HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: SSTO Viability (was: Shuttle replacement)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:20:03 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Nov19.150400.24961@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>Hmmm... this gives me an idea. Maybe the way to sell SSTO to Gore is
>to emphasize the non-poluting fuel it uses. Deltas and Titans burn
>nasty stuff which wold cause problems in large quantities.

Actually, the biggest polluter is the Space Shuttle.  (Hydrochloric
acid and other byproducts from those big SRBs.)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Spacelimk (should be Spacelink)
From: space_nz@kiwi.gen.nz (Spacelink)
Date: 16 Nov 92 09:12:04 GMT
Reply-To: space_nz@kiwi.gen.nz (Spacelink)
Organization: Household UNIX, Auckland, New Zealand

Dear Jeff Green, 
 
We apologize for not replying to your question .This is due to the fact that 
we did not recieve your question.  A Few of Days ago most of our news on 
our Use Net system (at kiwi.gen.nz) was inadvertantly wiped during a system 
clean out and we were unable to find your question in our system. 
Would you please send your Question again C/o email to avoid adding to the 
clutter on the News System. This way we will definely recieve your question and 
respond as soon as we can. 
 
If anyone else has sent us questions in the  past few days or if you haven't 
had a responce from us can you please resend your questions as we may have lost 
them in the system clean up. 
 
We Appreciates everyone's patience with us, as we are a Volentry group who spend 
our free time answering your questions, which can take quite a bit of research 
to get the correct information. Thankyou again. 
 
Tyrone (C/o Spacelink New Zealand) 
 -- 
DOMAIN:  space_nz@kiwi.gen.nz
SNAIL:   PO Box 331402, Takapuna, Auckland 9, New Zealand
FAX:     64-9-8494282
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Shuttle Bashing
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 20:49:47 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <mjohnson-211192082742@129.197.97.65> mjohnson@jedi.decnet.lockheed.com (Mark E. Johnson) writes:
>... Isn't the shuttle the primary reason Space
>Station Freedom is being built and deployed in a relatively low orbit?

No, the primary reason that Fred is slated for a fairly low orbit is simply
to maximize payload to that orbit (both for construction and for resupply).
Launches, be they shuttle or expendable, are still inordinately expensive
and in limited supply, so cutting the payload in half for the sake of a
higher orbit does not look like a good deal.  Especially if you're not the
one who has to solve the problems of the low-orbit environment.

>What would it have taken (too late now) to build Freedom in a higher orbit?

Much cheaper space launches available much more routinely, or a major
culture change at NASA (which would probably require the same in Congress).
Preferably both.  NASA is too used to micro-optimizing projects regardless
of cost (which drives up the cost, in a vicious circle).

>What ever happened to Shuttle/C? When I worked for Rockwell five years ago,
>that sounded like a viable alternative.

Griffin's how-to-launch-Fred "red team" has revived it once again, last I
heard.  The previous incarnation died of an overdose of politics.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: SSTO Viability (was: Shuttle replacement)
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 14:07:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.233848.25016@nuchat.sccsi.com> rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com (Rich Kolker) writes:

>Simulator testing for the DC-X/Y/1 pilots is underway.  As you know, DC-X
>will be flown remotely, DC-Y will be crew-capable.  Among the pilots trainingh
>is Pete Conrad.  If that name sounds familiar....it should!
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It sure does! He was one of the actors on the made-for-tv movie Plymouth.

:-)

  Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------152 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
From: kentm@marcus.its.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent)
Subject: Re: Shuttle replacement
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 23:21:50 GMT

In article <1e8qk2INNccc@spock.usc.edu> cbehre@spock.usc.edu (Charles Behre) writes:
>
>|>   What about the SSTO DC-Y?  It's my understanding that the DC-1 should be
>|> able to do just about everything that the shuttle can do (with the possible
>|> exeption of carry the SpaceLab).  And a lot cheapter to boot.

It will hopefully be able to perform crew transfer and small satellite launches
more reliably and for less money than the Shuttle or even expendables.  I don't
see it replacing all of the Shuttle's functions, but it's a start.

>What level of success would the DCX testing program have to show to make it a 
>viable candidate?  Does this program have the ability to fascinate congress and
>Al Gore if it demonstrates what it intendend to do? On the other hand, would a
>DCX program shifted to taking on the duties of a HL-20 be a disasterous 
>move in terms of the programs efficiency?

Crew transfer to the space station is already included in the standard view-
graph pitch.  Whether the potential cost reductions and increased access to
space will excite Congress is a question I can't answer.  NASP made a go of
it and failed, but DC is doing things a bit differently.  The main point in
DC's favor is they are FLYING.  Being able to show that the first $58 million
has already produced results should make funding for DCY easier to come by.

Of course with Congress, you never know.

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
From: hugh@whio.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz (Hugh Emberson)
Subject: Re: Shuttle replacement
Organization: Computer Science Dept., University of Canterbury, New Zealand
	<1992Nov17.180131.28863@iti.org> <1992Nov17.181045.29655@iti.org>
	<1992Nov17.194901.16883@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> <Bxvrv3.3tp@zoo.toronto.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:07:18 GMT

>>>>> On Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:01:50 GMT, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) said:

Henry> In article <1992Nov17.194901.16883@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:
>... is it concievable that an SSTO vehicle could be built with the same
>payload weight capability as the shuttle with the same base technologies?

Henry> Gary Hudson claims that you could put six SSMEs on a shuttle external
Henry> tank, without SRBs, and get it into orbit carrying a payload about 50%
Henry> greater than the shuttle's.  It wouldn't be reusable, though.

This sounds a lot like Shuttle-C, whatever happened to that idea?

As I understand it, Shuttle-C was an idea for using up old SSMEs.  The
idea was to take a normal stack (an ET and 2 SRBs) and bolt on a
fairing containing the payload and some SSMEs in place of the shuttle.

This was meant to be a cheap expendable HLV using parts that NASA was
already familiar with.  I guess it's payload would have been at least
100,000 lbs, probably a lot more.  Some of the pictures I saw had 4
SRBs.


Hugh





Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: mcmillan@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: Transcripts
Organization: NASA Johnson Space Center
Date: 19 Nov 92 12:57:02 -0600

In article <1992Nov19.021124.920@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
> In article <1992Nov18.010633.13733@rvgs.vak12ed.edu> cfifer@rvgs.vak12ed.edu (Craig Fifer) writes:
>>Does anyone have or know where I can get transcripts of shuttle
>>missions?   [...]
> 
> Nobody transcribes the entire mission's uplinked/downlinked audio
> (which is what I assume you want).  Audio recordings of the whole
> mission are kept.  You can get them via Freedom of Information Request
> from Johnson Space Center's Public Affairs Office.  They'll cost you a
> bundle.  Then you can transcribe the tapes yourself or pay a
> commercial transcription service (costing another bundle).
> 
Which reminds me...

The STS-1 mission was transcribed, but the transcription had a few mistakes.
The MCC call during ascent "Press to MECO" was typed as "Pressed amigo".
Guess someone had just eaten some TexMex food before transcribing!

Stokes McMillan -  	Flight Engineering Office (VF3)  NASA JSC
			MCMILLAN@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: Shuttle replacement
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 19:48:45 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.155202.16554@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> rbw3q@rayleigh.mech.Virginia.EDU (Brad Whitehurst) writes:

>	If you are using well tested current technology, why should
>the gov't. pay for any of the craft?...

First of all, this is being done to test the concept. Most (not all) of
the parts exist but they are still being used in a new way. The key is the
parts which don't exist yet and to veryfy the overall concept. Since DC-Y
is an experimental craft then we will have a nice testbed to try new
ideas. For example, after DC-Y flies we can replace the engines with
aerospike engines and see if performance improves.

Second of all it the issue of risk. We are currently in a catch-22: nobody
launches much because costs are too high and costs are too high because
nobody luanches much. SSTO offers the promise of greatly reducing costs
and thereby opening the markets.

  Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------155 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Hubble
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:12:07 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Nov16.034202.26234@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy) writes:
>#The really interesting space
>#telescopes are the small ones, not the megaprojects.
>
>While small projects certainly have their advantages, it is hard to
>have sensitive instruments on small packages. 

Admittedly, there are things you just can't do without (say) a 5m mirror.
But I don't think there's much doubt that the science community would have
been happier with half a dozen 1m mirrors launched in the 1970s than with
a single very impressive telescope not launched until 1990 and then found
to have spherical aberration!
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: petej@phred.UUCP (Peter Jarvis)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Answer to 104%/109% Thrust Quest.
Keywords: tion: Auburn University Engineering
Date: 16 Nov 92 13:45:41 GMT
Reply-To: petej@phred.UUCP (Peter Jarvis)
Organization: <1992Nov12.231120.4271@news.duc.auburn.edu>o

In article <1992Nov12.231120.4271@news.duc.auburn.edu> forrepr@eng.auburn.edu writes:
>
>Here's another trivium...Why do Shuttle Flight Rules state
>that an engine may be throttled to 109% ONLY if the other
>two engines are down ?
>
For obvious reasons. The only engine left would need max thrust to get
at least an AOA or TAL abort. 

Peter Jarvis..........
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
Subject: Re: Shuttle Landing Schedule
Organization: Unocal Corporation
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 22:25:28 GMT

In article <1erh31INNbvk@sal-sun132.usc.edu> orly@sal-sun132.usc.edu (Mr. Nitro Plastique) writes:
>Could someone please send me a Shuttle Landing Schedule? I'd like to plan a
>trip to Edwards for a big group, and need dates for scheduled Edwards landings.

The past couple or so have landed in Florida.  This is the eventual goal
to save the couple of million lost in transporting and refurbishing delay.
I don't think the Florida runway is optimal for all types of cargos.

What is the reliability of landing times?  Launches are often delayed for
weather or breakdowns.  Landings are often rescheduled for weather or
mission changes.  I have been hoping to catch one too and only live 2.5
hours away.
Xref: sparky sci.space.shuttle:2767 sci.space:16074
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
Subject: Re: SSTO Viability (was: Shuttle replacement)
Date: 18 Nov 92 20:08:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: convex.ewright.722117294
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Nov17.181045.29655@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>There are two things which need to be validated. First is the aerodynamics of
>the 'flip maneuver' they use on re-entry. The second thing is to verify
>their models and simulations on tasks needed for rapid operations (can the
>engines be serviced as fast as they think, ect).

The second goal is vastly more important than the first. If the flip
manuever proves problematical, the next vehicle could be redesigned 
to use a more conventional base-first reentry (like Apollo).  If the
maintenance goals can't be achieved, however, it would undermine the 
entire justification for the project.


>>Does this program have the ability to fascinate congress and
>>Al Gore if it demonstrates what it intendend to do? 

>I hope so. We are working hard on that (again, let me know if you want
>to help). We have shown a few key people that there is support for this.

Nothing that doesn't have "ecological disaster" in its title has
the ability to fascinate Al Gore.  However, Milton Freidman used
to tell a story about geese and politicians.  If you watch a flock
of geese, flying in "V" formation behind the leader, everyone once 
in a while you will see them start to head in the wrong direction.
The other geese, realizing something's wrong, turn and continue in
the correct direction.  Finally the "leader" turns his head, realizes
no one is following him, and starts to flap like mad to get in front
of everybody else again.  Politicians operate much the same way.

The critical test, I think, is public opinion.  If the American
people get really excited about this, Clinton and Gore will quickly
move into the "I said it was a good idea all along" camp.  That will
happen around the time of the first test launch, if it happens at all.
When a project goes from zero visibility to the network news, it makes
all the difference in the world because most politicians (and most
Americans) don't care about anything that doesn't make the network
news.  (Let's just hope the launch happens on a slow news day.)
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: davem@ee.ubc.ca (david michelson)
Subject: Re: *Angle of Attack*: have you read it?
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:28:18 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.105753.1@fnalf.fnal.gov> higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
>
>The book is the story of Harrison Storms, the head of North American
>Aviation's space division during the development of the Apollo command
>module (NAA also developed one of the Saturn V stages, I think). 
>Storms was canned in the wake of the Apollo fire investigation, much
>disucssed here in the past week.
>

NAA developed the S II stage - also, by coincidence (?) a problem
child.  Much interesting background in the NASA SP "Stages to Saturn".
  
--
Dave Michelson
davem@ee.ubc.ca             
  
Xref: sparky sci.space:16231 sci.astro:12292 alt.sci.planetary:347
From: clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Aerobraking [was Re: Magellan Update - 11/20/92]
Date: 21 Nov 92 17:14:10 EST
Reply-To: clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones)
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: Kendall Square Research Corp
In-reply-to: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)

In article <By32px.8Lp@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <1ellrpINNh2a@rave.larc.nasa.gov> claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Egalon) writes:
>>BTW, I think Magellan will become the first spacecraft to conduct an 
>>aerobraking maneuver to change its orbit, right???
>
>Wrong.  Hiten -- the Japanese engineering-test mission that's been batting
>around the Earth-Moon system for a couple of years -- did a small Earth
>aerobraking maneuver in spring 1991.

At least two of the Soviet circumlunar Zond flights used an aerobraking
maneuver to minimize the G forces on reentry.  The descent module entered the
atmosphere at an angle low enough to "skip" off back into space, having shed
enough velociy so the second reentry would have been more comfortable for the
human occupant(s) on the presumed followon flight (never flown since Apollo 8
got there firstest with the mostest).  I recall that the Zond flights which
reentered directly underwent over 15 Gs, while the "skip return" trajectory
subjected the craft to around 5 Gs.
--
Chris Jones    clj@ksr.com
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: thayer@odysseus.uchicago.edu (Mike Thayer)
Subject: Re: ALTERNATIVE Heavy Element Creation in Universe
Organization: University of Chicago  LASR
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 21:14:57 GMT

Is this for real?????

BMFO
-- 
Laboratory For Astrophysics		"Is it not the height of silent humour
and Space Research			 to cause an unknown change
(but I don't speak for them...)		 in the Earth's climate?"
University of Chicago		        "Cry...for the Fire..."
From: pmorvill@jade.tufts.edu (Paul Morville)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Patriot Missile
Date: 23 Nov 92 06:41:52 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

Could anyone tell me when the Patriot Missile came into being?  When was it 
first lauched, tested, etc.  I was under impression it was finished just
prior to the Persian Gulf conflict.  Is this correct?

Please E-Mail.

					Thanks
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: marc@r-node.gts.org (Marc Fournier - Admin)
Subject: OS in the shuttle (was Re: What kind of computers are in the shuttle?)
Organization: R-node Public Access UNIX Information System (416-249-5366)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 23:36:28 GMT

In article <BxqD9s.ApL@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>dead; the specs are stringent for a reason.  MSDOS doesn't qualify. :-)
>

	Speaking of MSDOS...NAWT!...what do they use?  An in-house
developed OS?  Some derived from existing OS's?

Marc


-- 
Marc G. Fournier      | R-node Public Access Unix running UnixBBS 1.10
Etobicoke, Ontario    | 416-249-5366   24hrs 7 days/week   network email
voice: 249-4230       | shell accounts available  2500+ newsgroups  FREE
marc@r-node.pci.on.ca | Telebit WorldBlazer/SupraModem2400/Cardinal 2400
From: awtron@strawber.princeton.edu (Andrew Tron)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: SATELLITE PHOTO
Date: 19 Nov 92 15:56:31 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Nov18.203418.13263@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>In article <16NOV92.12028663.0072@VM1.MCGILL.CA> IEGS@MUSICB.MCGILL.CA (IEGS000) writes:
>>COULD SOMEONE HELP ME: SUPPOSE A HURRICANE JUST BLEW IN! WHERE CAN I
>>FIND A SATELLITE PHOTOS OF IT'S PROGRESS?
>
>Try the Weather Channel, or if you don't have cable, your local broadcast
>TV station's weathercast.
>
You can also get North American satellite photos in .gif format via anonymous
ftp.  The site is "vmd.cso.uiuc.edu".  Once you connect, cd to directory
"wx".  The current visual and infrared high-resolution images are stored
in the files "cvis.gif" and "cir.gif".  You can also get images from the
past 24 hours -- however these are lower resolution to conserve disk space.
Be sure to set mode to "binary" before getting the images.

A note on interpreting the infrared images: basically speaking, a whiter 
portion of the image == colder cloud tops == higher cloud tops == more severe
weather.  This bit of info I got from a weather briefer at Milville Flight
Service Station while I was waiting out a line of thunderstorms.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Tron at Princeton University  | awtron@strawber.Princeton.EDU
And of the living ... none, not one who truly loves the sky
Would trade a hundred earth bound hours for one that he could fly.
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu ("Phil G. Fraering")
Subject: Re: Clinton's address
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: [via International Space University]
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 21:48:59 GMT

>For such a together dude, why doesn't Clinton (and Gore) have an e-mail 
>address and access to the NET???  They'll Never know what's going on 
>unless they be on-line.  They should at least be FAQed in. 

Probably because some smart-alec joker would put them on the
space-tech and extropians mailing list at the same time, and
their mailbox would be flooded with "moonbase chromium
picolante reality check" material...

At least we knew Lincoln's address...

>Wm. Hathaway 

-- 
Phil Fraering
In the country of the blind....
60 minutes doesn't run stories about people trying to ban hearing
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: wes@ian.stx.com (John S.)
Subject: Re: Space suit research?
Organization: STX, Lanham Maryland
Distribution: sci
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 18:40:47 GMT

In article <ewright.722278284@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>
>I can't see any reason why low pressure would cause bleeding under the nails
>as long as the pressure inside the body was equally low.  Sounds like NASA
>was worried about a pressure leak in the gloves, causing the pressure there
>to be lower than the pressure in the rest of the suit.  That could, quite
>likely, cause bleeding, with the pressure inside the body pushing a small
>amount of blood through the skin under the nails (which is quite thin).  
>
This makes me curious. I'm not at all familiar with space suit design.
I was wondering if they divided the suit into separate sections so that
if, say there was an extreme loss of pressure in one part, the rest
would remain pressurized? If so, how is the suit divided up?

If this has already been discussed here, my apologies for rehashing it.
In that case, could someone possibly email a response? 
Newsgroups: sci.space