HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: afcanav@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (VIC CANACCI)
Subject: Re: STS-1 Disaster -- follow-up #2
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 30 Dec 1992 08:33 EST  

Brian:

>   
>   However the discussion, very weird discussion, that you dropped
>   in upon was about lighting the engines on the back of the 747 and
>   going into orbit, a'la 'Moonraker'. Suffice it to say that CAPS LOCK
>   seems to have trouble differentiating fact from fiction.
>      

From my recolection, the Moonraker story was that one of the shuttles that 
the criminal wanted to used needed replaced, so they stole the shuttle from 
the ferry 747 by igniting the engines, but they didn't go into space, just 
to where he was going to launch the other 5 shuttles of people.  Was part 
of this crazy story about going into space too???


Vic Canacci, Sverdrup Tech., NASA Lewis Cleveland


Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: markb@spock.dis.cccd.edu (Julie Bixby)
Subject: KSC Tours while shuttle is on the launch pad
Organization: Coast Community College District, Costa Mesa, CA
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 21:24:26 GMT

I was wondering if someone at NASA could tell me how long before a
launch one could take the KSC tour with a shuttle on the pad. My
mom went to a convention in Miami last year and she said that a
shuttle was on the launch pad when her KSC tour bus (tram?) went
by, and she got a real good look at it up close. So what is the
tour "window" for getting to do this?

Thank you.

-- 
Julie Bixby                        Internet: markb@spock.dis.cccd.edu
Engage Romulan .sig cloaking device....
From: labrg@emory.edu (Ryan Montieth Gill)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: black tiles on the space shuttle
Date: 29 Dec 92 21:14:02 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

jwt@duke.cs.duke.edu (Jeffrey W. Tannehill) writes:
: 
: 
: 	For Christmas I received a Space Shuttle model with instructions to
: paint the underside black.  This brought up the question "Why is the
: bottom of the Shuttle black?"  It occurred to us that a black surface might
: absorb a lot more radiation and that in space there might be greater
: exposure to radiation than on earth, so why isn't the whole shuttle white
: or perhaps silver to reflect as much as possible?


	Colour affects heat absorption in cases where the heat is being
radiated. The shuttle experiences heat absorption due to friction.
The SR-71 is black. The skin of the plane is aligned perfectly so
that when the skin begins to ripple (sortof like coorogated sheet
metal), the ridges and valleys are set up so that they are in line
with the air flow.    If you take a sheet of white paper and a
sheet of black paper and rub each on a smooth surface they should
both heat at the same rate....

				Ryan
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: oliver@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: Trivia quiz
Organization: NASA Johnson Space Center
Date: 22 Dec 92 13:26:12 -0600

The December 18th Space News Roundup (The JSC paper) published a trivia quiz.
To give everyone something to do over the holidays I thought I would post some
of the questions.  I'll post the answers next week to give everyone ample time
to find the answers.

1.  What shuttle flight had the first all-rookie crew?

2.  What shuttle flight the first all-veteran crew?

3.  Name all the moon walkers.

4.  Which ocean did the first American manned orbital spacecraft land in?

5.  What did Tom Stafford and Gene Cernan call their Gemini IX rendezvous
    target, whose aerodynamic shroud got snagged?

6.  With the current manafest, who will be the first American woman to fly
    in space four times?

7.  With the current manafest, who will be the first man to fly on the shuttle
    five times?

8.  What four signatures are on the plaque mounted to the leg on the Apollo 11
    lunar module?

9.  To verify Galileo's premise about equal falling speed for two masses, Dave
    Scott dropped a hammer and a feather on the moon.  What kind of feather?

10. What astronaut has flown with the most number of different individuals?

11. Which president signed Executive Order No. 10849 establishing the NASA
    seal and meatball?

12. How many foreign payload specialists flew on board space shuttle orbiters
    in 1992?

13. What countries did they represent?

14. How many rookie astronauts made their first space flight in 1992?

15. Astronauts Dan Brandenstein and Robert "Hoot" Gibson commanded the space
    vehicle "Endeavour".  Who commanded the space vehicle "Endeavor"?

16. What date is the anniversary of three shuttle flights since return to
    flight?

17. Who was honored with the Oscar that flew on STS-45?

18. What astronauts received Emmys?

19. What was the first delivery for the Ace Moving Company?

20. What three men went to the moon twice?

21. Which astronaut wrote the book "How Do You Use the Bathroom in Space"?

22. Who sang "I was walking on the Moon one day"?

23. What satellite, including transponder, is NASA select carried on?

24. Besides the JSC Building 31 vault, where are the bulk of the pristine
    lunar samples stored?

25. Not counting Apollo-Soyuz, who was the first non-American to fly on a
    U.S. spacecraft?

26. What suttle astronaut holds the record for the most EVA time?

27. How many technical and weather delays did John Glenn have before Friendship
    7 was launched?

28. Who said "I felt red, white, and blue all over"?

29. Who described the moon as "A very dark and unappetizing place"?

30. How many Saturn V's flew?


-- 

Pat Oliver -  	Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company at NASA JSC
		OLIVER@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
		All standard disclamers apply.
From: Hugh.Craig@f3333.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Hugh Craig)
Sender: Usenet@f-454.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Sts-54 Prelaunch elm
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 11:12:57 -0600

STS 54
1 00054E          93 13.62838574  .00070000  00000-0  25599-3 0    12
2 00054  28.4620 152.5278 0004400 267.5660  92.4949 15.90925404    21
 
     STS 54 is scheduled for launch at 1352 UTC on Jan. 13, 1993.
These estimated TLEs are consistent with an on-time launch on the
13th and a normal trajectory through the TDRS-F deployment at an
approx. MET of 00/06:14 over the North Pacific on Rev 5.  The
IUS-13 first stage burn would take place at the ascending node of
Rev 6 at approx. MET 00/07:14.  The second stage IUS burn would
take place at the succeeding apogee at approx. MET 00/13:00.


 * Origin: HAM>link< RBBS 612/HAM-0000 Saint Paul, MN (K0TG) (1:282/100)

From: Mike.Hartmann@f100.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com (Mike Hartmann)
Sender: FredGate@tdkt.kksys.com
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Sts54 Prelaunch source
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:20:09 -0600

To Patrick Reed and anybody else interested. In addition to the 
Celestial BBS (513-427-0674), another good source of Space shuttle 
2-line orbital elements is the RPV ASTRONOMY BBS (310-541-7299).
Happy New Year!
Mike


Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc
From: jeff@drseus.jsc.nasa.gov (Jeff Szmyd)
Subject: Re: STS-1 Disaster
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:20:48 GMT

I'm sure I must be speaking for a lot of other people when I say that I'm
really sick of all the attention this bozo Dr. Beter is getting.  Let's
please put an end to this nonsense and get back to real postings.

-- 
*********************jeff@drseus.jsc.nasa.gov*******************
 Jeff Szmyd  -  Lockheed Robotics Department                  **
 Houston, Texas 77058                    (713) 333-7745       **
****************************************************************
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: edotto@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Otto)
Subject: Re: $6 million ??? (was: black tiles on the space shuttle
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 02:30:00 GMT

klassen@sol.UVic.CA (Melvin Klassen) writes:

>Ty Willis, Stephen F. Austin State University <a_willisgt@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> writes:
>> The grey insulation is a composite material called RCC (reinforced
>> carbon-carbon).  The principal drawback of RCC is the price - I heard once 
>> that, to replace a half-meter strip on one of the orbiter's wings 
>> cost somewhere around $6 million bucks...  

Yes, it does. Because it has to be moulded to fit, and NOT CUT. And it has to be ac close to aerodynamically smooth to avoid local hot spots.

-- 
Edward C. Otto III			* e-otto@uiuc.edu
No one really knows...                  * edotto@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
University of Illinois			* Voice: 217/333-9250
Printing Services Office		* Fax:   217/244-7277
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: davem@ee.ubc.ca (Dave Michelson)
Subject: Re: Columbia
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 08:53:40 GMT

In article <iw4NwB3w165w@midnite.pinetree.org> warden@midnite.pinetree.org (Tim Warden) writes:
>Could someone please explain to me about this Columbia destruction 
>theory?  This is the first time that I have ever heard of such a thing. 
> 
>Thanks in advance..

Trust me.  You *really* don't want to know.        

--
Dave Michelson
davem@ee.ubc.ca


Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space,sci.astro,alt.conspiracy,news.misc
From: rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com (Rich Kolker)
Subject: Re: Trivia quiz - answers
Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 04:20:35 GMT

In article <C01FHu.Jsu@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <1992Dec29.130042.1@vf.jsc.nasa.gov> oliver@vf.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>>30. How many Saturn V's flew?
>>    Thirteen - Apollos 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and Skylab
>>    1...
>
>If you really want to be picky, you can argue that the count was 12.6666...,
>since the Skylab 1 launcher was only the first two stages of a Saturn V.
>(The counterargument is that most of the payload was a rebuilt third
>stage, of course!)
>-- 

Of course, third stages flew to KSC on a SuperGuppy, so it could be said
they flew twice! :-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------
   rich kolker       rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com
                         < Do Not Write In This Space> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,rec.humor
From: jwt@duke.cs.duke.edu (Jeffrey W. Tannehill)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: black tiles on the space shuttle
Date: 26 Dec 92 01:56:24 GMT
Organization: Duke University Computer Science Dept.; Durham, N.C.



	For Christmas I received a Space Shuttle model with instructions to
paint the underside black.  This brought up the question "Why is the
bottom of the Shuttle black?"  It occurred to us that a black surface might
absorb a lot more radiation and that in space there might be greater
exposure to radiation than on earth, so why isn't the whole shuttle white
or perhaps silver to reflect as much as possible?

	Perhaps a simple posted response would be better than everyone 
sending mail to me, only to have me follow up with a post.

-- 
/*______________________________Jeff Tannehill_______________________________*
 * MAIL:  Duke Dept. of Computer Science        Internet: jwt@cs.duke.edu    *
 *        Durham, NC 27708 USA                  PHONE: +1 919 660 6500       */
Xref: sparky sci.space.shuttle:3023 alt.conspiracy:13421 talk.politics.misc:65379
From: BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: STS-1 Disaster -- follow-up #2
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 13:19:14 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Dec23.022237.25606@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
  <SHAFER.92Dec23213122@ra.dfrf.nasa.gov>

>Er, Dean, we did launch the Enterprise from the 747 at altitude.
>It was quite easy to see, too.  I saw it all five times.
>
>Having come into this in the middle, maybe I'm misunderstanding what
>CAPS LOCK means by launch.  If it's launching in the sense of going
>to orbit, you're quite correct; no such capability exists.  There's
>no 747 in the world that can carry the Shuttle with the external
>tank and SRBs.  The empty Shuttle is nicely within the 747's capacity,
>but adding any of the rest of the stack would exceed it.
>
>
>--
>Mary Shafer

   Trust us on this one, Mary... you DON'T want to know.
   
   Actually, a loaded Shuttle is within the 747s capacity too. Witness
   the ferry flight of Columbia from Edwards to KSC after the STS-32
   mission. The LDEF satellite was still in the payload bay.
   
   However the discussion, very weird discussion, that you dropped
   in upon was about lighting the engines on the back of the 747 and
   going into orbit, a'la 'Moonraker'. Suffice it to say that CAPS LOCK
   seems to have trouble differentiating fact from fiction.
      
   -Brian
   
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian S. Thorn                                    "If ignorance is bliss,
BrianT@cup.portal.com                               this must be heaven."
                                                -Diane Chambers, "Cheers"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: irwin@juliet.caltech.edu (Horowitz, Irwin Kenneth)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: STS-1 Disaster
Date: 31 Dec 1992 15:33 PST
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: juliet.caltech.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1992Dec30.201225.8959@pica.army.mil>, erudnick@claudius.pica.army.mil (Edward J. Rudnicki ) writes...
>Jeff Szmyd writes:
>However.... I have encountered the rantings of the schizophrenic Dr. Beter
>in other newsgroups. In those other cases the poster was McElwaine
>himself. Yet here in s.s.s the poster was not McElwaine but Jon Volkoff.
>Could it be that as a result of making himself a nuisance once too often
>McElwaine has been denied net access? Could this be done to Volkoff as
>well? Or at least keep him out of the sci newsgroups?
> 
Actually, the original article was posted by McElwaine...it's just that Jon
Volkoff has been the most vocal adherent to that nonsense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irwin Horowitz                        |
Astronomy Department                  |"Whoever heard of a female astronomer?"
California Institute of Technology    |--Charlene Sinclair, "Dinosaurs"
irwin@iago.caltech.edu                |
ih@deimos.caltech.edu                 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: charlie@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Charles Edward Patisaul)
Subject: Re: STS-1 DISASTER/COVERUP
Organization: We don't need no stinkin' batches!
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 07:42:17 GMT

charlie@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Charles Edward Patisaul) writes:

>	Well, at least he did have one thing... The " The
>last words Harris spoke as the voice of Mission Control were the
>words you just heard: "The Shuttle has cleared the tower." " part was correct.
>	NASA switches the PAO (public affairs officer), as well as EVERYone 
>else involved with control of the space shuttle system from the Kennedy Space 
>Center to the Johnson Space Center. So it SHOULD have been a different voice.
>Kennedy is responible for launch, Johnson for the rest...

>	Why the mission control should be in Texas is another story, not for
>me to tell...

	That is they switch to Johnson Control as soon as the shuttle clears 
the tower, right when the alleged tape (with a different voice) began.

-- 
Charles E. Patisaul        charlie@rtfm.mlb.fl.us       Melbourne, Florida USA
From: colint@spider.co.uk (Colin Tinto)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: STS-1 DISASTER/COVERUP
Date: 21 Dec 92 13:44:51 GMT
Followup-To: sci.space.shuttle
Organization: Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, UK

Hmm, good one...

OK, so who volunteers to send this script to Hollywood ?

Make a good film eh :-)

I gave up after the Cosmospheres made their first appearance...

At least every IMPORTANT word WASN`T in CAPITALS %-)

hehe - good Xmas time reading.


-- 
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------\
!   Colin Tinto			!  Time Travel Parcel Deliveries Inc          !
!   colint@spider.co.uk		!  The only courier with previous day service.!
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------------/
Xref: sparky sci.space.shuttle:3034 alt.conspiracy:13443 talk.politics.misc:65406
From: spl@ivem.ucsd.edu (Steve Lamont)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: STS-1 Disaster -- follow-up #2
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy,misc.test,alt.test
Date: 27 Dec 1992 22:50:29 GMT
Organization: University of Calif., San Diego/Microscopy and Imaging Resource
NNTP-Posting-Host: ivem.ucsd.edu

In article <1992Dec27.222007.28325@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>(see the James Bond film 'Moonraker' for more details.  I always wondered
>how one could launch 6 shuttles from underground without anyone seeing
>them launch, and without anyone feeling the ground shaking)

Easy.  If everyone is a Replicant -- er -- I mean, Robotiod -- they
can be simply programmed not to feel it.

							spl
-- 
Steve Lamont, SciViGuy -- (619) 534-7968 -- spl@szechuan.ucsd.edu
UCSD Microscopy and Imaging Resource/UCSD Med School/La Jolla, CA 92093-0608
Where is the summer, the unimaginable
Zero summer?                 - T.S. Eliot, "Little Gidding"
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc
From: dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu (Dean Adams)
Subject: Re: STS-1 Disaster -- follow-up #2
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 92 11:15:25 GMT


shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes:
 >>NO SHUTTLE GROUND LAUNCHES WERE SECRET.  LAUNCHES FROM A 747, AT 
 >>35,000 FEET OR SO, WOULD *NOT* BE EASY TO SEE.

 >Dean> Right, they would be IMPOSSIBLE to see, since NO such 
 > > capability exists.
 >Er, Dean, we did launch the Enterprise from the 747 at altitude.
 >It was quite easy to see, too.  I saw it all five times.

Now Mary, you should know that I could never forget something like the whole 
Approach and Landing Test series (even though I didn't see it from nearly
the vantage point you did! :)

 >Having come into this in the middle, 
I thought you came in before I did? :->

 >maybe I'm misunderstanding what CAPS LOCK means by launch.  If it's 
 >launching in the sense of going to orbit, you're quite correct; no such 
 >capability exists.  There's no 747 in the world that can carry the Shuttle 
 >with the external tank and SRBs.  

Well, speaking of capabilities that don't exist... the issue at hand 
was LAUNCHING the "Enterprise" *without* any ET/SRB stack at all.
Here is part of the original sordid prose in question...  :-)

 ->    Tuesday morning, April 14, genetic replicas called "Synthetics" of 
 -> the late astronauts John Young and Robert Crippen were readied at White 
 -> Sands.  They were programmed to take a computerized ride on the training
 -> shuttle "Enterprise."  The Young and Crippen entities boarded the 
 -> Enterprise, which was mounted on top of the launch 747.  After rocket 
 -> fuel was loaded for the shuttle, the 747 took off and headed west...
 -> On television we were told that the non-existent Columbia was re-entering
 -> from orbit.  Meanwhile the "Enterprise", re-labeled "Columbia", cut loose
 -> from the 747 and fired its rockets.  It sped up to a speed of nearly 
 -> 6,000 miles per hour, then we watched it as it made that dramatic race 
 -> in from the sea to a precise computer landing at Edwards Air Force Base.

Phew... pretty silly stuff!  (I sure hope THAT is not what you saw :)

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: davem@ee.ubc.ca (Dave Michelson)
Subject: Re: MOL (was Re: Terminal Velocity of DCX? (was Re: Shuttle ...))
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:49:05 GMT

In article <phfrom.413@nyx.uni-konstanz.de> phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Hartmut Frommert) writes:
>ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>
>>You heard wrong.  One MOL flew (unmanned).
>
>Could somebody provide data ?

The only MOL related flight of which I am aware flew on November 3, 1966.
Here are a few more details for the curious...
 
A Titan III-C carried a "simulated" MOL (an old fuel tank) with a "used"
Gemini capsule on top.  The whole payload stack was 49 feet long.
 
The unmanned Gemini capsule had previously flown (but I'm not sure which flight
- GT-2?) and had had a 24-inch circular hatch installed in its heatshield.
It was separated from the simulated MOL at an altitude of 127 miles, splashed
down 5500 miles downrange, and was recovered by the USS LaSalle.  The modified
heatshield performed satisfactorily during re-entry.  The heatshield test was an
important milestone in the MOL program.
  
Meanwhile, the transtage was ignited twice, the empty fuel tank was placed
in a 185-mile orbit, and three military research satellites were ejected.
The mission of the first was classified.  The other pair were used to study
propagation through the ionosphere between satellites in orbit (as opposed 
to earth-space propagation effects.)  
 
---
Dave Michelson
davem@ee.ubc.ca
From: Wales.Larrison@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Comparative $/lb to LEO (Was: Stupid Shuttle Cost Arguments)
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov 17 1992
Date: 28 Dec 92  15:44:58

David Anderman writes:
>The Space Shuttle is simply the highest cost (per pound) launch
>vehicle ever operated.
  
    ** Sigh **  This seems to have become a net legend --
unfortunately it does not seem to be supported by fact.  I've seen
this statement made numerous times over the past year or so in
sci.space, but based upon a little bit of research, it seems to be
wrong.
   To repeat what I posted about a month ago....
  
    David could you provide some data to support this statement?
For example, Pegasus costs about $14.5 M to put about 950 lbs in 150
nmi circular 28.5 deg LEO orbit (Cost from the price for the SCD-1
launch, planned for 1st quarter 1993, performance from the Pegasus
Users Manual).  That's about $15,000/lb.
    In comparison, Shuttle costs (depending on your source) about
$350-500 M per launch. (As a check on this cost/flight range, the FY
1992 NASA budget numbers for shuttle operating costs came to about $
3.2 B, and there were a total of 8 flights flown in 1992, which
gives about $ 400 M/flt, which is within the cost band I'm using).
For a 50,000 lb shuttle payload delivered to 150 nmi 28.5 deg
circular orbit, that's about $7000 -10,000 /lb.  (Note: shuttle
fleet average performance to 150 nmi, 28.5 deg circ orbit is
actually about 56,000 lbs -- so, again I'm being conservative about
shuttle cost $/lb)
   Titan IV, capable of putting about 32,000 lbs to the same orbit
(note the T-IV performance is corrected to put payloads into 150 nmi
28.5 deg circular orbits) is currently running about $360 M per unit
(Cost data from the Oct 92 DoD Selected Acquisition Reports), which
yields about $11,200 /lb.
   From these data points, I think the statement "the most expensive
per pound in orbit of all current launch vehicles" is incorrect.
  
   If you have better data, I would greatly appreciate it if you
could post it.
 ----------------------------------------------------------------
 Wales Larrison                         Space Technology Investor
  

--- Maximus 2.01wb
Newsgroups: sci.space