HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov (Peter Yee)
Subject: Shuttle Status for 11/04/92 (Forwarded)
Apparently-To: sci-space-news@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Followup-To: sci.space
Originator: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov (Peter Yee)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 22:41:08 GMT

                                SPACE SHUTTLE STATUS REPORT
                                Wednesday, November 4, 1992


          George Diller
          Kennedy Space Center
          407/867-2468


          Vehicle: OV-103/Orbiter Discovery
          Location: Vehicle Assembly Building (High Bay 3)
          Mission: STS-53/DoD
          Launch timeframe: December, wk 1
          Mission duration: 7 days
          Landing Site: KSC


          IN WORK TODAY:

          - remove lifting sling
          - establish electrical connections between Discovery and stack
          - preparations for Shuttle Interface Test (SIT)


          WORK SCHEDULED:

          - Shuttle Interface Test (mechanical) on Thursday
          - Shuttle Interface Test (electrical) on Friday
          - remove access platforms, position crawler transporter Saturday
          - rollout to Pad 39-A on Sunday Nov. 8 at 12:01 a.m.
          - countdown dress rehearsal (TCDT) Nov. 12-13


          WORK COMPLETED:

          - hard mating to external tank/solid rocket booster stack
          - rollover to the VAB transfer aisle (8:15 a.m. Tuesday)
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov (Peter Yee)
Subject: Mission Control Status Report for 10/30/92 [#23, 1700 CST] (Forwarded)
Apparently-To: sci-space-news@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Followup-To: sci.space
Originator: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov (Peter Yee)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 07:12:00 GMT

MISSION CONTROL CENTER
STS-52 Status Report #23

Friday, October 30, 1992, 5 p.m. CST
 
 
Payload Specialist Steve MacLean successfully brought back on line this
afternoon the computer used for the Sun Photospectrometer Earth
Atmosphere Measurement (SPEAM) experiment.  Investigators will use the
data gathered with the SPEAM's two measuring instruments to learn more
about the part of the upper atmosphere containing most of Earth's
protective ozone layer. The computer screen has been blank for the last
two working days. Experiment engineers developed procedures to restore
the computer to working condition. SPEAM observations will be included
in Saturday's work schedule.

Two about one-and-half minute long engine firings by Columbia were
performed flawlessly this morning placing the shuttle in a 113 by 114
nautical mile orbit. The lower orbit optimizes landing opportunities
and experiments that are investigating the various effects of atomic
oxygen on orbiting spacecraft.

At Columbia's lowered orbit of 114 by 113 nautical miles, MacLean
carried out a series of photographic observations for the Orbiter Glow
experiment. One series of observations had the Canadian Tracking
Assembly, held on the Canadarm, positioned in front of the leading edge
of Columbia's left payload bay door, adjacent to the crew hatch. This
study explores the glow around the Shuttle's surfaces facing the
direction of travel as observed in numerous photographs taken by
astronauts. The bright areas, concentrated around the Shuttle's tail
section, are thought to be caused by the impact of high-velocity atoms
and the effect of the Orbiter's surface temperature.

At about 2:30 p.m. CST today, Lacy Veach moved the Canadarm into the
exposure position for the Materials Exposure in Low Earth Orbit
experiment.  The arm will remain parked in the extended position during
the crew's sleep period. This is the third overnight exposure session
for the witness plates affixed to the robot arm. Over 350 materials
samples are mounted on the witness plates. Researchers will analyze the
samples' reactions to interaction with atomic oxygen in the low Earth
orbit environment to develop new coatings for future spacecraft
exteriors.

The STS-52 crew went to sleep at 4:24 p.m. CST and will awaken at 12:24
a.m. CST on Saturday to begin their last full working day in space.
Columbia has no mechanical problems of any concern, and is circling
Earth 88 minutes.
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: STS-52 Postflight Press Conference Set for Nov. 12
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 04:37:03 GMT

Mark Hess
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                   November 9, 1992
(Phone:  202/453-8536)

Barbara Schwartz
Johnson Space Center, Houston
(Phone:  713/483-5111)


EDITORS NOTE:  N92-96

STS-52 CREW POSTFLIGHT PRESS CONFERENCE SET FOR NOV.12

	The STS-52 crew postflight press conference will be held Thursday,
Nov. 12, at 10 a.m. EST, at the Johnson Space Center, Houston, in Building
2, Room 135.

	The crew members will narrate film highlights of their mission to
deploy the LAGEOS-2 satellite and to perform numerous scientific
experiments.  Canadian payload specialist Steven G. MacLean will talk about
the Canadian Experiment-2, and the astronauts will discuss the United
States Microgravity Payload-1.

	The briefings will be carried on NASA Select television with two-way
audio for questions from NASA Headquarters and other centers.  NASA
Select programming is carried on SATCOM F2R, transponder 13, located at
72 degrees west longitude.
-end-
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Give people a second 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | chance, but not a third. 
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 

Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov (Peter Yee)
Subject: Mission Control Status Report for 10/30/92 [#21, 0600 CST] (Forwarded)
Apparently-To: sci-space-news@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Followup-To: sci.space
Originator: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov (Peter Yee)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 07:10:36 GMT

MISSION CONTROL CENTER
STS-52 Status Report #21
 
Friday, October 30, 1992, 6 a.m. CST
 
 
Columbia's STS-52 crew rocked out of bed this morning to "Bang the
Drum" by Todd Rundgren, played in honor of Max Q drummer and Mission
Commander Jim Wetherbee.

Crew members will have another full day in space as STS-52 begins
Flight Day Nine.  Payload Specialist Steve MacLean and Mission
Specialists Lacy Veach and Tammy Jernigan will continue working with
the Space Vision System, a new kind of machine vision that uses the
science of photogrammetry for faster and safer robot arm applications.
Today's tests will move the Canadian Target Assembly in a triangular
pattern to help investigators determine how well the system can enable
operators to manipulate large and awkward payloads.  The second task
will test the SVS as an aid to close range proximity operations such as
final stage of rendezvous and capture of a free flying satellite.

Columbia also is scheduled to perform two burns of the Orbital
Maneuvering System engines to lower its orbit to about 114 n.m. The
lower altitude will optimize landing lighting conditions and will
maximize payload activities with the Orbiter Glow experiment.

Columbia is performing without major system anomalies resulting in
another quiet shift for the Planning Team overnight.

Columbia is currently in a 158 x 152 n.m. orbit.
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Mars Observer Update - 11/06/92
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  Mars Observer, JPL
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 12:03:11 GMT

Forwarded from:
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011

                  MARS OBSERVER MISSION STATUS
                        November 6, 1992

     The Mars Observer spacecraft team reports that all
spacecraft subsystems continue to perform well.  Instrument
payload and payload data checkouts are continuing as planned.

     The instrument calibration flight sequence currently under
way will continue through Nov. 17, 1992.  The Magnetometer and
Gamma Ray Spectrometer instrument teams are receiving early
cruise calibration data.  The Mars Observer Camera "bakeout" to
prepare the camera for operation will continue through Dec. 26,
1992.  New spacecraft activities are expected to be minimal over
the next several days.

     Today the spacecraft is about 12 million kilometers (7.5
million miles) from Earth, traveling at a speed of about 11,800
kilometers per hour (7,500 miles per hour) relative to Earth. 
The spacecraft is traveling at a heliocentric velocity of about
111,000 kilometers per hour (72,000 miles per hour).

                              #####
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Give people a second 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | chance, but not a third. 
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 

Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: jenkins@fritz (Steve Jenkins)
Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory (NASA)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 00:51:51 GMT

Sigh.  More myths about oxygen.  Normal oxygen partial pressure is
about 150 mmHg (3 psi).  A pure O2 atmosphere at 150 mmHg total
pressure is no better or worse, physiologically speaking, than air at
sea level.  Nor is it more of a fire hazard.  Oxidation proceeds at
a rate proportional to the partial pressure.

Oxygen, like many gases, has narcotic effects at very high pressures,
such as in deep-sea diving.  It can cause blindness in newborns
(retrolental fibroplasia) at 1 atm.  Otherwise, it's safe to breathe
pure O2 at 1 atm, and patients in cardiac care units often do so for
days and longer.  I've done it many times, and it has absolutely no
noticeable effects.

-- 
Steve Jenkins      			jenkins@devvax.jpl.nasa.gov
Caltech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory	(818) 306-6438
Xref: sparky sci.space:15434 alt.conspiracy:11951
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: NASA Coverup
Keywords: Gravity Neutral point falsified
Date: 6 Nov 92 22:57:55 GMT
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <4590@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes:
[
[   I'm not trying to suggest that we didn't land on (and  return  from)  the
[   moon. What I doubt is that we could have done it all with rockets.

Do you know some B.A. in Physics and Astronomy named Robert McElwaine?
Why couldn't rockets be used? The gravity you claim is still less than
one gee and there is no atmosphere to claw through on the way up.

[
[ >  Also  remember  that the Astronauts suits and baggage were set up for 1/6
[ >  g and not .6 gee.
[
[   So  we  made  them extra heavy so the astronauts couldn't jump too high ,
[   or wander off too far, right ? (see my most recent post.)

The suits (as noted in an earlier post by someone else) were heavy because of
the material and equipment required for them. They might have been able to 
make suits that were lighter but that would have required removing a bit of
safety margin. Say, less life support maybe? How about a slightly thinner suit?

[  > If any of you out there know Buzz Aldrin, there is no way he  would  keep
[  > something like this covered up.
[
[   Probably not , sorry , gee, I guess you're right . Do you think there's a
[   chance I might get to talk with your good buddy Buzz? Over the ol' modem?
[   Us investigative types just like to get told off by those in  a  position
[   to know , y'know ?

I thought you said everyone "in the know" was a conspirator. Or words to that
effect.

[
[  >So there snarfy.
[
[   Yeah , don't rub it in O.K.?  I'm very sensitive.
[
[   Now  that  you  mention Buzz Aldrin, didn't I read somewhere that he went
[   through severe depression and "therapy" after  his  one  moon  excursion?
[   What  was  this all about?  Was he confused or upset about anything after
[   this experience?

I think he was treated a few years after his lunar mission. Not immediately
after it.

I think he was depressed because we went to the Moon six times and then stopped
completely and fiddled around. Still doing it too. I know the idea depresses
me. 

[
[   snarfy


-- 
Patrick Chester            |----------------------------------------------------
wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu |"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to keep
Politically Incorrect      |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein
Future Lunar Colonist      |"The meek shall inherit the Earth. The rest of us
#^%$!! Militarist          |  are going to the stars." Anonymous
(Of the Sun Tzu mentality) |----------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: zowie@daedalus.stanford.edu (Craig "Powderkeg" DeForest)
Subject: Re: NASA Coverup
Organization: Stanford Center for Space Science and Astrophysics
Date: 8 Nov 92 18:37:20

In article <foo> jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes:
   Did you know that fully _half_ of all babies are born within one week of a 
   full  Moon!  No kidding.  Of course, if that surprises you or if you take 
   allegations of such things seriously, you really could use some help. 

Wait!  *I* thought it was that half of all babies were born within one week
of a new moon!  :-)
--
Craig DeForest -- astrophysicist for hire.   DoD#314159; PhD#271828
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: bell@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (E. V. Bell, II - NSSDC/HSTX/GSFC/NASA - (301)513-1663)
Subject: Re: Sounding Rockets
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:31:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.004030.11712@scic.intel.com>, johnu@scic.intel.com (John Urbanski) writes...
> 
>Anyone have / know where I can get data 
>on sounding rockets.
> 
>Thanks for any info you can send me .
> 
>john

	That depends on what kind of information you're wanting. As 
	part of it's duty as World Data Center A for Rockets and
	Spacecraft, the National Space Science Data Center tracks all
	kinds of information about rocket launches. It's not as 
	detailed as our information about various spacecraft, but that
	may not matter depending on what you want.

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Dr. Edwin V. Bell, II	|  E-mail:				       |
|  Mail Code 633.9		|	(SPAN) NCF::Bell		       |
|  National Space Science	|	or   NSSDC::Bell		       |
|    Data Center		|	or  NSSDCA::Bell		       |
|  NASA				|	or  NSSDCB::Bell		       |
|  Goddard Space Flight Center	|   (Internet) Bell@NSSDCA.GSFC.NASA.GOV       |
|  Greenbelt, MD   20771	|					       |
|  (301) 513-1663		|					       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Pen based computers in space
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:06:07 GMT

I received an inquiry from the editor of Pen Magazine, a magazine devoted
to the new pen based computers. He wanted to know about the use of PCs
and pen based PCs in space.

Does anybody know of any experiments or future shuttle flights where
there will be a pen based computer? If so, please email to me and I
will forward them.

  Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------165 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer)
Subject: Re: astronauts voting
Organization: Simon Fraser University
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 20:21:48 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.015547.12219@u.washington.edu>
bilgeoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Patricia Gellert) writes:
>
>Do any readers know if the shuttle astronauts voted by absentee ballot?
>
>I hope this is not considered non-topical for this newsgroup.

Steve Maclean (probably misspelled) was actually in orbit when Canada held its
recent "referendum" on constitutional matters. If the Canadian Space Agency was
on its toes then he must have cast an absentee ballot. Not to have done so
would have been politically incorrect. Canada had approximately three quarters
of its registered voters turn out to vote in that election. How'd the US do in
theirs?

Leigh

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: andy@osea.demon.co.uk (Andrew Haveland-Robinson)
From: kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn)
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: NASA Coverup
Keywords: Gravity Neutral point falsified
Date: 5 Nov 92 22:16:13 GMT
Reply-To: kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501

In article <4590@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes:
[ paranoid ranting deleted ]
>
>   snarfy
>
Yo, snarfy dude!  Seems that if you could eliminate or control the paranoid
side effects of your drugs, 'twould be a nice thing to share your sources,
dosage levels, etc. with us - or at least with alt.drugs....

Better physics thru chemistry, huh?


kbq



--
Kevin Quinn                         | kevinq@ingres.com
                                    | {mtzinu,pacbell,ll-winken,sun}!ingres.com
My opinions are my own.  Should you think otherwise, think again.
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Subject: Re: Nasa coverup
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: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:51:09 GMT


-From: moroney@ramblr.enet.dec.com
-Subject: Re: NASA Coverup
-Date: 9 Nov 92 20:01:37 GMT
-Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

-In article <1992Nov9.133331.1039@cs.rochester.edu>, dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes...
->In article <1992Nov9.031208.23856@engage.pko.dec.com> moroney@ramblr.enet.dec.com writes:
-> > Wouldn't a collision with something that size totally destroyed the Earth,
-> > blasting it (and the Mars-sized thing) out of existance leaving not
-> > much more than an asteroid belt?  If not, wouldn't the system be in a
-> > rather elliptical orbit?
-> 
->Answered in order: (1) no, there is insufficient energy available
->(recall that the gravitational binding energy of a sphere at constant
->density goes as the 5/3 power of the mass)

-I was thinking of the Voyager picture of one of the outer moons (forgot which
-one) which has a comparatively huge impact crater, and it was stated that if
-the impacting body was much larger the moon would have been shattered.
-Typically impact craters are larger than the body itself so the radius ratio
-and thus the mass ratio would have been quite large.

Isn't it Miranda that's supposed to have been blown apart and then reassembled
itself? If you want to permanently destroy a moon or planet, you have to hit
it so hard that most or all of the mass achieves escape velocity (and in
different directions :-).

Watch the computer simulation on "Space Age" - the Earth is pretty much turned 
to mush, but it doesn't fly apart.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov

Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
From: jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins)
Subject: Re: Comet deflection & mining
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 07:06:11 GMT

szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:

>Deflecting anything but the strongest nickle-iron asteroid
>with a nuclear explosive is silly.  Many asteroids are probably 
>rubble piles, not single big rocks, and comets are so fragile we've 
>seen some calve off big chunks and obliterate themselves just from
>internal gas pressure.  For a comet, farting can be suicide!

I don't see why this is a probelm.  If the comet shatters, there's a good
chance that most of the material will have enough transverse velocity to spread
out, thus limiting the amount that would hit the Earth.  Increasing the number
of bits would also increase the loss from solar heating and spread the chunks
out further due to natural rocket forces.  As long as you intercept the   
comet far enough out, I fail to understand why it's a problem. 

>Back to the P/Swift-Tuttle deflection problem.

>If upper-stage technology advances sufficiently over the next 30-40 
>years, eg magsails powered by the solar wind + a very advanced nuclear 
>electric second stage, we might be able to catch up with P/Swift-Tuttle 
>at perihelion in 2057 to track it.  Alternately, we might develop very
>good telescopes capable of tracking it that far out, eg huge microgravity-
>based reflectors combined with optical interferometry.

I always cringe when I hear about optical interferometers in microgravity. They
remind me of screen doors on submarines.  A _far_ better solution is to build
them on the Moon, allowing much higher resolution among other things.  

Who knows what
>technology we will have after 2100, but one possibility is to focus
>sunlight with a large parabolic mirror over the period of several
>months to change the time P/Swift-Tuttle crosses earth orbit by one day. 
>Anyone want to tackle the math on how large a mirror would be needed?  

My that would be big!

>Even with this gentle method, we need to gaurd against the possibility 
>of disrupting the comet rather than deflecting it.  Rendesvous with 50 km/s 
>incoming will also be a challenge, perhaps several years with a tacking
>magsail.  

There's a big difference between rendezvous and intercept.  A sidewinder missile
does not match speed with its target.  Not that an intercept would be all that
easy, but it's not impossible.
-- 
Josh Hopkins                                          jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu

"We can lick gravity, but the paperwork's a bit tougher."  Wernher von Braun
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: prb@access.digex.com (Pat)
Subject: Re: Russian Engines for DC-Y?
Organization: UDSI
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 18:04:06 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.153927.11010@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> rbw3q@helga9.acc.Virginia.EDU (Robert B. Whitehurst) writes:
>slush kerosene, anybody? :-) Seriously, I'll exhibit a little more
>ignorance here:  In kerosene/LOX engines, do they vaporize the LOX, or
>do they inject it as a spray into the combustion chamber?  We use
>strictly gaseous fuel in our work--just thinking about all those 2
>phase sprays gives me a headache! :)
>

If i understand it correctly,  the F1s in a saturn used something like
a giant shower head to spray liquid O2/ into the nozzle.
i saw something in Air and Space where they were describing the developement
troubles of the injectors.  they were using something like a manhole
cover with holes in it, and it wasnt real stable.  later improvements
improved combustion stability, but they lost a lot of sleep over it.

Newsgroups: sci.space