HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: New NASA logo?
Originator: kjenks@gothamcity
Keywords: NASA logos
Organization: NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:59:36 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.142523.5252@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> wdwells@nyx.cs.du.edu (David "Fuzzy" Wells) writes:
>[Talk about cool NASA logo deleted]
>
>>And most importantly it kinda reminds me of the old StarTrek logo... :-)
>
>Check out the United States Air Force Space Command logo, which looks
>exactly like the Star Trek logo.
>	Lt. David Wells
>	HQ AFSPACECOM

And check out the old Marshall Space Flight Center logo:
  ames.arc.nasa.gov:/pub/SPACE/LOGOS/msfc.gif

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368

     "The earth is the cradle of humanity, but mankind will not stay in
     the cradle forever." -- Konstantin Tsiolkvosky
From: Boinger@myamy.hacktic.nl (Paul Kolenbrander)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: New NASA logo?
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:49:35 MET
Reply-To: boinger@myamy.hacktic.nl (Paul Kolenbrander)
Distribution: world
Organization: System Information 2.0 Development
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16e (7/4/92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith

In article <1992Aug27.133908.3277@ducvax.auburn.edu> ggmar@ducvax.auburn.edu () writes:
> The NASA logo combining the meatball with the worm looks great! Does anybody
> else like it? If enough people support it, maybe we can get Dan Goldin to
> change the logo again - tell him that it represents the combination of the
> best of the Apollo and Shuttle eras for the future of NASA.

In my opinion it has more class then the new one. It makes NASA look both
dynamic and being a long-established company with an impressive trackrecord.
And most importantly it kinda reminds me of the old StarTrek logo... :-)
I'd be all for changing it to the one posted a couple of days ago.

-- 
Paul Kolenbrander  \ InterNet: boinger@myamy.hacktic.nl
Turfveldenstraat 37 \ Fido: 2:284/114.3 Paul Kolenbrander
NL-5632 XH EINDHOVEN | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Voice: +31-40-415752 | Timezone:GMT+1 | Fax: +31-40-426446 
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Hartmut Frommert)
Subject: Re: Antigravity
Organization: Dept. of Physics, University of Constance
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:57:46 GMT

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

>[..] ggiles@cie.uoregon.edu (Gregg Giles) writes:
>>   What sort of research is going on regarding antigravity? 

[...]

>(Well, I lie a little bit...  General relativity says it is possible, but
>only if your machinery can do fun things like accelerating large lumps
>of neutronium [assuming you can make it and stabilize it somehow] to
>substantial fractions of the speed of light in quite short times.  By
>the time we can do that, we're unlikely to find Earth's feeble little
>gravitational field much of a problem any more.)

Can you, please, give a reference (seriously) ? Since GR says gravity is 
curvature -- what is anti-gravity ? anticurvature :-) ? and what's 
that :-)) ?
--
 Hartmut Frommert, Physics, Univ of Constance, | + Whale killing is murder. +
 P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany | + Eat whale killers, not whales.
 E-Mail: <phfrom@dknkurz1.bitnet> or <phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de>
+    "Windows NoT" expands in German to "Windows Noch Teurer"
+                                                ^even   ^more expensive
From: petej@phred.UUCP (Peter Jarvis)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Beware! "Discovery" mockup is really ISF
Date: 3 Sep 92 12:57:27 GMT
Reply-To: petej@phred.UUCP (Peter Jarvis)
Organization: <BtvFrF.38F@spock.dis.cccd.edu>o

In article <BtvFrF.38F@spock.dis.cccd.edu> markb@spock.dis.cccd.edu (Mark Bixby) writes:
>Last week while on vacation in Seattle, my wife & I attended the Home Show,
>which was heavily advertised as having a "full-scale mockup of the space 
>shuttle Discovery".  What we actually found was a full-scale mockup of the
>Industrial Space Facility, plus some NASA exhibits..........
>
>I'm not sure why this stuff is being displayed at a home-improvement show.  We
>found some flyers that clearly said "space shuttle Discovery".........
>-- 
>Mark Bixby                         Internet: markb@spock.dis.cccd.edu

I also heard this from a friend of mine at work. (I live in the area).
Obviously someone doesn't know what he's talking about or they are hard
up to get people to the home show. 

However, if you want to see some pretty good Shuttle mockups, visit the
Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama. There *is* a full scale
Enterprise mockup there along with partials of the Columbia, Atlantis
and Endeavour. Outside is the original Pathfinder Shuttle mounted on an
ET with two SRB's strapped to it. Pathfinder was the first "Shuttle" made
for tooling and fitting purposes.

Peter Jarvis............
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer)
Subject: Re: ***QUESTION***  RE: Space Shuttles...
Followup-To: sci.space.shuttle
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:47:06 GMT

On 20 Aug 92 16:52:10 GMT, keithley@apple.com (Craig Keithley) said:

Craig> So just think of the shuttle as a darn thick flag.

Expensive, too.  But it probably can't be burned by protesters.

--
Mary Shafer  DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov                    Of course I don't speak for NASA
 "There's no kill like a guns kill." LCDR "Hoser" Satrapa, gunnery instructor
                       "A kill is a kill."  Anonymous
From: tadpole@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: How are station workers getting paid?
Date: 25 Aug 92 16:40:17 -0300
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article <1992Aug24.184107.6285@nrcnet0.nrc.ca>, sharma@nrcphy1.phy.nrc.ca
(Rohit Sharma) writes:
>
>   Anybody know of the Canadian Space Agency's part in Freedom ?  I heard
> that the CSA was collaborating with the Europoeans (ESA) for the Freedom
> space station.  Will appreciate any details on the CSA-ESA contribution.
>
>  rohit             sharma@nrcphy1.phy.nrc.ca 

The CSA is building the Mobile Service Unit for Freedom.  In turn Canada is
getting approximately 3% of the Space Station's resources (i.e., astronaut
time, energy etc.).  This arrangement is independent of ESA.

Richard Wassersug, Dept. of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Dalhousie University,
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: A new orbiter? (dont think so--was Re: National Space Plane)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:31:43 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <BtM0HB.us@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes:
>Hmm,  I can't get you most of the other hardware you wanted, but I think I've
>got a rocket you might be interested in.  Payload is about 40,000 lbs in a
>300 nm orbit, cost per pound is expected to on the order of 40% less than 
>Araine 4.  Flight rate can be fairly high and it's man(and woman)-rateable.
>Best of all, it's only three or four years away from first launch.  
>Arianespace would be happy to sell you some Ariane 5's...

Alas, it does not meet the specs by my lights.  For one thing, I don't
consider anything with large solid boosters "man-rateable" :-).  But even
if we let that one by, there are other problems.  It has the same big
wart as Titan:  it is too large and too costly.  I didn't pick 5-10 tons
lightly -- 20 is not what I asked for :-) -- and 40% less per kg than A4
is still way, way too expensive.  And they're building exactly 0001 pads
for it, which is a problem in many ways, including that surge capability
I asked for:  I want to see three or four launches in one week, to launch
a mission in several pieces, a rate Arianespace hasn't a prayer of reaching.
(There certainly isn't enough demand to *sustain* that rate any time soon,
but the ability to achieve it briefly is important.)

Although I composed that set of specs without any preconceived notion of
how it was going to come out, I note with interest that it's pretty close
to the long-term growth path originally intended for the Saturn I / Apollo
combination...  Sigh, the Road Not Taken...
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: What's the date on the moon? really.
Date: 26 Aug 92 00:18:57 GMT
Organization: Unocal Corporation

In article <1992Aug25.152539.27548@bnlux1.bnl.gov> schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder) writes:
>Back in July of 1989, the 20th Anniversary issue of the first lunar
>landing, Omni included a clever little Universal Time calendar that
>based all dates on July 20, 1969.  It worked much like the B.C./A.D.
>nomenclature that we use now, with 7/20/69 being the "zero date".
>Interesting idea.

The issue of a new zero year came up in sci.archeology where dates
are often given in B.P. for Before Present.   One doesn't have to add 2000 to BC
dates.  However, one needs to define a definite zero year for high resolution
dating methods.  Also, some people don't like chosing the zero year on the
basis of some religous figure or founding of a nation.
I propose defining 1950 as the zero year of the modern era.
It is midway among the invention of the electronic computer, atomic power,
and launching of a satellite.  It is also close to the birth year of
an important net personality :-)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Antigravity
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:48:53 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Aug27.021933.5608@nntp.uoregon.edu> ggiles@cie.uoregon.edu (Gregg Giles) writes:
>   What sort of research is going on regarding antigravity? You know: the
>ability to counteract the effect of gravity without using brute force...

Nobody is going to do any serious R&D work on antigravity until the theorists
come up with some hint that it might be possible.  Puttering around in the
lab hoping to find something that violates current theories is a good way to
waste a lot of time and money.  So far as we know right now, antigravity is
not possible.

(Well, I lie a little bit...  General relativity says it is possible, but
only if your machinery can do fun things like accelerating large lumps
of neutronium [assuming you can make it and stabilize it somehow] to
substantial fractions of the speed of light in quite short times.  By
the time we can do that, we're unlikely to find Earth's feeble little
gravitational field much of a problem any more.)
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: jac@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (John Clear)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: ***QUESTION***  RE: Space Shuttles...
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:57:21 GMT
Organization: occasional on alternate Tuesdays

In article <keithley-200892095256@kip2-56.apple.com> keithley@apple.com (Craig Keithley) writes:
>In article <Lc9kPB6w165w@iowegia.uucp>, quest@iowegia.uucp (Steve J. Quest)
>wrote:
>>         Can anyone answer the question that has been burning a 
>> hole in the back of my mind?  The question is:  Why is the flag 
>> painted on the shuttle in mirror image?  I have seen this 
>> represented on models, and in pictures.  This is quite puzzling.
>
>Here's the reason I've heard:
>
>For the same reason flags are reversed on (hmmm, left or right...) the
>right hand side of planes.  Imagine the shuttle (or plane) as one big flag,
>with the stars towards the front of the shuttle.  So looking at the
>flag/shuttle from the left side, the flag looks right.  Stepping around to
>the right side, the you would see the back side of the flag/shuttle, and it
>would be reversed.
>
>So just think of the shuttle as a darn thick flag.
>

	The way I have heard it, it is reversed so that it blows with the 
wind (as in from the front to the back of the plane).  This theory works 
for the shuttle in the atmosphere, but in space since the shuttle can and 
often does travel in other then nose first attitude I dont know if the flag 
placement and direction is correct. Hmm... then we need some way to change 
the flag during flight...  Anyone for an EVA???   :)

John


-- 
John Clear
jac@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
clearja@sage.cc.purdue.edu
From: eder@hsvaic.boeing.com (Dani Eder)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: A new orbiter? (dont think so--was Re: National Space Plane)
Date: 28 Aug 92 14:40:26 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Boeing AI Center, Huntsville, AL

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

>As for what I'd do...  It is important to realize that there are about
>four different roles involved.  You need to haul substantial loads of
>cargo up.  You need to bring rather more modest amounts down.  You need
>to take crews up and down (up and down can't really be separated very
>well here, because you need the down part to handle emergencies on the
>way up).  And you need support for manned missions that want to spend
>a while in orbit.

>The shuttle tried to fill all these roles, and didn't succeed very well.
>Setting aside SSTO...  We need to think about separating those roles.
>It's incredibly stupid, for example, to haul Spacelab up into orbit only
>to haul the whole thing back down a few days later.


I separate payloads into two classes.  The first is low intrinsic value,
g-tolerant cargo: Propellant, structural materials, frozen food, water.
The second is high value, g-senstive cargo: people, science instruments,
protein crystals.  It makes no sense to me to use a common transportation
system to carry both.  For the low value cargo, you do not particularly
care if you lose a few payloads, or how roughly you treat it.  You are
mostly interested in low operating cost.  That may be cheap, simple,
mass produced rockets, mass drivers, whatever.  For the high value
cargo, failsafe operation is more important than low cost, and you
have to treat the cargo gently.  It does make sense to me to design
separate systems each optimized for one of these types of payload.

Dani Eder

-- 
Dani Eder/Boeing/Advanced Civil Space/(205)464-2697(w)/232-7467(h)/
Rt.1, Box 188-2, Athens AL 35611/Member: Space Studies Institute
Physical Location: 34deg 37' N 86deg 43' W +100m alt.
***THE ABOVE IS NOT THE OPINION OF THE BOEING COMPANY OR ITS MANAGEMENT.***
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: New NASA logo?
Originator: kjenks@gothamcity
Keywords: AFSPACECOM logo
Organization: NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:02:16 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.142523.5252@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> wdwells@nyx.cs.du.edu (David "Fuzzy" Wells) writes:
>[Talk about cool NASA logo deleted]
>
>>And most importantly it kinda reminds me of the old StarTrek logo... :-)
>
>Check out the United States Air Force Space Command logo, which looks
>exactly like the Star Trek logo.
>	Lt. David Wells
>	HQ AFSPACECOM

Do you have a scanned image of that logo?  I'd like to add it to my
collection of space program logos.  If you don't have an on-line version,
would you be willing to send me a paper version I can scan?  Thanks!

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368

     Aldrin: "Contact light.  Okay, engine stop.  ACA out of detent."
     Armstrong: "Got it."
     Aldrin: "Mode controls, both auto.  Descent engine command override,
       off.  Engine arm off...."
     CAPCOM: "We copy you down, Eagle."
     Armstrong: "Houston, Tranquility Base here.  The Eagle has landed."
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: To view or not to view ...
From: ptsyck@miavx2.ham.muohio.edu
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:51:41 EDT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Miami University, Hamilton campus

> 
> It's even better to view a night launch.  It lights up the sky just like
> daylight.  I grew up in Central Florida and didn't miss a single launch
> until I went away to college (after Challenger).  You can even see the
> smoke plumes and hear the rumble from Orlando.  It's an awesome sight
> not to be missed.
> 
> - Craig
> 
I was at Walt Disney World, the resort part, and watched Discovery, I think it
was Discover, launch at the end of July. I watched it from outside my hotel
room, it was great even from that far away.

Patrick
From: dumoulin@titan.ksc.nasa.gov (Jim Dumoulin)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: To view or not to view ...
Date: 3 Sep 92 08:39:37 EST
Distribution: usa
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center

In article <1992Sep02.020437.3543@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu>, ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (George Hastings) writes:
>    The CLOSEST viewing area is (I think) the press area, right
> next to the VAB where they stack the shuttles. It's just about
> two miles from there to either pad 39A or 39B (a little farther
> to 39B)

     According to my KSC master plan (Map coordinate E2 & E3, the
     Press site is 16,400 feet from LC-39A (3.1 miles).  The LCC
     is 16,800 feet (3.2 miles) and the forward observer site
     which contains emergency vehicles is 11,100 feet (2.1 miles).
     
>    The next closest site is a V.I.P. viewing area across the
> lagoon, and I think it's about 2.5 miles. The NASA Causeway is
> another viewing site, just a little more distant.

     There are actually 4 VIP viewing areas.  The Banana Creek
     viewing area is the closest.  It is 17,600 feet (3.3 miles)
     from Pad LC-39B and 21,200 feet (4.0 miles) from LC-39A.  It
     is a great view of the pads (at least until RSS retraction)
     because most of the area between the viewing stands and the
     pads is open water.  Close to launch, the Rotating Service
     Structure (RSS) is moved away from the vehicle and its park
     site blocks a view of the vehicle at liftoff.

>    From ANY of those sites, the Orbiter, ET, and SRBs look
> incredibly far away and very small, even through binoculars.
> You might think at this point, "JEEZ! It wasn't WORTH it,
> coming all this way: I could have seen it on NASA SELECT
> better, with its closeup TV cameras"....(rest deleted)
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Jim Dumoulin                      INTERNET: DUMOULIN@TITAN.KSC.NASA.GOV
   NASA / Payload Operations      SPAN/HEPnet: KSCP00::DUMOULIN
   Kennedy Space Center
   Florida, USA  32899
From: yukyuk@beta.lanl.gov (Craig B. Huffnagle)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: To view or not to view ...
Summary: YES!!
Keywords: shuttle launch viewing
Date: 2 Sep 92 15:56:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: newshost.1992Sep2.155603.22488
Distribution: usa
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory

In article <1992Sep02.020437.3543@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu> ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (George Hastings) writes:
>[...stuff deleted...]
>   Yeah, I'd say so! It may be absolutely the most awesome, all
>engulfing experience you can have out of bed!
>-- 

It's even better to view a night launch.  It lights up the sky just like
daylight.  I grew up in Central Florida and didn't miss a single launch
until I went away to college (after Challenger).  You can even see the
smoke plumes and hear the rumble from Orlando.  It's an awesome sight
not to be missed.

- Craig

-- 
-----
Craig Huffnagle     			yukyuk@yuck.lanl.gov
"Shaah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt!" - Wayne Campbell
Think of a disclaimer, it applies.
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: awtron@strawber.princeton.edu (Andrew Tron)
Subject: Re: Weather Satellite pictures
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:44:49 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.165238.7418@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> tes@nomad.uucp (Thomas E. Smith [LORAL]) writes:
>I've heard of an ftp site about a year ago that keeps satellite pictures from
>the last 24 hours in gif format. Does any one know where this site is?
>
The site is vmd.cso.uiuc.edu.  Once you ftp to this site, cd to directory
"wx" and set the mode to "binary".  The latest weather satellite gifs in
high resolution are stored in the files "cvis.gif" and "cir.gif" (visual
band and infrared band images, respectively.  Lower resolution images
from the recent (i.e. 24 hr or so) past are stored in the files 
"cvMMDDZZ.gif" and "ciMMDDZZ.gif" where MM is the month, DD is the date
and ZZ is the hour in UTC.  Furthermore, composite surface analysis and
radar images are stored in the files "saMMDDZZ.gif".

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never trust a pilot with clean hands.| Andrew Tron at Princeton University
No flight plan has ever survived     | awtron@strawber.princeton.edu (Internet)
contact with air traffic control.    | uunet!phoenix!strawber!awtron (UUCP)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: cpetersn@iastate.edu (Clifton R Peterson)
Subject: Re: Antigravity
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 23:16:28 GMT

In <1992Aug27.160215.6381@lsil.com> gascan@dcst16.dc (Bill Gascoyne) writes:

>I think they're doing antigravity research at the same place where they're doing
>faster-than-light research: Paramount Studios, home of Star Trek.
>---
>1. Bill Gascoyne

Actually, I think that they've got it all figured out and in use.  They just
can't tell the rest of us.  Prime Directive and all you know.   <g>
-- 
 _________________________________________________________________________
/ Clifton R. Peterson    1108 Burnett		(515)232-5254	    	  \
| B.S. Chem E            Ames IA  50010                                   |
\_______________"42"_is_one_hell_of_an_answer!!___________________________/
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Subject: Re: What's the date on the moon? really.
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:25:39 GMT

In article <BtD4A9.6CE@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes:
>pstinson@pbs.org writes:
>
>>In article <1007@vk2bea.UUCP>, michael@vk2bea.UUCP (Michael G. Katzmann) writes:

>>> If an event happens on the moon (say a meteor strikes the surface), what
>>> do we record as the date that it occurs? Not Houston time I bet.

>>We seem to be heading towards a lunar based calendar.
>>  One lunar "day" = 4 weeks on Earth (about equal to 1 Earth month)
>>  One lunar year = 13 lunar days = 52 Earth weeks (with a little bit left over)

>>living on the moon using whatever calendar and time system they have devised to
>>meet their local needs.  The people on Earth may note the day that an event


Back in July of 1989, the 20th Anniversary issue of the first lunar
landing, Omni included a clever little Universal Time calendar that
based all dates on July 20, 1969.  It worked much like the B.C./A.D.
nomenclature that we use now, with 7/20/69 being the "zero date".
Interesting idea.



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Schroeder	                |  Warning: prolonged exposure to this
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov         |  .sig may cause retinal damage and 
Brookhaven National Laboratory  |  blistering skin rashes. 
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle