HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov
Subject: Viable alternatives to space? Was ( Re: Private Space Ventures)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 01:21:00 GMT

In article <8780.2339210127@kcbbs.gen.nz>, Simon_Demler@kcbbs.gen.nz (Simon Demler) writes...
>> [It bugs me that there are people like H Ross Perot, who
>> themselves have enough cash to finance their own space
>> programs, but that none, so  far, has underwritten one.]
> 
>Does it also bother you that these people could be spending some money 
>on the drought problems in Africa rather than on some space program...You 
>must be one of those space for the sake of space of types...
> 
>Come on get real...there are MUCH larger problems that need solving 
>on this planet before trying to get peoples private wealth for space 
>purposes..
> 
Yes that is the argument that was used in 1972 to end the Apollo and look how
much progress has been made with the seven trillion dollars that has been  
spent by the American government to end poverty here in the old income
redistribution system.  Yes we can proudly point to the government owned
welfare ghetto's where 90% of all murders in America take place and where over
70% of all drug trafficking comes from.  Yes this argument is the primary 
reason the American Government is 4 trillion dollars in debt. 

Yes the problems are large and yes they do need to be solved, but you only
have to read this group for a few days to see that there are many on here
trying to do just that, solve the problems of the planet by expanding the
domain of man.  This process is as old as Phonecian and Greek colonization and
trade.  Where else is the wealth available to input into the earth's system
to raise the standard of living and help those poor Africans that you are so
concerned about coming from? What ya gonna do, send Norman Schwartzkopf over
there to end
the anarchy? Go into debt another few billion to feed the hungry over there
today that will just need another infusion next year? What is your alternative?
How would you spend the fifteen billion dollars that NASA gets a year to help
the people?

What do you propose? Let us know and in the flame cauldron of sci.space maybe
we can learn enough toall be saved from a useless life of supporting the
progress of mankind.

Dennis Wingo, University of Alabama in Huntsville
Xref: sparky sci.space:11878 sci.astro:8963
From: mcdonald@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (J. D. McDonald)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: Saturn's moons
Date: 16 Aug 92 15:23:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: aries.mcdonald.215
Organization: UIUC SCS

In article <CMM.0.90.2.713934401.ephillip@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> Earl W Phillips <ephillip@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> writes:

>There are many programs that predict and displB{y the{ positions
>of{ the moons of Jupiter..... {my question:{ Are there {any{
>programs out there, written for the IBM-PC, that will do the
>same for Saturn's moons?

>*****************************************************************
>*                                    | ====@====      ///////// *
>* ephillip@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu|     ``________//         *
>*                                    |       `------'           *
>*                 -JR-               | Space;........the final  *
>*                                    | frontier...............  *
>*****************************************************************


You are in luck! And its free.  My special version of Elwood Downey's 
"Ephem" for the PC will do this. It will give either just a list
or a screen display of the positions (needs VGA for this). It's not hyper 
accurate for the outermost moons, but its good enough to locate all I can 
see with my 8" scope. It also, of course, does the rings. It does not
predict eclipses of the moons by the rings or Saturn.

It is available by anonymous FTP from c.scs.uiuc.edu in file "ephemvga.zip".


Doug McDonald
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: kellmer@milton.u.washington.edu (Brent Kellmer)
Subject: RedStone Rockets
Reply-To: kellmer@u.washington.edu
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 17:24:14 GMT

Almost forgot -- does anyone have more detailed information about the 
Redstone-class rockets that were used in the early Mercury program?

-kellmer@u.washington.edu


Newsgroups: sci.space
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: space industry
Date: 20 Aug 92 13:32:54 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Aug19.135709.17016@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>In article <1469100011@igc.apc.org> Mark Goodman <mwgoodman@igc.apc.org> writes:
>>There are really no private space launch providers
>>outside the United States -- Arianespace is the closest thing.
>
>So what are Atlas, Delta, and Titan, chopped liver?

Old ICBMs from captive government contractors.

Gary
From: fcrary@ocf.berkeley.edu (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: With telepresence, who needs people in Earth orbit?
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:19:12 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: lightning.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Aug21.123736.1575@samba.oit.unc.edu> cecil@physics.unc.edu (Gerald Cecil) writes:
>OK, fine.  But the only current `job' for SSF is apparently biological
>research on the long-term effects on microgravity, which means loading
>rats into a centrifuge.  I submit that that can be done with a conveyor
>belt. 

You might want to bounce this idea off a lab biologist: Experimental 
animals require _alot_ more than picking them up, putting them in
the experiment and then putting them back in a cage. For example, they
will sometimes actively resist being taken out of their cage (or put
back in it), get away from who (or what)ever is carrying them back and forth,
escape from their cages (requiring a very different sort of work to 
find again, etc...

							 Frank Crary
							 CU Boulder
							 (even though
							 I'm currently
							 using a Berkeley
							 account...)
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: strider@acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore)
Subject: Re: NASA statement on Earth Data System proposals [NTE 92-71] (Forwarded)
Organization: The Voice of Fate
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 16:24:17 GMT

In article <1538@hsvaic.boeing.com> eder@hsvaic.boeing.com (Dani Eder) writes:
>strider@acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore) writes:
>
	Ah, NO... I did NOT write the following...

>>>	NASA has elected, therefore, to offer an additional 
>>>opportunity for offerers in the competitive range to 
>>>adjust the proposed costs to a more realistic level.  In 
>>>instructions issued by the Goddard Space Flight Center 
>>>on Aug.10, 1992, as an amendment to the solicitation, 
>>>NASA has directed the offerers to submit revised cost 
>>>proposals. Changes to the previously submitted technical 
>>>and business management proposals will not be 
>>>considered.
[rest deleted for brevity]
>
>Dani
>
>>
>-- 
>Dani Eder/Boeing/Advanced Civil Space/(205)464-2697(w)/232-7467(h)/
>Rt.1, Box 188-2, Athens AL 35611/Member: Space Studies Institute
>Physical Location: 34deg 37' N 86deg 43' W +100m alt.
>***THE ABOVE IS NOT THE OPINION OF THE BOEING COMPANY OR ITS MANAGEMENT.***


-- 
<------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Greg d. Moore                  |  Strider@acm.rpi.edu
Green Mountain Software        |  "All that is gold does not glitter."  
Carpe Diem                     | 
Xref: sparky sci.space:11850 talk.politics.space:1074
From: kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space
Subject: Whither a Lunar Base (was: Energiya's role in Space Station assem)
Keywords: lunar base
Date: 15 Aug 1992 17:07:34 GMT
Organization: NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
Originator: kjenks@krakatoa

In article <1992Aug11.205655.6840@csi.on.ca> richard@csi.on.ca (Richard Martin) writes:
>When ARE we going to have a lunar base?  Why don't we have one yet?

We'll have a lunar base about six years after it becoms either
politically profitable for a Government to fund one or about two years
after it becomes economically profitable for a corporation to fund
one.  The only thing standing between us and a lunar base is money.
Most of the engineering issues are readily soluble with a sufficient
amount of money.  

As to why we don't have one yet, you'd have to ask Richard Nixon.
He (and the U.S. Congress of the time) shut down the Apollo program
and most of NASA's follow-on programs.

According to Mike Collins, in 1969, Spiro Agnew proposed putting a man
on Mars by the end of the century.  And we all know that Dan Quayle is
as pro-space as politicians come.  Gore seems OK, too.  Maybe the space
program should pay more attention to the VP.  (God knows, nobody else
does.)

Since the preponderance of motivations and problems in lunar base
construction are political and financial, not scientific or engineering
issues, let's take this discussion to talk.politics.space.

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368

     "Better.  Faster.  Cheaper." -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator
     "That's no way to get to the stars!"  -- me

P.S.  Richard, I note that you're posting from Canada.  When is YOUR
country going to start a lunar base?
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Shuttle (was: Private space ventures)
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:55:37 GMT

In article <18AUG199220091784@judy.uh.edu> wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov writes:

>Also in response to another post about the Shuttle and its availability, the
>routine landing of the Shuttle at KSC cancels the longer time in orbit
>for the Shuttles 

I don't understand this statement. Are you saying that Shuttles can't
stay in orbit as long if they land at KSC?

>and lowers the cost per mission by 3-4 million dollars.

A reduction of about one half of one percent. Not even a drop in the
bucket.

>Also for Allan's benefit that 8 per year launch rate was achieved BEFORE
>Endeavour came on line. 

Sure. It was achieved with 9 flights in 85. This rate strained the
Shuttle processing system and ended with Chalenger. Since then they
highest rate achieved was 6 per year in 90 and 91.

For 92 they scheduled nine missions, have flown 5 and will likely only
fly 7 or 8.

>A possible other use for Shuttle is to provide service to the CIS station
>as well as to SS Freedom.  

Sure. Another use would be to fly it to New York and use it for low
income housing. However, I don't think that would be a cost effective
use for the Shuttle.

Is there some reason you have to think sending the Shuttle to Mir would
be cost effective?

>Don't think your Atlas/Soyuz can do that Allan.
>That is of course launching out of KSC.

But I'll bet Titan/Soyuz could. However, if I wanted to fly something
on Mir, it would be cheaper for me to charter my own private 747 and
fly it to the CIS for launch. Hell, for the cost of a Shuttle flight,
I don't need to chater the 747, I can simply BUY it and still save 
millions.

   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?"                               |
+----------------------247 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dearnsha@wizard.worldbank.org
Subject: Re: Early Warning of missiles and meteo
Organization: The World Bank
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 18:09:42 GMT

In article <1469100010@igc.apc.org> Mark Goodman <mwgoodman@igc.apc.org>
writes:
>
>To:    sci.space From:  Mark Goodman (mwgoodman@igc.org) Re:
>Meteoroid Detection Date:  18 Aug 1992
>
> [... deleted...]
>
>Also, over-the-horizon radars are irrelevant to this discussion.
>They do not have anything like the sensitivity required to see a
>meteoroid against the backscatter of the Earth's surface.
>
>+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+
>|       Mark W. Goodman       | What a terrible thing it is |
>| mwgoodman@igc.org -- econet | to lose your mind.          |
>| goodman@ksgbbs.harvard.edu  |                             |
>+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+
>
>

Bzzzt. Wrong. OTH radars are very sensitive, and are usually located
in areas with very low noise floors - they have to be to resolve very
weak returns (via a path which exhibits high attenuation), and detect
small objects, such as aeroplanes, at very long ranges! As a meteor
entering the atmosphere causes ionisation, the "target" is twice as
close as a regular target (ie, half way along the propagation path),
and will have a much larger doppler shift than an aeroplane (or missile
for that matter). The main drawback is that it only detects meteors
than enter the atmosphere on the radar's boresight.
From: roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: SPS fouling astronomy
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:57:09 GMT
Organization: Johns Hopkins University

Frederick.A.Ringwald@dartmouth.edu (Frederick A. Ringwald) writes:

>In article <1992Aug13.175839.24133@cfa.harvard.edu>
>willner@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) writes:

>> > Also, the objection that
>> > "there'd be nowhere on Earth you could get away from the handiwork of
>> > humans - no remaining true wilderness" isn't really true: try Alaska
>> 
>> I give up.  The lattitude is only 60 to 70 degrees or so, and there
>> are plenty of flat places where the horizon is visible. And the
>> aurora is seldom bright enough to obliterate the bright planets.
>> Maybe you were there during a _really_ bright display. :-)

>Trees could block objects near the horizon, but come to think of it,
>you'd have to be above latitude 82 degrees, which is more northerly 
>even than Point Barrow, to get completely away from the
>Con-Ed-stellation. GEO is about 6.6 Earth radii away, and 
>arctan(6.6) = 81.4 degrees (My thanks to Mike McCall from Rutgers 
>for pointing this out.); atmospheric refraction will give 
>another 34'.

Are there really persons out there who believe a fair assessment of
the physical universe can be made by restricting our view to the
celestial cones around Earth's polar regions?
From: higgins@fnalb.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: He3 Power Source references
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:37:58 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

In article <1992Aug13.190624.1512@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, eatlv@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (thomas.vandoren) writes:
> One of them was about a proposal to use Helium3 mined from the moon as a power
> source on Earth.  [...]
>    Does anyone have more info, opinions on that proposal?  

I'll repeat what I posted a month or so ago: For the latest technical
information,  see the July 1992 issue of *Fusion Technology* (vol. 21,
no. 4) is a "Special Issue on D-3He Fusion."  The August issue of 
*Fusion Technology* is another special issue on the same subject, with
more about reactors and less about the Moon.

The original article about this is Wittenberg, Santarius, and
Kulcinski, "Lunar Source of 3He fpr Commercial Fusion Power," *FT*
v10, p.167 (1986).

Bill Higgins                           | In the distant future,
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory  | nuns will be bartenders
Bitnet:      HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET       | aboard starships
Internet:  HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV       | and Sternbach paintings
SPAN/Hepnet:      43011::HIGGINS       | will hang on every wall.
Xref: sparky sci.space:12135 sci.astro:9156
From: wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: Satellite of the Month
Keywords: artificial satellite observe Cosmos
Date: 22 Aug 92 19:53:16 GMT
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: Alpha Science Computer Network, Denver, Co.


Earth Satellite Cosmos 1220 (NORAD #12054, COSPAR 1980-089A) was launched
from the (then) USSR from Tyuratam (Baikonur) on 1980 Nov 4 with a SL-11 
(F-1-m) launch vehicle. This satellite is in an orbit inclined to the 
earth's equator by 65.0 degrees. It makes one revolution every 97.8 minutes 
and comes to within 552 km of the earth's surface and is most distant 
at 751 km. It's brightness is similar to a sphere of 6.0m diameter.
 
Cosmos 1220 is thought to be an military electronic intelligence ocean
surveillance satellite. It is one of three similiar satellites. The 
others are Cosmos 2096 and Cosmos 2122. In June of 1982 Cosmos 1220
exploded into 80 pieces. The elements below are for the largest fragment. 
It is beginning a sequence of evening passes for North American observers.
 
I have observed Cosmos 1220 from Denver once the last three summers at
magnitude +2, but it has been observed by others to flash to zero magnitude.
 
Cosmos 1220      6.0  0.0  0.0  4.5
1 12054U 80089  A 92217.72121940  .00000921  00000-0  12141-3 0  1192
2 12054  64.9963 343.0911 0141730  59.8679 301.6396 14.73087339547258
-- 
Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.  
Xref: sparky sci.space:11786 sci.space.shuttle:2094
From: paul@taniwha.UUCP (Paul Campbell)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Two questions about the shuttle tethered satellite experiment
Date: 10 Aug 92 17:50:59 GMT
Organization: Taniwha Systems Design

In article <1992Aug7.133626.19569@hemlock.cray.com> kilian@cray.com (Alan Kilian) writes:
>1) The shuttle is at one end of a conductive wire. The satellite is at
>   the other. If the wire moves through a magnetic field you can generate
>   an electric potential. Now how do you measure the potential?
>   They were hoping for 5000 Volts on a 12 Mile tether but got 40 Volts
>   on a 750 Feet tether.

Which scales up to ~3400V on a 12 mile tether - not bad ...... does anyone
know if the electron guns need some minimum voltage to start to run efficiently?

>3) (I know I said two but what the heck) How can you use the potential
>   from the one wire tether?

Run it backwards, get a satelite pair into LEO between a tether, use solar cells
to pump electrons and move you (very slowly) to a higher orbit. Maybe set it
up as a tug that moves back and forward. If you want to shunt a lot of stuff
into high orbit this may be the way to do it, boost it all up to LEO start it 
moving up, keep doing this for 3-4 years at which time it starts to arrive
at L5 or wherever you want to use it, at which time you detach the tug and
send it back for more (with a lower mass the trip back will be a lot faster).

	Paul

-- 
Paul Campbell    UUCP: ..!mtxinu!taniwha!paul     AppleLink: CAMPBELL.P

	"'Potato', not 'Potatoe'"
		Bart Simpson - on the blackboard 6/25/92
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: What happened to Viking?
Date: 21 Aug 92 22:27:39 GMT
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA

In article <1992Aug20.233734.691@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
burris@ennex1.eng.utsa.edu (John Burris) writes:
>What happened the Viking spacecraft?  

Both lands and orbiters were shut down for lack of funds and the need to use
the antenna resources for other projects (Galileo, Magellan, power
distribution experiments, SETI, etc.)

>I heard through the grapevine that someone sent a bogus signal to it which  
>turned the antenna away from Earth, resulting in LOS.

That was Voyager II (briefly).

[Not reading regularly.]

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Second Favorite email message: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
A Ref: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, vol. 1, G. Polya
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: cecil@physics.unc.edu (Gerald Cecil)
Subject: Re: Early Warning of missiles and meteors
Organization: Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Univ. North. Carolina at Chapel Hill
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 01:20:39 GMT

In article <bzaYe-yS/@clmqt.marquette.MI.US> stick@clmqt.marquette.MI.US (Stick) writes:
>   SAC's mission was never characterized as offensive except by our old
>opponents, the Warsaw Pact.  All planning was geared towards retaliation,
>not initiation.
General George LeMay's original SIOP for SAC called for a massive preemptive
strike with hundreds of aircraft at a time when the Soviet Union had less than 
a dozen nuclear weapons.  That sounds ``offensive'' to me.  This belongs in
talk.politics...
-- 
Gerald Cecil  cecil@wrath.physics.unc.edu  919-962-7169
Physics & Astronomy, U North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3255 USA
-- Intelligence is believing only half of what you read; brilliance is 
   knowing which half. ** Be terse: each line cost the Net $10 **
From: agc@bmdhh298.bnr.ca (Alan Carter)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: superstrings & supralight (was SPS feasibility and other space development)
Date: 19 Aug 92 18:35:11 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: BNR-Europe-Limited, Maidenhead, England

In article <Bt8Kss.4GA.1@cs.cmu.edu>, amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk writes:
|> > P.S. There's a preprint running around by Richard Gott (that may or  
|> > may not yet have come out in Physical Review D) that actually takes 
|> > faster-than-light travel seriously, basically as a consequence of  
|> > what two superstrings passing each other do to spacetime. Thorne and
|> > others are trying their hardest to find what's wrong with it, as it  
|> > severely strains the notion of causality...
|> > 
|> Now all we have to do is find a pair of superstrings. Details,  
|> details.... :-)

I thought the density variations of matter suggested by the COBE data
are very early quantum phenomena, and not at all like what would be 
nucleated (if that is the word) by superstrings or textures looping 
around and producing statistically different kinds of density variations, 
and this had done great damage to the case for the existance of 
superstrings. 

Perhaps it is not causality that is the problem, but the heuristic that 
'anything not forbidden is compulsory'. That is, we live in a universe 
where if only we had a superstring or two, FTL travel would be allowed 
by the physics, but as no-one can make a superstring in this epoch, FTL 
remains in an elsewhere of physics, allowed but inaccessable. 

Or might 'redundant' physics be like causality, not necessarily real,
but to do with how human minds interpret reality. I'm half joking, but
I'm half not, too.

   Alan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Maidenhead itself is too snobby to be pleasant. It is the haunt of the
   river swell and his overdressed female companion. It is the town of showy
   hotels, patronized chiefly by dudes and ballet girls. 

   Three Men In A Boat, Jerome K. Jerome, 1889
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: mwallis@clubzen.fidonet.org (Michael Wallis)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: SPS fouling astronomy
Date: 22 Aug 92 21:35:34 GMT
Organization: Club Zen BBS - Fidonet/Internet - +1 408 734 2289

Frederick.A.Ringwald@dartmouth.edu (Frederick A. Ringwald) writes:

> In article <roelle.714081429@uars_mag>
> roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle) writes:
> 
> > Are there really persons out there who believe a fair assessment of
> > the physical universe can be made by restricting our view to the
> > celestial cones around Earth's polar regions?
> 
> Hey, wait a minute. THIS wouldn't happen in any case. A full-up SPS
> system would brighten the entire sky, largely due to scattered light in
> the Earth's atmosphere. This would be seen by any observer on Earth,
> except those above |82| degrees latitude, who would see a dark sky
> (providing it's night, it's clear, and no aurora is around).

I have NO idea where you got your info in SPS systems, but it seems there
is little in what you say that relates to actual SPS designs or proposals.
The SPS systems transmit power in the microwave frequencies not in visible
light. Get some facts, please!!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mwallis@clubzen.fidonet.org - Michael Wallis
Newsgroups: sci.space