HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Saving an overweight SSTO....
Date: 11 Jan 93 12:27:25 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
NNTP-Posting-Host: fnalf.fnal.gov

In article <1993Jan11.075346.12742@bby.com.au>, gnb@baby.bby.com.au (Gregory N. Bond) writes:
> Suppose DC-X works more-or-less as planned, and they go ahead and
> attempt to build a DC-Y/DC-1.  And suppose the pollyannas are right
> and it bloats and the dry mass goes up.        ^^^^^^^^^^

Cassandras?

> There are a couple of scenarios here:
[...]
> 3) The mass overrun is much larger than that.  At this point, the
> project is lost; however I suspect that (given the findings of the
> various reports into the general feasability) this is much less likely
> than the previous cases.
> 
> And in any case, you know a lot more than when you started, and you
> can do it right next time! 

If DC-Y flops, there won't BE a next time for SSTO.  Not before our
teeth fall out. 

What a Pollyanna.  (-:

"Read my lips, Hal:          Bill Higgins   
Open the Pod Bay doors!"     Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
                             Bitnet:     HIGGINS@FNALB.BITNET
(Happy 1st, or -4th, birth-  SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS 
day to Hal 9000 on 12 Jan!)  Internet:  HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
From: nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu
Subject: Re: Question about SETI?+
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 05:02:37 GMT

In article <tim.726364246@giaeb>, tim@giaeb.cc.monash.edu.au (Tim Roberts) writes:
> OK, I'm a rank amateur, I don't normally read this group, so please be gentle
> with me.....
> 
> Lots of money (I understand) is being spent on SETI, on the usual quite
> reasonable assumption that there may be millions of civilisations out there.
> Now, it seems to me that it would be astonishing if another civilisation were
> at exactly our point in technology.  Those that are far below would not be
> able to send or receive anyway.  So we only need consider those that are in
> advance of us, perhaps to almost unimaginable amounts.  Further, we need only
> consider those that want to contact a backward civilisation like ours - if
> they don't want to, they'll make sure we never know about them.
> 
> So, we are left with a civilisation that is probably very far ahead of ours,
> but wants to contact us (for some reason).  Now, how would they go about it ?
> Surely they'd set beacons somewhere in space that could not possibly be
> missed.  And, remember, their technology is probably millenia (at least) ahead
> of ours.
> 
> So, my question is, given that we ought to look for beacons that cannot be
> missed:  has anyone examined the immediate vicinity of pulsars ?  I mean,
> REALLY examined them ?
> 
> Wouldn't this be better than searching more-or-less random points in space ?
> 
> Tim
> 

Only major problem I might see with SETI is that what I see almost
everday. NAmely to see two cultures that for one reason or another have to
interact. The Local Eskimo (Inupiaq) and White (General American).
Problem is I see lost people, kids who don't want to be eskimo but carbon
copy whites (unless its to their benefit to be eskimo, when its fashonable
to be eskimo).. Sorry for being pessemistic, just being open about possible
problems with alien contact.. We can hope that the alien civilisation is of
a lower technical level than our, we can always exploit them when possible.
For if the civilisation is of a "higher" level, we might face lossing
ourselves as human, what would the cost be??
 
I do liek the Star Trek ideal of alien contact, but we must be open about
possible problems..
 
Also I don't think we give enought time and money to the proper SETI
search. Well such is the budget..
 
==
==
Michael Adams alias Ghost Wheel/Morgoth NSMCA@acad3.alaska.edu
 
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: fast-track failures
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 19:33:50 GMT

In <1hrcplINNd4u@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> bafta@cats.ucsc.edu (Shari L Brooks) writes:


>In article <1992Dec29.164256.18889@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> 
>rbw3q@rayleigh.mech.Virginia.EDU (Brad Whitehurst) writes:

>>In article <ewright.725152007@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward 
>>V. Wright) writes:

>>>You think a typical engineer earns $100,000 a year?
>>>
>>>I want to work for your company!

>>	By the time you also pay for FICA, pension, benefits, and
>>overhead, a $50,000 engineer can easily cost a company double his base
>>pay!  BTW, Ed, I ALSO help do the budgeting for my lab, so before you
>>ask, yes, I have some experience in this!

>Wow, your lab pays for FICA?  I'm impressed.  It takes up about a third
>of *my* salary, when combined with income taxes.  Right out of my pay.
>I was under the impression it came out of everyone's pay, that that was
>the idea behind "Social Security".

I think you need to find out a bit more about manpower accounting and
just who pays what, Shari.  The first thing you will find is that your
employer pays the same amount of FICA that you do -- in other words,
you only pay for half of it.  Then there are things like health
insurance (typically in the $4k range), pension contributions (figure
about the same as your FICA bill, at least), usage of facilities, etc.
Having a single engineer is likely to cost you MORE than $100k, by the
time you add in all the overhead costs.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: sdd@larc.nasa.gov (Steve Derry)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: DCX tech. info?
Date: 5 Jan 1993 17:18:11 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
Reply-To: S.D.Derry@LaRC.NASA.Gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: zip.larc.nasa.gov
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Edward V. Wright (ewright@convex.com) wrote:
: In <1993Jan5.161425.5292@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

: >flight 1 is a low altitude hover test. Test two is a high-Q hover test.
                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >test three demonstrates flying longer distances, some maneuvers to be
: >executed at reentry, and use of GPS.

: For the benefit of anyone not up on the lingo, Q is the aerospace
: engineering symbol for dynamic pressure. 

How can you have dynamic pressure when you're hovering???

Also, will these flights be pre-programmed onboard, or will they be 
controlled from the ground?

--
Steve Derry
<s.d.derry@larc.nasa.gov>
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu (Doug Mohney)
Subject: Re: Who can launch antisats? (was Re: DoD launcher use)
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 20:55:08 GMT
Organization: Computer Aided Design Lab, U. of Maryland College Park
Reply-To: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu

In article <ewright.725665121@convex.convex.com>, ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:

>Achieving a precise orbit is not necessary to knock out a low-orbit
>satellite.  All of the nuclear powers have ballistic missiles capable
>of lofting a warhead to orbital altitude, if not into orbit.  Detonating
>a small nuke in the general vicinity of a satellite, at the right
>altitude, would do the job.

Sure. Technically speaking. 

Actual use of a nuclear weapon in anything other than a superpower conflict
would result in political consequences for the snot-nosed nation far and above
what you'd want. 

Not to mention the EMP problems you'd cause for commercial sats and (possibly)
electronics on the ground. 

It would be bad. And a waste of good fissionables for other purposes.


                    I have talked to Ehud, and lived.
  -- >                  SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU                        < --
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Subject: Re: DC-Y funding
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 13:41:55 GMT


-From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
-Subject: DC-Y Funding (was: How many flights are Orbiters designed for? )
-Date: 6 Jan 93 01:04:41 GMT

-DoD it the only thing. Much as I wish it where otherwise, the fact
-remains that the launcher buisness is a small market, not profitable
-for anybody, competes with government subsidzed competition, and currently
-suffers from an oversuply of launchers and too few payloads.

The Shuttle only launches about eight times a year, and represents relatively
few subsidized GAS cans, mid-deck experiments, etc. Is the market really
*that* small?

(And if these incidental payloads were not subsidized, the market
might be even smaller.)

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: prb@access.digex.com (Pat)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: DC-1 and the $23M NASA Toilet
Date: 13 Jan 1993 04:35:20 GMT
Organization: UDSI
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

In article <C0pMyM.F8H@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>
>Sorry, not correct.  The old shuttle toilet stores the solid wastes until
>landing, when it is removed and cleaned out.  Urine is separated to be
>dealt with differently (dumped, I think); this is what has been done by
>all such systems, including the Skylab one.
>


Uh, OH.  I think we have a sci.space first here.
I get to correct Henry.  Bill, Dennis watch this real careful, you'll
probably never see this again in this century.

I watched a NASA fiilm on Select late one night, where they discussed
the Skylab life support system.  Skylab had three seperate water
recovery systems.  identical in function and part.
Water was recovered from exhalation, urine and the shower/handbasin.
each system used a wick evaporator to distill h2o and then passed the
vapor through a carbon filter to remove odor and contaminants.  
For psychological reasons recycled urine was used solely forhand washing
although it met quality requirements for drinking.
The film showed the astronauts conducting daily qualtiy tests and
doing maintenance on the system.  

I imagine in the event of a system failure the contingency plan was
to valve all liquid sources back to one recycler for mission
preservation.

I think the shuttle dumps urine because the fuel cells produce lots
of water and the weight of the recycler is not cost effective.

pat
From: rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (rabjab)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: best food for space?
Date: 12 Jan 93 21:56:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: golem.rabjab.19.726875770
Organization: ucsd
NNTP-Posting-Host: lutherlab.ucsd.edu

I watched Robinson Crusoe on Mars the other day and got the idea to
put my food in toothpaste tubes.  I squezed out all the paste into
jars and used the blender to turn various foods into paste.  I'm
having some problems getting the paste in the tubes, however.  Does
anyone have suggestions?

When that problem is solved, I am going to need to get more tubes.

-rabjab
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack)
Subject: Re: Marketing SSTO
Organization: Lockheed ESC, Houston
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 19:18:36 GMT

>Airplanes made it possible
>to build Las Vegas in the dessert.  

Cake, pie, icream or pudding? :-)

>You have to allow for things like Las Vegas in space.  

It is anticipated that a combination Poconos Honeymoon Resorts/Mustang
Ranch will be the major allure of a 0g tourist facility.

> And if you're 
>trying to build public support, you need to talk about flashy
>things like Las Vegas, rather than mundane stuff like air mail.  

"Come on 6, baby needs a pair of Heavy Boots!"

-- 
Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov - I speak only for myself, unless blah, blah..
"You know, I think we're all Bozos on this bus."
"Detail Dress Circuits" "Belt: Above A, Below B" "Close B ClothesMode"
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Should NASA operate shuttles (was Re: Shuttle a research tool)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:43:00 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1993Jan7.220739.9367@cerberus.ulaval.ca> yergeau@phy.ulaval.ca (Francois Yergeau) writes:

>Spin off shuttle to the private sector, and
>you're likely to get at most one provider, and one buyer (NASA).  Not
>my idea of a free, competitive market where cost savings could be
>realized.  By contrast, the commercial launch market has many buyers
>and a few more or less subsidized sellers, so there's competition,
>incentive to invest, etc.

When there's only one supplier in a market, that's usually
a pretty good incentive for other companies to invest.  How
many companies followed Federal Express into the day-next
delivery market?


>>>But didn't I read not long ago that MacDD would not operate DC?  Who would?
>>
>>I understand that American Airlines has indicated some interest. Why
>>not them?

If you read the same account I did, I believe it was Northwest Orient.
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Antimatter reality (was Re: *** BUSSARD RAMSCOOP ***)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:18:15 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1993Jan7.184016.1@fnala.fnal.gov> higgins@fnala.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
>> ... There are *NO* fundamental barriers that
>> anyone has been able to find.  It's purely a matter of scaling up and
>> optimizing the hardware -- the existing accelerators are optimized for
>> production of Nobel prizes, not bulk antimatter...
>
>I don't appreciate the gratuitous sneer at the people who sweated to
>get the production rates *this* high.  They solved difficult
>engineering problems and had to make use of technology available at
>HEP labs rather than some blue-sky paper scheme.  And, yes, Simon van
>der Meer did win a Nobel prize for stochastic cooling, an essential
>process in the storage of antiprotons.  So what?

I can't vouch for the exact wording, but the basic comment is from
Robert Forward.  I never saw a good explanation of the details, and
probably wouldn't have retained them if so -- an accelerator expert
I'm not -- but my dim recollection is that the existing systems lose
a good many antiprotons because of wanting a relatively narrow range
of energies, so the antiprotons can be stored and accelerated easily.
They're optimized for their end use -- high-energy particle physics --
not for maximum efficiency in antimatter production.
-- 
"God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
       -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: gwc@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Greg F Walz Chojnacki)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: asteroids beyond Jupiter
Date: 4 Jan 1993 17:52:20 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Reply-To: gwc@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: gwc@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

>>In article <1992Dec2t.edu> <3342.29953@hpcv3@hp.caacp.com>, 
>>billn@hp53@ac.cv.c.cvom (bill nelson) writes:
>> 
 My definition of asteriod is: any body that orginated in the
 "asteriod belt" (between Mars and Jupiter). I have made no claim as to  
 where they can orbit. Jyonder is large enough to cause significant 
 perturbation to their orbits.
>
Correct me if I'm wrong, but was the original poster intersted less
in terminology than whether an object in the "main" asteroid belt
could be perturbed into an orbit like, say, Chiron's? If so, I
don't know the answer (I suspect it's yes), but it's an interesting
question.

(I'm just trying to put out misdirected flames.)

Greg

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com (Rich Kolker)
Subject: Re: Contacting Pete Conrad 
Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:05:20 GMT

In article <C0Jqyz.34v@rahul.net> mike@rahul.net (Mike Smithwick) writes:
>[]
>
>Does anyone know how I could get in contact with Pete Conrad? I have
>a couple of questions regarding Apollo 12 I need to get answered.
>

Contact Pete care of MacDAC in California where he is chief pilot (I'm
sure his real title is more impressive than that, but that's what
he's doingt) of Delta Clipper.  Pete may make it back to the moon yet!

++rich
-------------------------------------------------------------------
   rich kolker       rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com
                         < Do Not Write In This Space> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: hughes@gary.enet.dec.com (Gary Hughes - VMS Development)
Subject: Re: ASTM, Saturn and MOL (Was Re: MOL)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:04:21 GMT


In article <72444@cup.portal.com>, BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn) writes...
>   Thanks for all that info, my copy of 'Stages to Saturn' is in a box
>   stored away somewhere. But wasn't this discussion REALLY about
>   whether Centaur actually flew on a Saturn? Not was it intended to,
>   but did it ever go up on one? It didn't, to the best of my knowledge.

No live S-V stage ever flew. Indeed, the Block 1 Saturns and the first Block 2
Saturn used boilerplate Jupiter tanks and nose cones to simulate the S-V. One
reference suggests that Von Braun pushed to cancel the S-V, to maintain the
image that the Saturn 1 was an R&D vehicle (thus ensuring funds for future
Saturn development).

FWIW, I did some more digging over the holiday and found that an earlier
proposal had the S-V powered by two LR-119 engines (aka RL-10B in at least one
source) before the LR-119 was canned.

Does anyone know if 'Stages to Saturn' is still purchaseable?

gary
Xref: sparky sci.space:18685 comp.robotics:2764
From: mcs@wet.UUCP (Gil Nardo)
Newsgroups: sci.space,comp.robotics
Subject: Re: Dante Advisory #5
Date: 4 Jan 93 20:21:04 GMT
Followup-To: sci.space
Distribution: na
Organization: Wetware Diversions, San Francisco

Looks like exploratory robots ought to travel at least in
groups of two.  One specialized for experiments, the other
for critical supplies and repair (the Maytag repair robot?).
-- 
Gil Nardo                  | mcs@wet.com
Migrant Computing Services | (415)664-1032
1032 Irving Street, #435   |-----------------
San Francisco, 94122       | Supernova = *!
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dennisn@ecs.comm.mot.com (Dennis Newkirk)
Subject: Iridium plans use of Proton
Organization: Motorola
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:44:00 GMT

This weeks Space News has 3 stories related to Iridium.
The first says Iridium spokesman John Windolph confirmed
the Russian Proton booster has been selected as one of
several launch suppliers.  The article also claims 3
Protons are planned to launch 21 Iridium satellites.

In a related story, Lockheed (prime contractor for
Iridium satellites) has entered a partnership with the
Krunichev plant near Moscow to market the Proton booster.
Lockheed has agreed to pay $5 million over the next few
years to support the Krunichev plant and in return gets
exclusive marketing rights for all but Russian government
use of the Proton.

Any export of a US satellite like Iridium must still
get export permits to permit launch on the Proton. The
State Department approved the partnership late last month
and this decision is producing criticism now from
some US government officials, says Space News.

Last month the Russian Prime Minister announced the
deal and said something about funding Krunichev to
establish new Proton launch facilities at Plesetsk,
a move that would be good for NPO Energia which has mentioned 
the desire to launch Mir 2 from Russian territory.

There are a lot more details in the articles so check
them out if your interested, I don't know anything about
Iridium. 

Dennis Newkirk (dennisn@ecs.comm.mot.com)
Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector
Schaumburg, IL
From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: LRDPA
X-Sender: newtout 0.06 Jan  3 1993
Date: 11 Jan 93  09:47:52

Back to the Moon Bill to Be Unveiled in San Diego during January
-
        San Diego L5, a chapter of the National Space Society, will
publicly release a draft version of the Lunar Resources Data
Purchase Act on Thursday, January 28 in Tierrasanta, San Diego. 
The event will begin at 7 pm at the Tierrasanta Public Library,
located at 4985 La Cuenta Drive, and is open to the general
public. 
        This legislation, also known as the Back to the Moon bill, 
would authorize the U.S. government to purchase lunar science data
from private vendors. This new cost-saving approach to
exploration of the Moon would jump start the long dormant U.S.
lunar program, and provide scientists with a more complete
understanding of the potentially valuable mineral and elemental
resources on the lunar surface.
      The Lunar Resources Data Purchase Act is planned to be
introduced in the 103rd Congress, once comments on the draft
bill to be released in January are considered.
      San Diego L5, founded in 1982, promotes the development and
exploration of space through public education, communication
with other special interest groups, and political activity. San
Diego L5 played a major role in the enactment of the Launch
Services Purchase Act, a Federal law that prohibits NASA from
launching most space satellites.
      For more information, please contact Gregory Nemitz, San 
Diego L5 Publicity Coordinator, at 619/295-3690.

--- Maximus 2.01wb
From: BEAUFAIT%CEBAFVAX.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: privatly financed space colony
Date: 11 Jan 93 14:09:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C0p0uJ.65K.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Mmdf-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

Your figures seem fine but I see one problem. If you start saving at 20
you arnt ready to purchase a colony untill your 40. If it takes 10 years
from the time you start purchase untill you can expect delivery ,then the mean a
ge of the colonists will be 55 to 60. The moon may be a great place to spend
your old age and you could maybe live to be a hundred there but this isn't
proven yet. (And source of income) If you want to leverage your buy of a colony
you need a way to payback the morgage. If all your investors go to the moon
they wont have a proven source of income and all of ther planet side job
income will disipear.(accept maybe retirment benifits) And the banks at
least in the US frown on giving loans to anyone whos life expectancey is
shorter than the loan period. I hate playing the bad guy, your ideas have
merit and I will give it personal consideration, but you had beter think
of using a Japanese bank.(They are starting to give 100 year morgages to
families as aposed to individuals.) And youd better think about sending
your kids.
beaufait @cebaf2.cebaf.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: *** BUSSARD RAMSCOOP ***
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:26:42 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <C0IIG5.J1I.1@cs.cmu.edu> ganderson@nebula.decnet.lockheed.com writes:
>How can
>we talk about the performance of antimatter propulsion without knowing
>the mass fuel ratio? How much hardware does it take to contain a "tank" of
>antimatter (magnetic fields, etc.)? ...

Open question; the detailed engineering has not been done.  As usual, you
could make a wide variety of assumptions, from cautious-first-generation
to ambitious-long-term-possibilities.

>How do they contain the antimatter before injection into the collider?  If
>I remember correctly they have it going around in a racetrack in a holding
>facility, no???

That's right.  They work with antiprotons, not neutral antimatter atoms,
and they never do slow them all the way down to zero.
-- 
"God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
       -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: sci.space