HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rfeadf@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Andrew Finegan)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Australian space industries....
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:03:19 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.

10706747@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au (ANDREW BENNETT) writes:

>Hi everyone,

>I was wondering if anyone knew of any Australian space societies, companies,
>organisations etc that I could write to ( e-mail(?) ) and/or join.

>I am particularly interested in any that are around the Melbourne area.

Try:

Space Association of Australia
PO Box 351
Mulgrave North
Victoria	3170
Australia

also there is:

Melbourne Space Foundation (or something similar)
I don't have the address, but it may be contactable through:
Department of Aero-space Engineering, RMIT.

and finally a related group is (for remote sensing):

Victorian Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
GPO Box 1020H
Melbourne
Victoria	3001

cheers

ANDREW FINEGAN   (Standard Disclaimers)     | RMIT Centre for Remote Sensing
Email : rfeadf@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au         | PO Box 12182, A'Beckett Street
Phone : (03) 6603274   Fax : (03) 6632517   | Melbourne Australia 3000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"... I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by
reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion
of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency and demoralization."
					                    Petronius, AD 60
From: U57053@uicvm.uic.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Eclipse '92-Who saw it?
Date: 4 Sep 92 15:26:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: uicvm.92248.102642U57053
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago


 Is there anyone out there who went to see the solar eclipse of June '92? I am
looking primarily for a .GIF of it, but any description would be helpful.
                                       Thank You,
                                           Dan Kwiatkowski
                                           u57053@uicvm.cc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov
Subject: Re: Saturn class (Was: SPS feasibility and other space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:23:00 GMT

In article <BtGL92.DB2@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes...
>In article <19AUG199220200286@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?
>>
>>... Look at the growth in size of geosync communications satellites.
>>Ariannispace has and that is the basline for the growth into the Arianne 5...
>  
>Apart from them, there is *no* actually-rolling project, anywhere, that
>has a firm need for more than incremental improvements to existing boosters.
>If there were, there would be commercial interest.  There have been several
>commercial heavylift projects that needed only some committed customers to
>justify proceeding with privately-funded development.  None have appeared.
>-- 
Henry read the entire thread of what I posted. I agree with you on this subject.
My thesis on this is that if you start with a single engine (baby Saturn) with
one F1A engine, one or two STME's you get better payload to orbit by over 
25% at the same or lower cost because the cost of the labor to put all of those
strap ons on and the software developemnt and verification that it takes begins
to become a negative factor in the cost cycle of the existing boosters.  The 
labor and engineering costs of a single F1A first stage is much lower than for 
a HLV Delta or Atlas. AND you design it to take a second engine and stretch 
tank and you just bought yourself the next Heavy step up with only an increment
al cost.

We agree on this except that I see the baby Saturn as the beginning of a new
class of incremental growth that will eventually drive down the cost of the
true HLV when the need for it becomes reality.  You simply cannot do this 
with Allan's HLV Delta/Atlas idea.  They are spending the money anyway why not
do it in a fashion that plans for the future without driving the costs up today.
Motorola did that in 1979 with the 68000 and it worked pretty good for them.

Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: aweder@iiic.ethz.ch (Andreas Michael Weder)
Subject: Re: Is NASA really planning to Terraform Mars?
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
Distribution: sci
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:38:43 GMT


Hi Barry,

two days ago I read an article on the topic of Mars in the german
magazine 'GEO'; they talked about some of the planned missions to
our neighbour planet and mentioned that there were still some
dreamers at NASA that actually intended to transform Mars.

I'd say, forget about that. Even a manned mission to Mars would cost
*at least* 500 billion dollars (according to a NASA researcher).
Terraforming is a nice SF idea and sounds like an easy thing to
do, but IMHO we don't know enough about the involved systems
to even think about changing a planet. It's stupid, will cost
too much (NASA will not be given the money for 'Big Tickets' in the
next years) and belongs to SF.
From: nicho@VNET.IBM.COM
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Private space ventures
Date: 25 Aug 92 14:03:14 GMT
Reply-To: nicho@vnet.ibm.com

In <1992Aug25.035359.23129@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Frederick A. Ringwald writes:
>(Also, it bothers me to hear arguments about how "the Third World
>doesn't bother me at all, they're overpopulated anyway." This strikes
>most people as very callous.
   I'll pick this up, since it was my comment you are objecting to.
Firstly, I was responding to the poster who whinged about spending
money on a space program instead of feeding the starving millions.
Most moderately sentient beings will recognise this as a piece of
fin de siecle western angst. My response was designed deliberately to
be excessively callous, in an attempt to highlight the stupidity of
the original append.
>You wouldnUt think this if you were in this situation:
  Perhaps not, however I would hope that were I in such an unfortunate
situation, I would have sufficient vision to recognise that the best
way out for all, was wealth creation (access to extra resource in space)
rather than redistribution.
>Space should be helpful, not hurtful, and it certainly can be helpful,
>like many other technologies.)
  Space can indeed be helpful, however if we have too many fools
screaming about it being a waste of resource, we will never have the
chance to prove it.
  As an aside, I will point out that most of those starving in Africa
are doing so because their family and countrymen think it more
important to kill each other than feed each other. Against a climate
such as this, it is difficult to see how diverting finance from space
into Africa is going to be of any lasting benefit.

 -----------------------------------------------------------------
               ** 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
From: gwh@soda.berkeley.edu (George William Herbert)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: With telepresence, who needs people in Earth orbit?
Date: 24 Aug 1992 02:26:25 GMT
Organization: Dis-
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
Summary: Bad Nick, no donut.

szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:
>gwh@soda.berkeley.edu (George William Herbert) writes:
>>We can't get away (now) with just using robots in space.  
>
>Funny.  All commercial space projects, the vast majority of military
>space projects, and all exploration projects that have gone farther than
>Moon, have gotten away with using fully automated spacecraft.

Ahem, Nick.  Bad boy; you deleted the sections describing the
things in particular that need some attention (most biology,
some materials science, permanent presence (stations etc) maintenance)
and tood my conclusion out of context.  You know better 8-)

About (18 months ago?) I proposed and Nick championed the concept of
a "LabRatSat", an unmanned, robotically tended bioresearch satellite.
Having talked to some space robotics people now, I have a bad feeling
that it might be more difficult that I thought to deal with the
lab animals on board; I'm not sure it's feasible.  (It is worth looking
in to.  I'd hate to have to justify the experiments in acceptable delay
on telehandling lab animals though 8-( ugh).

There's only so much you can do with fixed and irrepairable systems.
If you want to do something else, you have to either put a robot able
to move things, operate things, and fix things up there with it, or
put a person there, or both.  Both are preferable if you can afford them,
from the capability standpoint.

I am by no means suggesting putting people on every exploration vehicle
or communications satellite.  Some things need little maintenance and have
no mobile/dexterity operations needs (they don't need robots either).
Unless you want to put an Energizer Battery Bunny on the next
Jupiter mission, for good luck...


   -george william herbert
   gwh@soda.berkeley.edu  gwh@lurnix.com 


Newsgroups: sci.space
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: With telepresence, who needs people in Earth orbit?
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 12:34:32 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.084645.28803@mullet.gu.uwa.edu.au> phew@mullet.gu.uwa.edu.au (Phew) writes:

>Depending solely on telepresence in space would limit human intervention to
>any reasonable "real time" sense to about the Moon or so...

Using only telepresence is limited not only to distance but also to scale.
The available bandwidth is limited and telepresence in any realistic sense
will use up a lot of it.

    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?"                               |
+----------------------238 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: smd@fct.unl.pt (Sergio Marco Duarte)
Subject: Re: Is NASA really planning to Terraform Mars?
Organization: Universidade Nova de Lisboa -- Lisbon, Portugal
Distribution: sci
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:11:35 GMT


barry@chezmoto.ai.mit.edu (Barry Kort) writes:

>   A colleague of mine, who claims to be knowledgeable in such matters
>   tells me:

>	   A fairly large team <at NASA>, is planning the terraforming
>	   of Mars, which involves destroying the planet as we know it.
>	   Mars will be rasied 20 degrees C.  And with minimal study of
>	   that planet it becomes clear what chain of events will occur.
>	   After this chain Mars will be 'polluted' with earth-based
>	   micro-organisms and rugged plant life.
>
>   Can anyone confirm, deny, or refute the above, or otherwise
>   elaborate on NASA's plans with respect to Mars?


 We all suspected NASA was a bit senile, 
 now we have the confirmation!

--
 Sergio Duarte  *** smd@fct.unl.pt *** FCT/UNL *** PORTUGAL
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: fils@iastate.edu (Douglas R Fils)
Subject: 2 stage to orbit question
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 04:22:25 GMT

sci.space
	The August 24th, 1992 issue of Aviation Week (page 23) has
an article on an XB-70 style aircraft.  Part of the speculation 
about this aircraft concerns its possible use as the first stage
of a two stage to orbit craft. 

	If a Pegasus (sp) style rocket could be released from 100,000 feet
at Mach 6-8, what could one expect as a payload to LEO (say 200 Km).

just curious
Doug
fils@iastate.edu

--
From: katzr@ucs.orst.edu (Russell Katz)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Inflatable Space Stations - Why Not ?
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:26:34 GMT
Organization: University Computing Services - OSU

This is a bit related to the topic...I think.

I have read in several sf stories about using the shuttle main tanks as 
modules for space habitats...just having the shuttle carry the tank with it
into orbit.  Some authors stated that it would not take any extra fuel(??)
to do so.

Any of you experts out there have an answer as to why NASA doesn't use the
tanks as at least a temporary habitation?

*************************************************************************
* The Crystal Wind is the Storm, * Daniel K. Moran: * Russell Katz      *
* and The Storm is Data,         *  "Emerald Eyes"  * katzr@ucs.orst.edu* 
* and the Data is Life.          *       and        *                   *
* -The Player's Litany           *  "The Long Run"  *                   * 
*************************************************************************
From: john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: soviet rovers on mars
Date: 3 Sep 92 03:10:00 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: Newave Communications, Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN

In article <1992Sep2.900.2102@ALMAC> bill.edwards@almac.co.uk writes:
> The Soviets maintained for many years that Gagarin did not eject -
> something to do do with claiming the record - but later, it is reported,
> admitted he did.

I read something about this in one of the NASM exhibits.  The flight did
not count as a record unless you land with your craft.  I guess I personally
do not whether Gagarin ejected or not--it was still a very impressive feat
that the Soviets pulled off.

I have also heard a rumor that Gagarin's flight did not complete an entire
orbit, and the Soviets supposedly airlifted his capsule a few hundred miles
to the east to make it appear that they completed a full orbit.  Has anyone
else heard this?

-john-

-- 
==============================================================================
John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: HST Update - 08/31/92
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  HST
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 06:00:26 GMT

Forwarded from the SpaceLink BBS

                       HUBBLE STATUS REPORT
                         August 31, 1992

HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE (HST):  HST operations have returned to
normal following the recent safehold entry and recovery. Starting
on July 30, a chain of events caused HST first to enter an
inertial hold safemode followed by a hardware sunpoint safemode.
The first was caused by an incorrect ephemeris table that was
loaded into the spacecraft computer, and the latter by a problem
with an onboard computer software macro. Science observations
that were scheduled for execution during the safemode events are
being rescheduled. HST launched April 24, 1990 aboard the Space
Shuttle Discovery.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Anything is impossible if
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you don't attempt it.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 

Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee)
Subject: Shuttle Status for 09/01/92 (Forwarded)
Apparently-To: sci-space-news@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 19:55:55 GMT

           KSC SPACE SHUTTLE STATUS - TUESDAY, SEPT. 1, 1992 -- 10:00 A.M.

           --------------------------------------------------------------
                STS-47/SPACELAB J --  ENDEAVOUR (OV 105) -- PAD 39-B

          WORK IN PROGRESS:
          *  Pad cleared for the loading of hypergolic fuels on board the
             orbiter (pad will remain closed through tomorrow afternoon)
          *  Flight Readiness Review
          *  Launch countdown preparations

          WORK COMPLETED:
          *  Main engine flight readiness test
          *  Helium signature test
          *  Inertial Measurement Unit calibrations
          *  Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test (TCDT)

          WORK SCHEDULED:
          *  Hypergolic fuel pressurization
          *  Orbiter aft closeouts
          *  Further troubleshooting of the 2-inch gaseous oxygen line
             quick disconnect valve near the main propulsion system's 17-
             inch liquid oxygen umbilical


                   STS-52/LAGEOS - COLUMBIA (OV 102) -- OPF BAY 1

          WORK IN PROGRESS:
          *  Forward Reaction Control System electrical mates and checks
          *  Orbiter-payload interface verification tests
          *  Ammonia boiler servicing

          WORK COMPLETED:
          *  Installation of Auxiliary Power Units
          *  Installation of fuel cells storage tank set number 5
          *  Crew Equipment Interface Test
          *  Payload pre-mate operations
          *  Payload bay door cycles

          WORK SCHEDULED:
          *  Orbital Maneuvering System functional tests
          *  Auxiliary Power Units hook-ups
          *  External tank mate with solid rocket boosters (on hold pending
             determination of VAB 250 ton crane status)


                   STS-53/DOD  -  DISCOVERY (0V 103) -- OPF Bay 3

          WORK IN PROGRESS:
          *  Deservicing freon coolant loop #1
          *  Hydraulic line fill and bleed operations

          WORK COMPLETED:
          *  Crew module leak checks
          *  Crew Equipment Interface Test
          *  Raise main landing gear for tile work


               MODIFICATIONS PERIOD --  ATLANTIS (OV 104) -- OPF BAY 2

          WORK IN PROGRESS:
          *  Main propulsion system leak checks
          *  Preparations for removing the Power Reactant and Storage
             Distribution system tank sets numbers 3 and 4
          *  Deservice payload bay active cooling system
          *  Removal of robot arm from payload bay

          WORK COMPLETED:
          *  Moved to Hypergolic Maintenance Facility the Forward Reaction
             Control System

          WORK SCHEDULED:
          *  Remove the orbiter's three main engines (begin tonight)
          *  Remove Power Reactant and Storage Distribution system tanks
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: UARS Update - 08/31/92
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  UARS
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 06:02:32 GMT

Forwarded from the SpaceLink BBS

                       UARS STATUS REPORT
                        August 31, 1992

UPPER ATMOSPHERE RESEARCH SATELLITE (UARS): Attempts to restart
the Improved Stratospheric and Mesospheric Sounder (ISAMS)
chopper wheel motor have not been successful.  The motor stopped
working on July 29. The chopper wheel breaks up or "chops" the
incoming light beam for analysis. Automated attempts to restart
the chopper motor continue. ISAMS measures ozone, nitrogen
compounds and other gasses important in ozone depletion. Most of
these compounds are measured by other UARS instruments, so the
loss of ISAMS has minimal impact on the UARS science mission at
this time.  UARS launched September 12, 1991 from the Space
Shuttle Discovery.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Anything is impossible if
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you don't attempt it.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 

Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
Subject: Magellan Update - 08/25/92
Keywords: Magellan, JPL
Date: 26 Aug 92 07:02:32 GMT
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

Forwarded from the Magellan Project

                       MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT
                          August 25, 1992

1.  Magellan continues to operate normally, performing only
    starcals (star calibrations) and desats (desaturation of
    the reaction wheels).  The present command sequence includes
    radar mapping commands, but the radar system remains in
    standby mode.

2.  The principal activity for this week is to gradually warm
    the transmitter to a stable operating mode.  The sequence
    includes two "heat" periods in each orbit when the
    spacecraft is placed in an attitude to warm portions of
    the spacecraft.

3.  The radar will be turned "on" tomorrow and a swap  from
    Transmitter A to B on Thursday.  Then controllers will
    closely monitor the signal spur as the transmitter
    temperature rises into the mid-50's.  If all goes well,
    Magellan will resume mapping during the M2247 sequence
    which begins September 3rd.

4.  Yesterday the Magellan Project hosted 18 students and 4
    teachers of the "Space Ship Dunbar" from Dunbar High
    School in Washington, D.C.  After a status update from
    Doug Griffith, Project Manager, the group participated in
    a Venus geology exercise led by Jeff Plaut.  After their
    visit at JPL the group had a barbeque and swim party at
    Phil Allin's, with the food donated by various Magellan
    team members.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Optimists live longer
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | than pessimists.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Magellan Update - 08/31/92
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  Magellan, JPL
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 04:29:25 GMT

Forwarded from the Magellan Project

                       MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT
                         August 31, 1992

1.  Magellan continues to operate normally, performing radar
    mapping maneuvers and routine starcals (star calibrations)
    and desats (desaturation of the reaction wheels).

2.  Tests over the weekend indicate that a satisfactory
    operating mode for returning radar mapping data has been
    found with Transmitter B ranging between 56.8 and 60
    degrees C.

3.  On Friday afternoon controllers discovered that the signal
    strength from Magellan was in the range of -130 dn for 12
    minutes at the beginning of the playback period following
    the heat maneuver.  As the temperature dropped below 57
    degrees C the AGC (Automatic Gain Control) also dropped.

4.  Over the weekend controllers continued to monitor the AGC
    and temperatures as the spacecraft continued its expected
    temperature rise.  The length of the periods of
    satisfactory signal strength increased.  Controllers
    turned on the 360 kHz subcarrier and obtained some high
    rate data from 70 meter tracking passes.

5.  The signal-to-noise ratios are presently varying from -2
    to 0 dB at the 34 meter HEF (High Efficiency) stations,
    and +2-3 at the 70 meter stations.

6.  The present plan is to resume radar mapping on Thursday
    the provide coverage of the area southwest of Alpha Regio
    which includes the mountains Ushas, Hathor and Innini
    Mons.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Optimists live longer
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | than pessimists.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 

Newsgroups: sci.space.news