouldn't take too many >>>succesful cases like that to make bill-sats prohibitively expensive. >Fred responds: >>Except for one small detail: I thought it had already been >>established that this would interfere minimally, if at all, with even >>*professional* astronomers, much less with amateurs. Damned difficult >>to win a case where you can't demonstrate damages, and I don't think >>complaining that your sky has been 'besmirched by vile mankind' is >>going to get you real far. >I don't recall the establishment of the lack of potential interference, but >if there is none, I'd agree there would be no point in pursuing compensation >for it. I had no idea that you feel people are vile, Fred ;-) Try reading the thread, Tommy, and maybe you'll understand where that came from -- not being a reference to my opinion on the matter. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 16:55:19 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: Vandalizing the Sky Newsgroups: sci.space In flb@flb.optiplan.fi ("F.Baube[tm]") writes: >From: fred j mccall 575-3539 >> >> Why does your ostensible right to see the sky "as nature >> intended it" [..] override the 'right' of the advertiser >> or the right of the folks putting it up to access part >> of their funding that way so they can do things they >> wouldn't otherwise be able to get funding to do? >This pseudo-justification has been used repeatedly, and now it >has insinuated itself into the discussion as an =assumption=: Uh, *which* pseudo-justification? The 'keep the sky pure' folks want to prevent the folks launching this mission from getting the advertising revenues. Seems like they ought to have to make that up, and *not* out of *MY* tax dollars, either. > Anything that makes money off of space is Good, > because it gets our civilization into space faster; > it doesn't matter *who* is making the money, and > it doesn't matter *what* they are doing to make it. >Gee, how Eighties. How retro. How misattributed. >That's roughly akin to saying let's let Anaconda strip-mine >the Grand Canyon so that strip-mining can boldly go where no >strip mining technology has gone before .. because after all, >mining means profits, and profits mean technological advance- >ment, and technogical advancement means prosperity, and pros- >perity means happiness, and so to hell with the Grand Canyon .. Well, it's only roughtly akin to saying that if you stretch *real* hard. As long as you won't let anyone do anything to make money at it, there won't be anything much going on in space. I bet you'd have signed the Moon Treaty, too. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 20:39:42 GMT From: Garrett Wollman Subject: Vandalizing the Sky Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993May6.165519.13880@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >Distribution: sci There is no such distribution, and so your article was dropped by a growing number of standards-conforming news transports throughout the network. >Uh, *which* pseudo-justification? The 'keep the sky pure' folks want >to prevent the folks launching this mission from getting the >advertising revenues. Seems like they ought to have to make that up, >and *not* out of *MY* tax dollars, either. To paraphrase: The `keep the streets safe' folks want to prevent the folks who want to build a 100-store shopping mall from putting their only entrance on a residential street. Seems like they ought to have to build a new road for the shopping mall developers, and *not* out of *MY* tax dollars, either. Are you opposed to zoning, too, Fred? -GAWollman PS: I'm happy to live in billboard-free Vermont, and I want to keep it that way. -- Garrett A. Wollman | Shashish is simple, it's discreet, it's brief. ... wollman@emba.uvm.edu | Shashish is the bonding of hearts in spite of distance. uvm-gen!wollman | It is a bond more powerful than absence. We like people UVM disagrees. | who like Shashish. - Claude McKenzie + Florent Vollant ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 23:15:35 GMT From: hathaway@stsci.edu Subject: Vandalizing the sky. Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space In article <1993May5.165907.8336@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: > In <1993May3.170140.1@stsci.edu> hathaway@stsci.edu writes: > >>In article <1993May3.155738.21258@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >>> In <1993Apr30.160814.1@stsci.edu> hathaway@stsci.edu writes: >>>> (stuff) ... > >>> Object as you like. Do as you like. But if you think that a minority >>> 'right' that doesn't exist should be allowed to stand in the way of >>> research just because you don't like the idea that part of it is being >>> funded by 'grubby commercialism', then I would suggest that you come > >> (huh? this wasn't _my_ reason for objection, but does it matter?) > > Ok. Rephrase it as an aesthetic argument of your choice. Why does > your ostensible right to see the sky "as nature intended it" (as if I never claimed ANY 'right'. You're battering a strawman. Chill already. > mankind is not a part of the forces of 'nature') override the 'right' > of the advertiser or the right of the folks putting it up to access > part of their funding that way so they can do things they wouldn't > otherwise be able to get funding to do? > .. >>I push to persuade, not to 'prohibit' and >>it bothers me for someone to think I could force my views on anyone. >>I'm just not that kind of person. Views (sky sights) forced on me by >>others is another matter. > > Perhaps, but where does this end? I don't like the color of your > house and I have to see it every day as I drive by. Paint it. I > don't like the cut of your suit that you force me to see when you're > in a crowd. Take it off. I don't like the model of your car that I > have to look at on the freeway. Junk it. > I said persuade - "Paint it" "Take it off" "Junk it" are demands. Methinks you are arguing for pleasure. Reminds me of a belligerent drunk I know who delights in goading people for entertainment. You'll make more friends with a little love, sweet'ums. .. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. Wm. Hathaway Baltmore MD ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 16:57:24 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: Visas for astronauts after an abort Newsgroups: sci.space In <1s9br9INNq25@rave.larc.nasa.gov> C.O.Egalon@larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Oliveira Egalon) writes: >I have a question that has been ringing in my >head for a while. What if after a launch, there is >one of these nasty aborts and the Shuttle has >to land in a foreign country (Spain or Morroco). >Do the astronauts need a visa for staying there >or NASA has some kind of special arrangement >with the governments of these countries??? I would assume that all the places that are emergency abort strips have some kind of arrangement similar to what the military does. I travelled all over the place and never needed a passport or visa. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1993 20:54:05 GMT From: Claudio Oliveira Egalon Subject: Visas for astronauts after an abort Newsgroups: sci.space > In '85 a Saudi Prince went up as a mission specialist. The Prince was indeed a Spaceflight Participant but the PR's called him a Payload Specialist just to be nice... C.O.Egalon@larcn.nasa.gov Claudio Oliveira Egalon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 20:07:17 GMT From: Dillon Pyron Subject: Visas for astronauts after an abort Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1s9br9INNq25@rave.larc.nasa.gov>, C.O.Egalon@larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Oliveira Egalon) writes: >I have a question that has been ringing in my >head for a while. What if after a launch, there is >one of these nasty aborts and the Shuttle has >to land in a foreign country (Spain or Morroco). >Do the astronauts need a visa for staying there >or NASA has some kind of special arrangement >with the governments of these countries??? This most likely covered by the Ditressed Seamen and Passengers Treaty, which allows crew and passengers of ships that have sunk or been seriously damaged to enter a country. Usually, they are turned over to theri embassy, consulate or ligation. Of course, one must have diplomatic relations for this to be secure. This allowed by wife to get off her plane in Denmark while flying from Amsterdam to Dallas after some annoyance with one of the PWs caused the pilot to declare an emergency. -- Dillon Pyron | The opinions expressed are those of the TI/DSEG Lewisville VAX Support | sender unless otherwise stated. (214)462-3556 (when I'm here) | (214)492-4656 (when I'm home) |The TI GBU-28 redefines overpenetration. pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com | PADI DM-54909 | ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 20:15:43 GMT From: Dillon Pyron Subject: Visas for astronauts after an abort Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993May5.230201.17311@eos.arc.nasa.gov>, brody@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Adam R. Brody ) writes: >C.O.Egalon@larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Oliveira Egalon) writes: > >>I have a question that has been ringing in my >>head for a while. What if after a launch, there is >>one of these nasty aborts and the Shuttle has >>to land in a foreign country (Spain or Morroco). >>Do the astronauts need a visa for staying there >>or NASA has some kind of special arrangement >>with the governments of these countries??? > >>C.O.Egalon@larcn.nasa.gov > >>Claudio Oliveira Egalon > >I've read that the crews' passports are kept in a pouch at launch, ready >to be flown to an abort landing site. I always thought that pretty strange >since it would be pretty clear and documented in the media who these people >are and from whence they came. This issue invites further questions: >When the President flys overseas, does he, and those with him carry >passports. What about military people? It must have been a nightmare >having 100,000 passports for US GIs in the Persian Gulf! They all do. Prez. Bill probably has a red passport. In my life, I have carried a Green one (Military non-duty and dependents), a Blue one (citizens) and a Red one (diplomatic, oh lala!). Active duty military on orders travel under the cover of their orders and ID. My father flew to Germany under orders, but used his passport when we went to France, Netherlands, Austria and others. Did I say Denmark? She landed in Iceland. (See my previous post on this topic). -- Dillon Pyron | The opinions expressed are those of the TI/DSEG Lewisville VAX Support | sender unless otherwise stated. (214)462-3556 (when I'm here) | (214)492-4656 (when I'm home) |The TI GBU-28 redefines overpenetration. pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com | PADI DM-54909 | ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 538 ------------------------------