HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rbw3q@helga9.acc.Virginia.EDU (Robert B. Whitehurst)
Subject: Re: Russian Engines for DC-Y?
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:39:27 GMT

In article <BxC2uq.E5M@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.055945.28439@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> rbw3q@helga9.acc.Virginia.EDU (Robert B. Whitehurst) writes:
>>	The interesting thing about this article was that it said that
>>the RD-701 used only two turbopumps, with the LOX and kerosene being
>>pumped by one, and the LH2 by the other.  I read it quickly, so I
>>might have this wrong, but that sounds rather intriguing.  Is
>>fuel/oxidizer premixed in other engines? ...
>
>I haven't seen the article yet... but almost certainly that means a
>common turbine driving two separate pumps.  It's fairly normal to
>use a separate pump turbine for hydrogen, because a hydrogen pump is
>a very different animal due to hydrogen's very low density, but a
>common turbine for more normal propellants is nothing unusual.  The
>thought of trying to pump premixed propellants would make any sane
>rocket engineer dive for cover, even disregarding the fact that you
>*can't* premix LOX and kerosene due to temperature differences...
>-- 
	Gives new meaning to the term "molasses in January"!  Hmmm,
slush kerosene, anybody? :-) Seriously, I'll exhibit a little more
ignorance here:  In kerosene/LOX engines, do they vaporize the LOX, or
do they inject it as a spray into the combustion chamber?  We use
strictly gaseous fuel in our work--just thinking about all those 2
phase sprays gives me a headache! :)

-- 

Brad Whitehurst    |   Aerospace Research Lab
rbw3q@Virginia.EDU |   We like it hot...and fast.
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu (Doug Mohney)
Subject: Re: reality check
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:33:40 GMT
Organization: Computer Aided Design Lab, U. of Maryland College Park
Distribution: sci
Reply-To: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu

In article <BxHHnI.B2o.1@cs.cmu.edu>, roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:
>
>So ship it in the form of nylon. Plenty of hydrogen, nitrogen, and carbon,
>and able to withstand high impact velocity, which should save considerably
>on delta-v to land it on the moon.

How difficult is it to break down nylon into useable components? Burn it or
shove some ozone at it? 

                 Play in the intelluctual sandbox of Usenet 

  -- >                  SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU                        < --
From: roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Apollo fire
Date: 12 Nov 92 21:19:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: uars_mag.roelle.721603155
Organization: Johns Hopkins University

henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:

>............ Mercury
>used normal air for ground pressurization, although I believe the astronaut
>breathed pure oxygen at all times.  However, it turned out that there were
>risks in this approach:  a technician was killed in an accident which would
>not have happened with pure oxygen.  (I don't have details, but I would
>guess a pressure-chamber test went awry and he ended up breathing air at
>low pressure.)  

Around 7-8 years ago several technicians died at space shuttle pad 39A
or B when they entered a chamber of pure Nitrogen (during a purge?).
Does anyone have more information about that?  I believe they were
contractors with Rockwell.

A broader question is: In the history of the U.S. manned space program, 
what other fatal accidents have ground crews members been involved 
in at the Cape?

Curt Roelle
roelle@sigi.jhuapl.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Automated space station construction
Date: 10 Nov 92 22:34:49 GMT
Organization: Lockheed ESC, Houston

In article <1992Nov8.064256.7682@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> 
       fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>Is anyone looking into robots with very limited autonomy? That is,
>under direction from a human, but able to execute instructions on
>their own for periods of, say, ten seconds?

Yes, there is work on this going on at JSC and (I think) at JPL.  We
call this telerobotics at JSC (i.e half teleoperation, half robotics).
It is a problem that is very difficult, as you must be able to do both
autonomy and teleoperation and be smart about when and how to switch
modes.

Most of the work is centered on teleoperation and on robotics at the
centers.  I am working on a KC-135 experiment for this fiscal year to
take an arm and a vision system and test grasping of polyhedra in
microgravity with vision as the primary input. This is a tough problem
and one that needs to be solved to make lots of missions less expensive.
(From SEI lunar bases to Nick's comet/asteroid miners).


-- 
Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov - I speak only for myself, unless blah, blah..
NAR 12256 TRA 2004 (dang, 3 too late, Hal.....)
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: NASA Coverup
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 05:23:48 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <3NOV199209041648@judy.uh.edu> wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov writes:
>A very easy way to blow this one up is to look at the weight of the Apollo
>LM and the thrust of the engine. The rocket equation says that there must be
>at least a 1.141 thrust to weight ratio. Remember the LM only had one
>Ascent stage. Henry can probably provide the numbers...

Ascent-stage liftoff weight was about 10000lbs on a 3500lb-thrust engine.

Of course, he'll just claim that the references are lying about these.
Really serious conspiracy theorists are religious fanatics, not rational
debaters; there is not much point in arguing with them, because any source
which disagrees with them is ipso facto lying.

>Astronauts suits and baggage were set up for 1/6 g and not .6 gee. If any of
>you out there know Buzz Aldrin, there is no way he would keep something like
>this covered up.

This is just a specific illustration of a point I should probably have made
at greater length:  there is just *no way* to keep something like that quiet
with so many people involved.  There's always somebody who's honest enough
or greedy enough or ethical enough or annoyed enough with the management
to spill the beans to the press... especially when it's big enough
and important enough to get his name into the history books and make him
a bundle of money.  Classifying something "secret" won't stop someone who
really thinks the public deserves to know, as witness the guy who went to
jail for leaking a spysat photo of a Soviet aircraft carrier being built.
-- 
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
Xref: sparky sci.space:15872 sci.astro:11968 alt.sci.planetary:316
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Mars Observer Update - 11/13/92
Keywords: Mars Observer, JPL
Date: 14 Nov 92 02:50:13 GMT
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4


                      MARS OBSERVER STATUS REPORT
                          November 13, 1992
                            11:00 AM PST
                          Launch +49 Days

Flight Sequence C3 C continues executing toward its completion on
November 17.  Magnetometer and Gamma Ray Spectrometer instrument
teams are receiving early cruise calibration data.  The Mars Observer
Camera "bakeout" is continuing through December 28.

A new Star Catalog/Ephemeris was uplinked and a successful "USE"
command radiated this morning.  The ephemeris previously used had the
intended effect of altering the solar array sun incidence angle by 5
degrees, from 60 degrees to 55 degrees.  This sun incidence angle periodic
decrease will be performed in subsequent ephemeris loads, with the final
objective being to point the high-gain antenna at earth by the time
transition from inner to outer cruise takes place.  The current offset is
designed to prevent direct sunlight on the solar panels creating an excess
amount of power.  At the time of transition from inner to outer cruise, the
spacecraft will be of sufficient distance from the sun that excess power
is of a lesser concern.

Uplink of the C4 sequence is planned for November 16.  C4 will begin
execution at 8:00 AM, PST, upon completion of C3 C.  C4 is 28 days in
duration and continues the MOC bakeout, performs Radio Science Ultra
Stable Oscillator tests, Modulation Index Test, Radio Frequency Subsystem
Automatic Gain Control and Command Data Unit Signal to Noise Ratio
tests, and a Static Phase Error test.

The Spacecraft Team reports that all Mars Observer subsystems continue
to perform well.

Today, the spacecraft is 8,793,376 miles from earth, traveling at a
velocity of 8,106 miles per hour.  One way light time is approximately 47
seconds.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Give people a second 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | chance, but not a third. 
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
From: giglio@betsy.gsfc.nasa.gov (Louis Giglio)
Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check
Reply-To: giglio@betsy.gsfc.nasa.gov (Louis Giglio)
Organization: NASA/GSFC
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:09:01 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.192439.1354@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W.
Sherzer) writes:

|> >* A livable atmosphere is mostly nitrogen, not oxygen.
|> 
|> Which comes as a rude suprise to the astronaust who lived
|> weeks on end on pure oxygen.
                   ^^^^ ^^^^^^

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with either party, but I want to point
out that
this can't possibly be correct.  The oxygen had to be diluted with
something.
They would have died otherwise.



Louis Giglio
Severe Storms Branch
NASA/GSFC
From: wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: First Saturn 5 Launch - 25 Years Ago Today
Date: 9 Nov 92 21:26:44 GMT
Organization: Alpha Science Computer Network, Denver, Co.

Twenty five years ago, 1967 November 9, the first launch,
of the Saturn V, designated Apollo 4 ,took place from Merrit 
Island, Florida early in the morning. The dummy payload went
into a nearly circular orbit of 300 km with an inclination 
of 32.6 degrees. Decay occurred the same day.

I got up before dawn to watch the TV coverage. The old TV
had a vertical control problem and I had to turn it off and
back on repeatly to get a picture--I felt like I had been
part of the effort to get it into space.

With this first successful launch, the stage was set for
the spectacular feats to occur in the next few years.
-- 
Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.
From: Lauren.Podolak@mechanic.Fidonet.org (Lauren Podolak)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Drop nuc waste into
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 16:03:00 PDT
Organization: Mechanic: The Usenet<->Fidonet Gateway oF St. Pete Florida

DD>Since the earth's escape velocity from near the surface is 11 km/s, a
DD>payload on a direct solar impact trajectory would have to be moving at
DD>about sqrt(11^2 + 30^2) = 32 km/s at thrust termination.  However,
DD>a payload on a solar escape trajectory would need a speed of only about
DD>sqrt(11^2 + 12^2) = 16 km/s.  Since energy is proportional to v^2, the
DD>direct solar impact trajectory takes about 4 times the launch energy as
DD>the solar escape trajectory.  This is a HUGE difference.

Why not simply dump the stuff on Luna?  Less energy involved yet and
frankly it makes sense since at some date we will probably come up with
a need for the stuff.

Lauren
___
 X OLX 2.1 TD X Who said that Interstellar Empires don't exit?

--  
Internet: Lauren.Podolak@mechanic.Fidonet.org
UUCP:     ...!myrddin!tct!mechanic!Lauren.Podolak
Note: Mechanic is a free gateway between USENET & FIdonet.
      For information write to chief@mechanic.fidonet.org

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: jdnicoll@prism.ccs.uwo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: astronauts voting
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:07:12 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.202148.2629@sfu.ca> palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer) writes:
>
>Steve Maclean (probably misspelled) was actually in orbit when Canada held its
>recent "referendum" on constitutional matters. If the Canadian Space Agency was
>on its toes then he must have cast an absentee ballot. Not to have done so
>would have been politically incorrect.

	With the exception of voters in  Quebec (Quebec ran its own
'referendum' with slightly different rules), I do not think Canadians
were allowed absentee ballots  in  the recent 'referendum'.

						James Nicoll
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Russian Engines for DC-Y?
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:12:14 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Nov9.153927.11010@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> rbw3q@helga9.acc.Virginia.EDU (Robert B. Whitehurst) writes:
>...In kerosene/LOX engines, do they vaporize the LOX, or
>do they inject it as a spray into the combustion chamber? ...

It goes in as a spray.  Rocket engines normally make no attempt to vaporize
the fuels on the way in; liquids are easier to handle and make better
coolants.  Localized small-scale boiling is sometimes permitted in cooling
jackets, but without affecting the bulk of the coolant flow.  There are
some borderline cases like liquid hydrogen, which is often above its
critical point (where the distinction between gas and liquid vanishes)
in rocket applications.

>...just thinking about all those 2
>phase sprays gives me a headache! :)

Designing a good injector gives lots of rocket engineers headaches. :-)
-- 
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,alt.sci.planetary
From: skoester@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Scott A Koester)
Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 00:29:19 GMT


   I don't know too much abotu many of the specifics, but in the sense of the 
moon 'colony' paying for itself, did any mention the fact that if solar arrays 
are set up on the moon the can produce a large amount energy, energy which 
could be used to power the base/colony, or could be beamed back down to the 
EArth in the form of microwaves and then collected and tranformed back into 
usable energy.  This could be sold at a rate to other countries also.


Scott Koester
Xref: sparky sci.space:15342 sci.astro:11647
From: dcb@mulka (David Bell)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: the Happyface on Mars
Date: 5 Nov 1992 05:05:51 GMT
Organization: University of Melbourne
NNTP-Posting-Host: mulka.ph.unimelb.edu.au
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892) writes:
: In article <1992Nov1.232545.9121@twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com> mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com (Ed McCreary) writes:
: >Well, I'm happy, I received my Mars CDROMs in just the other
: >day.  I like to find the images that show the "Happyface" on
: >mars and the Kermit the Frog.  If anyone has either the Lat/Long.
: >or the image id of the pics, I'd appreciate hearing from you.
: >
: >I've got the both the raw and the MDIM sets.
: >
: 35A72 and 70A13
: 
: 86A10
: 
: 4A50, 4A51, 4A52, 4A53, and 4A54
: 
: 775A10 and 775A11  or
: 77A10 and 77A11  (one is probably a misprint)
:
	Stuff Deleated.... (inbetween as well)

The Image Numbers with the A in them represent the Viking 1 Orbiter Primary Imaging mission.
The Cdroms that you have are from the Survey Mission and therefore all have an S in the image
numbers. The best way to find the images that you are looking for is to look at the MDIM 
disks and using a suitable search utility look at the files "label.tab" in the index directory
on the disks. Each map image was taken from a collection of Raw Images and each label has
the raw images listed. So just search through the file using the string that you want and that
will enable you to find a MDIM image of the feature that you want. Check to see what other 
images are listed along side and there may be a raw Image that you have on the Survey disks as well.
	I have tried this myself and have had some success but not overall success, since
some of the images refered to don't seem to be used in the MDIM Images.
All the cataloging data is also explained on the disks, I also believe that Dbase can be 
used as well, since there are files that support it on disk.

	Warm Regards,
	David

	dcb@electron.ph.unimelb.edu.au
	School of Physics, The University of Melbourne, AUSTRALIA 
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: GE777010@brownvm.brown.edu (Bill Collins)
Subject: Re: Space Digest V15 #412
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: [via International Space University]
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:16:11 GMT

Apollo 1 fire:

One of the main reasons that the fire was so devastating was the fact
that at the time Apollo capsules had 100% oxygen atmospheres at normal
atmospheric pressure (14.7 lbs./sq.inch).  That's a lot of oxidizing
agent to help with combustion!  After Apollo was allowed to fly subsequent
to the Apollo1 fire the pressure was dropped to 5.3 lbs/sq. inch (am I
right, Henry?).

                                     Bill
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent)
Subject: Re: Space suit research???
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 03:36:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.020758.7868@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>
>The current (unfunded) goal is for a 8.5 psi "no pre-breath"
>pure-oxygen suit. One of the proposed designs (the Ames Hard Suit)
>doesn't suffer at high pressures, so in theory it could go all
>the way up to one atmosphere (although this isn't currently 
>planned for...)

What type of line item would the Ames Hard Suit (or the competing design)
need to move forward at a reasonable pace?

Mike

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

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: darknite@camelot.bradley.edu (John S. Novak III)
Subject: GPS Satellite Info?
Organization: Bradley University
Date:  8 Nov 92 22:28:46 GMT

Hi.

I would greatly appreciate it if someone could point me to a
recent list (ideally, a completely up to date list) of which GPS
satellites have been launched, and which satellites are still in
operation.

The most recent list I've found on my own initiative is dated
from 1986.

Email or post, I'll see it either way.

Thanks,
--
"What did I tell you last semester...  When you think you're rightm stand your
 ground, and slap him in the head until he listens."
          -Steve Gutschlag to Carrie Weissberg. 01-28-92
 John S. Novak, III		darknite@camelot.bradley.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Subject: Re: Metric again
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:10:18 GMT


-From: Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn)
-Subject: Metric again
-Date: 8 Nov 92 17:03:22 GMT
-Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

-> John Roberts writes:
->
-> By the way, I think you'll be much happier in the long run if you do your
-> calculations in SI (metric) units. I often do simple calculations in
-> standard
-> units, but the tough problems are much more easily handled using SI.

-        I am delighted to find that NASA seem finally to be moving toward
-metric, not just in theory but in reality.  

-        Does anyone know if NASA uses degrees C for reporting things like the
-Shuttle cabin temperature and the temperature of experiments?

The US officially became "metric" on October 1, I think. I'm pretty sure
what this means is that government publications are required to include
the SI units (but not forbidden to also include the "standard" units). I
don't know of plans to change highway mile markers and speed limits any time
soon. (Note: these are my own impressions - that's not the part of NIST I
work for.)

There are risks associated with changing the working units of a working
system - if the Shuttle launch people have given up on feet elevation and
nautical miles downrange, I'm not aware of it. I don't know what effect this 
recent policy decision will have on SSF - it *was* planned to use standard 
units.

I'm pretty sure the furnaces, etc. have been using SI units all along.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Subject: Re: Reality check (2)
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 01:26:41 GMT


-From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
-Subject: Re: reality check (2)
-Date: 11 Nov 92 15:04:10 GMT

-In article <BxHJsu.D5G.1@cs.cmu.edu> roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:
->-Most of this is for processes which will have lunar equivalents which
->-don't use water. Abundant and cheap solar energy will provide alternatives.

->Abundant - yes, cheap - no (at least by Earth standards). It may actually
->make sense to start with fission and imported fuel (or a combination of
->fission and solar power - performing the energy-intensive tasks only
->during the day), until large power storage facilities can be brought on line.

-True enough for electricity but that's not what I had in mind. At first
-electricity will be hard to get (until the solar cell plant becomes
-operational) but raw heat is abundantly available with a few light weight
-mirrors. Many processes can use heat.

Like burning nylon, for instance. :-)  One such application was mentioned
on "Space Age" - using solar mirrors to heat lunar soil until it partially
fuses, forming a building material that's stronger than concrete.

->I'm in favor of establishing permanent human settlements on the moon, but I
->think there's a tendency to underplay the problems (or overplay them :-).

-Granted but I believe that we won't know what the problems are until we
-actually do it. If we sit here and wait until all the problems are solved
-then we won't ever go.

I think a lot of the initial work could be done with robots, more cheaply than
sending humans there right away. (Once we know more, and hopefully have more
appropriate launchers, we can send humans.)

This approach is also likely to be more politically feasible (especially
if you call it "technology development" rather than "SEI".

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov

Newsgroups: sci.space