HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: window's
Date: 29 Jul 92 18:56:05 GMT
Organization: Alpha Science Computer Network, Denver, Co.

In article <712233454.F00001@csource.oz.au+ John.Bennett@f301.n670.z3.fidonet.org (John Bennett) writes:
+
+ Giday All
+            
+   Can someone explain please just exactly what is meant by 'Window'.
+I know that it's a hole but that is about all I really properly 
+understand.
+            
+             ...JOHN...
+ * Origin: Tassie DataBank Line #03, D'bridge Tasmania 2800mb PEP (3:670/301)

If you mean launch window, it is an interval of time within which a space
vehicle can be launched such that certain mission restrictions will be met:
Such as:

1. Making sure if you are launching to something already in orbit will
be there went you get there.

2. Aborts (incomplete missions) can land at sites in daylight and without
the sun in your face.

3. For the Shuttle there is a maximum time the astronauts can be on their
backs.

4. There used to be a maximum time liquid fuels could remain in the vehicle.

There are many more, but I hope it gives an idea.


-- 
 __________________________________________________________________________   
|wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.com|    "Another Case of too many scientists and     |
|Bruce Watson            |     not enough hunchbacks." -- Gary Larson      |
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: ET color and micro g experiments
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:53:52 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <BrwB4z.2Cs@news.larc.nasa.gov> claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Egalon) writes:
>1. Is there any special reason why the External Tank of the Space 
>Shuttle has that color?

That's the color of the spray-on insulation on its exterior.  A few of
the early ETs were painted, but leaving the paint off saves weight.

>2. What happened with that agreement between NASA and a 
>company (I do not recall which one) to install microgravity 
>experiments in a compartment of the External Tank?

My understanding is that it's still alive but moving slowly.
-- 
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.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Double flight ?
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:51:49 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Jul22.093505.22310@newshost.anu.edu.au> smukherj@student.anu.edu.au (Sujit Mukherjee) writes:
>Are there any plans at this stage of having more than one orbiter in space 
>at one time. That is a double flight ?

No plans for it, unless perhaps they end up doing it as part of early
space-station missions where a long-stay orbiter stays connected to
the station while other missions are flown.  (It's too early to say
what, if anything, is going to happen to the station.)

>Would it be possible and/or viable for NASA to do this ?

There's no fundamental problem, although some support facilities might
have to be beefed up to handle two at once.

>If it was how would they handle the launches of the separate vehicles ?

Stack them simultaneously, roll them out to the pads, launch them.  There
are two launch pads and two fully-equipped VAB bays.  Again, various
support facilities might have to be beefed up, and you might need to hire
more technicians to handle the processing.
-- 
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.shuttle
From: caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX)
Subject: Re: Emergency Evac/Reentry Vehicle
Organization: Omen Technology INC, Portland Rain Forest
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 06:11:16 GMT

Presumably there two reasons for emergency return from the space
station - medical emergency and The Green Slime.  As for the former,
might a Mercury or Gemini capsule do?

It might be cheaper to pay the Russians to keep their station
operational and fly Freedom nearby, close enough to provide the
desired redundancy.
-- 
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX          ...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf 
Author of YMODEM, ZMODEM, Professional-YAM, ZCOMM, and DSZ
  Omen Technology Inc    "The High Reliability Software"
17505-V NW Sauvie IS RD   Portland OR 97231   503-621-3406
From: aero@titan.ecn.uoknor.edu (Aero Student Account)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Emergency Evac/Reentry Vehicle
Date: 24 Jul 92 15:43:29 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes:

>In article <1992Jul23.061116.10969@omen.UUCP> caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) writes:
>> Presumably there two reasons for emergency return from the space
>> station - medical emergency and The Green Slime.  As for the former,
>> might a Mercury or Gemini capsule do?

>You could start with the concept of an Apollo capsule. You could strip out
>the stuff required for the long duration moon flights and add back the parts
>that are missing because you don't have a service module.  Then build a
>docking adapter for Fred and the Shuttle.  And a booster to lift it into
>orbit.  This would work, but you are still involved in a major R&D project.

I'm not sure how much could be stripped out of the original CM.  What was
removed for the Skylab flights?  Plus, you're
going to need a power system (presumably fuel cells) and an engine to de-orbit.
So, we're back with some sort of SM.  As I recall, we still don't know what the
effect of cold on the heat shield would be, so we want some kind of cover too.

>If we are going to spend money, lets spend it on something that is a step
>forward rather than a step back.

I heartily agree with you.

--------
Jonathan A. Bishop
aero@neptune.ecn.uoknor.edu

"Yippee!  That may have been a small one for Neil,
 but it was a big one for me."
                            --Pete Conrad
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: tes@gothamcity.uucp (Thomas E. Smith [LORAL])
Subject: Re: Double flight ?
Organization: Software Technology Branch - NASA/Johnson Space Center
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 00:47:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.093505.22310@newshost.anu.edu.au> smukherj@student.anu.edu.
au (Sujit Mukherjee) writes:
>Are there any plans at this stage of having more than one orbiter in space 
>at one time. That is a double flight ?
 
>Would it be possible and/or viable for NASA to do this ?
 
At the present time this is not possble, because mission control is presently 
only able to handle one mission at a time. This is because there is one lan 
where incomming and out going data can be read.
 
However :) we are about to deliver a new Mission Control Center Upgrade in 
September which will allow 2 shuttle missions. But so far there are no multiple 
shuttle missions planned as far as I know.
 
                                                             Tom the Smith
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions stated here in no way reflect |
           the opinions of the             | Tom Smith                    
   Galactic Hyperspace Planning Council.   | tes@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: dennis@nebulus.ca (Dennis S. Breckenridge)
Subject: Re: Our Friends the Russians
Organization: Alchemy Mindworks, Edmonton, Alberta
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 00:32:53 GMT

3001crad@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Charles Frank Radley) writes:

>Most Shuttle flights are at 28 deg inclination and do not
>overfly Russia.
>  Might be useful for some of the 57 deg missions though.

Have you ever pondered the idea of why they launch in a counter 
orbit rotation. More time over Moscow!

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Dennis S. Breckenridge VE7TCP@VE7TCP [44.135.160.59]  dennis@nebulus.ca
Just because everything is different doesn't mean anything has changed - Oracle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John.Bennett@f301.n670.z3.fidonet.org (John Bennett)
Sender: acsnet@csource.oz.au
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: window's
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 19:49:00 +1000

 Giday All
            
   Can someone explain please just exactly what is meant by 'Window'.
I know that it's a hole but that is about all I really properly 
understand.
            
             ...JOHN...
 * Origin: Tassie DataBank Line #03, D'bridge Tasmania 2800mb PEP (3:670/301)
From: colombo@bronco.fnal.gov (Rick Colombo - Fermilab)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: What's the date on the moon?
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:37:09 GMT
Followup-To: sci.space.shuttle
Organization: Fermilab Computing Division

In article <980@vk2bea.UUCP>, michael@vk2bea.UUCP (Michael G. Katzmann) writes:
> The newspapers and broadcast media were celebrating yesterday, July
> 20th as the 23rd aniversary of the first moon walk by Armstrong and
> Aldrin of Apollo 11.
> 
> I remember the moon walk as occuring on Monday July 21st.  I was
> in Australia in 1969, and watched it on television at around 3pm
> (0200 GMT) July 21st. Since US EDT would be 4 hours behind this 
> ( 10pm July 20th ), Americans remember July 20th as the aniversary.
> 
> The television signals from the moon were first received on the earth
> by the CSIRO's radio telescope at Parks, west of Sydney (Australia), 
> therefore the moon would have been over Australia at the time.
> 
> So what is the date on the moon?  One might guess that it is the
> same as the point on the earth that it is directly above, or one
> might conceivably use GMT (UTC) as moon time but I doubt one uses
> US EDT.  Therefore please adjust your history books to read the
> first step on the moon took place JULY 21 1969.
> 


I've always wonder too, but it seems that history books (that I've seen)
avoid mentioning the date, just July, 1969.  However, the only
fair thing to do is use UTC, therefore the landing was on July 20 and
the walk on July 21 (they had a sleep period after landing, as I recall).

But then, when did WWII start, on Dec 7, 1941 or (in Japan) Dec 8, 1941?

It hardly matters, everyone will remember/celebrated the date that an
event occurred on for them.

 ___________________________________________________________________________
 *****  *   *  From the e-net desk of: Rick Colombo CD/DCD/DSG    *    *
 *      **  *  Fermi Nat'l Acc'l Lab   708-840-8225 Fermilab     * *   *
 ***    * * *  P.O. Box 500   MS 369   Feynman Computer Center  *****  *
 *      *  **  Batavia, Ill. USA 60510 Colombo@fnal.fnal.gov    *   *  *****
 *  Sure to get `Flamed' if I didn't cross all my i's and dot all my t's ;-)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Egalon)
Subject: ET color and micro g experiments
Reply-To: claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Egalon)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA USA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 13:36:34 GMT

I have two question about the External Tank of the Space Shuttle:

1. Is there any special reason why the External Tank of the Space 
Shuttle has that color?

2. What happened with that agreement between NASA and a 
company (I do not recall which one) to install microgravity 
experiments in a compartment of the External Tank?

Claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov


Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: strider@acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore)
Subject: Re: FTP
Organization: The Voice of Fate
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 12:31:43 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.045340.14476@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) writes:
>any shuttle ftp sites?
>--
	Yes there are, but downloading is a pain.  I tried once and my
speakeron my modem wasn't large enough and when I downloaded the shuttle
wing it tore right through the speaker.  I thought I was fine until I
ftp'd a SRB and I accidently picked a lit one.  Well, we needed a new
computing center anyway.

:-)


>==============================  *  Marshal Perlman               * DO
>=-> mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu <-=  *  Huntington Beach, California  * NOT
>==============================  *  (Surf City, U.S.A)            * EAT
>"It's the greenhouse effect, officer. That's why I am not wearing pants."


-- 
<------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Greg d. Moore                  |  Strider@acm.rpi.edu
Green Mountain Software        |  "All that is gold does not glitter."  
Carpe Diem                     | 
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: michalj@fuw.edu.pl (Michal Jankowski)
Subject: Re: What's the date on the moon?
Organization: Warsaw University Physics Dept.
	<2A6FC77D.15186@noiro.acs.uci.edu> <21039@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 11:15:37 GMT

>>>>> On 30 Jul 92 01:29:42 GMT, slb@slced1.nswses.navy.mil (Shari L Brooks) said:

Shari> WWII started when Nazi Germany ignored Allied warnings and invaded Poland.
Shari> 30 September, 1939. 

Make that '1 September, 1939'.
  
   Michal

PS. What is this doing in sci.space.shuttle?

Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: smukherj@student.anu.edu.au (Sujit Mukherjee)
Subject: Double flight ?
Organization: ANU
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 09:35:05 GMT

Are there any plans at this stage of having more than one orbiter in space 
at one time. That is a double flight ?

Would it be possible and/or viable for NASA to do this ?
If it was how would they handle the launches of the separate vehicles ?

Sujit Mukherjee.
smukherj@student.anu.edu.au
From: robertj@mars (Robert Jongbloed)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Emergency Evac/Reentry Vehicle
Date: 29 Jul 92 03:40:11 GMT
Organization: Uni of Newcastle, Australia

aero@titan.ecn.uoknor.edu (Aero Student Account) writes:

>john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes:

>>In article <1992Jul23.061116.10969@omen.UUCP> caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) writes:
>>> Presumably there two reasons for emergency return from the space
>>> station - medical emergency and The Green Slime.  As for the former,
>>> might a Mercury or Gemini capsule do?
>>You could start with the concept of an Apollo capsule. You could strip out
>>the stuff required for the long duration moon flights and add back the parts
>>that are missing because you don't have a service module.  Then build a
>>docking adapter for Fred and the Shuttle.  And a booster to lift it into
>>orbit.  This would work, but you are still involved in a major R&D project.
>>If we are going to spend money, lets spend it on something that is a step
>>forward rather than a step back.
>I heartily agree with you.


In the August Spaceflight magazine (from the British Interplanetary Society)
there is an articale about the HL-20, a lifting body "micro-shuttle". Its
based at Langley and there is a full scale mock up already built. Lockheed
have a contract to study the concept and it is being considered for the ACRV
role. The drawing show pilot/copilot and 8 passengers.

Both the Russians and Japanese have had similar concepts. The Russians even
launched a prototype which the Royal Australian Air Force managed to
photograph during its recovery.

This seems like a reasonable idea as it should reuse technology from the
shuttle (thermal protection, orbital manouvering etc) without some of
the nasty side (SRBs, SSMEs etc).


--
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Robert Jongbloed              | University, where the real world is something
 robertj@mars.newcastle.edu.au | to be understood but not be a part of. 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: noyes@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov (tom noyes 283-4177)
Subject: Re: Double flight ?
Organization: nasa-jsc
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 19:27:33 GMT

No there are no plans for a double flight.

There are several reasons why. Maybe someone else can tell your more
this is not in my current job.

1) Stresses training facility usage (SMS, WETF ...)
2) Stresses Cape prelaunch/launch equipment usage (only one launch control)
3) Stresses Mission support capabilbities (mission control, MER, payload ops)

There is no permanent constraint that would prohibit the operation
of a dual mission, but I doubt if the American taxpayer would like
to increase the size of the work force necessary to support a double
mission. You see there are just enough mission controllers to work around
the clock for a given mission (plus a few extra), and there needs to
be a dedicated mission control room for each flight (there are two
mission control rooms at JSC). So we would have to qualify more people
to act as mission controllers (lots of training, and lots of $). I would
imagine that there are similar work force shortage problems that
would arise at other facilities due to a dual launch.

Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: What's the date on the moon?
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:51:35 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <2A6FC77D.15186@noiro.acs.uci.edu> dkrause@noiro.acs.uci.edu (Doug Krause) writes:
>#But then, when did WWII start, on Dec 7, 1941 or (in Japan) Dec 8, 1941?
>
>Neither of those two dates.

Indeed, depending on how you define WWII, dates as early as 1933 can be
justified.  (That was when Japan invaded China... which is not just a
side issue, because it was the ultimate cause of Pearl Harbor.  Japan
attacked because of the US/UK/Dutch oil embargo, which was imposed due
to Japan's unwillingness to halt its ongoing conquest of China.)
-- 
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.shuttle
From: oliver@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: STS-50 Launch Date?
Organization: NASA Johnson Space Center
Distribution: usa
Date: 31 Jul 92 13:54:02 -0600

In article <1992Jul31.143405.479@news.acns.nwu.edu>, aaronson@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (David Aaronson) writes:
> 
> Can anyone give me the exact date that Columbia was launched
> last month?
> 
> 		Thanks in advance
> 			David

The launch was on June 25, 1992 at 16:12:22.997 GMT.

-- 

Pat Oliver -  	Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company at NASA JSC
		OLIVER@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
		All standard disclamers apply.
From: bmears@deltahp.jsc.nasa.gov (Brad Mears)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: shuttle computer FAQ
Date: 29 Jul 1992 20:02:29 GMT
Reply-To: bmears@deltahp.jsc.nasa.gov
Organization: Barrios Technology @ NASA/JSC; Houston

In article <1559@alderan.sdata.de>, chris@alderan.sdata.de (Christoph Splittgerber) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul10.153815.17618@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> bmears@deltahp.jsc.nasa.gov (That's me!) writes:
|> 
|> >   Unfortunately, there is a small (very small) chance that the transition
|> >   from PASS to BFS will not succeed.  That is, the PASS machines will be
|> >   disabled AND the BFS machine will be disabled.  If this happens, the
|> >   vehicle will be uncontrolled and uncontrollable.  The odds of recovering
|> 
|> And what could be the reason for this *not very nice* behavior ?
|> I mean it sounds strage to me that they accept such a behavior.
|> 
|>     Just would like to know,
|>                                    Chris

First, a little background.  The problem I described was certainly not an 
intentional feature of the shuttle's hardware.  It was an unexpected, 
anomolous event that had been observed on multiple occaisions in the Shuttle
Avionics Integration Laboratory.  There was an ongoing effort to determine
where the exact cause of the failure lay.  Due to the high fidelity of the 
SAIL simulator, the safe bet was to assume the same failure could occur in 
the actual vehicle.

Since I had been away from that environment for a while, I figured I should
do some further research on this topic before trying to answer your question.
As it turns out, my FAQ is already outdated.  The problem was solved and is
no longer an issue.  It turned out to be a slight difference between the
orbiters and hardware installed in the SAIL.  There were a set of switches
that operated a little differently than the ones on the vehicle.  This
difference introduced some bizarre behaviour in the simulator, but never
posed a threat to a real flight.  This was not know at the time, however.
Since SAIL is the final checkout of the software and hardware integration,
they HAD to assume that the same fault could occur in-flight.

I hope I've reassured you that NASA did not just "accept such a behavior".
It was treated as a serious problem and eventually resolved.  I will update
my FAQ to delete the now-erroneous information.

-- 
Brad Mears
bmears@deltahp.jsc.nasa.gov                      No disclaimer, no quote
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: aero@europa.ecn.uoknor.edu (Aero Student Account)
Subject: Re: Emergency Evac/Reentry Vehicle
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 16:05:19 GMT

Pauli.Ramo@hut.fi (no, I don't repeat it!) writes:

>Maybe an Apollo capsule could be launched as a secondary payload in some
>shuttle flight having some extra payload capacity? Would it fit into the
>payload bay?

Yes, it will.  I remember watching the pre-launch STS-1 coverage.  Someone
(I think Gene Cernan; he did all of the early launches for ABC) had a model
of the orbiter and a model CSM to the same scale.  He talked about how the
cargo bay was big enough to hold the whole CSM.

--------
Jonathan A. Bishop
aero@neptune.ecn.uoknor.edu

"Yippee!  That may have been a small one for Neil,
 but it was a big one for me."
                            --Pete Conrad
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: jcs@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (John "C". Sucilla)
Subject: Re: What's the date on the moon?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 03:46:36 GMT

colombo@bronco.fnal.gov (Rick Colombo - Fermilab) writes:
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> *****  *   *  From the e-net desk of: Rick Colombo CD/DCD/DSG    *    *
> *      **  *  Fermi Nat'l Acc'l Lab   708-840-8225 Fermilab     * *   *
> ***    * * *  P.O. Box 500   MS 369   Feynman Computer Center  *****  *
> *      *  **  Batavia, Ill. USA 60510 Colombo@fnal.fnal.gov    *   *  *****
> *  Sure to get `Flamed' if I didn't cross all my i's and dot all my t's ;-)

Sorry for the interruption here, but I just GOTTA know....

If Fermi's acronym is FNAL, does this mean that Argonne's is ANAL?

-- 
John C. Sucilla, AT$T Bell Labs Naperville IL., jcs@ixstar.ih.att.com

"Tell me I'm a sinner I got news for you.  I spoke to God this morning 
and he dont like you."   --  Ozzy
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: What's the date on the moon?
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:27:46 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.113709.1@bronco.fnal.gov> colombo@bronco.fnal.gov (Rick Colombo - Fermilab) writes:

>fair thing to do is use UTC, therefore the landing was on July 20 and
>the walk on July 21 (they had a sleep period after landing, as I recall).

A sleep period was scheduled but they didn't take it and went out on
the EVA early. I wonder what idiot put a sleep period at that place in
the schedule. How could they expect anybody to sleep after that?

  Allen
-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they     |
|  aws@iti.org     |  put a man on the Moon?"                               |
+----------------------274 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+