HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: TWICK@corral.uwyo.edu (Tony Wickersham 307-766-6832)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Nasa flight sim code/Simulator Game
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:00:34 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: [via International Space University]
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

> Date: 18 Jan 93 17:46:33 GMT
> From: "joseph.l.nastasi" <nastasi@cbnewsk.cb.att.com>
> Subject: Nasa flight sim code/Simulator Game
> 
[...]
> 
> I've tried writing to various factions of the govenment and have
> gotten nowhere (big surprise, huh? :-).
>  
> Someday, I'll get to finishing this thing!
>  
> I wonder if anyone has data on the old Mercury hardware, possible
> someone who worked on the project?  I need _very_ techincal info,
> not the usual P.R. stuff.  I would be willing to pay for copying,
> and mailing.

[...]

> Thanks,
> Joe Nastasi
> AT&T, Middletown, NJ

I realize this is almost ten days old and I don't know if anyone
has replied yet.  Hey, it's tough keeping up with 100K of traffic
per day!

Have you tried the National Archives (NARA) yet?  Perhaps some
Mercury material has been moved there, by now.  All government
branches routinely deposit material of this type, including NASA. 
NARA publishes a periodic listing of new deposits.  I try to post
any new NASA-related deposits to this newsgroup.

If I lived where you live, I would try contacting the New Jersey
Regional Branch of NARA.  For anyone else who wishes to pursue this
type of research, I am including the address and phone of each of
the Regional Branches.

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA):

_NATIONAL_
   Reference Service Branch                          
   7th St & Pennsylvania Ave NW
   Washington, DC  20408                             202-501-5400

_REGIONAL_
Anchorage       AK   654 W 3d Ave, 99501             907-271-2441
San Bruno       CA   1000 Commodore Dr, 94066        415-876-9009
Laguna Niguel   CA   24000 Avila Rd, 92677           714-643-4241
Denver          CO   Denver Federal Center, 80225    303-236-0818
East Point      GA   1557 St Joseph Ave, 30344       404-763-7477
Chicago         IL   7358 S Pulaski Rd, 60629        312-581-7816
Waltham         MA   380 Trapelo Rd, 02154           617-647-8100
Kansas City     MO   2312 E Bannister Rd, 64131      816-926-6272
Bayonne         NJ   Military Ocean Terminal, 07002  201-823-7545
Philadelphia    PA   9th & Market Sts, 19107         215-597-3000
Fort Worth      TX   501 W Felix St, 76115           817-334-5525
Seattle         WA   6125 Sand Point Way NE, 98115   206-526-6347

Source: The United States Goverment Manual, 1990/91; pp. 631-2

---
Tony Wickersham            twick@corral.uwyo.edu
Programmer/User Consultant
University of Wyoming
American Heritage Center
Laramie, WY  USA
From: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Defuse Xray Experiment
Date: 22 Jan 93 17:04:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C19M4G.ABs.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Originator: nickh@SNOW.FOX.CS.CMU.EDU

In article <1993Jan21.194331.1147@sal.wisc.edu> edgar@sal.wisc.edu (Dick Edgar) writes:

   In article <C0uvAy.C5I.1@cs.cmu.edu> TCS1%DCC.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu (Tom Schruefer) writes:
   >
   >>With the successful deploy of TDRS-F, STS-54's other primary payload bean
   >>operations. During orbital night, the Diffuse X-Ray Spectrometer will tke
   >>measurements of the x-ray background of the solar system's interstellar
   >>medium. This information will be used to answer questions about a nearb
   >>super nova that scientists believe occurred about 300,000 years ago.
   >
   >   Does anyone know which star they are talking about ???
   >
   This *may* have to do with the Geminga object, recently revealed by
   Rosat and GRO to be a pulsar with an age of about 300,000 years.  The
   best estimate of the distance is around 100 light-years, so is quite
   close in astronomical terms.

Yes, they're talking about Geminga. See a recent Science News for
more.

Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu
From: nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Beanstalk?
Date: 28 Jan 93 03:25:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: acad3.1993Jan27.192526.1
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

Does anyone know anythng about how to build a beanstalk?

Michael Adams
Alias: Morgoth/Ghost Wheel 
nsmca@acad2.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher)
Subject: So what's happened to Henry Spencer?
Summary: S/N is much reduced
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 04:20:41 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

Does anyone know why Henry Spencer has not posted recently?
His were consistently the most interesting, informative
and terse posts. What a shame if the intemperate remark by
that Harvard snotnose drove him away...
From: lawson%ssdvax.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com (Jim Lawson)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Nasa Select contact req ?
Date: 26 Jan 1993 21:38:02 GMT
Organization: MDSSC-SSD
Reply-To: Lawson%ssdvx1.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: netsun.mdc.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

My cable company is now under the impression that they need "permission"
to broadcast Nasa Select.

Do they ?

Who can I contact at Nasa Select to straighten this out ?

Thanks 

--
Jim Lawson	Lawson%ssdvx1.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com
		Alt:	Lawson@netsun.mdc.com or Lawson@bbs.ug.eds.com

Opinions/Comments expressed here are my own and no one elses !!
From: higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Saves Less Money This Way (was Re: Sabatier Reactors.)
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:42:15 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: fnalf.fnal.gov

In article <24JAN199320503892@judy.uh.edu>, wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov writes:
[Spacelab, Spacehab, and COMET as precursor facilities for SS Fred]
> 
> So NASA, who you think is stupid, IS doing what you are saying there, and
> for a lot more money than a full up program of throwing away hardware.
            ^^^^
Uh-oh, Dennis, I don't think that's what you *meant* to say...

> All of the Spacelab and Spacehab experiments can be used again for very
> minimal costs, as well as the experiments returned from the COMET module.

I thought not.
 
> These experiments are all important as precursors to SSF because we can get
> all of the bugs out of the experiments and the experiment process before we
> fly them on SSF where they can be run in an effective manner, having all of t
> eh bugs worked out on less expensive platforms.  See there NASA ain't half
> as dumb as the average poster to sci.space.

It is all I can do to resist the urge to comment.

Except to say...


> Delta II/Small Expendable (Tether) Deployer System (SEDS) flight
> configuration during deployment, circa March 1993.

GO SEDSAT!!!!!  Huzzah!

Of course, what Shakespeare        | Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey
ORIGINALLY wrote was "First thing  | Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory  
we do, let's kill all the EDITORS."| Bitnet:           HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET  
But for some reason it didn't      | Internet:       HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV  
survive past the first draft.      | SPAN/Hepnet:           43011::HIGGINS  
-- David D. "Laserdave" Levine (davidl@ssd.intel.com)
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Next unmanned missions to Venus
Date: 25 Jan 93 03:35:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C1E4p2.5zI.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: rkornilo@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ryan Korniloff)
-Subject: Re: Next  unmanned missions to Venus *
-Date: 24 Jan 93 06:39:04 GMT
-Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.

-Hmmm, well, I guess if we were to make any kind of serious exploration of
-Venus's  surface we would have to develop electronics componants that
-operate comforably at 900f. And metals that can protect the inards of the
-probe from terrential sulfuric acid down-poors..
-How WOULD we do that by the way? Anyone know??

Read the October 1992 Scientific American. If they pan out, diamond film
semiconductors should be able to operate at up to 700 C (as compared to
~450 C Venus surface temperatures), and be smaller and 40-100 times faster
than silicon semiconductors.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Mir and Solar Sail Combo, more.
Date: 27 Jan 93 03:32:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: acad3.1993Jan26.193236.1
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

In article <1993Jan26.210426.10853@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu>, ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (George Hastings) writes:
>  (nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu) writes:
>> Imnot sure if this idea is feasible, but, its an idea..`
>> What about pre-positioning feul/food/gear packets along the route of the Mars
>> mission or maybe send a unmanned mission ahead maybe by Solar Sailer(s).
>> And pre-[.positioning the craft to be near na..mars when the Mir mission
>> arrives at Mars.
>> 
>> Michael C. Adams
>> NSMCA@ACAD3.ALASKA.EDU
>   Your first idea would be good on an arctic expedition, or
> even on a lunar traverse, but not on a trip to Mars, since
> everything bewteen here and there ALSO has to be revolving
> around the Sun: different distances from the Sun = different
> periods of revolution. You could drop stuff off evenly spaced
> between here and Mars, but when you got to that distance, they
> would no longer be lined up, having travelled along their
> orbital paths since they were left.
>   The second idea of sending some sort of resupply craft ahead,
> and parking it in Martian orbit where you could find it,
> redezvous with it, dock and transfer from it, is a MUCH better
> suggestion!
> 
> George Hastings
> ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu

Your right George, the second is more fesible.. Maybe a multiple stage 
pre-positioning nission.. Why must the big stuff, the extra food/supplies be
sent with the quick human mission.. The slow part can
get there a year or two before the human mission, and maybe act as 
a sensor, launch probes and such and maybe act as a NAV bouy..
And maybe do other missions that would make the human mission easier..Do the
things that humans don't need to do..

Question what would you use to get it there?? Automated Solar Sail would be
nice.. Seems you only need rockets and such when you have to get someplace
quick.. The auto-mission would do surveys of possibel landing/survey sights..

Any better ideas are expected..


Michael Adams
Alias: Morgoth/Ghost Wheel 
nsmca@acad2.alaska.edu
From: hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Apollo Program photos
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:03:15 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Lockheed ESC, Houston

George - email me your site's IP number (or your CIS ID) - I have a few
pointers I'd like to email to you.  Our mailer can't resolve your
address.

-- 
Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov - I speak only for myself, unless blah, blah..
"I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV."
"Detail Dress Circuits" "Belt: Above A, Below B" "Close B ClothesMode"
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: mjensen@herman.gem.valpo.edu (Michael Jensen)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Promises (space) in Charlotte Observer
Organization: Gnosis Industries
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:48:06 GMT
X-Posted-From: gellersen.valpo.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu


I must agree with Dennis from Hunstville.  As a extreemly low paid engineer, 
I too find it sad when people continue to slam NASA for things that are out
of it's control.  We who work for NASA are accepting lower salaries, and 
hard work not because we want to "rip off the taxpayer" or anything close, but
because we love what we do, and we love our country.  The only reason that 
we have the significant majority of the problems we do encounter is because
the US Congress refuses to allow us to do our jobs the way they should be done.

*** Disclaimer - the rantings and ravings in this post are not nessesarily
those of NASA, the United States of America, any Federal Employee, the Federal
Government, or Walt Disney Inc. ***

-- 
Michael C. Jensen				mjensen@gellersen.valpo.edu
Electrical Engineering				jensen@cisv.jsc.nasa.gov
Valparaiso University				mcj0716@exodus.valpo.edu
"I bet the human brain is a kludge." -- Marvin Minsky
From: higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Is it open yet? (was Re: Galileo update?)
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:00:41 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
NNTP-Posting-Host: fnalf.fnal.gov

In article <93025.205009IO20721@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>, Michael Petersen <IO20721@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>Could someone tell me if NASA has successfully deployed the high-gain
>antenna on Galileo yet?   

As newscaster Chevy Chase used to say:

"This just in from Madrid.  According to doctors attending 
Generalissimo Francisco Franco,  the former head of state 
is valiantly hanging on in his fight to remain dead."

No.

[It's been 39 days since the last time I posted this answer 
to this question.]

>I heard that their most "aggressive" attempts
>would occur after the the last Earth flyby.

True.  Still going on.

Bill Higgins                           | Sign in window of 
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory  | Alice's bookstore:
Bitnet:      HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET       | "EVER READ BANNED BOOKS?
Internet:  HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV       |     YOU SHOULD!"
SPAN/Hepnet:      43011::HIGGINS       | Gee, I hope it doesn't become
                                       |   *compulsory*.
From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Soyuz as an ACRV
X-Sender: newtout 0.06 Jan  3 1993
Date: 20 Jan 93  23:31:02


DA>>Under the terms of the Launch Services Purchase Act, NASA is prohibit
DA>>from orbiting non-shuttle-specific payloads. Therefore,
DA>>using the shuttle to orbit Soyuz spacecraft contravenes the LSPA.
>
EH>Why do you assert that it is not STS specific, since the final design 
EH>not yet established?  For example, the design might require a full
EH>load of fuel/oxidizer to do safe deorbit and landing, so it would need
EH>to be docked without using the propulsion system by placing it with th
EH>RMS on the Shuttle. 

The final design of Soyuz was established in 1965 by Sergei Korolyov. 
There have been modifications since. Soyuz is not a Shuttle specific
payload. Any attempt to call a Soyuz a shuttle-specific payload falls
under sophistry.

EH>>However, several U.S. commercial vendors can supply launchers that
EH>>can easily orbit a Soyuz for a more reasonable price than the shuttle
EH>>a nice side benefit, this would create a second means of access to sp
EH>>in the US, in case the shuttle fleet is grounded. 
EH>
EH>The cost to orbit might be cheaper by commercial carrier, depending on
EH>how you do the accounting.  As we have seen here, the entire governmen
EH>uses different procedures for figuring the "cost" of something.  If th
EH>STS fleet is grounded, the only impact aside from STS-specific ops wou
EH>be on Freedom.  This might or might not be critical.

Since Freedom and shuttle will be the only manned space activities in 
this country, grounding of the shuttle would mean the end of manned space
here. This might or might not be critical, depending on your point of
view.

___ WinQwk 2.0b#0

--- Maximus 2.01wb
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Shuttle safety margins
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:30:16 GMT

In <1jk3beINN6c4@mirror.digex.com> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes:

>	my problem with the shuttle is that they used Military safety amrgins.
>	Now when one flys a 747, one does not usually put the vehicle
>	past 1.25 G.  The vehicle is rated for 4 Gs.  The failure limit
>	is around 6 Gs.   99% of the time you will be below 1.25 Gs.
>	an emergency manuever may require you to pull 4 Gs,  everytthing
>	is sized for this.  if something unusual occurs you can exceed
>	the limit.  Hence 747's have ridden out hurricanes and supersonic
>	dives.  

>	Now an F-15  is rated for 9 Gs.  THe pilots will routinely
>	pull 9 Gs.  but at 10 Gs, structural damage is assumed
>	and the vehicle is overhauled.  Now F-15 pilots will
>	pull these high G forces in Training,  in operations,
>	in Combat and in emergencies.

I have to question this.  I don't have figures handy for the F-15
airframe, but a historical note may give a slightly clearer picture on
"Military safety margins" (if my memory isn't flawed).  The rated
plus-g for the F-4 was something like 5 g.  Pilots in Southeast Asia
almost routinely did 8-g manuevers when avoiding flak, etc., because
going outside the envelope was better than being shot down.  I don't
know of any aircraft that went down from structural failure, and I
would expect that if that had happened it would have been widely
publicized in the anti-war press of the day.

I would suspect that you would have more serious problems than
g-induced structural damage if you did 10-g manuevers in an F-15,
since you have almost assuredly exceeded the g-tolerance of the
wetware.  In point of fact, there have (apparently) been instances of
near-instantaneous GLoC which resulted in loss of aircraft in F-16s
doing 9-g pull-ups.  Structural damage from g loading ceased to be
much of a problem if the aircraft impacts dirt.  I also assume we're
not talking about jolt, but about sustained manuever, since I think
planes coming off a cat take higher jolt than 10 g.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: Wales.Larrison@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Availability of SPOC Software (Was Hewlett Packard con in spac
X-Sender: newtout 0.06 Jan  3 1993
Date: 23 Jan 93  20:37:22

kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>Before you ask, the SPOC software is NOT available to the general
>public.  It includes a world map showing day/night and the current
>position of the Orbiter, updated in real time.
  
Doug Mohney responds:
>Like, bogus. Do you realize how much money NASA could make by
>selling it off to Space Junkies at $50 a pop? :)
  
Hmmm.... you guys might check around some of the local sites for a
copy.  I note a copy of SPOC is available with documentation in the
file archives on the site I post from.  Never unloaded it, so I
don't know how it runs,  but it appears to available to the general
public...
                                     - Wales Larrison -

--- Maximus 2.01wb
From: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu (Doug Mohney)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Precursors to Fred (was Re: Sabatier Reactors.)
Date: 27 Jan 1993 19:22:24 GMT
Organization: Computer Aided Design Lab, U. of Maryland College Park
Reply-To: sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: queen.eng.umd.edu

In article <1993Jan27.165812.6931@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>In article <1k6aj1INNgtf@mojo.eng.umd.edu> sysmgr@king.eng.umd.edu writes:
>
>>[Dennis tries to convince Allen that building hardware and flying it on
>>Spacelab is a good thing]
>
>No, Dennis it trying to convince me that space stations cannot be built
>without doing lots of Spacelab flights.

So how do you suggest NASA tests hardware and flight procedures before Freedom
goes up? 

Thirty seconds on the vomit comet don't cut it.


                    I have talked to Ehud, and lived.
  -- >                  SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU                        < --
From: nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Reason for SSTO/DCX and Market
Date: 28 Jan 93 03:06:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: acad3.1993Jan27.190643.1
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

Uses for a SSTO/DC-X seem to be for long distance flying and for
low orbit launching of satelites and other packets.. If I remember correctly
hat SSTo/DC-X is.. Later is like how a F15 sent a missle into orbit for the SDI
tests..

Long Distance flights seem perfect, namely the London or Paris to Tokyo/Hong
Kong Route.. Or maybe Australia to US or Australia to Europe.. Any place where
people fly fro that takes more than 12 hours to fly normally or where they need
to get somepalce fast,., I wonder if the courior services would be interested..
Also the Large Corps who ned to get people places fast..

Yes market is needed and a way to convince the builders that there is a
market..
Is there or will there be a special on SSTO or DC-X in the near future even on
PBS??


Michael Adams
Alias: Morgoth/Ghost Wheel 
nsmca@acad2.alaska.edu
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: 2001/2010 Rocket Engines
Date: 22 Jan 93 05:05:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C18oxM.BFx.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: mrw9e@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Michael Robert Williams)
-Subject: Re: 2001/2010 Rocket Engines - What are they?
-Date: 21 Jan 93 18:02:38 GMT
-Organization: University of Virginia

-I don't know about the "Leonov", but I remember reading something about 
-Clarke's intentions for the Discovery's engines. He wanted to use a pulsed
-nuclear drive (something like Orion, I think) and tried to convince
-Stanley Kubrick to show the Discovery's engines pulsing on and off as
-the drive fired. It's been a while since I saw the film, but I don't
-remember seeing anything like that.

As I recall, they don't show the Discovery's engines firing until "2010".
I don't think Kubrick was involved in that movie.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov