HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bobp@hal.com (Bob Pendleton)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Automated space station construction
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:26:33 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.

From article <1992Nov12.044348.827@ke4zv.uucp>, by gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman):
> In article <6615@ucsbcsl.ucsb.edu> 3001crad@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Charles Frank Radley) writes:
>>Space Station Freedom is Apollo type technology ?
>>Really ?
>>
>>Using ADA and 386 / 586 processors and Nickel Hydrogen batteries,
> 
> Military COBOL and Intel processors, FRED IS DOOMED. :-) :-)

Get your history straight. COBOL was a US Navy project. The Air Force
also had it's own programming language. ADA is the result of
inter-service rivalry :-)

			Bob P.

-- 
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. >>>
Xref: sparky sci.space:15672 alt.sci.planetary:273
From: regester@astro.as.arizona.edu (Jeff Regester)
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: UPCOMING ASTRONOMY CAMPS FOR ADULTS AND TEENS
Date: 10 Nov 92 23:51:38 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

The Steward Observatory Astronomy Camps for Adults and Teens for the
coming winter, spring and summer have been scheduled. The dates are:
   Advanced Adult Camp   Feb 18-21
   Beginning Adult Camp  Apr 23-25
   Beginning Teen Camp   Jun 7-14
   Advanced Teen Camp    Jun 18-25

The Astronomy Camps are run by Steward Observatory (Univ. of Arizona)
as a non-profit educational outreach project. Attendees use the 40",
60", and 61" research telescopes of the Mt Lemmon and Mt Bigelow
Observatories (north of Tucson) operated by NASA and Steward. A 16"
Schmidt camera and numerous portable telescopes are also available.

The Adult Camps are during weekends and consist of observing (using
eyepieces, astrophotography with film and CCDs, and photometry,
according to participant interest) and lectures, demonstrations, and
discussions. Tours of research and engineering facilities, such as the
spin-casting facilities of the Steward Observatory Mirror Lab, are
also conducted.

The Teen Camps (for ages 13 to 17) each last a week, four nights of which
are spent observing. Activities include those of the Adult Camps plus tours
of Kitt Peak facilities, science demonstrations, lectures (space program,
archaeoastronomy, space art with Kim Poor, etc.) and other activities 
(model rockets, volleyball, orienteering in the mountains, etc.)

For both Teens and Adults, the Advanced camps are for those who have 
previously attended a Beginning Camp or who have prior amateur astronomy
experience. The Camps are run by Dr Donald McCarthy of Steward Observatory.
Other Steward faculty and graduate students, as well as personnel of Flandrau 
Planetarium, participate as guest speakers and camp counselors.

To receive more info about the Camps, contact either

 Don McCarthy  voice: (602)621-4079
               email: mccarthy@astro.as.arizona.edu
               usps:  Steward Observatory, U of A, Tucson AZ, 85721
    or

 Jeff Regester voice: (602)621-6535
               email: regester@astro.as.arizona.edu
               usps:  Steward Observatory, U of A, Tucson AZ, 85721


     Jeff Regester
     counselor, U of A Astronomy Camps
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Hard suits
Date: 13 Nov 92 03:41:41 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU


-From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
-Subject: Re: Space suit research???
-Date: 12 Nov 92 04:48:26 GMT
-Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

-In article <1992Nov10.232320.4521@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> stanczyk@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (STANCZYK MICHAEL B) writes:
->With all the talk about US space suits being at 5 psi and pure O2 I was 
->wondering what the current state of research is in space suits using
->1 atm and normal air?

-Imagine a starfish. Constant volume joints aren't constant volume. At
-1 atm, you can't move unless you're Arnold S. The suit fabric becomes
-so stiff when inflated to 14 PSI that you can't get any feeling through
-it, gloves don't work. 1 atm suit designs are hard suits with remote
-manipulators, one man space ships, not suits at all.

The prototype hard suit I've seen pictures of isn't made of fabric (at
least on the outside), and it doesn't use remote manipulators. It appears
to be made of rigid white plastic, though I suppose it could be metal.
The joints are made of pieces that slide over one another - the general
appearance is that of a medieval suit of armor. I *think* the finger joints
are similarly constructed, but I don't remember the details.

One concern that's been expressed over the eventual introduction of this
suit is pneufrancaisophobia - the fear of looking like the Michelin Man. :-)

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: sk4i+@andrew.cmu.edu (Samuel John Kass)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Mars Simulation in Antarctica
Date: 12 Nov 92 03:45:44 GMT
	<1992Nov11.202516.28429@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
Organization: Sophomore, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


   "The Tartan", our school newspaper, has reported that the problem
"can be fixed easily, but until it is, the project cannot be approved. 
Consequently, the date of departure for California en route to
Antarctica will continue to be pushed back."
    Basically, Dante looks like a big, purple bug.  It's transport
counterpart, "Virgil" (which was dropped from the Antarctica mission due
to manpower and time constraints) looked like a high-tech purple dune
buggy with lots of extra wheels.
    The project was concieved of a year ago, and has already completed
most final testing.  It has some pretty neat features, including the
ability to repel down steep slopes, and look around with a laser
scanner.  It's being worked on as a joint project with NASA and the NSF,
who are interested in Mt. Erebus' analog to alien landscapes.
    If our newspaper reports anything new and exciting, I'll be sure to
post again.
    --Sam

-- Disclaimer:  Everything is true. - sk4i+@andrew.cmu.edu               --
-- A Math/CS major at Carnegie Mellon University --  Beward the fnords.  --
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Re: Galileo HGA: Hypothesis
Summary: HGA stuck because of bent ribs or pre-launch protective cello?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords: Galileo; HGA; ribs ; bending; envelope
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 01:51:28 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.140620.8359@cc.umontreal.ca>, dignard@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Michel Dignard) writes...
>I imported the newly released GIF of Galileo High Gain Antenna (HGA)
>photographed during its assembly [ames.arc.nasa.gov: 
>/pub/SPACE/GIF/gllhga.gif].

This photo is of the *backup* antenna and was taken in 1991 at JPL.  
Jim Hoffman, Galileo's antenna engineer, is pictured working on the antenna.  
If you'll notice, the antenna is placed in a three stuck rib configuration.  
This image is in the GIF89a format with a caption file embedded in the image.  
You can view the caption file provided that your GIF viewer supports this 
feature of the GIF89a format.

>Could the HGA be stucked because of:
> 
>1) One or more rib bent/compressed during encapsulation/decapsulation?
>

Galileo was never encapsulated.  It was deployed from the cargo bay of the
Space Shuttle and no encapuslation was required.

>2) The transparent "celluloid" kind of dust protection envelope around
>   the HGA during its preparation could have been accidentally torn
>   when removed, and a piece has remained caught at the top of a rib
>   and prevent it to be released, thereby exercising a retaining force
>   on the whole assembly?

The spacecraft was inspected before it was placed in the cargo bay, and
was in full view of the Shuttle astronauts during the deployment, so
anything like this would have been easily detected.

When the antenna didn't open, it surprised a lot of people including
Jim Hoffman who was most familiar with the antenna.  He said, "I was
so confident.  I knew the antenna inside and out.  I had worked with it
daily.  I surpervised all the technicians who performed the modifications
and testing and finally buttoned the thing up.  We had deployed its
engineering twin so many times.  We knew everything there was to know
about what could possibly compromise its proper deployment.  When it
didn't open it was really a shock."
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     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. 
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |
From: clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: X-15  pictures
Date: 5 Nov 92 09:58:54 EST
Reply-To: clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones)
Organization: Kendall Square Research Corp
In-reply-to: claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Egalon)

In article <1d64b8INN7fv@rave.larc.nasa.gov>, claudio@nmsb (Claudio Egalon) writes:
>I would like to know where I could get hold of X-15 pictures for 
>possible publication. I am also interested, specifically, in a picture of 
>one of the first flights of the X-15 that was flown by Scott Crossfield in 
>which the (space)craft crashed and was broken in its very middle 
>(Crossfield survived). I have never seen a picture of the X-15 after this 
>accident and I am curious how it looked like.

I don't have any pointers to stills, but the show "The Rocket Pilots" (I think
that's the title), originally aired on NBC and occasionally rerun on A&E, has
film footage of this accident.  It's exaggerating to call it a crash: the
engine caught on fire and was shut down.  There wasn't enough time to dump the
whole fuel load before landing, so the craft was too heavy for the loads it
underwent on landing.  Crossfield did put it down nicely, and the fuselage
broke.  He received a trophy from the Southern California Soaring Society (a
streamlined brick mounted on mahogany) for the shortest time from 38000 feet
to the ground in a glider.

The flight took place on 5 November 1959, and was the fourth flight of the
program, and the third of the number two X-15.
--
Chris Jones    clj@ksr.com
From: vander@flab.fujitsu.co.jp (Mike van der Velden)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: astronauts voting
Date: 10 Nov 92 04:57:05 GMT
	<1992Nov9.180712.18824@julian.uwo.ca>
	<1992Nov9.193810.2996@julian.uwo.ca>
	<1992Nov9.205854.11270@julian.uwo.ca>
Organization: Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd., Kawasaki, Japan

In article <1992Nov9.205854.11270@julian.uwo.ca> jdnicoll@prism.ccs.uwo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes:
> In article <1992Nov9.193810.2996@julian.uwo.ca> crispin@csd.uwo.ca (Crispin Cowan) writes:
> >In article <1992Nov9.180712.18824@julian.uwo.ca> jdnicoll@prism.ccs.uwo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes:
> 
> >>	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'.
> >
> >This is false.  I have two friends who used absentee ballots for the
> >referendum.
> 
> 	The one recent posting  I make  that gets  general commentary,
> and I screw  up. For the record, I was wrong.  
> 
> 	The funnt thing is, I could swear  I read  a  posting from a
> Canadian abroad who wasn't allowed to vote...

Don't be so quick to apologize, James.  You were right.  Canadians
abroad were not allowed to vote, unless they were from Quebec.  I
should know.

I think Crispin is confused by the term "absentee ballot."  In Canada
there is a slightly different type of absentee ballot, known as the
"advance poll," where you vote in the election/referendum a few days
early if you know you're going to be out of town on voting day.  On
the other hand, if you are a Canadian citizen living abroad there is
no mechanism in place by which you can cast an absentee ballot in the
American sense of the word.

I've lived my entire 27 years in Canada except for these past 5 months
(I'll return in 2 more for a total of 7 months spent abroad), yet I
was not allowed to vote in this important referendum.  Silly, eh?

However, if it turns out that citizens of Ontario living abroad were
indeed allowed to cast their ballots while those of us from BC were not,
it would be Yet Another Example of Western Alienation.  :-)
 
--
Mike van der Velden             
s-mail: Distributed Systems Laboratory, Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd.
        1015, Kamikodanaka Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki 211, Japan
e-mail: vander@flab.fujitsu.co.jp
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Addr: SPACWE FOOD
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 20:06:57 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <Bxo3r3.9I.1@cs.cmu.edu> KEVIN@VM.CC.FAMU.EDU ("Kevin R. Cain") writes:
>>The standard Shuttle menu supplies each crew member with three
>>balanced meals, providing 2,800 kilocalories each day...
>
>WOW! No wonder they say that the shuttle glides like a brick. At 2,800
>kilocalories a day per I'm not suprised!  :-)
>
>As the saying goes, what's a order of magnitude among friends.

2800 kcal/day is correct.  The unit of food energy content, often sloppily
called a "calorie", is in fact a kilocalorie by the normal scientific
definition of "calorie".
-- 
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:15637 alt.sci.planetary:263
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:12:13 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Nov9.180901@betsy.gsfc.nasa.gov> giglio@betsy.gsfc.nasa.gov (Louis Giglio) writes:
>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.

No, all US "spam in a can" missions, Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo, used
a pure oxygen atmosphere identical to the atmosphere used in US space
suits, 5 PSI pure oxygen. Certainly a 14 PSI pure oxygen atmosphere would
lead to oxygen poisoning, so *they don't do that*. Nitrogen serves as
a dilutant at sea level pressure, but a dilutant is not needed if the
pressure is reduced enough. Of course this atmosphere isn't *pure* oxygen. 
There's some CO2 from respiration, and trace gases from out gassing of 
the capsule materials.

The point being made, however, is that gaseous nitrogen is not needed
to support life. Even plants can't directly use atmospheric nitrogen. 
They depend on "fixed" nitrogen that they get from the soil or the water
in the form of nitrates. There are bacteria that can fix atmospheric 
nitrogen, and soybean plants form symbiotic relationships with them to 
get part of their nitrogen requirement. But most plants get their nitrogen 
from inorganic sources such as the nitrates that form as the result of 
lightning discharges in the atmosphere forming nitric acid in combination 
with rain drops that in turn forms nitrates when mixed with soil. In other
words, acid rain is important to plant life on Earth. And also, plants 
get nitrogen recycled through animal wastes. This is just plant nitrogen
that has been consumed by animals and excreted as waste. And/or plants
get nitrogen from synthetic fertilizers. Any of the sources will do,
gaseous nitrogen isn't essential to life, nitrates are.

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Mars over the Moon???
From: carlis_jc@cs1.lamar.edu
Date: 9 Nov 92 15:56:45 CST

I realize that any complete attempt to terraform a body should take into
account such things as retainablity of gasses and, hopefuly the body it's self
will have a modicum of material to work with. I still don't see why we
shouldn't experiment with techniques for creating at least a heavy gas blanket
around the Moon. This would seem like a pretty major problem to overcome within
a reasonable length of time. (a few decades?) The stuff that is being pushed at
the moment talks about setting up "Factorys" on Mars that would produce heavy
gasses that would be traped by its' gravity and then once the temp. starts
bumping up they would establish "Greenhouses" for plant life and start feeding
Oxygen and etc....... Anyway thats the BASIC gist of what I've seen on the
subject (Newspaper articals, Spots on programs such as "Beyond 2000" on A&E,
even stuff like Weakly Readers thats distributed to grade school children)
and it set me to wondering why the sudden hurry to get to Mars? It's like
everyone just forgot about the Moon once we got there and started focusing on
Mars. (By the by has anyone heard any further reports on the long term effects
of weightlessness on those Russian Cosmonaughts?)
  
Anyway I wasn't sugesting that we terraform the Moon, I was just wondering why
we seem to have skiped over it and was trying to get some more info on the
whole subject in general.

Thank you for your time all who've posted.......
                                                 Jay
Xref: sparky sci.space:15821 sci.astro:11927
From: jordan@warped.pnl.gov (Randy Jordan)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: Pioneer 6 Update - 11/11/92
Keywords: Pioneer 6
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:56:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: oracle.1992Nov12.165619.22851
Reply-To: jordan@warped.pnl.gov (Randy Jordan)
Organization: Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratory


In article <1992Nov11.170839.20313@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes:
|>Xref: pnl-oracle sci.space:15125 sci.astro:11423
|>Path: pnl-oracle!ogicse!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov!baalke
|>From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
|>Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
|>Subject: Pioneer 6 Update - 11/11/92
|>Keywords: Pioneer 6
|>Message-ID: <1992Nov11.170839.20313@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
|>Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 17:08:36 PST
|>Article-I.D.: elroy.1992Nov11.170839.20313
|>Sender: news@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Usenet)
|>Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
|>Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
|>Lines: 21
|>News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
|>Nntp-Posting-Host: kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
|>
|>
|>                            PIONEER 6 STATUS REPORT
|>                              November 11, 1992
|>
|>     Yesterday, the Deep Space Network's 70 meter antenna in Goldstone,
|>California supported a tracking pass of the Pioneer 6 spacecraft.  Receiver
|>lock was attained, but we were unable to attain telemetry lock because no
|>subcarrier was detected.  The expected bit rate was 16 bps uncoded telemetry.
|>The AGC (Automatic Gain Control) was initially at -175.3 dbm, but was seen to
|>fluctuate causing the receiver to toggle in and out-of-lock.  The problem is
|>under investigation.
|>
|>     Pioneer 6 was launched on December 16, 1965 and is the oldest surviving
|>spacecraft.  Pioneer 6 was last supported on December 16, 1990, on the
|>25th anniversary of its launch, and no problems were encountered then.
|>     ___    _____     ___
|>    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     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. 
|>|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 
|>
--
	Where is Pioneer 6 and how far away?
RJ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	To Thyne Own Self be true...
	                             myne opinions are.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones)
Subject: Re: Nasa coverup
Organization: Vonnegut Tent Rentals, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:31:08 GMT

John Roberts (roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov) wrote:
> 
> Isn't it Miranda that's supposed to have been blown apart and then reassembled
> itself? If you want to permanently destroy a moon or planet, you have to hit
> it so hard that most or all of the mass achieves escape velocity (and in
> different directions :-).
> 
Not necessarily.  There's that moon of Saturn that was split in two and
now exists as two fragments that exchange orbits regularly.

--
||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com)|Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY  |
From: jmcd@sag4.ssl.berkeley.edu (John McDonald)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: NASA Coverup (pooh, pooh)
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:53:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Space Science Labs

))   jump about 18 inches vertically without a  run.   On  all  of  the  video
))   footage  shot  by  the  astronauts  while  in  the moonwalking mode , the
))   highest leaps performed by the most vigorous individuals,  such  as  John
))   Young,  never  amounted  to  more  than  about 18 inches, while they were
))   THEORETICALLY CAPABLE OF SLOW BACKFLIPS!
)
)If we assume, though, that the moon landings *were* real and in low G (just
)for the purposes of argument, of course), wouldn't it be plausible that the
)astronauts were being very careful and restrained *NOT* to do backflips, in
)ordor to avoid possible adverse effects due to a bad landing damaging their
)space suits?

Not to mention an additional 80 some odd pounds of life support equipment
they were lugging on their backs.


Newsgroups: sci.space
From: davem@ee.ubc.ca (david michelson)
Subject: Re: Coverup - gravity doesn't exist?
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:36:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.202215.347@pixel.kodak.com> dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
>John Roberts (roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov) wrote:
>> 
>> There's an apple tree on the NIST grounds that's a direct descendant of the 
>> tree Isaac Newton was sitting under when he thought up the laws of gravitation.
>
>Hmmm.  After that fact was disclosed in your first-day orientation class,
>were you sent out to fetch a can of striped paint ?

Back off, Dave Jones! ;-)  John Roberts is not *totally* out to lunch.

There are (were?) a couple of "Newtonian" apple trees planted
outside the Triumf Meson Facility (world's largest cyclotrom) at the 
University of British Columbia in Vancouver, too.  I gather that Cambridge
University makes apple tree seeds which are direct descendants of the 
trees from the orchard where Newton pondered available to deserving
institutions.... 
 
--
 
Dave Michelson
davem@ee.ubc.ca

Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.geo.geology
From: gawne@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: Viking Photos Shows Evidence of Marsquakes
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 19:42:04 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.041202.16050@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, 
corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley ) writes:

> I thought that the Viking landers had picked up only
> minimal Marsquake activities.  Has something changed?
> 
> I remember reading that only two, and those very slight,
> earthquakes were recorded over the umpteen year run
> of the Viking probes.
> 
> Could someone please explain the new data to me (an
> ignorant physics/math undergrad?)
> 
> 	Jason
> 	Ono-Sendai R&D

The article refered to images taken with the Viking orbiter which
suggest fault boundaries and other evidence of past Marsquakes.
This is separate and distinct from Marsquake data provided by the
Viking landers.

-Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute
Newsgroups: sci.space