HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee)
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
Subject: Currently mounted CD-ROMs in the SPACE Archive
Date: 30 Jul 92 00:27:53 GMT
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Apparently-To: sci-space-news@ames.arc.nasa.gov

I've just mount Viking Orbiter Images of Mars, volume 8.  This will be the
last of the Viking Orbiter discs that I'm mounting (until the next go
around).  I've also mounted Magellan volume 31.  Both discs are available
via anonymous ftp to ames.arc.nasa.gov, in the pub/SPACE/CDROM and
pub/SPACE/CDROM2 directories.
							-Peter Yee
							yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: SAMPEX Spacecraft Emergency - 07/21/92
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  SAMPEX
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 23:50:35 GMT

                            SAMPEX SPACECRAFT EMERGENCY
                                  July 21, 1992

     The SAMPEX POCC (Payload Operations Control Center) declared a spacecraft
emergency on July 21 at 1400Z.  The project reports high voltage readings
on their LEICA instrument which were out of limits.  DSS-66 (Madrid 26 meter
antenna) was taken off of maintenance to provide emergency support.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Most of the things you 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | worry about will never
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | happen.

Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Magellan Update - 07/27/92
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  Magellan, JPL
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 02:01:38 GMT

Forwarded from the Magellan Project

                     MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT
                         July 27, 1992

1.  Magellan continues to operate under the M2206 command
    sequence, which consists of a starcal (star calibration)
    on every orbit and a reaction wheel desaturation on every
    other orbit.  No radar mapping is being performed.

2.  Later today the spacecraft controllers start preliminary
    command activity for a test of the transmitter which will
    start tomorrow.

3.  The objective is to find an operating mode which will
    allow radar mapping in early September to fill the only
    significant gap in Magellan's global coverage of Venus, a
    10-day mapping segment at the end of the cycle.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Most of the things you 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | worry about will never
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | happen.

Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Mars Observer Update - 07/22/92
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  Mars Observer, JPL, KSC
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 06:31:12 GMT

Forwarded from Glenn Cunningham, Mars Observer Deputy Project Manager

                          MARS OBSERVER
                 DAILY ACTIVITIES STATUS REPORT
                            FROM THE
      KENNEDY SPACE CENTER/CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION

                      Launch Minus 56 Days

Date of report:     7-22-92        Time of report:     5:50 pm EDT

Work on the communications problem between the spacecraft computers
and the spacecraft checkout station seems to have been solved by
bypassing the KSC provided multiplexer/demultiplexer system with
four hard wire circuits to carry the command data and associated
clock signals.  Successful loads of the spacecraft computers were
accomplished last night.

A tiger team has been put in place to assess, and correct if
required, the potential for a similar communications problem with
the spacecraft on launch complex 40.

MMH fueling has been completed and the crew is finishing cleanup
operations at this time.

As soon as the high bay is available for electrical work, the
cables to the TOS (Transfer Orbit Stage) adapter and to the TOS
will be replaced to further validate readiness for the MO/TOS interface
test #2 which is now scheduled for Thursday afternoon.

Hydrazine sampling is scheduled for Thursday morning.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Most of the things you 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | worry about will never
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | happen.

Newsgroups: sci.space.news
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Mars Observer Update - 07/24/92
Followup-To: sci.space
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Keywords:  Mars Observer, JPL, KSC
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 05:56:51 GMT

Forwarded from Glenn Cunningham, Mars Observer Deputy Project Manager

                          MARS OBSERVER
                 DAILY ACTIVITIES STATUS REPORT
                            FROM THE
      KENNEDY SPACE CENTER/CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION

                      Launch Minus 54 Days

Date of report:     7-24-92        Time of report:     5:00 pm EDT


The MO/TOS (Mars Observer/Transfer Orbit Stage) interface test #2
was completed last night without problem.

The hydrazine sample taken yesterday was analyzed last night and
found to fail the particulate count requirement.  In addition, a
red powdery residue was obtained from the filter paper.  Hydrazine
loading was not started this morning as scheduled.

A second set of samples was taken this morning from further
downstream in the loading cart after the final filter.  One of
these samples passed the particulate count test (the other failed
by only one count), and thus the test was considered successful.
No red residue was detected.  The chem lab assumes (from prior
experience) that the contaminate came from a dirty cart and was
filtered out by the final filter.  The final samples appeared as
the lab expected.  Analysis of the residue will be made.  Hydrazine
loading was then begun about 4 pm.

The adapter harness pyro circuit test previously scheduled for
tonight, will be conducted tomorrow afternoon.  The remainder of
the weekend will be used for starting the final mechanical closeout
operations, and readying support equipment for mating to the TOS
adapter.

Weighing of the spacecraft in the fueled condition is scheduled for
Monday, and mating to the TOS adapter is scheduled on Tuesday.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Most of the things you 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | worry about will never
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | happen.

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Re: Galileo Antenna. What's left to try?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 02:58:08 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.190805.4575@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, knapp@spot.Colorado.EDU (David Knapp) writes...
> 
>Perhaps I've missed some crucial posts (which is entrirely possible given
>a quirky news server) but I haven't seen a lot of news regarding the
>details of the Galileo Antenna. 
> 
>What can be attempted?  Thruster bursts? Fast rotation?

After the Earth flyby when the thermal conditions are more favorable, the
deployment motors will be pulsed to hammer the ballscrew which drives the
shaft which opens the antenna.  An additonal 1.5 revolution turn of the
ballscrew is expected. 

>What is the confidence that *some* technique will succeed?

The best news occurred in the past week when the motors were 
turned on twice for a two second duration each time.  The data indicates 
ballscrew had turned and this provides a lot of confidence in the
upcoming pulsing attempt.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Most of the things you 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | worry about will never
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | happen.
From: roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Propulsion questions
Date: 23 Jul 92 01:32:11 GMT
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology
	formerly National Bureau of Standards


-From: sherwood@fenris.space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford)
-Subject: Re: Propulsion questions
-Date: 20 Jul 92 19:39:55 GMT
-Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada

-> (if you have only a microgram of protons in your one-metre bottle, the
-> potential energy is as high as the mass energy).
-> 
-> Nick Haines nickh@cs.cmu.edu

-Is this then a means of storing energy at higher densities than merely having  
-it as mass?  (Anti protons, heck, we'll just stuff a pound of electrons into a  
-soda straw.  Point it away from the direction you want to go, and snip off the  
-end...)

The mass of the bottle + contents goes up by the mass-equivalent of the 
energy it took to force the contents into the bottle.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace)
Subject: Re: ETs and Radio
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 20:30:00 GMT

In <1992Jul29.162909.3574@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:

>In article <rwallace.712328556@unix1.tcd.ie> rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace) writes:
>>Given that for evolution of life to start, a simple living organism must
>>come together from amino acids etc. by accident; and that for any
>>complex structure to fall together by accident is extremely improbable;
>>then it looks pretty much like the odds against life appearing on any
>>one planet could easily be more than 10^1000 to 1 against, and the
>>number of planets in the visible universe is only about 10^22.

>When you place hydrogen and oxygen together in a 2:1 ratio and provide 
>an energy source, what happens? Blooey! Every time? Yes, every time. 
>That's the way it is with life chemicals, there is nothing accidental 
>about their combination.  It's just basic organic chemistry at work. 
>We have very good evidence that the primordial chemical mixtures of
>early planetary bodies contain the proper precursor compounds and
>elements in abundance. We know that solar UV and electrical discharges, 
>lightning, will supply the necessary energy. We've done it in a test tube. 
>We haven't yet made the step to the enclosed cell, but with 10^23 precursor
>molecules in every cubic meter, the combination is bound to occur.

Yes, I realize that amino acids are bound to form under the appropriate
conditions. However, those amino acids are no more likely to
spontaneously assemble into a life form than 10^6 transistors placed in
a box and shuffled around are to assemble themselves into a working
computer.







--
"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem"
Russell Wallace, Trinity College, Dublin
rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: FYI No. 97: NASA Issues Space Station Strategic Plan...
Originator: kjenks@krakatoa
Organization: NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:26:22 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.001406.12352@unixg.ubc.ca> keith@msmri.med.ubc.ca writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.185457.18611@relay.nswc.navy.mil> rsherme@nswc-wo.navy.mil (Russel Shermer) writes:
>>NASA Issues Space Station Strategic Plan; Station Opponents
>>Announce Plans
>>
>>FYI No. 97, July 24, 1992
>>
>>In a new 48-page report, NASA has presented its vision of Space
>>Station Freedom's projected accomplishments, mission, goals, and
>>objectives.  [...]
>
>Is anyone planning on scanning this report into GIF files and making it
>available via anonyomous ftp?  

If somebody mails me a paper copy, I'll scan it.

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

     "We at NASA develop cutting-edge technology for our aeronautics and
      space programs.  We view technology transfer as a way of life.  
      It's one of our top priorities." -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: bmartino@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Bob Martino)
Subject: Re: Star Trek and public perception of space/science/engineering
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:44:48 GMT


     About the terra-forming thing, and someone saying we shouldn't
do it unless we're *SURE* we're not killing any strange life forms...

     unless someone is first willing to define "life", this
discussion borders on meaningless.  Now don't look at me, I
wouldn't begin to even try to formulate such a definition.

     Just so we all are aware of limitations here.

_________________________________________________________________________
                                    | "...for since the creation of the
      - that Bob Martino guy -      |  world His invisible attributes,
 bmartino@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu |  His eternal power and divine
                                    |  nature, have been clearly seen,
   God invented science.  so there. |  being understood through what
       ^^^^^^^^                     |  has been made        -Romans 1:20
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 "That's the whole problem with science.  You've got a bunch of
  empiricists trying to describe things of unimaginable wonder."
                                                  -Calvin
From: cfrandal@iastate.edu (Charles F Randall)
Subject: GPS for satellite positioning
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 05:33:43 GMT

I've been told that there are _no_ satellites that use GPS for their
positioning data. I find this hard to believe. I've seen
advertisements for the Monarch GPS receivers in 'Space News'.

Does anyone know of an actual satellite that uses GPS for it's
positioning data? Or part of it's positioning data?

It is my understanding that the current level of GPS is only capable
of providing lat. and long. information and in the future, they plan
to incorporate elevation. Is this correct?

Finally, does anyone know if crew members of the Shuttle have taken up
a hand held GPS unit?

Any information would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Randy

Charles F. Randall IV |    _               | "Are you kidding? I study
Aerospace Engineering |  == \---------..,  |  from crisis to crisis!"
Iowa State University |  ==___-----_____>  |       -anonymous student
cfrandal@iastate.edu  | _____b________d___ | <== ascii space shuttle


Newsgroups: sci.space
From: hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack)
Subject: Re: Space Station Freedom assembly questions
Organization: Lockheed ESC, Houston
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 13:56:49 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.111750.65951@cs.cmu.edu> amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk writes:
(The >> below is from a response I wrote on what technical problems
there might be in launching Freedom on Energias)
>> still somewhat suspect.  On one launch, the second stage failed.   
>Not
>> good. There have been only a couple launches, so there is little  
>basis
>> to predict reliability.  There could be problems with things like
>> 
>
>
>On the FIRST launch. Not all that unusual to have problems with a  
>first flight.
>
True, but when the number of flights is 2 (or is it 3?), one of which
(Buran) didn't have the upper stage (according to my fuzzy
recollection), that could be significant.  Also, there would need to be
much fuller disclosure of what went wrong so a rational decision could
be made.

>True, it has not had much flight history. Neither has Pegasus.  
>Neither has SSTO. By that logic we will still be flying Delta's and  
>the shuttle a century from now. 

There is a big difference in risking a few lightsats (on the Pegasus
launches) and a multiBillion $$ program.  Note that out of two launches
of Pegasus, the second was a partial failure due to an upper stage
separation problem. (Note: this is not a slam at OSC - I admire what
they have done and as an engineer, I know that Things Happen.)  The
third Pegasus launch has been delayed again due to a ground test failure
of the new upper stage separation mechanism.

As for SSTO, it has 0 launches.  I also wish the Delta Clipper folks the
best, as what they are doing could be the Next Big Thing in aerospace.

-- 
| Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
| hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov    SpokesPersonp(Me,or(NASA,LESC)) = NIL
|   **** Papoon for President! You Know He's Not Insane!! ****
From: gnb@duke.bby.com.au (Gregory N. Bond)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Antiproton-boosted fission
Date: 30 Jul 92 07:46:02 GMT
Organization: Burdett, Buckeridge & Young, Melbourne, Australia

>>>>> On 23 Jul 92 20:25:49 GMT, tjn32113@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Thomas J. Nugent) said:

>> Unrelated: Weren't books like the Skylark series and the Lensman series
>> (both by E.E. Smith) written sometime in the thirties?  As in, he was
>> simply ignoring the physics which said one simply could not accelerate
>> to a speed faster than that of light?

Each series had a different approach.  The Skylark series basically
said relativity was wrong.  The Lensman series had a device to
neutralize inertia, the assumtion being that relativity didn't apply
to massive but inertialess matter!

[As one of the characters said, inertialess mass isn't so wierd if you
consider we don't really know what mass is!]

Greg, ashamedly admitting a fairly extensive E.E. Smith collection!
--
Gregory Bond <gnb@bby.com.au> Burdett Buckeridge & Young Ltd Melbourne Australia
``USL has never sold long distance.  You're going after the wrong men in black 
  hats.  (Or, in the case of Plan 9, black space suits)'' - Tom Limoncelli
From: roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Star Trek Realism
Date: 28 Jul 92 02:00:02 GMT
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology
	formerly National Bureau of Standards


-From: 18084TM@msu.edu (tom)
-Subject: Star Trek Realism
-Date: 27 Jul 92 16:47:03 GMT

-As long as we're on the Star-Trek vs. reality thread, here's a question
-that used to come up before my housemate Doug said "Shut up and just watch
-the show!":   When the ship is streaming through space, stars moving past
-at several per second, how is it that the ship is steadily lit from one
-side?  What is the source for this light?  It's pretty bad when you aren't
-even into the actual show, and it's already violating known principles :-)

--Tommy Mac                     .  "  Malcolm X:      +

Hi Tom, glad to have you back!

See the Lensman series, re: ultrawave viewers. :-)

In actual practice, it's fairly complex. The ship is filmed in one pass,
and the cabin lights in another pass. The cameras are computer driven,
so they reproduce the same motion for the second pass. There may be a third
pass to produce the silhouette image to chop out of the background.

The entire show is created on actual movie film (not videotape), so each episode
is roughly equivalent to making a half-length theater movie.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: afwendy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (WENDY WARTNICK)
Subject: Re: FTL drives
Summary: those in McIntyre's books
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 23 Jul 1992 11:36 EST  

In article <20755@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL>, slb@slced1.nswses.navy.mil (Shari L Brooks) writes...
>I never saw the original request, so am unsure if you have this...In Vonda
>McIntyre's _superluminal_, they traveled along hyperdimensional axes (the 
>higher the dimension, the farther you went).  This travel was incompatible
>with rhythms and pilots had to replace their hearts with mechanical, non-
>beating pumps.
> 
>Also, in another McIntyre book, the ship uses a solar sail to get to a
>magnetic cosmic string, grabs the string with magnetic claws, rotates around
>it to end up elsewhere in the galaxy.

funny you should mention this...I just finished this "other" book, it was 
called "Starfarers".  Not a bad book!

			wendy
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Whales (SETI)
Date: 24 Jul 92 06:28:48 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie (russell wallace) writes:

> Whales are _not_ intelligent in any significant sense of the word. If they
> were, they could prove it in about 30 seconds, by any number of means (e.g.
> whistle the prime numbers, *-* *-*-* *-*-*-*-* etc. - for that matter just
> whistle the numbers from 1 to 10). In fact, if they were intelligent, since
> they were physically quite a lot tougher than the whaling ships of the 18th
> and 19th centuries, they could have developed tactics to defeat them (e.g.
> several whales surround a whaling ship and clobber it, rather than all the
> whales trying to dive, and the ship gets one of them).

That doesn't prove that they are not intelligent.  They could have reasons for
letting men kill them; reasons that they understand but we don't.  Look at all
the absurd things humans do in the name of religion.  Aliens judging humans by
a few religious fanatics might decide that humans aren't intelligent.  :)

I'm not arguing that whales are intelligent.  However, your argument simply
isn't valid for disproving intelligence.

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: rcs@cs.arizona.edu (Richard Schroeppel)
Subject: censorship, yet again
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 18:41:33 GMT
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci

Henry Spencer (henry@zoo.toronto.edu) posted a short analysis of
Bill Clinton's Space Position.  Doug Davey (ddavey@iscp.bellcore.com)
feels that Henry should'na done it:

> Henry, your technical postings are probably the best things in sci.space.*.
  However, I would respectfully ask that those who neither pay the taxes
  nor vote in the elections kindly refrain from posting politcal analyses
  of political statements from the USAian election campaign.  If you have a
  technical reason why something a candidate proposes is a good or bad idea,
  fine.  However, a cross border political analysis is rude at best.  Thanks.
  Stop Canadian Imperialism!  Yankee Go Home! :-)

I think Doug is wrong.  As a US taxpayer, I hereby invite Henry Spencer to
offer me whatever perspective he has on the politics of space in the US.
I will also note that Henry is a directly interested party, since the outcome
of the election will influence his prospects for eventual space travel.
As an interested party, he is certainly entitled to participate in the debate,
and perhaps even to complain that many disinterested parties (who don't pay
taxes, and don't care about space) are allowed to vote, while he isn't.
I must also ask Doug why he wants to muzzle Henry.  Is it because you don't
like the analysis?  Is it too close to the truth?

Rich Schroeppel  rcs@cs.arizona.edu

Newsgroups: sci.space