HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: RE: CONSCIOUSNESS AND SCIENCE DISCUSSION GROUP
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:10:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bt4swF.Hxq.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

> Newsgroups:  
soc.culture.indian,soc.college,talk.religion.misc,talk.origins,sci.ma 
th,sci.chem,sci.misc,sci.bio.technology,sci.physics,sci.space
> 


Your cross posting is really excessive. Unless you can tie your  
discussion more closely to the exploration and colonization of space,  
or at least something vaguely related thereto, I would recommend not  
posting it to Space Digest (where it ends up via sci.space)
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: nicho@VNET.IBM.COM
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: pigs in space was(Re: Beanstalks in Nevada Sky)
Date: 14 Aug 92 10:27:29 GMT
Reply-To: nicho@vnet.ibm.com

In <16fvm0INNckq@agate.berkeley.edu> George William Herbert writes:
>That will, barring massive revision of space law, NOT happen to the
>space near earth 8-)
>The outer space treaty, which has been ratified by all spacefaring
>and most other nations at this time, agrees that there is no territory
>in space, i.e. that no country can "own" space above itself.  China
>was the last holdout, but they signed about 2 weeks after the US brought
>up its nonsignatory status during the Long March launch debate for
>a Hughes-built sattelite a couple of years ago (smart move).
>If you go "into space", normally defined as >100km (62 nautical miles)
>above the earth, then the only laws that apply are those of the launching
>nation.  This is due to responsibility and liability issues (if your
>vehicle rams mine, who's responsible?) etc.  If the US national law does
>not prohibit gambling, then you can gamble on a US station or vehicle.
>If someone else's laws did, then you couldn't.
   Can someone point me towards a fiction work which deals with the
possibility of a group not based in a current spacefaring nation, who
gain relatively cheap and easy access to space, and then proceed to
cheerfully ignore all these self-important treaties ??
   I'd be interested in a work which dealt with how the
major powers would be likely to react, and issues such as where
popular support would be likely to side.
   I've seen several sets of numbers demonstrating that you can chuck
some serious quantities of people and material into orbit if you're not
too fussy about high tech or perfect safety. Now suppose somone did
this for real, and started up the sorts of operations that Allen and
Nick espouse, and decided they were going to do what they liked, without
giving a pair of dingo's kidneys for what anyone else thought. (maybe a
group of space-going Ayatollahs ..).
   What would the likely outcome be ??

 -----------------------------------------------------------------
               ** Of course I don't speak for IBM **
Greg Nicholls ... nicho@vnet.ibm.com or nicho@cix.compulink.co.uk
                  voice/fax: 44-794-516038
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu (Doug Mohney)
Subject: Re: Energiya's role in Space Station assem
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 18:50:39 GMT
Organization: Computer Aided Design Lab, U. of Maryland College Park
Reply-To: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu

In article <65969@hydra.gatech.EDU>, ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.123208.13141@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug13.225903.5705@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>>>Name *one* major military procurement that
>>>proceeded on a fixed price basis with *no* adjustments. 
>
>>The ATF prototype
>>LACE
>>RME
>>DC-X
>
>We've procured DC-X's already?  How did the first launch go?
>
>(For the sarcasm impaired: these aren't procurements.)

He also left out the difficulties in seeing DC-X to fruition (i.e.; one attack
on funding already), but don't let sweating the details stop him...


                 Support U.N. military force against Serbia

  -- >                  SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU                        < --
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: samw@bucket.rain.com (Sam Warden)
Subject: Re: Balloon Launches
Organization: Rick's Home-Grown Un*x
Date: 22 Aug 92 22:52:44 GMT

cc843@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Paul A. Voytas) writes:

>Descriptions of schemes to have a floating spaceport in the stratosphere
>are also seen from time to time. These would be huge floating structures
>with runways for single stage to orbit type of vehicles. Of course,
>you have to get everything up there in the first place....

With lighter-than-air flight, that's the _easy_ part I would think.  8-)

-- 
 
samw@bucket.rain.com (Sam Warden) -- and not a mere Device.
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Energya and Freedom and Soyuz ACRV and...
Date: 19 Aug 92 15:18:42 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <16qgt2INN2gn@agate.berkeley.edu> gwh@soda.berkeley.edu (George William Herbert) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.154937.24078@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>Indeed. If we follow the plan of using Soyuz and HL Deltas, the Shuttle
>>fleet is *gone*. That's Sherzer's plan anyway. With this plan 3/4 of the 
>>Shuttle fleet is available for other work than servicing Fred. Now if
>>your plan includes operating the full Shuttle fleet in *addition*
>>to Soyuz at the station, then *never mind*. Expensive though.
>
>3/4 of the shuttle fleet will not be available for non-station duties.
>Since the long duration flights screw up the shuttle  turnaround,
>you only get about half the previously-available flights.  Is that
>worth it?

Maybe. In a sense Shuttle is priceless. It can do some things that
no other vehicle currently available, or in the pipeline, can do.
We have to make a value decision on whether those things are worth
doing at the price. I think some of them are.

>Soyuz prices might well go up.  They won't likely go past (installed
>on a US Vehicle, inclusive of integration exclusive of vehicle)
>$30 million per Soyuz.  Even at $30 million, total vehicle cost
>is only $80 million on an Atlas.  If the price stays low for
>a while, we're looking at my quote of $65 million.
>
>Satisfied?

Yeah. Using Soyuz for ACRV *is* a cheap way to get the capability
now. It may even *remain* a cheap way to get the capability by
the time we need it. But we are depending on a very unstable 
situation for what could be a critical mission requirement. I'd
feel a lot better if they could be manufactured here under license
as a *second* source. Even at the higher price, it's cheaper than 
developing an entirely new vehicle. 

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: eatlv@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (thomas.vandoren)
Subject: He3 Power Source
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 19:06:24 GMT

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: He3 Power Source
Summary: 
Expires: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: world
Organization: AT&T
Keywords: 

   About 2 weeks ago I saw a series of 5 minute modern videos of great interest.
One of them was about a proposal to use Helium3 mined from the moon as a power
source on Earth.  One of the claims was that the value of one shuttle load
of He3 was a couple billion dollars or something in that order when computed
relative to the power output it would provide.

   Does anyone have more info, opinions on that proposal?  If it is true it
would seem that there may be some kind of business case for lunar operations.
My only concern or potential skepticism is how easy is it to develop an
He3 power plant?  I mean are we talking something as hypothetical as fusion
power, or something that does have a reasonable chance of being developed
in the near future.

   The video mentioned how He3 as exhaust from the sun doesnt make it to the
Earth's surface due to the atmosphere or magnetosphere but does get absorbed 
into the lunar soil.  It showed proposed lunar surface strip mining machines
that would filter out the He3 and replace the regolith behind it thus having
minimal environmental impact.  Other items such as oxygen and water could be
extracted at that time as well.

  How hypothetical is this and is it practical?

Lee
From: robert@whiplash.er.usgs.gov (Robert Holder)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Meteor Soaks Daytona
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:10:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bt4vM2.K2o.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

hi.  I am a unix administrator here at the US Geological Survey's
Center for Coastal Geology.  When the big wave hit daytona, one
of our nearshore geologists visited the site and his guess is that
there was a large underwater sinkhole which suddenly collapsed
near the coast, causing the single wave.  I'm going from memory
here: he might have said "rockslide" instead of sinkhole.  If there
is any interest, I can ask him again.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~robert holder~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~       unix beast wrassler  us geological survey        ~
~ robert@whiplash.er.usgs.gov  st petersburg florida usa ~
~ FREEDOM HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN EXPENSIVE THING dr m l king ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~namaste~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: kmj@newt.phys.unsw.edu.au (Morris Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Spacecraft computers: a request for information
Keywords: computers, space
Date: 20 Aug 92 22:21:52 GMT
Reply-To: kmj@newt.phys.unsw.edu.au (Morris Jones)
Organization: School of Physics / UNSW

I'm working on an undergraduate computer applications report, and I
would appreciate any information on the use of computers in space
systems. Details on languages used, physical components, memory,
protocols, etc would interest me. Please e-mail me with any details. 


Morris Jones. University of New South Wales. Happy International Space Year!
From: Frederick.A.Ringwald@dartmouth.edu (Frederick A. Ringwald)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Saturn class (Was: SPS feasibility and other space 
 development)
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:44:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.1992Aug19.174427.9782
 <1992Aug18.130245.9231@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  
 <18AUG199220444595@judy.uh.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <18AUG199220444595@judy.uh.edu>
wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov writes:

> There
> is a demonstrated need for larger lift capability.

Sure, I believe you. I'm curious to know: what is the demonstrated
need? How is it demonstrated?
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Early Warning of missiles and meteo
Date: 19 Aug 92 15:41:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: ke4zv.1992Aug19.154155.4082
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1469100010@igc.apc.org> mwgoodman@igc.apc.org (Mark Goodman) writes:
>
>Meteoroids also travel faster than ballistic missiles -- tens of
>km/sec compared to up to 7 for missiles, at least until they get
>vey low in the atmosphere and are below the radar fan -- so
>theradar won't have as much time to look.  The United States has a
>PAVE PAWS radar in Georgia for warning of SLBM attack, which I
>think had a good chance of seeing a meteoroid off Daytona Beach.

The system at Warner Robbins AFB has only been activated at full power
*one* time.  The effects at the (then) SAC flight line were such that 
the system hasn't been turned on since. Can you say boondoggle? I
knew you could.

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Beanstalks in Nevada Sky (was Re: Tethers)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:30:24 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <16eqs1INNb5k@early-bird.think.com> moravec@Think.COM (Hans Moravec) writes:
>The latest and greatest version of carbon fiber is Buckytubes!
>Like graphite but rolled up forming a teeny, tiny soda straw.
>No loose edges or ends (the ends are capped with a half Buckyball).

Last I heard, some doubts had been raised about their existence:  looked
at with an STM, they appear to be just rows of buckyballs, not tubular
structures at all.  Still interesting, but unlikely to be very strong.
-- 
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
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: LJ10717@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Meteorite/Fireball object spotted?
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 20:04:24 GMT


Hello,

I just recently heard over NPR (National Public Radio) that a possible
"meteorite" was spotted over Europe somewhere.  I missed the information on
exactly where it was spotted.  However, the object was accompanied by large
tremors covering a 12 mile stretch and a flood of calls to authorities who
have already confirmed that the "fireball" object was NOT
military test aircraft, abnormal weather patterns, an earthquake OR
anything else identifiable, at this point.

If anyone has specifics to this event please post or email.  Thank you.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diamond - lj10717@lmsc5.is.lmsc.lockheed.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky sci.space:11725 sci.physics:12766
From: rone@alcor.usc.edu (Ron Echeverri)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Parsecs?
Date: 13 Aug 1992 00:40:29 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: alcor.usc.edu

In article <1992Aug13.030630.3919@cco.caltech.edu> keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:
>Hmmm...  at the distance of one parsec, one astronomical unit subtends an
>angle of one arc second.

Coincidence.  Remember, one AU is the distance from the Earth to the Sun...

5150
look ma, i can nitpick too! :)
From: Frederick.A.Ringwald@dartmouth.edu (Frederick A. Ringwald)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Watching a Shuttle launch
Date: 13 Aug 92 10:41:42 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

The topper of all the toppers is still Apollo 17.

The birds came out and sang, because they thought it was morning - at
my parents' house, 100 miles away! Then again, what do you expect from
something that burns two tons of kerosene per second?

Sounds are interesting. I could almost swear that, under the right
conditions, you can even hear Deltas and Titans from 100 miles away.
Anyone else noticed this? 

P.S. Never mind the ants, John, watch out for the alligators.
P.P.S. A wild dolphin stuck its head above water after the launch? You
*did* get a special treat that day: they almost never do this!
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: hughes@gary.enet.dec.com (Gary Hughes - VMS Development)
Subject: Re: Mini Energiya(?) & MIR replacement
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 19:43:58 GMT


In article <1992Aug13.161933.6107@samba.oit.unc.edu>, cecil@physics.unc.edu (Gerald Cecil) writes...
>Last week's AW&ST had a CAD sketch of the redesigned MIR 2 station on a 
>launch vehicle I can't identify.  It *looks* like a cut-down Energiya core, 
>judging by the relative diameters of the strap-ons/core.  Has anyone seen 
>this configuration before?  I recall that the brief article mentioned that 
>MIR 1 will be operable until 1995. Someone here mentioned last week that the
>core module will have to be replaced soon. Details on this & MIR 2 anyone?

The launch vehicle shown is the configuration that they (Energia NPO, reported
in AvLeak) have talked about in the past as Energia-M.

Two strapons and a shortened core using a single engine (instead of the usual
4). The drawing also showed an unidentified upper stage that looked somewhat
like their proposed (under development?) RCS upper stage. This is the smaller
of the two upper stages proposed for Energia use.

gary
From: garry@mdavcr.mda.ca (Garry Holmen)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Energya and Freedom and Soyuz ACRV and...
Date: 12 Aug 92 16:38:46 GMT
Organization: MacDonald Dettwiler, 13800 Commerce Parkway, Richmond, BC, Canada  V6V 2J3

Reading the subject header of this posting gave me a great idea....

Why don't we just strap the shuttle onto the Energia and throw the soyuz into
the shuttle's cargo bay. This takes care of heavy lift capability, cheap
escape vehicles and low G returns of space hardware. I'm sure we can get 
that fellow from South Africa to supply the propellent for the whole project
if we donate the raw sugar, salt peter and a large candle.

The total price for this scheme would be :

	Energia		2 pairs 501 jeans and Rolling stones CD
			( equivalent to 10,000,000 rubles in the black market)
		
	Shuttle		1 Billion US $. (No red tag special here....)

	Soyuz		Macdonald franchise for St. Petersburg.

for a grand total of 	1 billion plus spare change.
      plus tax		3 billion.

(PS.... I think Allen can get all this for about 200M if we just let him
work with the numbers for awhile.)

As one can see this solves all the space problems that we currently have....
Next stop Alpha-Centuri...... All aboard.

8^)

Garry
================================================================================What we're in space????
From: Eric_S_Klien@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Tethers
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 19:46:15 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world
  <1547@hsvaic.boeing.com>

"I would suggest you look into Lofstrom Loops and other active,  
surface based structures. Theoretically you can build a tower 100km  
high with this technology.
 
Should be something on it in the FAQ's. It's been discussed over and  
over again all the way back to Space Digest V1 in 80-81."
 
Could you send me the FAQs?  I couldn't find them.
 
                                                          Eric Klien
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: johnc@calvin.ee.cornell.edu (John Cho)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Satellite orbit info needed
Date: 18 Aug 92 18:32:33 GMT
Organization: Cornell Space Plasma Physics

Does anyone know where I could obtain information regarding the orbits of
satellites?  The objective is to try to calibrate an atmospheric radar
using a satellite with a known cross section.  In order to do this, I need
to know which satellite passed directly overhead a certain point on the
ground at a given time and altitude.  I suppose NORAD would have this
kind of data.  But does someone know of a contact there?

If you have any clues, please reply to johnc@magneto.ee.cornell.edu since
I do not subscribe to this newsgroup.

________
John Cho
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dbriggs@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Daniel Briggs)
Subject: Re: Parsecs?
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 23:51:12 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.192659.7698@wixer.cactus.org>
>The definition of a parsec is the distance at which the PARallax of an object
>(star, galaxy, what have you) is one SECond.  This distance is about 3.21
                                      ^^^^^^
>light years if I remember correctly (Don't have any books near me to check
>this).  Hope this is helpful.

arcSECond, please.  Astronomy uses both time seconds and arcseconds.  It's a
bad habit to get into to use 'second' for both.  Many an observation has
gone down the tubes because these units were inadvertantly mixed up.  Even
the pros do it, if they are not careful.

BTW, it's 3.26 light years to the parsec.  You were pretty close.

-- 
| Daniel Briggs  (dbriggs@nrao.edu)                      |        USPA B-14993
| New Mexico Tech / National Radio Astronomy Observatory |            DoD #387
| P.O. Box O / Socorro, NM 87801   (505) 835-7391        |
Support the League for Programming Freedom  (info from league@prep.ai.mit.edu)
Organisation: European Space Technology Centre (E.S.T.E.C)
Date: Thursday, 20 Aug 1992 16:52:44 CET
From: Hugh D.R. Evans <HEVANS@ESTEC.BITNET>
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: SPS feasibility / Astrophysical Engineering
Distribution: na
 <10AUG199219061012@judy.uh.edu> <1992Aug13.075037.2707@ke4zv.uucp>
 <Bsxo2q.MJy@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com> <1992Aug15.151108.14455@ke4zv.uucp>
 <1548@hsvaic.boeing.com>

In article <1548@hsvaic.boeing.com>, eder@hsvaic.boeing.com (Dani Eder) says:
>
>I'm working on a book that discusses DISMANTLING planetary bodies
>(and rebuilding them more to our liking, sigh - all that wasted
>mass inside planets doing nothing more useful than holding
>atmospheres down, sheesh what poor design).
>
>
...stuff deleted...
>Methods of disassembly include:
>
>(1) Large body impact
>
>Messy, but quick.  Don't let the pieces re-coalesce into a body
>again.
>
>(2) Big bomb(s)
>
>Again, messy.
>
>(3) Spin up to orbital speed.
>
>You collect stuff off the equator that is now orbital.
>
>(4) Boiloff
>
>Good for removing pesky atmospheres, takes longer to evaporate
>planet.  Use lots of concentrated sunlight
>
>(5) Mining
>
>Mass drivers, tethers, etc.
>
>
>For those who are wondering why I am considering such stuff --
>Understanding how such large scale engineering might be done can
>tell us what to look for around other stars in the search for
>life in the Universe.
>
>Dani
>
>--
>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.***



Hmmm. I wonder what the environmental impact of redistributing the Earth
would be...:):) :)

Hugh

   Standard Disclaimer...    * Inet:   hevans@estwm8.dnet.estec.esa.nl
                             *     or  hevans@estec.esa.nl
"The road to nowhere is      * SPAN:   ESTCS1::HEVANS
    shorter than you think"  * BITNET: HEVANS@ESTEC
From: ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (George Hastings)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: To anyone who is interested in science
Date: 21 Aug 92 14:43:33 GMT
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network (Richmond)

marina@tk.mainet.msk.su  writes:
> 
> We apply   to everybody  who  is   interested in future  Russian
> science; who would like to assist it to integrate  in  the World
> science society.
> We  need  information  about Foundations and other organizations
> those   are   interested   in    attraction    russian   science
> organizations into a science research but also about  conditions
> of participation russian  scientists  in  this projects. Besides
> we would like to know about questions of finance.
> We  hope on   establishment of  interaction  and  development of
> international cooperation.
> 
>         Best regards.
>                     M. Naumenko
> 
> 
     Have you sent any requests to the main N.A.S.A. research
centers that are doing aeronautics research? If you haven't
contacted them yet, you should send letters to the 
     PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE at each of the following NASA
Centers:
	NASA Langley Research Center
	Hampton, VA

	NASA Lewis Research Center
	Cleveland, OH

	NASA Ames Research Center
	Mountain View, CA
-- 
Newsgroups: sci.space