HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lee@turbo4.rsg.hac.com (C. Lee)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Re: HUD question
Date: 10 Nov 92 01:38:50 GMT
Organization: Hughes Transportation Simulation Center; Hughes Aircraft Company; Culver City, CA

In article <1992Nov6.033242.7230@cactus.org> rdd@cactus.org (Robert Dorsett) writes:
>In article <9211051727.AA19848@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil> davehyde@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil writes:
>>refocus your eyes periodically.  It has also been my observation that, on HUD-
>>equipped airplanes I've flown, that I had to re-focus somewhat to read info on
>>the HUD after looking through it to see outside....
>
>It appears that even the slightest accumulation of dust, grease, or other
>particulate matter on the collimater will ruin the infinite-perspective
>effect.
>
>>(as they exisit in production today) HUD, you won't see anything coming at you
>>outside of boresight.  I.E. a HUD may not be the ideal thing for VFR...
>
>From HUMAN FACTORS IN AVIATION (Nagel & Wiener, Academic Press, 1988), p. 399:
>  { ... study indicating HUD's may distract
>  from peripheral situational awareness ... }

How do people feel the problem with HUD's causing lack of attention to
non-boresite activity is applicable to cars, trucks, trains, boats, and
ships?

E.g., I know of at least one study on the use of HUD's on trains.

I believe GM offers HUD's as an option on some cars, and is studying
putting them on other cars, and possibly trucks.

At least one company offers HUD's for law enforcement vehicles to
supplement their in-car terminal message system.

At least one company offers, and several others are developing, HUD's
for commerial airliners (and I'd assume for private planes as well).
From: lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: DATCOM
Date: 5 Nov 92 06:50:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.seyJ3cq00WB7MavKAe
Organization: Doctoral student, Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Could someone give me a reference for the details of the DATCOM method,
or for other semi-empirical methods of drag coefficient determination. 

Thanks,
-Larry
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
From: markp@noncomf.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca (Mark A. Pitcher)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Looking for airfoil design software.
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 21:43:27 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Socioanarchy and a bit of feudalism

I am looking for software which will help me design airfoils
such as airplane wings and fuselages.  I am involved in model
airplane work and currently I am ready to start experimenting
with custom designs.  Please note, I am not interested in simple
programs and dinky utilities.  What I am looking for is
professional and accurate CAD type software.  I especially
require graphical output of: air pressure gradients, as
well as turbulence levels around a cross-section of a given
airfoil, given parameters such as air density (temperature and
elevation), air velocity, airfoil angle of attack etc.

Note: Send EMAIL because I can only post to, but not read from
this group.  Also, please note that my name is Wally Malicki
not Mark Pitcher; I am only using Mark's account.




------------------------------------------------------------------darkpark BBS
markp@noncomf.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca (Mark A. Pitcher)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
From: wd@cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfgang Diestelkamp)
Subject: Re: How accurate can I make a homebrew altimeter? - more Q's
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany
	<1dmlk5INN8pm@agate.berkeley.edu>
	<WD.92Nov10132748@sam.cs.tu-berlin.de>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 12:34:34 GMT

In article <WD.92Nov10132748@sam.cs.tu-berlin.de> wd@cs.tu-berlin.de (I) wrote:

> altitude reading for separation. Below this, proximity to the ground,
> i.e. height, becomes an important factor. so the local actual pressure (QNH)
                                                                          ^^^
> is measured by a ground station, converted to the equivalent sea level pressure
> (QNH) and manually preset on the altimeter.

Damn, all those Q's indeed :-); the local pressure (which is sometimes used,
because it gives a zero reading on the ground) is QFE, not QNH.
-- 
Wolfgang Diestelkamp
wd@cs.tu-berlin.de
wolfgang@first.gmd.de
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Re: How accurate can I make a homebrew altimeter?
From: bell2@lincoln.ac.nz
Date: 9 Nov 92 13:56:36 +1300

In article <1992Nov5.194816.12996@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, sherwood@space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford) writes:
> J. Mark Noworolski writes
>> I am working on building an electronic altimeter and vario combination

   <stuff deleted>

>> My question basically is:
>> How accurate are airplane altimeters and how do they compensate for
>> weather fluctuations?

   Electronic altitude encoders (for ssr radar transponders) are accurate
   to only 100'.  Flight altimeters are usually accurate to +-50'.
   I can use the one in my glider to assess height gains/losses of ~20'

   Varios are where it's at for accurate measurement of rate of 
   height gain/losses, however as with most instruments there is a fair
   amount of instrument lag..

   Gliders varios when properly calibrated can measure accurately to .125 m/s
   (climbing in very weak wave lift this can be useful)

   The positioning and type of pitot/static/total energy probe lines have a
   big effect on accuracy of the vario. 
 
   There are a number of good books on gliding which go into technical details
   of various instruments and their limitations..

> Off hand from the altimeters I've seen, +- 50 feet is as good as you're  
> going to get.  But I wouldn't bet my life on it.
      .
      .
      .
>     .
> If you need more accurate altitude measurement to keep from bumping the  
> ground, consider making a radar altimeter.

  I'd never use an altimeter to work out separation from the ground..it's way
  too scary, while you're looking inside at the instruments the ground comes
  up to check out what you're up to, I'd use my eyes for that one.


-- 

Stephen Bell                                          -----
c/- A.V.S.G.                                            |
Lincoln University                     \---------------(*)---------------/
Canterbury
New Zealand                                     NIMBUS II - Driver

Email: S.Bell@ono.lincoln.ac.nz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps you could explain to us the merits of remaining in visual contact with
the airfield while on final approach...

(anon ..   BTW it wasn't me!.)


Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: Mark_Dakins@Novell.COM (Mark Dakins)
Subject: Re: Lunar astronaut covers earth with thumb
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:37:28 GMT

In article <30473@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes:
>On the last installment of "Space Age" Jim Lovell said while he
>was in the vicinity of the moon, he could cover the earth with his
>thumb while his arm was outstretched. (It was also attributed to
>Rusty Schweikart).
>
>I heard this a few years ago on a radio talk show with one of 
>the lunar astronauts as guest--was it Jim Lovell? 
>
>A caller, who had a German accent, had trouble with this reasoned:
>
>(1) This distance to the moon from the earth is the same as the
>    as the distance to the earth from the moon,  
>
>(2) The earth is larger than the moon, and
>
>(3) We ordinary mortals here on earth can't cover the moon with 
>    a thumb with arm outstretched.
>
>His unstated conclusion was that the astronaut could not have done
>it and you could sense his reluctance to call the astronaut a liar.
>
>What is the error the caller made? Give up? It's number (3).
>There's a full moon out tonight. Go out and try it.

I have not done any serious calculation, nor any measurements but,
I suspect from the published diameters of the Earth and Luna
that you would need to be wearing a glove to cover the Earth
with your thumb at arms length if you were standing on Luna.
However, on Earth you can cover Luna with the fingernail of
your littlefinger at arms length.  It was nice to see from the
posting above that some people besides me know this.

I keep having trouble convincing people of this!

This is independent of where the moon is
in the sky (on the horizon or at culmination.)  It is also
indepndent of the phase of the moon but, is easier to see that
you have really covered the whole moon when the moon is full.

I have said this here before and every time I get into
an argument (usually by email) with someone who is so sure
that I am wrong that he can not be bothered to actually
try it.  Very frustrating.
						Mark Dakins


Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892)
Subject: Re: Know an adjective for black holes?
Keywords: black hole
Organization: NASA GSFC CDP VLBI
Distribution: sci.astro
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:10:09 GMT

In article <12NOV199210275214@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov> batchelor@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (Dave Batchelor, Space Phys. Data Facil. 301/286-2988) writes:
>In article <SRCTRAN.92Nov11233822@world.std.com>, srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) writes...
>>   To refer to the Earth, I can use  "terrestrial".
>>   To refer to the stars, I can use  "stellar".
>>   To refer to galaxies,  I can use  "galactic".
>>   To refer to black holes,  what can I use?
>> 
>>Any suggestions would be appreciated.  Thanks.
>> 
>>Greg Aharonian
>>-- 
>>**************************************************************************
>>Greg Aharonian
>>Source Translation & Optimiztion
>>P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178
>
>We can always make one up.  For example, in geology, a spherical cavity in a
>rock is known as a vesicle.  The word 'vesicle' has French origins, so we
>could prefix it with a French word part meaning black, convert it to an
>adjective, and voila!
>
>Negrivesicular: adj. pertaining to a black hole
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Dr. Dave Batchelor   Space Science Data Operations Office   Mail Code 632
>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center  Greenbelt  MD  20771  USA
>batchelor@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov

How about 'black holey'

It would give the fundimentalist cults fits!
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: era_pul@arkimedes.ki.ericsson.se (Peter Ulfheden consultant)
Subject: Observatory Techniques Magazine
Organization: Ericsson Radio Sytems AB, Sweden
Distribution: sci.astro
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:40:59 GMT



Hi,

Has anybody on the net read the 'Observatory Techniques Magazine'?
Any comments? Is it worth a subscription?

Clear Skies

Peter
--

=======================================================
 Peter Ulfheden              |  era_pul@ki.ericsson.se
 Amorinav. 3                 |  Phone: +46 8 751 02 15
 S-191 44 Sollentuna, SWEDEN |  Fax:   +46 8 35 04 29
=======================================================
From: mwh@ovro.ovro.caltech.edu (Mark Hodges)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Bylaws for Astronomy Club
Date: 14 Nov 1992 00:29 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: ovro.ovro.caltech.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

A local group of amateur astronomers would like to form a club and I thought
that there might be some people out there that may have suggestions for or
copies of their bylaws that this club could use as a guide.

They have proposed NOVAS (Northern Owens Valley Astronomical Society) as a
name.

Thanks in advance,  Mark
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: fy@lucid.com (Frank Yellin)
Subject: Re: Know an adjective for black holes?
Organization: Lucid, Inc., Menlo Park, CA
Distribution: sci.astro
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:04:40


In article <SRCTRAN.92Nov11233822@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com
(Gregory Aharonian) writes: 

>  To refer to black holes,  what can I use?
>  Any suggestions would be appreciated.  Thanks.

In general, English lets you use any noun as an adjective when no better
word exists.  And you hyphenate it if its multi-word.
"My high-school reunion."  "His death-bed request."

So just use "black-hole" as your adjective.

But "negrivesicular" does have its charms.

-- Frank Yellin
   fy@lucid.com
Xref: sparky sci.astro:11824 sci.space:15617
From: bobp@hal.com (Bob Pendleton)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space
Subject: Re: Hubble's mirror
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:05:13 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.

From article <1992Nov10.160238.6523@hal.com>, by bobp@hal.com (Bob Pendleton):
> From article <69203@cup.portal.com>, by BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn):
>> If there is a perfect mirror presumably sitting at Kodak, why doesn't NASA
>> simply return Hubble to Earth and replace the faulty mirror?
> 
>> Doesn't bringing Hubble home for repairs make more sense than jerry-rigging
>> and dangerous EVAs on orbit? 
>>   
>> -Brian
> 
> Depending on whose figures you believe a shuttle launch costs some
> where between $100,000,000 US and $250,000,000 US.
> 
> Repair on orbit requires 1 launch. Repair on the the ground requires 2
> launches. 
> 
> Thus, repair on orbit, saves somewhere between $100 and $250 million
> dollars. As the US is rapidly approaching it's legal debt limit of
> roughly $4,100,000,000,000 dollars (your share, if you are a US
> citizen, is roughly $16,000) we really can afford to piss away

                                         ^^^

That's supposed to be "CAN'T"


> $250,000,000 for the convenience of some astronauts and astronomers.
> Especially when we are borrowing the money to fix it.
> 
> As much as I value the information that we can get from Hubble. I'm
> not willing to go $0.01 US more than is needed to fix it.
> 
> I think it is time to face the simple fact that as long as we are
> paying $300,000,000,000 US in interest on the Debt we (US) are not
> going to be spending money on large, long term, space programs.
> 
> The interest on the Debt is the single largest item in the US Federal
> budget.
> 
> 			Bob P.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> What we pay in interest on the Debt, if spent on education, would just
> about double what we spend per student in the K-12 grades.
> 
> 
> P.P.S
> 
> Do we need nuclear weopons anymore? Or can we destroy the worlds
> economy by just defaulting on the our loans?
> -- 
> Bob Pendleton             | As an engineer I hate to hear:
> bobp@hal.com              |   1) You've earned an "I told you so."
> Speaking only for myself. |   2) Our customers don't do that.
>                    <<< Odin, after the well of Mimir. >>>
-- 
Bob Pendleton             | As an engineer I hate to hear:
bobp@hal.com              |   1) You've earned an "I told you so."
Speaking only for myself. |   2) Our customers don't do that.
                   <<< Odin, after the well of Mimir. >>>
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: mje@pookie.pass.wayne.edu (Michael Joseph Edelman)
Subject: Re: Amateur Radio Astronomy
Reply-To: mje@pookie.pass.wayne.edu
Organization: Wayne State University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 13:05:37 GMT

In article 12084@waikato.ac.nz, Andrew T. Chambers <atc@waikato.ac.nz> writes:
> I am interested in setting up a small radio telescope...
> Most of the books I've seen, are rather old and outdated.
> Written in the days when cheap scanners and recievers for 800-1300 Mhz
> didn't exist.
> So a lot deal with modifying or building what is now rather outdated
> insensitive equipment.
> I would like to use one of the new scanners that can operate upto 1300
> Mhz with a simple antenna setup, the whole thing connected to a computer
> to analyze the data.
> Is there anyone out there who has set up a small radio telescope, based
> around a scanner?
> 
> Is there any information available on the net about radio astronomy?


I wouldn't use a scanner for a radio telescope. Scanners have rather cheap receivers- 
low gain and high noise. You might get away with using one as a tuneable IF section,
though. Front ends are cheap enough these days. Companies like Hamtronics have
low-noise GaAsFET preamps and downconverters up though 2.4GHz that can be used at the
antenna. Combine that with a scanner and you might have something, but it's still
a second-best solution.
         --mike
From: benoit@netcom.com (BENOIT SCHILLINGS)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: wanted : Lynxx CCD camera
Date: 10 Nov 92 01:52:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

I'm looking for a second hand Lynxx ccd or equivalent.

Please, make offer to


benoit@be.com
benoit@netcom.com
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: rfl@oddjob.uchicago.edu (Bob Loewenstein)
Subject: Re: Real Men Astronomers [Was Re: e-mail activated telescope?]
Organization: U. of Chicago, Astronomy and Astrophysics
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:17:02 GMT


Of course, -30 to -35C (-35F) is not as bad as -75C (-100F) at
mid-winter at the South Pole.
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: reinhard@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: starchart programs? (try Hipparchus).
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:27:20 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.152742.17306@husc3.harvard.edu>, slayman@husc11.harvard.edu (Andrew Slayman) writes:
> 
> I am an archaeology student doing a little archaeoastronomy.
> Nothing heavy duty. Purely observational stuff such as, "Does
> this building face the summer solstice sunrise?" or "Does this
> date correspond to any planetary conjunctions?" I'm also 
> interested in eclipses and the like.
> 
> Do any of you know of any good, preferably cheap or free,
> programs for the Mac (SE) that will tell me information 
> along those lines, perhaps that will even plot out the stars
> in the sky facing in a certain direction from a certain place
> on earth at a certain time? I'd very much appreciate any 
> info anyone could give me.
> 
> Thanks,
> Andrew

I have been using a program called HIPPARCHUS that is put out by 
sofTouch APpLications.

The thing about this software is that it will do precision plots
for about +/- 50,000 years by applying the correct proper motion
for the stars in the Yale 2000 catalog.  It does have the option 
of showing you the horizon view for any given place on the Earth 
at any given time or you can view the entire sky from your location.

It will also show you the positon of all the planets, Moon and Sun
with the same type of precision.  If you are doing archaeoastronomy
then this might be the thing you are looking for.

The software costs $50 and will run on any Mac.
The address for more inforation is;

sofTouch APplications
646 North Bend Road
Baltimore,  MD 21229

410-788-4963
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Kent Reinhard
REINHARD@STSCI.EDU
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org (Dave Chaloux)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Lunar astronaut covers earth with thumb
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:38:05 GMT
Reply-To: chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org (Dave Chaloux)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va

Leonard Abbey writes:

>It is a common illusion (optical and pshological) that the Moon is a large
>object as viewed from the Earth.  It is actually only 0.5 degrees.

>At its widest point, my thumb is about 1" wide, and I can extend it roughly
>24" from my eye.  Therefore my thumb subtends an angle of about 0.04 radians,
>or about 2.5 degrees (rough calculations).

>Since the Earth is roughly three times as large (in diameter) as the Moon,
>it would subtend an angle of 1.5 degrees as viewed from the Moon.  Plenty
>small enough to be covered by a thumb.

The fact the moon is only about 30' in size has some interesting implications
for planetary observing (especially for Mars). When I go out and look at the
full moon I can see LOTS of detail with the naked eye. In fact, I once read
a book that recommended looking at and sketching the moon with the naked eye
as great practice for planetary observing. Now Mars at opposition is going to
be about 15" in diameter. This is 120x smaller than the moon. Therefore if
we use a telescope at 120x it subtends the same angle. At least in theory a
three or four inch (76mm to 100mm) telescope working at 120x will show a
lot of detail on Mars as well. In reality, I think that I personally see
more detail on the moon at those magnifications. I think I gather from this
that the contrast of the features on the moon is higher.

Still, this little bit of calculation should give hope to those with
relatively small scopes. This also helps explain why 5 and 6 inch refractors
are popular as planetary scopes. You do not need a huge scope to give
good planatary views. You do need a scope that will give absolutely crisp
views at 120x or more. A 6" refractor working at a crisp 240x is going to
give a wonderful view of Mars with about 4 times the angular area seen as the
moon seen with the naked eye.
Xref: sparky sci.astro:11695 sci.space:15387
From: Frederick.A.Ringwald@dartmouth.edu (Frederick A. Ringwald)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space
Subject: Re: ANSWER: Recognizing a Dyson sphere if you saw one
Date: 6 Nov 92 05:14:07 GMT
 <Fq6mTB8w165w@west.darkside.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <Fq6mTB8w165w@west.darkside.com>
max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis) writes:

> An F-K _dwarf_?  How's that?
> 
> Seems to me that a globe with a radius of 1 au and a temperature of 300 K 
> would look like an infrared supergiant or, perhaps, a protostar.

No - the main point to the article is that the filling factor does not
necessarily have to be high, so plenty of light from the central star
would get through. What we'd see is a Sun-like star, with a small IR
excess indicating a 300 K shell with size on the order of 1 AU: in
other words, something not necessarily easily distinguishable from a
natural object. Unless there's something obvious, such as narrow-band
radio signals...
Newsgroups: sci.astro,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.shortwave
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 04 November
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date:  5 Nov 92 08:26:53 GMT

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 309, 11/04/92
10.7 FLUX=142.8  90-AVG=124        SSN=119      BKI=1234 4423  BAI=016
BGND-XRAY=B5.5     FLU1=1.5E+07  FLU10=2.7E+06  PKI=2335 5524  PAI=027
  BOU-DEV=008,017,036,064,050,067,018,021   DEV-AVG=035 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= C3.7   @ 1103UT    XRAY-MIN= B4.7   @ 1605UT   XRAY-AVG= B8.5
NEUTN-MAX= +001%  @ 0650UT   NEUTN-MIN= -005%  @ 2245UT  NEUTN-AVG= -1.7%
  PCA-MAX= +0.8DB @ 1345UT     PCA-MIN= -0.1DB @ 2255UT    PCA-AVG= +0.3DB
BOUTF-MAX=55430NT @ 2346UT   BOUTF-MIN=55377NT @ 1532UT  BOUTF-AVG=55412NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+098NT@ 1729UT   GOES7-MIN=N:-026NT@ 0845UT  G7-AVG=+063,+039,+006
GOES6-MAX=P:+107NT@ 2203UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-017NT@ 0423UT  G6-AVG=+079,-004,+035
 FLUXFCST=STD:128,124,120;SESC:145,140,135 BAI/PAI-FCST=015,010,015/020,015,020
    KFCST=2345 4222 2234 3333  27DAY-AP=009,021   27DAY-KP=3212 1233 2225 5443
 WARNINGS=*SWF;*PROTON
   ALERTS=**PROTN10
!!END-DATA!!
Newsgroups: sci.astro