HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Mascons on Earth
Date: 14 Nov 92 01:39:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxonDM.Gyw.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU


-From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk
-Subject: Re: Ten embarrassed questions about the moon (very long)
-Date: 12 Nov 92 23:28:14 GMT

-> You don't see these phenomena on the Earth, because over the long run it
-> behaves pretty much like a flexible crust floating on a liquid interior,
-> so any local area of high density tends to sink down, and any region of  
-low
-> density tends to bob up, so out at the distance of Earth orbit, the 
-> anomalous effects tend to cancel out - in other words, the Earth is in 

-John: A slight difference of opinion. Although what you say is true to an  
-extent, there are some gravity differences on Earth. In fact, a good laser  
-altimeter can read off major underwater features from the differences in  
-ocean hieght. Sea level is a relative term. In some places water is  
-actually going "up hill" and "down hill" in sync to the gravitational  
-anomalies caused by subsea massifs and such.

-There are also some differences on land. Although the isostatic  
-equilibrium you name is certainly real, it doesn't always track rapid  
-changes, so there can be highs and lows to some extent.

I agree with all that - I believe I discuss it in a followup post. But
based on my interpretation of several sources, the mascons of Earth have
little or no perceptible effect on orbiting spacecraft (in the sense that
you don't have to allow for them in your calculations when putting your
spacecraft into a selected orbit). I believe this is because the Earth
mascons are generally less intense than those on the moon, and because the
gravitational field of the Earth is so much greater than that of the moon that 
the mascons have a much smaller relative influence on spacecraft trajectory.
(Again, the equatorial bulge does not count as a mascon.)

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Light sails again
Date: 5 Nov 92 15:58:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bx931E.B99.1
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Originator: nickh@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

In article <ida.720921989@atomic> ida@atomic (David Goldschmidt) writes:

[about light-sails]

      force            force
	| /               \  /
	|/         or      \/________>  light path
	/_____>            /|
       /|                 / |
      / | <light         /  |
     ^mirror            ^mirror

     If possible could somebody explain why it happens whichever way.  Its not
   clear to me why the energy lost or gained in red or blue shifting the light
   has to go into kinetic energy  (couldn't it just heat up the sail?)

The left-hand diagram violates conservation of momentum. The
right-hand diagram is correct. Net force for a perfectly-reflecting
mirror is perpendicular to the mirror.

Energy lost or gained (and red- or blue-shifting) is irrelevant. Think
always in terms of momentum transfer, then it's easy.

(tried to send this by mail but you don't have a real Internet address
and I can't be bothered to figure out bang-paths).

Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dong@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Don M. Gibson)
Subject: Re: Mars Simulation in Antarctica
Reply-To: dong@oakhill.sps.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Semiconductor Products Sector
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:58:43 GMT

In article 6433@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov, baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes:
>FIRST STEPS TO MARS TAKEN BY SIMULATION IN ANTARCTICA
>
>	Scientists from NASA and the National Science Foundation (NSF) are
>taking the first steps to Mars this winter in the most unearthly place on the
>planet -- Antarctica.

whose winter?  Dec-March or June-Sept?
>
>	NASA and NSF researchers are conducting several unique science and
>technology projects developed under a joint effort called the Antarctic Space
>Analog Program.  The program uses the harsh, frigid conditions of the
>Antarctic continent to test technology and techniques for future missions to
>the moon and Mars.
>
>	"Our current work stresses exploration by robots and tests of the
>equipment needed to support humans in a remote environment.  We're also
>studying how humans interact with those technologies," said Dr. John D.
>Rummel, NASA Program Committee Co-Chairperson.

this plan always seemed like a boondoggle to me.  can anyone tell me
exactly why this stuff couldn't be done by locking folks into a 
trailer in Houston?  or maybe taking a trip to Minn.  or Alaska or
Canada for the field trials of the equipment.  we know those places 
aren't exactly like mars, but neither is Antarctica.  does the greatly
inflated expense justify the difference at this stage?


Organization: Doctoral student, Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: sci.space
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 23:24:24 -0500 
From: Lawrence Curcio <lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Mars Simulation in Antarctica

Is this rover the same robot we at CMU call, AMBLER? Big red sucker?
Legs arranged like eggbeaters?
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 04:58:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.002919.1688@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> skoester@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Scott A Koester) writes:
>
>   I don't know too much abotu many of the specifics, but in the sense of the 
>moon 'colony' paying for itself, did any mention the fact that if solar arrays 
>are set up on the moon the can produce a large amount energy, energy which 
>could be used to power the base/colony, or could be beamed back down to the 
>EArth in the form of microwaves and then collected and tranformed back into 
>usable energy.  This could be sold at a rate to other countries also.

The inverse square law is a hard master. A microwave array on the Moon
needs a gain 1,000,000 times that of an array at LEO to produce the same
beam on Earth's surface. A Lunar array needs to be 100 times larger than
an array at GEO and is available only 12 hours a day to any given site on
Earth, and receives solar power only 2 weeks a month. It would take decades
of concentrated work to build a Lunar array after permanent manned presence
is established on the Moon, if the array is to be constructed from native
materials. If it's imported from Earth, transport costs kill any chance of
payback.

Satellite power systems are of dubious economic viability at best. Placing
one on such a distant satellite is lunacy. [I kill me. :-)]

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Automated space station construction
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:21:56 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <6615@ucsbcsl.ucsb.edu> 3001crad@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Charles Frank Radley) writes:
>Space Station Freedom is Apollo type technology ?
>Really ?

Pretty much so.  Only incidentals have improved very much.

>Using ADA and 386 / 586 processors and Nickel Hydrogen batteries,

Ada is not an improvement. :-)  Nor is the 386. :-)

The batteries are better... but a solar-dynamic system with phase-change
heat storage would be far superior to any kind of battery.  Had there been
any real effort at improving power technology since Apollo, it would have
been flight-qualified in time for Fred.  Even a regenerative fuel-cell
system would be superior.  Every five years or so, they're going to need
an entire shuttle flight just to replace the batteries.  This is 1960s
technology with minor embellishments.

I won't even mention the antiquated propulsion system being planned for
attitude control and reboost. :-)

Nor the 1970s-vintage spacesuits.
-- 
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: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Dante
Date: 13 Nov 92 03:54:25 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU


-From: lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lawrence Curcio)
-Subject: Re: Mars Simulation in Antarctica
-Date: 12 Nov 92 04:24:24 GMT
-Organization: Doctoral student, Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

-Is this rover the same robot we at CMU call, AMBLER? Big red sucker?
-Legs arranged like eggbeaters?

..........

-From: sk4i+@andrew.cmu.edu (Samuel John Kass)
-Date: 12 Nov 92 03:45:44 GMT
-Organization: Sophomore, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

-    Basically, Dante looks like a big, purple bug.  It's transport
-counterpart, "Virgil" (which was dropped from the Antarctica mission due
-to manpower and time constraints) looked like a high-tech purple dune
-buggy with lots of extra wheels.

Hm, I wonder how they came up with that name. :-)  :-)
It's very, *very* purple - I saw it on display at the rover exposition in
Washington, D.C. a few months ago. (Is the color functional?)

Here are some notes I took at the exposition:

............

  - Dante -- the Erebus Explorer
    size: 3.0 x 1.9 x 3.5 meters
    mass: 400 kg
    speed: 2 cm/s
    comments: Another (6-legged?) walker, hard to describe. It appears to
      be made of beautiful purple anodized aluminum. It's intended to explore
      the active volcano Mount Erebus in Antarctica in 1992. Another robot,
      Virgil, also called the transporter, is to ascend to the rim of the 
      crater, where it will lower Dante, also called the rappeller, to observe 
      the lava lake, measure temperatures, take samples, etc. Not scheduled
      for a demo. Cameras return anaglyph stereo display.

............

-    If our newspaper reports anything new and exciting, I'll be sure to
-post again.
-    --Sam

Please do so.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
From: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check
Date: 13 Nov 92 00:01:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxMo56.8t6.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

> bias and not the state of knowledge in this area. Also underground water and
> volatiles are a definite possiblity. What about carbonaceous meteor impact 

> areas? Would this not enrich the surrounding area and the underground where
> the meteor penetrated with voliatiles or even water in the case of a comet?
> 


Dennis... Have you considered lava tubes? They are old, they are permanently  
dark. If they are deep enough to get below the "permafrost" depth for the moon,  
we might well find volatiles in some extremely useful places. Right on your  
doorstep if you think like the Oregon L5 people. :-)

I do not remember ever reading this idea in print. If it hasn't been then I  
want primacy on it. One problem I see is that the high thermal conductivity of  
the lunar surface. It might cause significant temperature swings even in  
permanently dark caverns.

But if the temperature is right, there is nothing different between the  
proposed mechanism for volatiles to freeze out in polar craters. Cometary  
volatiles form a temporary atmosphere after an impact and most of it escapes  
except the small amount that happens to float into a cold trap. So could a good  
deep lava tube act as such a cold trap?

This seems like a very, very interesting possibility.
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Lunar "colony" reality check and Apollo fire
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:30:34 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Nov11.163643.20662@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas) writes:
>You are right, of course...  Rechecking my refs., I should have said 
>"Spacecraft 12" and not "Apollo 12".  Damn naming conventions.  :)
>Apollo 1 was the mission number, and Spacecraft 12 was the spacecraft
>name...Pardon my confusion.

Actually, the mission code at the time of the fire was AS-204, aka
Apollo 204.  There was no official name; the astronauts were calling it
Apollo 1 but the booster people were calling it Apollo 4 (since three
unmanned tests had preceded it), and NASA HQ had not issued a decision.
The astronauts' wishes were complied with posthumously, at the request
of their widows, and the Apollo 1 name was made official.
-- 
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: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Space suit research?
Date: 13 Nov 92 03:30:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxMxsF.GA0.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU


-From: mheney@access.digex.com (Michael K. Heney)
-Subject: Re: Space suit research?
-Date: 12 Nov 92 14:00:12 GMT
-Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA

-In article <BxL47u.6Fs.1@cs.cmu.edu> roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:
->
->In the NASA Select coverage of a Shuttle mission (this year, I think) in which
->EVAs were used, I believe the commentator remarked that with something other 
->than the usual pre-EVA cabin depressurization, only about half an hour of
->EVA pre-breathe was required. I considered that to be an astounding
->statement, but I never heard any followup. (I'm pretty sure that the mission
->was STS-49, and the cabin pressure was 10.2 psi.)
 
-I remember that, too - I recall that the Shuttle cabin pressure was reduced
-to 8.4 (?) psi, which gretly reduced the pre-breathe times.  Given the
-number of EVA's they had to do on that flight (Intelsat rescue), this
-was a Very Good Thing.

Thanks for the confirmation. 8.4 psi sounds plausible - 10.2 seemed a little
high, since they always depressurize somewhat in preparation for an EVA.

Anyone recall whether there was an unusually high rate of equipment
failure for that flight that might be associated with the lower pressure?
(Other than the fax machine jamming as usual, of course. :-) I remember
that one or more of the cargo bay lights burned out, but that wouldn't
be pressure-related.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dennisn@ecs.comm.mot.com (Dennis Newkirk)
Subject: Re: N-1 giant Moon rocket photo in *AvLeak*
Organization: Motorola 
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:39:56 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.135703.1@fnalf.fnal.gov> higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
>
>The new 9 November issue of *Aviation Week* just hit my mailbox.  On
>page 65 is a nice photograph of the Soviet N-1 rocket on its pad with
>service tower.   The N-1 was the "Soviet Saturn V," the BIG rocket
>whose failure doomed their manned lunar landing program.
>
>The N-1 has always been cloaked in secrecy, and this is only the
>second photo of it that's been published in the West.
> |       |     Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

That's not true. At the least, photos of the N-1 published in the west
probably number in the dozen.  Spaceflight magazine had several detailed
photos of the N-1 Block A (first stage) and excerpts of film of one launch
in an issue a few months ago.  

Aerospace Ambassadors group has published a few photos in their Russian
made books, but these have mostly been seen in other sources first.  

Also, a book published a few months ago in France contains some 
photos of the N-1 different from any I have seen in this country, 
including an aerial photo of 2 N-1's on both launch pads. This book also
contains information on other once secret projects similar to the 
Russian "Unknown Spacecraft" booklet privately published earlier this year
or last year and translated by the good folks at FBIS-JPRS.

Dennis Newkirk (dennisn@ecs.comm.mot.com)
Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector
Schaumburg, IL
From: clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Soviet lunar sample return [was Re: NASA Coverup]
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:49:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: ksr.18349
Reply-To: clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones)
Organization: Kendall Square Research Corp
In-reply-to: snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us

In article <4603@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us>, snarfy@cruzio writes:
>				    The  Soviets  announced  that  pure  iron
>   particles  brought back by the remote controlled lunar probe Zond 20

There was no Zond 20.  Three Soviet Luna missions did bring back lunar soil
samples, and I believe Luna 20 was one of them.
--
Chris Jones    clj@ksr.com
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent)
Subject: Re: What kind of computers are in the shuttle?
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 03:54:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.001047.10408@nuchat.sccsi.com> rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com (Rich Kolker) writes:

>Now, if we can just get the money for the glass cockpit...

Rockwell recently won a multi-million dollar contract to upgrade the Shuttle's
avionics.  This contract is the one, I believe, that is known as glass cockpit.

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!
From: r.kracht@abbs.hanse.de (Rainer Kracht)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: the Happyface on Mars
Reply-To: r.kracht@abbs.hanse.de
Date: 07 Nov 92 00:17:00 MET
Distribution: sci
Organization: ABBS AstroMail, D-W 2121 Dahlenburg / Germany
X-Version: ZerUU V6.45c


Happyface = Crater Galle = 31 deg/-51 deg = 352S26 = VO_1005


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABBS AstroMail, the first and most popular German astronomical bulletin board
------------------------- for amateur astronomers ----------------------------
    + 49 5851 7896 / V.21, V.22, V.22bis, V.32, V.42, V.42bis and MNP5
    ------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: sci.space
From: rcs@cs.arizona.edu (Richard Schroeppel)
Subject: Clarke's Law
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: [via International Space University]
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:57:36 GMT

I always liked

  Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.

Rich Schroeppel   rcs@cs.arizona.edu

Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy
From: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Subject: Re: NASA Coverup
Originator: nickh@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<1992Nov7.172512.19339@scic.intel.com> <gregn.721376009@coombs>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:20:53 GMT

In article <gregn.721376009@coombs> gregn@coombs.anu.edu.au (Gregory Newton) writes:

   ObConspiracy(quite possibly true): Von Daniken wrote a lot of crap with
   evidence he made up in order to sell books (to the gulible) and make
   himself very rich.

Oh, this _is_ true. I've seen him admit it to a journalist in a
documentary about the crap he makes up.

Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov
Subject: Re: Ten embarrassed questions about the moon (very long)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 06:11:00 GMT

In article <721206789snx@osea.demon.co.uk>, andy@osea.demon.co.uk (Andrew Haveland-Robinson) writes...
> 
>In article <BxD5Hz.Ewt.1@cs.cmu.edu> roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov writes:
> 
>>
>>
>>-From: snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us
>>-Subject: NASA Coverup
>>-Keywords: Ten Embarrassing Questions about the Moon
>>-Date: 6 Nov 92 23:37:31 GMT
>>
>>-   As promised ,here come the ...
>>
>>-                    TEN EMBARRASSING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MOON
>>
>>I expect you'll get a tremendous number of replies - I'll try to answer some
>>of the easier questions.
> 
>An excellent article!  I have a couple of questions...
> 
>What is the ratio of density of the mascons to the "masdeps" (depletions)?
> 
>Are the mascons responsible for the locked orbit? If so, then that would
>explain why the Marias are dense and are only found facing the Earth.
> 
>References I've seen indicate that Earth's tides are responsible for
>locking the moon's rotation to the orbit.
> 
>Andy.
> 
>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>| Haveland-Robinson Associates   | Email: andy@osea.demon.co.uk         |
>| 54 Greenfield Road, London     |        ahaveland@cix.compulink.co.uk |
>| N15 5EP England. 081-800 1708  | Also:  0621-88756 081-802 4502       |
>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>>>>> Those that can, use applications. Those that can't, write them! <<<<
>> Some dream of doing great things, while others stay awake and do them <



Here are a couple of references that may help people on this subject. It isn't
as cut and dry as my friend John suggests.

Mascons: Lunar Mass Concentrations

P. M. Muller and W. L. Sjogren
SCIENCE 16, August 1968, Volume 161. pp 680-684

Lunar Gravity Via the Apollo 15 and 16 Subsatellites
W.L. Sjogren and R. N. Wimberly
Paper presented at the Lunar Science Institute conference on Geophysical
and Geochemical Exploration of the Moon and Planets, January 10-12, 1973

Reprinted in "The Moon 9 (1974) pp. 155-128

This is all for now, good luck on your research, the Moon is a wonderful
place and we WILL live there one day.

Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville
From: elling.olsen@thcave.no (Elling Olsen)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: NASA COVERUP
Date: 11 Nov 92 18:09:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Thunderball Cave BBS - Oslo, Norway  (47 2) 56 70 18
Reply-To: elling.olsen@thcave.no (Elling Olsen)

HS> This is laughable.

EO>Why don't you do some work and disprove the claim that the
EO>earth/moon neutral point have changed from 20,000-25,000 miles
EO>to 43,495 miles from the center of the moon?

HS>I have too much real, worthwhile work to do already.

EO>Or is it more
EO>confortable to sit in your couch judging and laughing?

HS>"They laughed at Fulton."
HS>
HS>"Yes, but they also laughed at Rube Goldberg."

With limited time, I understand and respect peoples need to do
what they consider real and worthwhile.  What I feel rather
strongly about is someones need to laugh at what they know
little about and do not care to look at.  I do not know about
Fulton or Rube Goldberg, so please enlighten me.  My current
interpretation of Henry Spencers comment is that he finds it OK
to laugh at Fulton because Rube Goldberg was wrong.  I find that
kind of attitude very saddening, more so when it comes from one
interested in science and even more so if the person happens to
be a scientist.  Such a person may be useful in science, but it
is not likely he will do anything outrageous for his time.  He
will not invent the telephone, build an airplane, ask the
doctors to wash their hands after touching a corpse or (read my
lips) find a cure for AIDS.

Elling

Newsgroups: sci.space