Date: Sat, 8 May 93 05:00:16 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #543 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 8 May 93 Volume 16 : Issue 543 Today's Topics: ASTRONAUTS---WHAT DOES WEIGHTLESSNESS FEEL (2 msgs) ASTRONAUTS---What does weightlessness feel like? BBS IN SPACE? (2 msgs) BOEING TSTO (WAS: WORDS FROM CHAIRMAN OF BOEING TSTO (WAS: WORDS FROM CHAIRMAN OF BO CAPE YORK IS DEAD; LONG LIVE PNG! CORIOLIS (WAS RE: ASTRONAUTS---WHAT DOES WE DC-X Status? DRAG-FREE SATELLITES GAMMA RAY BURSTERS. WHERE ARE THEY. HST SERVICING MISSION SCHEDULED FOR 11 DAYS LEVEL 5? Philosophy Quest. How Boldly? PT 3/3: RUSSIA'S OPERATIONAL STARWARS DEFENSE SYS REPORT ON REDESIGN TEAM Shuttle Landings in Florida SPACE COLONY SIZE PREFERENCES SUMMARY Space Manuevering Tug (was HST servicing mission_) VANDALIZING THE SKY VISAS FOR ASTRONAUTS AFTER AN ABORT (2 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: Thu, 06 May 1993 06:47:00 -0800 From: Henry Spencer Subject: ASTRONAUTS---WHAT DOES WEIGHTLESSNESS FEEL Newsgroups: sci.space 76 Organization: U of Toronto Zoology In article <1993May6.021401.21063@ee.ubc.ca> davem@ee.ubc.ca (Dave Michelson) writes: >I'm under the impression that spacesickness was a far more serious problem >on Apollo flights than it was on Gemini. Presumably the far larger (!!) >cabin had a lot to do with it. Anyone care to confirm or refute? Indeed, it was barely recognized as an issue until spacecraft got roomy enough to roam around in. Evidently, just sitting there doesn't produce sufficient sensory confusion to give most astronauts trouble. -- SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 01:58:00 -0800 From: Henry Spencer Subject: ASTRONAUTS---WHAT DOES WEIGHTLESSNESS FEEL Newsgroups: sci.space 738 764 776 Organization: U of Toronto Zoology In article Bob_Hearn@qm.claris.com (Robert Hearn) writes: >> : Some people are more prone to it than others, like some people are more >> : prone to get sick on a roller coaster ride than others. > >But are they the same set of people? If I get queasy on a roller coaster, >would I necessarily have a problem with zero G? ... Nobody has yet found *any* test that can be done on the ground which predicts spacesickness especially well. There is a great deal of interest in being able to predict who will get sick, since it hurts productivity on extremely expensive missions, but so far no way to do it. In particular, there is no particularly strong correlation between susceptibility to more ordinary forms of motion sickness and susceptibility to spacesickness. At least, not that the research people have been able to find -- I don't know if they've tried roller coasters :-). -- SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 May 1993 04:57:13 GMT From: "Robert B. Love " Subject: ASTRONAUTS---What does weightlessness feel like? Newsgroups: sci.space In article henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > Indeed, it was barely recognized as an issue until spacecraft got roomy > enough to roam around in. Evidently, just sitting there doesn't produce > sufficient sensory confusion to give most astronauts trouble. > -- Personal experience in the KC-135 led me to believe that head movements were the worst offenders in generating sensory confusion. Head movments could be performed in the Gemini capsules. Conventional motion sickness, not SAS, seems to come about from conflicting sensory inputs--that is your eyes tell you one thing and your inner ear another. First time passengers in medical experiements on the KC-135 are blindfolded and forced to wear neck braces to keep sensory conflicts to a minimum. Are you suggesting that a large cabin allows for head and body movements and that a threshold is passed. N number of movements/hour brings on the onset of trouble. Interesting. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 01:54:00 -0800 From: Henry Spencer Subject: BBS IN SPACE? Newsgroups: sci.space 776 Organization: U of Toronto Zoology In article <3_713_6352bdf7f83@Kralizec.fido.zeta.org.au> ralph.buttigieg@f635.n713.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Ralph Buttigieg) writes: >This is just an idea that has occurred to me. We can make telephone calls to >international aircraft via the imarasat satellite system. Can such calls be >made to an orbiting space craft? ... There's no fundamental reason why similar equipment couldn't be carried, but at present it's not. >...what would be involved in setting up a BBS on Mir or an eventual >international Space Station... A good reason to do it, and a pile of money to pay the Inmarsat charges. Inmarsat phone calls are *not* free. -- SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 15:04:00 -0800 From: Dave Stephenson Subject: BBS IN SPACE? Newsgroups: sci.space 29 764 776 Organization: Dept. of Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa 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 >Amateur radio is a BLAST! Note also several 'microsats' are digital transponders or BBS's. FO-20 144 MHz up, 435 MHZ down runs a BBS for 6 days a week, on Wednesdays it is an SSB/CW transponder. There was a 'popular' article on this bird in QST a couple of months ago. Arsene will soon (we hope) be launched by ariane and this satellite is a high orbit, packet radio transponder designed to link BBS's and packet nodes on Earth. Just get a Ham licence, invest a $1000 or so from the station and join in. I operate AO-13 with 10 watts CW from a condo backyard! -- Dave Stephenson Geological Survey of Canada Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Internet: stephens@geod.emr.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 15:10:00 -0800 From: Dave Stephenson Subject: BOEING TSTO (WAS: WORDS FROM CHAIRMAN OF Newsgroups: sci.space 17 738 764 776 Organization: Dept. of Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >A non-trivial side issue, by the way, is that you can build experimental >aircraft with much less hassle than experimental rockets. As Gary Hudson >put it (at Making Orbit): "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, build it, try it, learn a bit, mod it a bit, and try again. Better known in academic circles as 'the scientific method':- Observation hypothesis, and experiment. (trial and error in a lab coat). If Boeing are proposing their own program on the same ASAN (that's anti-NASA) principles, more power to them. -- Dave Stephenson Geological Survey of Canada Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Internet: stephens@geod.emr.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 02:19:00 -0800 From: Henry Spencer Subject: BOEING TSTO (WAS: WORDS FROM CHAIRMAN OF BO Newsgroups: sci.space 1000/764 153/764 Organization: U of Toronto Zoology In article <1s5vk3$4ci@access.digex.net> prb@access.digex.net (Pat) writes: >|... But if you are *already* in the >|aerodynamics business, and plan to stay in it, that changes things a bit. > >Maybe, boeing is in the business of getting launcher money to >improve their aerodynamics business. like they may not care about >the launcher, but if they can get moeny to pay for developeing a >large fast mach 3 civil transport, then they have something. Maybe, although the first stage of such a launcher isn't going to look much like a transport. But my point was that it's not necessary to assume the worst about their motives. They are not trying to build the simplest launcher they can; they are trying to optimize their future revenues, bearing in mind that their main business is aerodynamics. It may well make sense to build a launcher that also gives them experience with large hypersonic aircraft. It's not the optimum way to build a launcher, but the extra cost of doing it that way is an investment: they'd be learning how to build hypersonic aircraft, and also establishing a very visible track record in that area. This could be very valuable to an aerodynamics company even if the actual hardware has no other direct application. They may still be perfectly serious about building a good launcher; remember that "good" and "optimum" are not the same thing. A non-trivial side issue, by the way, is that you can build experimental aircraft with much less hassle than experimental rockets. As Gary Hudson put it (at Making Orbit): "You can build an aircraft with less paperwork than it takes to build a house." -- SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 02:38:00 -0800 From: Adrian Lewis Subject: CAPE YORK IS DEAD; LONG LIVE PNG! Newsgroups: sci.space EN-BY: 153/305 764 776 Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia. gnb@leo.bby.com.au (Gregory N. Bond) writes: >A story appeard on the (Australian) ABC radio news last night that is >of interest. It is also mentioned in "The Australian Financial >Review" this morning (4/5/93), p14. (Don't say I don't give >references!) >Space Transportation Systems is the company that was the preferred >bidder for the Cape York space port, [...]. There was a >one-last-time, firm-and-this-time-we-mean-it deadline for STS to line >up funding for CY that expired without a whisper in December. >Last night there was an announcement by the Prime Minister of Papua >New Guinea [...]. STS has been given an in-principle >go-ahead for the establishmnent of a commercial spaceport on an as-yet >unchosen PNG equatorial island. The project was predicted to cost >about $USD 920m. Talks with internation funding sources are >continuing, and STS is "confident about their success." A feasability >study (a $mil or so) is about to begin and could be completed by the >end of 1993. >This pretty much implies that Cape York is dead, and the report said >as much. More details as they come to hand. >Greg. Interesting isn't it? I could well imagine that they choose Manus Island in the Admiralty Islands (Bismarck Archipelego). It is 2 deg S, and has a large abandoned air and naval base from WWII. However, any site in PNG is going to suffer from the problem of political instability and law- and-order troubles. I know a number of people who have worked in PNG over the last five years and nearly all of them consider it too risky to work there these days. Also, PNG has a very high level of thunderstorm activity, which may be a problem for the launch vehicles. adrian ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 02:00:00 -0800 From: Henry Spencer Subject: CORIOLIS (WAS RE: ASTRONAUTS---WHAT DOES WE Newsgroups: sci.space /312 717 738 764 776 Organization: U of Toronto Zoology In article zowie@daedalus.stanford.edu (Craig "Powderkeg" DeForest) writes: > The Huntsville ride is definitely pretty good. Anybody know offhand what > the peak acceleration is? > >3.mumble G's. It's a simulated Shuttle lift-off. Okay, if they're simulating the shuttle accurately, then max is 3G. The shuttle goes to some lengths (e.g. throttling the main engines down late in flight) to limit accelerations to 3G; it was a design goal. -- SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 May 1993 12:04:03 GMT From: Bill Innanen Subject: DC-X Status? Newsgroups: sci.space What is the current status of the DC-X program? Wasn't there supposed to be a static test firing recently/real soon now? Bill -- Bill Innanen (Internet) wgi@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu #include /* Unless otherwise noted */ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 02:44:00 -0800 From: Isaac Kuo Subject: DRAG-FREE SATELLITES Newsgroups: sci.space 153/764 Organization: U.C. Berkeley Math. Department. Hi, To all: Sorry for the flame-bait. I spoke too hastily at first, and after a while, the truth which I suspected but unfortunately did not air came out (that the effect involved was due to longitutidinal differences in the Earth's gravitational field). So, here are my conclusions: 1. There is significant longitudinal differences in the Earth's gravitational field. 2. Those differences, and not the Earth's oblateness, are used to affect the orbits of certain satellites. 3. Drag-free satellites are satellites which use a reference mass within a shell accelerated by air friction, solar radiation,etc.. which are compensated for with thrusters based on the reference mass. 4. Drag-free satellites may be used to study tesseral harmonics, as well as LEO air resistance, but do not inherently use such harmonics in any way. -- *Isaac Kuo -->isaackuo@math.berkeley.edu<-- * ___ * * _____/_o_\_____ * Who am I? Where am I? What do *(==(/_______\)==) * I do? The address says it all. * \==\/ \/==/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 15:33:00 -0800 From: Pharabod Subject: GAMMA RAY BURSTERS. WHERE ARE THEY. Newsgroups: sci.space /764 Organization: [via International Space University] Are there theories or hypotheses associating or mixing the "gamma ray bursters" with the "dark matter" ? If my memory is good (I am not an expert) the distribution of dark matter also is isotropic. I sort of remember that exotic dark matter should have nothing to do with the electromagnetic interaction, hence with gamma rays, but who knows really ? Maybe there is some kind of interface ? Something triggering quantum void fluctuations ? (Well, now I shall probably be demolished by one of the brilliant theoretical physicists belonging to this discussion group...). J. Pharabod ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 May 1993 18:29:00 -0800 From: Dani Eder Subject: HST SERVICING MISSION SCHEDULED FOR 11 DAYS Newsgroups: sci.space 12 475 717 764 771 776 Organization: Boeing AI Center, Huntsville, AL In the interest of spreading useful knowledge, the following data about the HST repair mission are provided. My source is the "Shuttle Systems Weight and Performance" Status Report, 21 Jan 92. The mission was known as "L33", and was listed as 5 crew for 8 days. The altitude was 330 NM, and the inclination 28.45 degrees. Listed Payload: HST M&R Payload weight 14001 lb Lift Capability 27212 OMS propellant 25064 (this is the largest value for any mission in the report) MECO Targets - Alt 57 NM - Vel 26148 fps - Flight path angle 1.48 deg Payload Components: - Fuselage Support Station 4183 lb - Repair Unit 9818 lb (The first seems to be the workstand the HST will rest on while being repaired. It has tilt and rotation capability, and can be used to lower the HST into the cargo bay if needed. The second is probably the replacement parts for the HST, the tools needed, and carriers to hold all the stuff in the Shuttle cargo bay) Other items of note carried: Payload Bay keel camera 90 lb Airlock Stowed Items 290 Dani Eder -- Dani Eder/Meridian Investment Company/(205)464-2697(w)/232-7467(h)/ Rt.1, Box 188-2, Athens AL 35611/Location: 34deg 37' N 86deg 43' W +100m alt. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 09:25:00 -0800 From: Mark Spiegl Subject: LEVEL 5? Newsgroups: sci.space ATH: 11000/764 153/764 Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Wingert@vnet.IBM.COM (Bret Wingert) writes: >I am familiar with the project. It is the Onboard Shuttle Flight >Software Project. This software controls the Space Shuttle During >all dynamic phases as well as on-orbit. >It has ultra-high reliability and extremely >low error rates. There have been several papers published on the >subject and I'll collect some references. There may be an >article in the IBM Systems Journal Late '93, early '94. >There is no magic formula. We did it with dedicated and disciplined >folks who worked to put together a process that finds and removes errors >and is corrected based on errors that "escape". We present a >one day overview of our process periodically to interested folks. >The next one is May 19th in Washington, D.C. I can fax specifics >to those who are interested. Pardon my ignorance with this program, but can you provide some project specifics: number of lines of code, staff size or staff months to implement. I suspect (admittedly unsubstantiated though) that commercial projects are much more market driven and do not have the time/staff luxuries of government programs. That is, a difference of just six short months frequently defines which companies make the profits and which bust. A lot of good it does to deliver a zero defect product if your competition already has won the lions portion of the market. Opinions? ^ |U| Mark Spiegl |S| Motorola Inc. /|A|\ spiegl@rtsg.mot.com ~~U~~ ------------------------------ Date: 5 May 1993 08:40:08 -0400 From: Pat Subject: Philosophy Quest. How Boldly? Newsgroups: sci.space 16th century japan encountered western civilization and technology, and kept it out of their cultural base for 3 centuries. 13th century china encountered mongolian culture and absorbed them from below. no matter how many of them they slaughtered, there were still more. same thing with ancient persia and the mongols. the alaskan inuit, met westerners and seem to have adapted quite well. pat ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 May 1993 21:03:00 -0800 From: Mcelwre Subject: PT 3/3: RUSSIA'S OPERATIONAL STARWARS DEFENSE SYS Newsgroups: sci.space 1/0 6491/0 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1010 Robert E. McElwaine B.S., Physics and Astronomy, UW-EC ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 May 1993 21:22:00 -0800 From: Dani Eder Subject: REPORT ON REDESIGN TEAM Newsgroups: sci.space Y: 153/717 764 776 Organization: Boeing AI Center, Huntsville, AL Sender: mrf4276@egbsun12 (Matthew R. Feulner) Other political stuff being tossed around - We can get 38K lbs into 220 nm orbit at 28.5 degrees with a shuttle. Now, if we want Russian cooperation and go into 51.6 orbit, we can only get 25K lbs at 220 nm. But, if we go for development of the Al-Li tanks, we can get 37K lbs into 175 nm orbit (or 32.5K into 220 nm) at 51.6 degrees. The ASRM brings us to 44.5K lbs at 220 nm and 51.6 degrees. So, it looks like they're thinking about the Al-Li tanks to go for a 175 nm orbit at 51.6 degrees since it still has the same capabilities as 28.5 degrees and 220 nm. But, now, the Russians may have problems with 51.6 degrees because things are now falling into one of the republics, Kazakstan (sp?). Incidentally, the launch site (don't remember the name) is at about 45 degrees lat, but they launch into 51.6 so they don't drop things on China. [end quote] As I said to my management at Boeing, the performance numbers above look about right, you lose about 12-13000 lb going from 28.5 to 51.6 degrees inclination, and the Aluminum-Lithium ET will gain an expected 7500 lb. Gaining 12,000 lb on the ASRM may be optimistic. That was the original goal. My understanding is the actual gain will be more like 10,000 lb. Treating the Shuttle performance as a single number, however is only sufficient for a gross comparison. In reality, which Orbiter you fly, how many crew for how many days, how much on-board power you need, and the time of year you launch all affect the payload capacity by thousands of pounds. Another thing to think about: it is estimated that the Al-Li tank will cost $300 million to develop. The ASRM is about $3 billion. The new tank will gain enough performance to be worthwhile under any circumstance where the shuttle continue to fly. The ASRM should be second priority, followed by SSME turbopump improvements (worth around 10,000 lb). The problem with launch sites is that Baikonur, where the Mir station is launched from, is in Kazakstan, which is now an independant country from Russia. There is not much worry about booster impact, since thats why they picked that launch site in the first place - the downrange area is pretty barren. You are correct that 51.6 degrees is needed to clear China. A higher inclination orbit also allows you to launch to the Station from Tanegashima (Japan). Along with Kourou (French Guiana) you would have 4 launch sites representing all the major participants which could reach the station. This is good for resupply/contingency (like what do you do if the Shuttle can't launch), and for spreading the work around. Dani -- Dani Eder/Meridian Investment Company/(205)464-2697(w)/232-7467(h)/ Rt.1, Box 188-2, Athens AL 35611/Location: 34deg 37' N 86deg 43' W +100m alt. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 May 1993 10:40:30 GMT From: "Phil G. Fraering" Subject: Shuttle Landings in Florida Newsgroups: sci.space henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >Personally, in this case I suspect that operational expediency is being >given a bit more weight than it really should get. At eight flights a >year, I don't think it would cripple the program to land at the Cape >only when Edwards is unavailable... and that would be a better policy. Why don't they land at White Sands, New Mexico any more? >SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology >between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry -- Phil Fraering |"Where's my kaboom? Where's my Earth-shattering pgf@srl02.cacs.usl.edu|kaboom?" - anomynous "dark skies" activist ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 20:40:00 -0800 From: Jay Thomas Subject: SPACE COLONY SIZE PREFERENCES SUMMARY Newsgroups: sci.space /764 153/764 Organization: Space Studies Institute I thought I was the only one who ocasionally designed space colonies. Well, anyways, here are my preferences: Size: at least 50,000 people. Shape: I like the cylinders. If you play with your mirrors and lighting right, you can even see stars. Size: at least Island 3 size. Also: space colonies really should have large 0-G areas. I think multicubic mile free areas would not be undesirable. Also there should be lots of 0-G cafes, observation areas, etc. Finally, how about several underground floors under the surface. Perfect place for extra agriculture, storage, or ECLSS ------------------------------ Date: 5 May 1993 08:34:13 -0400 From: Pat Subject: Space Manuevering Tug (was HST servicing mission_) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993May3.172758.25035@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: |In <1s15p6$7lj@access.digex.net> prb@access.digex.net (Pat) writes: | |There is a difference between 'on orbit servicing' and taping a motor |to its butt and firing it, Pat. Keep in mind that this motor is going |to have to thrust exactly through the center of mass of the HST or |you're going to tumble. It is then going to have to cease firing |cleanly, unbolt itself from HST, and move away (all without leaving |any contamination). Note that most of this is not a problem when |using the Shuttle for reboost, because it can basically wrap itself |around the HST and all that stuff with center of mass is already |computed. Plus, there are people on scene if anything goes wrong. | I guess fred, you never heard of guidance navigation and control thrusters. as long as the tug, can balance the expected forces, it will cope. Nesides, with the service points on the HST, i am sure there are places where a tug could be securely bolted on for a low impulse thrust, and a few explosive bolts, and it can cut itself free. You have heard of explosive bolts? as for using the STS, from what i understand, it is going to be on the long end of the arm, so if a forward RCS thruster fires, the HST gets to fly through the vapor cloud. i'm sure they have programmed to mostly use the aft RCS system, but that chance is always possible, escpecially if you get a thruster leak. rare, but possible. |>I suspect, the BUS-1, may not have enough basic thrust for the HST |>re-boost. it mayu need bigger tanks, or bigger thrusters. | |I see. So we change a bunch of stuff on it, then take it up and duct |tape it to a $1G instrument and hope everything comes out ok? I think |not. | gee fred, i better let you do all the thinking for the world. |>Also, please tell me how some sort of sublimated material like |>CO2, or H2O would manage to contaminate the mirror, anything |>that goes to vapor state, shouldn't adhere to the mirror. | |Sounds like you're thinking of things in atmosphere, Pat. Any stray |molecule in space may adhere to any solid surface it hits, whether |it's 'vapor' or not. That's why there's a worry about contamination |of the instruments by thruster exhaust, which is something of a vapor, |last time I checked. | i chatted with a guy from lockheed missiles and space. he said that actually most short chain molecules have a low condensed volatile material quotient (CVM). even hydrazine is not really a big problem for optical systems, and even though he couldn't name birds (classified) he said, the use of hydrazine around optical arrays was not considered a problem, at least for the systems they worked on. so somehow, i dount that stray CO2, or H2O would really wreck up the HST. pat ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 13:40:00 -0800 From: "f.baube[tm]" <"f.baube[tm]"@f776.n153.z1.ship.net> Subject: VANDALIZING THE SKY Newsgroups: sci.space 53/717 738 764 776 Organization: [via International Space University] > > 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=: 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. 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 .. -- * Fred Baube (tm) * In times of intellectual ferment, * baube@optiplan.fi * advantage to him with the intellect * #include * most fermented ! * How is Frank Zappa doing ? * May '68, Paris: It's Retrospective Time !! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 02:30:00 -0800 From: Henry Spencer Subject: VISAS FOR ASTRONAUTS AFTER AN ABORT Newsgroups: sci.space H: 11000/764 153/764 Organization: U of Toronto Zoology In article <1s9br9INNq25@rave.larc.nasa.gov> C.O.Egalon@larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Oliveira Egalon) writes: >... 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... Technically, they do, but emergencies are special cases. If there was some reason why they had to stay on in the country of landing, the local authorities typically would issue short-duration visas as necessary; if they left immediately, they would probably be treated like passengers in transit. It would be much the same situation as an aircraft making an emergency landing at an unintended location -- the paperwork for the intended trip should be in order (e.g. the aircraft should have proper documents), but the extras needed for the emergency (e.g. local visas) would be arranged when it happens. If it's a country where emergency-landing rights have been prearranged, some of the formalities might well be bypassed entirely. NASA does make advance arrangements with the countries containing major abort sites. -- SVR4 resembles a high-speed collision | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology between SVR3 and SunOS. - Dick Dunn | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 01:02:00 -0800 From: "Adam R. brody " Subject: VISAS FOR ASTRONAUTS AFTER AN ABORT Newsgroups: sci.space 11000/764 153/764 Organization: NASA Ames Research Center 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! ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 543 ------------------------------