HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: medin@dscs.arc.nasa.gov (Milo S. Medin)
Subject: Re: Telnet access to spacelink ?
Keywords: telnet, spacelink
Organization: NASA Science Internet Office
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 10:04:07 GMT

Try telnetting to spacelink.msfc.nasa.gov.  It's not really a full
internet host, so you can't ftp there etc...

					Thanks,
					   Milo
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: dsf5454@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Launch sequence of events?
Reply-To: dsf5454@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:06:48 GMT

Hello, net community... I just got this information. However, I would like to
see if anyone can correct this or add to it. If you don't want to read this,
just press 'n' or whatever your newsreader permits to skip this article.

(T minus hours:minutes:seconds:tenths of a second)
T-0:0:06.94	Computer starts SSMEs
T-0:0:06.60	SSME #1 ignites
T-0:0:06.48	SSME #2 ignites
T-0:0:06.36	SSME #3 ignites
T-0:0:03.00	Shuttle CDR/Pilot checks MPS Press Pc gauge to make sure it's
above 90%. MN ENGINE STATUS lights should be off.
T-0:0:02.64	2.64 sec timer for SRB ignition starts.
T+0:0:00.00	SRBs ignites, Lift-off
T+0:0:05.50	Launch tower cleared
T+0:0:07.00	120 degree roll into "heads down" position
T+0:0:14.00	Roll maneuver completed; LVLH reminder to CDR/Pilot.
T+0:0:30.00	ADI to give LVLH status.
T+0:0:44.00	Approx. Mach 1 velocity achieved, Max Q; SSMEs throttle down to
65% from 104%.
T+0:01:06	SSMEs throttle back up to 104%
T+0:02:00	SRBs burnout - Pc<50 signal appears on CRT indicating that SRB
combustion chamber pressures (Pc) is less than 50 psi (345 kilopascals).
T+0:02:07	SRB SEP, approx 174,000 feet high, 160 mi. downrange
T+0:04:20	Negative return call from Mission Control (MC); RTLS no longer
possible at this point.
T+0:06:30	TAL can only occur when velocity is over 1.11 mi/sec or 4000
MPH.
T+0:07:00	Report to MC that orbit can be reached even if 2 SSMEs fail.
T+0:07:40	SSMEs throttle down to keep acceleration at around 3g.
T+0:08:28	SSMEs throttle down to 65%
T+0:08:38	MECO
T+0:08:54	ET SEP.
T+0:09:00	-Z translation done; preparation for OMS-1 burn
T+0:10:39	OMS-1 burn.
T+0:12:24	End of OMS-1 burn.
T+0:12:30	Post-OMS-1 activities, APU shutdown.
T+0:45:58	OMS-2 burn.
T+0:46:34	OMS-2 cut-off.

In orbit (from 160-210 miles at 17,590 mi./hr or almost 5 mi/sec).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vocabulary list:
SSME-Space Shuttle Main Engine
SRB-Solid Rocket Boosters
ADI-Attitude Direction Indicator
LVLH-Local vertical/local horizontal
Max Q- Maximum dynamic pressure on orbiter
RTLS-Return to Launch Site
TAL-Transatlantic abort
MC- Mission Control
MECO-Main Engine Cut Off
ET-External Tank
OMS-Orbital Maneuvering System


Many thanks!

--Dan Foster

Just in case my .sig doesn't work (I'm having some problems)...you can always
send e-mail to dsf5454@ritvax.isc.rit.edu


|------|  Dan Foster, Rochester Institute of Technology
| Rent |  <-- This space for rent!
| Me!  |      Sorry, this .sig is still in beta testing!  :-)
|------|  Internet address: dsf5454@ritvax.isc.rit.edu                
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: drg@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu (David Gutierrez)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Russia's OPERATIONAL Starwars Defense System
Date: 5 Nov 1992 19:49:18 GMT
Organization: Univ. Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center

You left out their PHOTON TORPEDOES.

David Gutierrez
drg@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu

"Only fools are positive." - Moe Howard

Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: mheney@access.digex.com (Michael K. Heney)
Subject: Re: Launch sequence of events?
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:39:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.000648.6893@ultb.isc.rit.edu> dsf5454@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>Hello, net community... I just got this information. However, I would like to
>see if anyone can correct this or add to it. If you don't want to read this,
>just press 'n' or whatever your newsreader permits to skip this article.
>
>(T minus hours:minutes:seconds:tenths of a second)
>T-0:0:06.94	Computer starts SSMEs
>T-0:0:06.60	SSME #1 ignites
>T-0:0:06.48	SSME #2 ignites
>T-0:0:06.36	SSME #3 ignites

  [...etc.  Summary - Big Piece of Hardware becomes airborne against its ]
  [         better judgement and begins moving mind-bogglingly fast.     ]

>T+0:08:38	MECO
>T+0:08:54	ET SEP.
>T+0:09:00	-Z translation done; preparation for OMS-1 burn
>T+0:10:39	OMS-1 burn.
>T+0:12:24	End of OMS-1 burn.
>T+0:12:30	Post-OMS-1 activities, APU shutdown.
>T+0:45:58	OMS-2 burn.
>T+0:46:34	OMS-2 cut-off.

Shuttle launches now use a "direct ascent" trajectory, no OMS-1 burn is
performed.  The time and duration of the OMS2 burn is a bit dependant 
on the height and inclination of the target orbit, I believe; however,
with no OMS-1 burn, I think the OMS-2 burn is closer to 2 minutes in 
duration.  I'm sure someone will tell us ... ;-}




-- 
Mike Heney                |   Senior Systems Analyst and     |  Reach for the
mheney@access.digex.com   |  Space Activist / Entrepreneur   |  Stars, eh?
Kensington, MD (near DC)  |     * Will Work for Money *      |
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: glp7584@tamuts.tamu.edu (Gordon Lee Powell Jr)
Subject: Re: e
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 23:26:43 GMT

In article <1469200004@igc.apc.org> tom@igc.apc.org writes:
>
>do we still use UDMH as a liquid fuel?
>

I don't know about "we", but Iraqi Scud B's and Al-Hussein's 
use UDMH and IRNFA.

So, I assume other countries at that level of technology would
also still use them.

Gordon L. Powell, Jr. '89            glp7584@zeus.tamu.edu (VMS on VAX 9000)
Aero Engr  Texas A&M Univ.           gordon@aero.tamu.edu (D. U. on S. C.)
Oh well, some people can flame in a nitrogen environment.--Les Earnest

Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: forrepr@eng.auburn.edu (Philip R. Forrest)
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle Frequencies Scannable?
Reply-To: forrepr@eng.auburn.edu
Organization: Auburn University Engineering
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:50:31 GMT


I am definitely not a communications specialist, but I'll give these
a once over...
>
>Is that information publically available?  

Well, if you find yourself in Houston, you can pick up
both CAPCOM and NASA-Select Audio around the 170ish Mhz range.
Other NASA-villes may have similar set-ups. The Public Affairs
Office has never arrested anyone for asking questions. 

>Are the transmissions scrambled?

I think the Flight Surgeon's Channel is scrambled for crew
personal privacy. I guess so you won't hear:

'Hey Doc, Where's the Immodium AD ?!?!?!?!?!?'

Also, I'm sure they'll scramble the 'juicy' audio from
the upcoming DOD flight; although, the 'phone' of choice
will probably be the relatively new laser communications
system.

>Can someone post the frequencies?

I think UHF and C-Band are the utilized bands during dynamic
flight phases. It's just a guess, but they probably use the
military band (~300-400 Mhz ?)

I have heard CAPCOM on NASA Select say:

"Atlantis, Houston. COM check, UHF only"


...just my two cents...

--
Phil Forrest - Ascent FDO wanna be
Auburn University Mechanical Engineering
Auburn, AL
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Russia's OPERATIONAL Starwars Defense System
Date: 9 Nov 92 05:35:05 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <1992Nov5.220205.25028@pony.Ingres.COM> kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn) writes:
]Oh Bobbie, you of the purported degree (which I have come to doubt): can the
]crapola, son.  You've flooded so many forums, so often, so repeatedly, with
]the same junk, that you are no longer amusing.

I've emailed him some critiques of that article and basically demanded he
find better proof than his canned articles. Let's wait and see if he decides
to grow up and use fact, not screaming tantrums. I wouldn't hold your breath
too long waiting for that.

]
]--
]Kevin Quinn                         | kevinq@ingres.com
]                                    | {mtzinu,pacbell,ll-winken,sun}!ingres.com
]My opinions are my own.  Should you think otherwise, think again.


-- 
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) |----------------------------------------------------
From: forrepr@eng.auburn.edu (Philip R. Forrest)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Answer to 104%/109% Thrust Quest.
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:11:20 GMT
Reply-To: forrepr@eng.auburn.edu
Organization: Auburn University Engineering

Yea, you guys got it right. The thrust percentages use an
older engine's power output as a baseline. 

Here's another trivium...Why do Shuttle Flight Rules state
that an engine may be throttled to 109% ONLY if the other
two engines are down ?

--
Phil Forrest - Ascent FDO wanna be
Auburn University Mechanical Engineering
Auburn, AL
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Software/NASA employees
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 07:34:03 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Nov6.001418.7066@ultb.isc.rit.edu> dsf5454@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>Hello... I was wondering if anybody knows HAL/S (High-order Assembly
>Language/Shuttle)? That is, how different is it from regular assembly language?

It's not an assembly language at all.  It's a rather weird Algol/Pascal-ish
language with built-in vector operations.

>Incidentially, is the area that KSC is in still referred to as Cape Canaveral
>by its employees, tourists, or the local natives?

Well, technically KSC is on Merritt Island, mostly.

The general area is correctly known, by all and sundry including USGS maps,
as Cape Canaveral.  The name change to Cape Kennedy lasted only a few years
before it was officially rescinded.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu (DANIEL M. DEOCAMPO)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Russia's OPERATIONAL Starwars Defense System
Date: 7 Nov 92 10:16:00 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Nov6.185847.29199@newsgate.sps.mot.com>, rrgd50@email.sps.mot.com (Chris Terwilliger) writes...

[some really weird stuff deleted]

This reminds me a posting over on sci.geo.geology.  It was a pseudoscience
posting about how tectonics doesn't really happen, how geophysicists,
seismologists, and others are involved in a grand scheme to deceive us all, and
how (I'm fuzzy on the details, but it was garbage anyway) in fact earthquakes
are caused by electromagnetic radiation interacting in certain ways with cosmic
waves and the Earth's crust.

There was a pretty heated discussion, but I'm wondering if people here have any
thoughts about how these sorts of ideas are contrived.  Of course, I
_completely_ understand if people just want to leave this one alone and let it
float away (as I wish all of these ideas would). In any case, they do provide a
bit of entertainment ;-), although they can be a little unnerving.

Daniel Deocampo                          Undergrad (I have an excuse for    
ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu                            any silly comments.)
                                         Department of Geology
---------------------|                   Environmental Studies Program
"Be gneiss to me,    |                   Tufts University
 I'm going through   |
 a lot of schist."   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Russia's OPERATIONAL Starwars Defense System
Date: 8 Nov 92 22:35:48 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <cpetersn.721002012@vincent2.iastate.edu> cpetersn@iastate.edu (Clifton R Peterson) writes:
[Did this guy write for Dr Who?  <g>

As I claimed when I first flamed McElwaine on this article, he plagarized most
of his data from Japanese anime except he replaced Gamilons with Russians.
After all, his EXTREMELY POWERFUL NEUTRAL PARTICLE BEAM WEAPON sounds 
suspiciously like the Wave Motion Gun from "Spaceship Yamato." :-)

[
[-- 
[ _________________________________________________________________________
[/ Clifton R. Peterson    1108 Burnett		(515)232-5254	    	  \
[| B.S. Chem E            Ames IA  50010                                   |
[\_______________"42"_is_one_hell_of_an_answer!!___________________________/


-- 
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.shuttle
From: forrepr@eng.auburn.edu (Philip R. Forrest)
Subject: Re: Launch sequence of events?
Reply-To: forrepr@eng.auburn.edu
Organization: Auburn University Engineering
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 05:42:45 GMT

In article AG1@zoo.toronto.edu, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <1992Nov7.234954.2416@serval.net.wsu.edu> kfarmer@wsuaix.csc.wsu.edu (keith farmer;S10000) writes:
>>>Shuttle launches now use a "direct ascent" trajectory, no OMS-1 burn is
>>>performed...
>>
>>Does this invalidate the Space Shuttle Operator's Manual?
>
>The SSOM was written pretty early in shuttle history and I don't think it's
>been updated.  Don't take it as gospel on fine points.
>-- 
>MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
>              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

The SSOM still includes the OMS-1 burn due to the fact that it is an integral
part of the Abort-to-Orbit (ATO) profile, and it is also used when the shuttle
experiences a real low first or second stage performance with 3 SSME's to MECO.

Here's a good trivium...How can ANY engine develop more than 100% of rated 
power output ?? (i.e. 104% ?)

--
Phil Forrest - Ascent FDO wanna be
Auburn University Mechanical Engineering,
Auburn, AL
From: BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Shuttle's rocket booster question
Date: Sat,  7 Nov 92 14:34:03 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Oct25.195911.3215@rvgs.vak12ed.edu> <17445@ksr.com> <3978@phred.UUCP>

I believe the RCS thrusters have also been used for very minor orbital
maneuvering where the OMS engines would not be efficient. Specfically, the
RCS thrusters were used to adjust the orbital parameters during all of the
rendesvous missions, most recently the STS-49 Intelsat VI rescue flight.
-Brian
From: rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com (Rich Kolker)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Launch sequence of events?
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:48:18 GMT
Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc.

In article <1992Nov12.130538.28783@slcs.slb.com> brydon@dsn.SINet.slb.com writes:
>Philip R. Forrest (Forrest@eng.au) writes:
>>Here's a good trivium...How can ANY engine develop more than 100% of rated 
>>power output ?? (i.e. 104% ?)
>
>I'm an electrical engineer, not a rocket scientist, but if principles of
>electrical generators apply to rockets...
>
>Electrical generators in hydro stations routinely run at 110% (or whatever) of
>rated capacity during peak loads.  In one respect, the rating is a somewhat
>'soft' ceiling and the actual load can be exceeded for 'short' periods of
>time.  The term 'short' for large generators can be measured in days.  The
>rating assumes steady state operation (which it isn't) and is mostly thermal
>in nature.  It takes a long time to heat up one of those suckers, and 'burn
>out' would have to be pretty drastic over a long period of time.
>
>Same thing with circuit breakers.  While a 35 amp breaker is designed to trip
>at about 35 amps steady-state operation, it is also designed to pass much
>larger currents (ie. about 200 amps) in surges for short periods of time to
>allow for things like motors to start up.  A motor will routinely generate
>this kind of load when you turn it on.
>
>Is this applicable to shuttle engines?  Do I get a gold star?

The 100 percent rating for SSMEs was determined during initial testing.
Since then, the engines have been improved.  They could change the rated
thrust, or use 104 (or even 109) percent.  NASA chose the latter.
.
++rich
-------------------------------------------------------------------
   rich kolker       rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com
                          It's been a long, long time
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: sk4i+@andrew.cmu.edu (Samuel John Kass)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Launch sequence of events?
Date: 9 Nov 92 01:41:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.EezYtl200WBNI0qYgq
	<1992Nov9.054245.3985@news.duc.auburn.edu>
Organization: Sophomore, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

On 09-Nov-92 in Re: Launch sequence of
user Philip R. Forrest@eng.au writes:
>Here's a good trivium...How can ANY engine develop more than 100% of rated 
>power output ?? (i.e. 104% ?)

Ask Scotty... he used to do it almost every episode.
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: forrepr@eng.auburn.edu (Philip R. Forrest)
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle Frequencies Scannable?
Reply-To: forrepr@eng.auburn.edu
Organization: Auburn University Engineering
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:48:31 GMT

In article 22946@dartvax.dartmouth.edu, flowerpt@coos.dartmouth.edu (Bill McGonigle) writes:
>I can't find a FAQL, so lets hope this isn't a FAQ... 
>
>I was looking at scanners, and I was wondering if its possible to pick
>up space shuttle frequencies on any scanners.  

I am definitely not a communications specialist, but I'll give these
a once over...
>
>Is that information publically available?  

Well, if you find yourself in Houston, you can pick up
both CAPCOM and NASA-Select Audio around the 170ish Mhz range.
Other NASA-villes may have similar set-ups. The Public Affairs
Office has never arrested anyone for asking questions. 

>Are the transmissions scrambled?

I think the Flight Surgeon's Channel is scrambled for crew
personal privacy. I guess so you won't hear:

'Hey Doc, Where's the Immodium AD ?!?!?!?!?!?'

Also, I'm sure they'll scramble the 'juicy' audio from
the upcoming DOD flight; although, the 'phone' of choice
will probably be the relatively new laser communications
system.

>Can someone post the frequencies?

I think UHF and C-Band are the utilized bands during dynamic
flight phases. It's just a guess, but they probably use the
military band (~300-400 Mhz ?)

I have heard CAPCOM on NASA Select say:

"Atlantis, Houston. COM check, UHF only"


...just my two cents...

--
Phil Forrest - Ascent FDO wanna be
Auburn University Mechanical Engineering
Auburn, AL



Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: gawne@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: Launch sequence of events?
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:17:19 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.054245.3985@news.duc.auburn.edu>, 
forrepr@eng.auburn.edu (Philip R. Forrest) writes:
> Here's a good trivium...How can ANY engine develop more than 100% of rated 
> power output ?? (i.e. 104% ?)

Easy, just get it rated conservatively.  My Dodge 318 is *rated* at
150 bhp from the factory.  But a rear-wheel dynomometer measures 235
bhp at 4400 rpm in high gear.  Thus the engine produces (235/150)*100%
of its rated power.  That's 157% of *rated* power.

In the case of the shuttle the main engine's power output was rated
based on preliminary information that proved to be slightly conservative
after testing.  Thus the main engines are easily run up to 104% of their
rated power.

-Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Software/NASA employees
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 00:53:30 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1469200003@igc.apc.org> tom@igc.apc.org writes:
>isn't cape canaveral the air force base just south of ksc?

The name applies to several things, including the region, a specific
geographical feature, and a USAF base.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: wb8foz@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (David Lesher)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Russia's OPERATIONAL Starwars Defense System
Date: 7 Nov 1992 23:36:28 GMT
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex
Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher)
NNTP-Posting-Host: skybridge.scl.cwru.edu

Mother says:
	Cattle mutilations are up, again....

--
A host is a host from coast to coast..wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
From: hendrick@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Heath S Hendrickson)
Subject: Re: Shuttle Launch Info?
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 21:44:52 GMT

In article <27205@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bonanni@oasys.dt.navy.mil (David Bonanni) writes:
>Hi all!
>
>I saw a post the other day (which has now dissappeared from my reader)
>which said that there is a DOD flight of Discovery scheduled for launch
>Nov 19 1992.  Through incredible luck, I am going to be in the Orlando
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well, don't worry about it, the missions postponed until the first week of
December (they don't want a crew up around a holiday).  I don't
have the exact date in front of me  (Right now it's scheduled for
the 2nd, but you know Shuttle launches...<grin>).  As for
getting on-site to see it, I don't know.  Hope it helped.

Heath



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Heath S. Hendrickson                         "For what is man without
hendrick@gn.ecn.purdue.edu                    his dreams?"
Aerospace Engineering at Purdue University
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Spacelink.
From: Jeff_Green@kcbbs.gen.nz (Jeff Green)
Date: 10 Nov 92 13:53:54 GMT
Organization: Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, New Zealand

To Space_nz@kiwi.gen.nz(Spacelink)
From Jeff_Green@KcBBs.gen.nz.

It is with interest that I see your address in Usenet. Are you connected
somehow with SpaceLink in the U.S.?
Could you enlighten me on the position of the Galaxy 7 spacecraft and 
the situation on the TDRSS mark 11 spacecraft please.

Also do you have any info on Australian Astronaut Candidate Andrew Thomas
who worked at J.P.L.

Thankyou in advance.
Message ends.