HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eagle@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Daniel L'Hommedieu)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Can You See A Shuttle Launch From Orlando?
Keywords: well . . . . .
Date: 27 Jan 93 01:34:20 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: NCSU

wasser@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Steve Wasser) writes:
>I've been wondering: what is the farthest from KSC anyone
>has been able to observe a shuttle launch?  I suppose we
>should separate daytime and nighttime launches.

The key is how clear the day is.  On a clear day, I've seen the
shuttle's trail from Tampa.

Daniel
--
Daniel "eagle" L'Hommedieu / Junior, NCSU CSC Dept / eagle@catt.ncsu.edu
"It will not be easy.  It will require sacrifice."--President Bill
Clinton in his inaugural speech, 20 January 1993.  Translation: "we're
getting ready to tax the hell out of you."
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (George Hastings)
Subject: Re: Physics/Shuttle Question
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network (Richmond)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 00:18:30 GMT


You must also remember that the moment that the Canada Arm RMS,
or astronaut Bob, attached by his feet ps to the shuttle, grabs
something, then the shuttle, the astronaut, and thething
grabbed are, as far as the physics dynamics are concerned, a
single object whose center of mass if now slightly different
than before.
  If astronaut Bob or the RMS movese object, such as a
satellite, there is ALWAYS an equal and opposite movement. The
amount of opposite movement is determined by the relative
masses of the two objects and the length of the lever-arm doing
the moving.
   I was doing weightlessness training aboard an IL-76 MDK over
Star City, Russia, it was easy to move a 200 KG mass as long as
my feet were secury tucked under restraining ropes between the
floormats, but when I attempted it floating in mid-air, I moved
myself more than twice the distance that I was able to move the
mass itself...both sides of the equation balance!


---
From: nsx@cba.ufl.edu (Mark Sterling)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Shuttle lauches & viewing
Date: 26 Jan 93 18:58:45 GMT
Organization: College of Business,  University of Florida

In article <93025.121743U57053@uicvm.uic.edu> <U57053@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

>To all,
>    I am planning on creating a summer vacation around a launch of the Space
>Shuttle. However, I need to know a few things.
>    One, I know there will be approx. 8 launches this year, are any of them in
>August? Or does someone have a list of projected dates?
>    Two, How reliable do you think a lunch date is?
>    Three, How early in advance should I reserve viewing passes from launch
>date?
>    Any help will be GREATLY APPRECIATED!!!!!!!!!

>                                                   Thanks!
>                                                    Dan Kwiatkowski
>                                                u57053@uicvm.cc.uic.edu


The weather here in Florida is very unpredictable.  It does tend to rain a 
bit August here as well.

Mark Sterling
NSX@chip.cba.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: drickel@bounce.mentorg.com (Dave Rickel)
Subject: Re: Re : To the moon.....
Originator: drickel@bounce
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 06:48:40 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics 
Keywords: 
Followup-To: 


In article <PAULI.RAMO.93Jan24190410@vipunen.hut.fi>, Pauli.Ramo@hut.fi (no, I don't repeat it!) writes:

|> If someone has the velocity change requirements for the rest of our trip
|> to moon, we can continue this little number game.

OK, here's a table from Sutton

Mission			Ideal velocity		Approx actual velocity
			(km/sec)		(km/sec)

Satellite orbit 		 7.9-10			9.1-12.5
Escape from earth		11.2			12.9
Escape from moon		 2.3			 2.7
Earth to moon (soft landing	13.1			16.1
   on moon, no return)		
Earth to Mars (soft landing)	17.5			20
Earth to Venus (soft landing)	22			26
Earth to moon (soft landing
   on moon, return to earth)	15.9			18.6
Earth to Mars (soft landing	22.9			27
   and return)


Oh well.  Not quite what we need, but interesting, regardless.  Anyway, call
it 3.2 km/sec for TLI, .7 km/sec for LOI, another .7 for TEI, and aerobrake
somehow for reentry.

Someone must have posted the empty and full masses of the ET--i seem to have
missed them.  Anyway, if you assume a mass ratio of between 4 and 5 for
shuttle + ET, you get a delta v of between 6 and 7 km/sec.  Plenty for TLI.
I don't think OMS is sufficient for LOI, however, so you'd need to restart
the main engines.  And again for TEI.  You aren't going to have enough left
over at reentry to bring you down to normal LEO reentry speeds, but maybe
you can do a couple of skips to burn off some speed.


david rickel
drickel@sjc.mentorg.com
From: dalbert@jade.tufts.edu (David L. Albert)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Challenger Tribute
Date: 28 Jan 93 14:43:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA


In Their Memory,

			  CHALLENGER
			   1/28/86


			Francis R Scobee
			Michael J Smith
			Elison S Onizuka
			Judith A Resnick
			Ronald E McNair
			Gregory Jarvis
			Christa McAuliff



"Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of earth,
 And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;
 Sunward I've climbed and joined the tumbling mirth
 Of sun-split clouds -- and done a hundred things
 You have not dreamed of -- wheeled and soared and swung
 High in the sunlit silence. Hov'ring there,
 I've chased the shouting wind along and flung
 My eager craft through footless halls of air.
 Up, up the long, delirious, burning blue
 I've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace,
 Where never lark, or even eagle, flew;
 And, while with silent, lifting mind I've trod
 The high, untrespassed sanctity of space,
 Put out my hand, and touched the face of God."






=================================================================

		David L. Albert   PP-ASEL/IA

dalbert1@PEARL.TUFTS.EDU		dave@SETI.JPL.NASA.GOV

Tufts University			Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Box 2 - Physics Dept.			Mail Stop 169-506
Medford, MA  02155			Pasadena, CA  91109
(617) 776-6505				(818) 354-4111

"Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of earth
   and danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings..."

=================================================================
From: nsx@chip.cba.ufl.edu (Mark Sterling)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: patches
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:27:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: chip.nsx.26
Organization: College of Business,  University of Florida

Does anyone know how to get the space shuttle patches for each mission 
without going to KSC?  I haven't had the chance to get by there in a while 
and I'm really starting to fall behind...

Thanks,
Mark
NSX@chip.cba.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: edgar@sal.wisc.edu (Dick Edgar)
Subject: Re: Earth Views from STS 54
Keywords: attitude
Organization: Space Astronomy Lab, Madison WI
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:17:32 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.175137.15052@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>In article <00966AA0.C6BD3A40@SAMSON.PHYS.VIRGINIA.EDU> cole@SAMSON.phys.virginia.edu writes:
>>There seems to be a lack of the usual earth views
>>from the payload bay during the crew sleep period
>>on this mission.  Anybody at JSC care to comment?
>
>Good eyes!
>
>The Orbiter was in an unusual attitude for much of the mission.  We
>usually position the PLB toward the Earth for Earth Obs and for some
>thermal effects.  But this mission, the PLB was facing away from Earth
>(in an orientation called "+ZLV") for extended periods in support of
>the DXS experiment, which was apparently a "Deep Space X-ray"
>experiment.  So the PLB was pointing at deep space.  I don't know any
>details about the experiment.  I can dig more if anybody's really
>interested.
>
>I noticed especially that we lost sight of a really nifty thunderstorm
>when the PLBD obscured the view.
>
>References: 
>
>  NSTS-07700, Volume III, FLIGHT DEFINITION AND REQUIREMENTS DIRECTIVE
>    Rev L, Change 291, Table C-1, "Flight History"
>
>  JSC-10511, Attitude and Pointing Flight Procedures Handbook,
>    Rev A, 1985, Figure 5-4, page 5-5.
>
>-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
>      kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368
>
>     "NASA turns dreams into realities and makes science fiction
>      into fact" -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator

The shuttle attitude for STS-54 was driven much of the time by the
DXS experiment.  This instrument, the Diffuse X-ray Spectrometer
(I'm the project scientist) is designed to look at the sky in x-rays
and measure the spectrum of the glow that comes from interstellar
space.  We have a large and unique data set to analyze; the quick look
shows that the solar system is embedded in a region of hot gas about
300 light-years in radius.

Since we wanted to look at deep space, the shuttle was put into an
inertial attitude (fixed relative to the stars), with the payload
bay facing deep space during orbit night, and facing earth during orbit
day.  This causes some of the equipment in the payload bay to get too
cold, so when the astronauts were awake, they maneuvered the shuttle
into a -ZSI attitude (bay to sun) during orbit day, and then back to
the DXS attitude during orbit night (2 maneuvers each 90-minute orbit!
Thanks, guys!)  So there was not much time when the crew could observe
the earth.


Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: hammond@tellabs.com (Mark Hammond)
Subject: Can You See A Shuttle Launch From Orlando?
Keywords: well . . . . .
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 14:43:21 GMT


Can anyone tell me if I were in Orlando for a shuttle launch,
would I see it in the sky? Would I hear the lift off? I may be there
during one of the launches and will drive towards the launch
if necessary. Please e-mail responses.

Mark Hammond
From: hollis@titan.ksc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re : Re: Manifest 01/07/1993
Date: 22 Jan 93 15:47:14 EST
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center

Greetings and Salutations:

From: fedor@dinah.lerc.nasa.gov
>I believe the manifested missions listed represent the major effort of the
>and not a sum total of all activities that will be done.

Yes.  This is correct.  The lines would overflow if I included all of the
smaller experiments also.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------
Ken Hollis  INTERNET: HOLLIS@TITAN.KSC.NASA.GOV
            SPAN/HEPnet: KSCP00::HOLLIS
Due to additional budget constraints, the light at the end of the tunnel
will be turned off until further notice...
From: Pauli.Ramo@hut.fi (no, I don't repeat it!)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Re : To the moon.....
Date: 25 Jan 93 03:04:10 GMT
	<PAULI.RAMO.93Jan19184850@vipunen.hut.fi> <74006@cup.portal.com>
Reply-To: Pauli.Ramo@hut.fi
Organization: /u/opi/s/ramo/.organization

In article <74006@cup.portal.com> BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn) writes:

>    Of course, the Shuttle can't jettison the ET to to lighten the
>    load for TEI. Then again, even a single SSME has an order of
>    magnitude more thrust than the Apollo SPS engine.

...

>    Previous paragraph about SSME thrust versus Apollo SPS thrust
>    applies here as well. Of course, no reason to limit Lunar Shuttle
>    to using only a single SSME...

The *thrust* is not a problem, after getting to LEO. If you have less
thrust, it only takes a little longer to get to the Moon. In fact, you
could make both TLI and LOI with only one OMS (or even RCS) engine, if
you had enough fuel to it and it lasted a long continuous firing. The
problem is the amount of fuel needed.

There is a simple equation to calculate the amount of velocity change
for a given amount of fuel and mass of vehicle:

	dv = ln (m/m0) * I

where
dv = velocity change
m  = initial mass (with full tanks)
m0 = mass without fuel (empty tanks & payload)
I  = the impulse of the engine used

With chemical rockets, I is some thousands of m/s. For example, the impulse
of SSME is about 4400 m/s. With SRB's it is lower.

For a complete trip to moon and back, you must sum the velocity changes 
needed in it's various parts together and use that to calculate your 
fuel requirements. Unfortunately, I don't have the exact requirements
for TLI, LOI, TEI and EOI on hand (maybe someone can help me here), but
even LEO requires a total velocity change in the order of 9000 m/s.

Thus, to only get to LEO with a single stage booster equipped with SSME's,
you had to have the mass ratio of about 7.73:1. That means that of the
initial mass of the vehicle, 87% had to be used as fuel just to get to
LEO, and the remaining 13% would include all the tanks and engines for
the fuel.

If someone has the velocity change requirements for the rest of our trip
to moon, we can continue this little number game.

	Pauli
--
Disclaimer fault - lawyers dumped
From: BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Manifest 01/07/1993
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 17:15:06 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <73863@cup.portal.com> <1993Jan20.201634.2380@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>

>NSTS-07700, Volume III, Rev L, Change 291 (the OFFICIAL manifest) has a
>couple of other payloads listed for STS-62: OAST-2, DEE.  We're also
>flying the Extended Duration Orbiter (EDO) pallet and a Remote
>Manipulator System (RMS) or "CanadArm."
>
>-- Ken Jenks

   Whew! I thought that was ridiculous to fly a shuttle with just
   USMP-2. Is OAST-2 related to OAST-1 (the 41D solar panel test)?
   DEE is the Dextrous End Effector, right?
   
   Wile I'm a firm beleiver that every mission capable of it should
   have the EDO pallet, why is this mission carrying EDO but not
   next month's Spacelab D-2?
   
   -Brian

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian S. Thorn                                    "If ignorance is bliss,
BrianT@cup.portal.com                               this must be heaven."
                                                -Diane Chambers, "Cheers"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: tcora@pica.army.mil (Tom Coradeschi)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Can You See A Shuttle Launch From Orlando?
Date: 25 Jan 93 16:50:10 GMT
Followup-To: sci.space.shuttle
Distribution: na
Organization: Elect Armts Div, US Army Armt RDE Ctr, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ

In article <1993Jan22.144321.797@tellab5.tellabs.com>, hammond@tellabs.com
(Mark Hammond) wrote:
> 
> 
> Can anyone tell me if I were in Orlando for a shuttle launch,
> would I see it in the sky? Would I hear the lift off? I may be there
> during one of the launches and will drive towards the launch
> if necessary. Please e-mail responses.

I have friends who live in Oviedo (northeastern suburb of Orlando). They
watch the launch on TV, then walk out their front door and down the walk
about 10 ft, then turn right and look down the street at the orbiter
climbing out of the trees.

                tom coradeschi <+> tcora@pica.army.mil
From: sdd@larc.nasa.gov (Steve Derry)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Todays Landing
Date: 21 Jan 1993 04:25:11 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
Reply-To: S.D.Derry@LaRC.NASA.Gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: zip.larc.nasa.gov
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Brian Stuart Thorn (BrianT@cup.portal.com) wrote:
:  Every now and then one main gear touches down before the other.

I didn't see this particular landing :-(.  Was there a bit of a crosswind?
In the presence of a strong crosswind, an airplane should be landed with
its upwind main gear touching down first.
--
Steve Derry
<s.d.derry@larc.nasa.gov>
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Physics/Shuttle Question
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:56:20 GMT

In <1993Jan19.235621.13674@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) writes:

>I am not a big physics fan, so maybe one of you can answer this in
>plain english for us non-NASA [as of now, =8)] people.

>In microgravity, the weight of 'stuff' is less (quite less). And more then 
>once I've seen astronauts handle objects of much mass (and if on earth, 
>much weight) like they were feathers. OK, fine I understand that. BUT
>what allows the shuttle to not be effected by this? For example. If
>astronaut bob was standing in the shuttle, and grabbed a big-ol satellite,
>he reaches out and grabs it... ok? But what doesn't stop astronaut bob from
>accidently grabbing the shuttle or something? and turning it end over end?

>I am sure there is some simple answer to this, but I cannot think of it
>now. 

Weight changes, but mass remains the same.  Inertia comes from mass,
not weight.  The astronaut, the satellite, and the Shuttle all have
the same mass and inertia that they have when they're sitting on
Earth.  One is not likely to move a mass the size of the orbiter very
much by bouncing astronaut-sized masses off of it (unless one throws
the *real* hard ;-)).

-- 
"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.
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: lwall@netlabs.com (Larry Wall)
Subject: Re: Physics/Shuttle Question
Organization: NetLabs, Inc.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:02:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan19.235621.13674@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) writes:
: In microgravity, the weight of 'stuff' is less (quite less). And more then 
: once I've seen astronauts handle objects of much mass (and if on earth, 
: much weight) like they were feathers. OK, fine I understand that. BUT
: what allows the shuttle to not be effected by this? For example. If
: astronaut bob was standing in the shuttle, and grabbed a big-ol satellite,
: he reaches out and grabs it... ok? But what doesn't stop astronaut bob from
: accidently grabbing the shuttle or something? and turning it end over end?

Remember, for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction.  So
if bob grabs the shuttle and starts to turn it, bob turns more than the
shuttle does, unless bob is Very Heavy, or is attached to something
Very Heavy.  Not many things up there are Very Heavy, compared to the
shuttle.  Even if bob is attached to something Very Heavy, it would
still take a Long Time to get the shuttle turning (and just as long to
get it to stop turning), because as you pointed out, inertial mass
doesn't vary the way weight does, and your acceleration is gonna be the
amount of force divided by the mass, ignoring angular considerations.

Larry Wall
lwall@netlabs.com
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: fedor@dinah.lerc.nasa.gov (Gregory Fedor)
Subject: Re: Manifest 01/07/1993
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:56:33


Brian Thorn says:

>   > 62   8 Feb 94    -     -    28.45  296  Col-16  USMP-2
>
>       They gotta be kidding, right? A whole Shuttle mission for
>       a single pallet in the payload bay?
>
>       NASA doesn't like to change the manifest less than one
>       year prior to flight (a result of the Challenger investigation),
>       so they'd better get cracking on this one!

I know for a fact that there is more going on in this flight than just USMP-2,
since I am working on an experiment project that will be flying on the OAST-2
carrier also slated for that flight.  I believe the manifested missions listed
represent the major effort of the flight and not a sum total of all activities
that will be done.  

I can't speak for what else is being done on this flight, but I am *really*
looking forward to it! (somewhat biased of course :)

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory A. Fedor                      Email: gfedor@lerc.nasa.gov
Sverdrup Technology                   NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland OH
Space Experiments Department          Thermal Energy Storage Experiment 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: matthew@phantom.gatech.edu (Matthew DeLuca)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Can You See A Shuttle Launch From Orlando?
Date: 26 Jan 1993 18:29:40 -0500
Organization: The Dorsai Grey Captains
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: oit.gatech.edu
Keywords: well . . . . .

In article <11825@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> wasser@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Steve Wasser) writes:

>I've been wondering: what is the farthest from KSC anyone
>has been able to observe a shuttle launch?  I suppose we
>should separate daytime and nighttime launches.

On a very clear day, you can just barely distinguish a Shuttle launch from 
the top of the Peachtree Plaza hotel here in Atlanta.  Atlanta is 1000 feet
above sea level and the hotel is another 743 feet tall, so this probably 
has something to do with it.
-- 
Matthew DeLuca
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!matthew
Internet: matthew@phantom.gatech.edu
From: ralph.buttigieg@f635.n713.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Ralph Buttigieg)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Can Shuttle Fly to Moon?
Organization: Fidonet. Gate admin is fido@socs.uts.edu.au
Date: 21 Jan 93 07:31:38 GMT

Original to: BrianT@cup.portal.com
 B> BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn), via Kralizec 3:713/602
 B>       
 B>       But if you do somehow get an ET fully refueled in orbit, this
 B>       should be more than adequate for TLI, Lunar Orbit Insertion, TEI,
 B>       and Earth Orbit Insertion upon return, IF you could keep the
 B>       ET from boiling off fuel during the flight. I think one SSME would
 B>       be enough for the later burns.
 B>       
 B>       Feasible, probably, but very definitely not worth the cost.
 B>       Start anew.
 B>       

 I'm dreaming too but the shuttle has a delta V of about 9kps to get to
 Freedom. A delta V of about 11kps will be enough to give it in a
 elongated orbit which would take it around the Moon. So if we could
 boost it by aprox 3kps (larger ET plus extra SRBs?) might it not be
 possible  to release a lander at one lunar approach and the pick up the
 crew at the next orbit?

 ta
 Ralph

--- Maximus 2.01wb
 * Origin: Vulcan's World-Sydney Australia 02 635-1204 (3:713/635)
Organisation: European Space Operation Centre (E.S.O.C)
Date: Monday, 25 Jan 1993 09:12:37 CET
From: <TNEDDERH@ESOC.BITNET>
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Can You See A Shuttle Launch From Orlando?
Distribution: na

From the Orlando area you will see but not hear a launch at KSC.
At least due to the traffic noise I was not able to hear anything
related to the Shuttle, but I doubt that it will be possible.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Thorsten Nedderhut             |  Disclaimer:
mbp Software & Systems GmbH    |
c/o ESA/ESOC/FCSD/OAD/STB      |  Neither ESA nor mbp is responsible
Darmstadt, Germany             |  for my postings!
tnedderh@esoc.bitnet           |
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: taylors@hubcap.clemson.edu (C. Taylor Sutherland III)
Subject: Re: Can You Hear A Shuttle Launch From Orlando?
Organization: Clemson University
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:58:40 GMT

wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes:

>Downtown Orlando is about 35 miles from Merritt Island. Sound
>travels at 0.21 miles per second, so one could not hear anything
>until about 166 seconds (=2.8 minutes) after SRB ignition.

>Anyone in Orlando want to listen for the sound and time the lag?

The thundering sound from the SRB's would probably fade to nothing
just like the thunder from lightning after about 20 mi. give or
take about 3 or so depending on weather conditions.

-- 
	     We're not hitchhiking anymore.  We're riding!
		     -The Immor(t)al Ren & Stimpy-
         The Fly Boy  <| E-MAIL:  taylors@hubcap.clemson.edu |>
+--<| My life is a math question with one equation and 42 unknowns. |>--+