HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: lunar base/life-support
X-Sender: newtout 0.06 Jan  3 1993
Date: 25 Jan 93  09:57:02


AM>      o.k., I'm not an aerospace engineer, just a biology major, but I
AM>wondering what the outlook is, in the near future, for 
AM>establishing a lunar base.
AM> It seems logical to me that before we start planning a 
AM>manned mission to Mars,
AM>we ought to start planning a permanent base on the moon.  Is NASA devo
AM>time or resources toward this direction?  


The outcome for a lunar base in your lifetime is pretty slim. Most folks
just aren't interested in creating the political climate necessary
for the powers that be to decide to spend money on lunar exploration
and development. However, a small group of activists is working
on legislation for the government to purchase lunar science data from
the private sector that may be sufficient to discover water ice
at the lunar poles. If ice is discovered, that may be sufficient
impetus to move the government to further explore the moon.

The legislation is called the Lunar Resources Data Purchase Act (A/k/a 
the Back to the Moon bill) and we could use your help in getting it
passed through the 103rd Congress. Please E-mail me for more
information!

___ WinQwk 2.0b#0

--- Maximus 2.01wb
Xref: sparky sci.space:19910 sci.space.shuttle:3226
From: gandalf@wpi.WPI.EDU (James Michael Sambrook)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger
Date: 28 Jan 93 14:50:10 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu


Where was I when the Challenger accident occurred?

I was an eight grader at Chestnut Junior High School.  I distinctly remember
being told by one of my teachers, Mr. Roche.  However, he had a reputation of
being a joker, and nobody believed him.  He wouldn't even put on the TV to
prove it, so we didn't believe a word he said.  Our next class was Social
Studies with Mr. Mills.  Unfortunately, he was out that day, and we had a sub
who ALSO told us the bad news.  By this time, it started to sink in.  
Needless to say, very little was done for the rest of the day.  I don't
remember much of what happened for the rest of the day, I was in a state of
shock.  To this day, I still get chills when I see the explosion.  Let's ALL
hope that it never happens again...

							James Sambrook
From: atae@crab.ph.ic (Ata Etemadi)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Using off-the-shelf-components
Keywords: space science, electronics, computers
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:07:34 GMT
Organization: Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine, London.

G'Day

 Are there any companies out there whose off-the-shelf products are
space-qualified ? I ask this since a colleague at IKI told me that 
they had flown many standard PC hard discs as onboard storage devices 
and had great success. I just wondered what other components might be
out there which are standard and space-qualified. I don't imagine
for one minute that these components will be chosen for major space 
missions since they are just not expensive enough. Maybe the UOSAT
folks will be willing to give them go...

    regards
       Ata <(|)>.
|               Dr Ata Etemadi, Blackett Laboratory,                          |
|               Space and Atmospheric Physics Group,                          |
|               Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine,        |
|               Prince Consort Road, London SW7 2BZ, ENGLAND                  |
| Janet                        atae@uk.ac.ic.ph.spva or ata@uk.ac.ucl.mssl.c  |
| Internet/Arpanet/Earn/Bitnet atae@spva.ph.ic.ac.uk or ata@c.mssl.ucl.ac.uk  |
| Span                              SPVA::atae       or     MSSLC:atae        |
| UUCP/Usenet                       atae%spva.ph.ic@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk        |
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: faught@berserk.ssc.gov (Ed Faught)
Subject: Re: Beanstalk?
Reply-To: faught@berserk.ssc.gov
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 18:19:22 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.192526.1@acad3.alaska.edu> nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu writes:
>Does anyone know anythng about how to build a beanstalk?
>
Magic beans.

--
Ed Faught  WA9WDM  faught@berserk.ssc.gov
 Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Xref: sparky sci.space:19828 sci.space.shuttle:3207
From: orly@aludra.usc.edu (Mr. Nitro Plastique)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger
Date: 27 Jan 1993 22:38:10 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu


I was in my 8th grade physics class when our principal went on the P.A. system
and told us the news. We wee sent home early (about 12:30 E.S.T.) When I got
home, my Dad didn't even know about it, and I told him to turn on the VCR to
tape any channel, he asked me what happened. He couldn't believe it either.
Now that I'm a junio studying Aerospace Engineeing at USC, I know that the
Challenger accident told us that NASA and ou technology is not pefect, and it
never will be. We learned fom our mistakes on Jan. 28, 1986, but we still have
alot to lean before space flight will ever be a outine part of all our lives.
We learn fom cas accidents, plane accidents, and home accidents, and there is
always a small chance  that something will go wong sooner or later.
Unfortunately, for the STS-26 crew, it happened sooner.


				Victor R. Orly
				(orly@aludra.usc.edu)

-- 
|Victor R. Orly               | "Try to imagine all life as you know it,      |
|aka "Mr. Nitro Plastique"    |  stopping instantaneously, and every molecule |
|Univ. of Southern California |  in your body exploding at the speed of light"|
|Internet: orly@aludra.usc.edu|    -Egon Spengler, from "Ghostbusters"        |
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer)
Subject: Re: So what's happened to Henry Spencer?
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:41:14 GMT

On Sun, 24 Jan 1993 04:20:41 GMT, schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) said:

R> Does anyone know why Henry Spencer has not posted recently?
R> His were consistently the most interesting, informative
R> and terse posts. What a shame if the intemperate remark by
R> that Harvard snotnose drove him away...

Henry was at a space conference in Berkeley early last week.  He came
to Dryden on Friday and went to San Diego on Saturday for USENIX.  He
should return to the net the end of the week.

--
Mary Shafer  DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov                    Of course I don't speak for NASA
 "A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all."  Unknown US fighter pilot
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: 0004244402@mcimail.com (Karl Dishaw)
Subject: What happened to Henry Spencer?
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: [via International Space University]
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:00:03 GMT

I ran into Henry at the Making Orbit con.  He's on a long trip through
the US, which I guess keeps him away from the net.  So he was alive and
unconnected to SDI a week ago....    ;-)


Karl
sold my soul to Uncle Sam . . . now marked down for resale.
From: andrew@cuenews.UUCP (Andrew Folkins)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Question:How Long Until Privately Funded Space Colonization
Distribution: world
Date: 18 Jan 93 23:28:11 MDT
Organization: AmiCUE (Amiga SIG, Commodore Users of Edmonton)

In <1993Jan7.211905.21553@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>I think they where kind of drifting in the past but the unfortunate
>death of Gerald Oneil seems to have galvanized them.

What?  When did that happen?  Damn...

--
  Andrew Folkins  andrew@ve6mgs.ampr.ab.ca
  ...!cs.ualberta.ca!adec23!ve6mgs!cuenews!andrew
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
From: gawne@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:25:14 GMT

In article <1993Jan28.010055.1691@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, 
sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
 
> Just a reminder- 7 years ago today- 11:38am EST....
> So, where were you when the Challenger disaster took place?
> It was during my sophomore of high school, and I was in English class
> when they told us.
> No tribute of any sort was allowed, nor could we openly talk about it
> without some sort of negative reaction from administrators.
> I remember it well, I even got in 'trouble' for this.
> Pro-space exploration views were not welcome.
> At least now things have improved.

I was at work in the service department of Bill Utter Ford in Denton TX
(working my way thru my undergrad physics degree).  Joel Petty (another
mechanic) and I listened to the launch on his radio while we worked.  I
recall hearing the comment, "...looks like a major malfunction..." and
feeling the same way I would if I saw flashing lights in my rear view
mirror -- a gut wrenching fear.

After another minute or so the word started to circulate that "the shuttle
blew up".  The owner called all employees up to the showroom where we
watched the TV and waited for further results.  After ~45 minutes we knew
the worst was confirmed and went back to work somewhat dazed.

-Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: *** BUSSARD RAMSCOOP ***
Date: 23 Jan 1993 06:51 UT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <C1ABD8.Ms2@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh Hopkins) writes...
>lwahl@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Lynne K Wahl) writes:
> 
>>Hmmm... This sounds like an interstellar probe is needed to collect 
>>information before a *really* fast spacecraft is launched.  How about
>>a .01c speed probe with a small "sail" that would be primarily used to 
>>collect interstellar H (for testing) and with magnetic sensors to check
>>on the magnetic medium as it goes.  How far from the sun would this
>>"Pathfinder" type of probe need to go before getting outside the sun's
>>environment?  

We have four spaceraft (Pioner 10 & 11 and Voyager 1 & 2) that have already
left the solar system and looking for the heliopause.  I'd say one of them
would reach the helipause within 10 years.

>>As an exercise, how fast would, say a refueled shuttle ET, one SSME,
>>and a 30 ton probe go if launched in a "generic" solar escape orbit? 
> 
>Really slowly.
> 
>JPL proposed the TAU (Thousand AU) mission a number of years 
>ago.  It would have used a nuclear reactor and an ion drive to boost out of
>the solar system in about fifty years and check out interstellar space. 
>Unfortunately, since it required new power, engines and communications gear it
>never got very far.

The TAU mission would also use a light-wave communications system. It would
study low energy cosmic rays, low frequency radio waves, interstellar gases,
gravity waves and perform high precision astrometry.  The spacecraft would
also be targeted to flyby Pluto on its way out of the solar system.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Every once in a while,
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | try pushing your luck.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: Rent Mir/Commerical SS Fred not build it.
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 21:05:46 GMT

In article <1k9b54INN5i1@phantom.gatech.edu> matthew@phantom.gatech.edu (Matthew DeLuca) writes:

>>I know Mir is far from ideal, but what is.. Why reinvent the wheel when the
>>wheel is already in Orbit??

>Because if you just keep using the same wheel, you never develop better 
>wheels.  Sure, we can do as some people have suggested and rent Mir and 
>buy Soyuzes and use Energia and save lots of money, but the end result would
>be the complete stasis of the space arm of the U.S. aerospace industry, 
>coupled with Russian dominance of space down the line.  

I'm not sure our current path will result in any difference. As it is,
NASA is avoiding cheaper commercial services as much as it can. We are
pouring more and more money into an infrastructure which is getting more
and more expensive. The end result has been a statis of the US space
arm for a long time.

Maybe intelligent leverage of Russian technology (like Soyuz) combined
with US capabilities in ELV and cheap commercial HLV's will allow space
to become large enough to become self sustaining and end the stasis.

  Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------138 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
From: irwin@juliet.caltech.edu (Horowitz, Irwin Kenneth)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger
Date: 28 Jan 1993 11:34 PST
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: juliet.caltech.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

I too, remember quite clearly where I was and what I was doing on 28 Jan 86.
It was my senior year at MIT and I had just finished a three week program at
Lowell Observatory and was visiting my parents in South Florida.  I got up that
morning watching the TV for news on the shuttle launch.  When I heard about the
delays and the pad condition, I figured that there was no way they would launch
that day, so I decided to pop a video of "Close Encounters" into the VCR.  When
the movie finished, the TV came back onto CNN, where I saw a graphic of the
Shuttle disaster.  I ended up spending the rest of the day in a state of shock.

To this day, I still can not watch "Close Encounters" b/c of this association.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irwin Horowitz                        |
Astronomy Department                  |"Whoever heard of a female astronomer?"
California Institute of Technology    |--Charlene Sinclair, "Dinosaurs"
irwin@iago.caltech.edu                |
ih@deimos.caltech.edu                 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: holloway@titan.ksc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Todays Landing
Date: 21 Jan 93 20:13:46 EST
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center

In article <1jl8j7INNsn5@rave.larc.nasa.gov>, sdd@larc.nasa.gov (Steve Derry) writes:
> Brian Stuart Thorn (BrianT@cup.portal.com) wrote:
> :  Every now and then one main gear touches down before the other.
> 
> I didn't see this particular landing :-(.  Was there a bit of a crosswind?
> In the presence of a strong crosswind, an airplane should be landed with
> its upwind main gear touching down first.
> --
> Steve Derry

None to speak of, the winds were almost directly off the nose, and very light. 
The fact that one wheel touching down first was made so obvious because of the
grooved concrete surface of the runway at KSC.  The grooves are murder on the
tires is any amount of side-slip exists at touchdown, the fact that one wing
was lower than the other meant that some amount of side-slip was probably
present, resulting in the very noticeable puff of smoke at tire contact. 
Reports from the runway also indicated that one tire was much more noticeably
worn than the other.  If this landing had occured at Edwards, the touchdown
would have been much less eye-brow raising, owing to the nature of the runway
there.

Darrell Holloway
From: BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Manifest 01/07/1993
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 13:29:43 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

>Greetings and Salutations:
>
>From: fedor@dinah.lerc.nasa.gov
>>I believe the manifested missions listed represent the major effort of the
>>and not a sum total of all activities that will be done.
>
>Yes.  This is correct.  The lines would overflow if I included all of the
>smaller experiments also.

>Ken Hollis

    Ken, I'm not complaining about the manifests, I am very much pleased
    that you take the time to post them here. However, USMP-1 was the
    only payload listed on your manifest for that mission. If you can
    squeeze the SSBUV on the manifest, how 'bout at least mentioning that
    its an EDO flight.

    Thanks for your manifest updates!
    
    -Brian

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian S. Thorn                                    "If ignorance is bliss,
BrianT@cup.portal.com                               this must be heaven."
                                                -Diane Chambers, "Cheers"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: Pauli.Ramo@hut.fi (no, I don't repeat it!)
Subject: Re: Re : To the moon..... 
Reply-To: Pauli.Ramo@hut.fi
Organization: /u/opi/s/ramo/.organization
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:22:27

In article <727907500snz@chrism.demon.co.uk> chris@chrism.demon.co.uk (Chris Marriott) writes:

>Your equation is too simplistic - it only really applies either in the
>absence of gravity, or if the velocity change occurs instantaneously
>(ie, an "impulse").  If the fuel is burned over a finite time, you
>have to take into account the losses due to gravity and (if in atmosphere)
>friction.

True, I should have mentioned that. The losses due to gravity and
atmospheric friction are comparable to a velocity change of about
1500 m/s and have to be taken into account. Otherwise, however,
the equation is right.

Btw, after getting to LEO, the burning rate of the fuel makes no
difference to total velocity change acquired from it.

	Pauli
--
Disclaimer fault - lawyers dumped
From: jgladu@bcm.tmc.edu (grungy (John F. Gladu))
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Poor Shuttle Audio
Followup-To: sci.space.shuttle
Date: 21 Jan 1993 19:07:19 GMT
Organization: Systems Support Center, BCM
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: j.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu

In article <1993Jan20.213417.15223@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>,
fisher@decwin.enet.dec.com () wrote:
> In article <CKS002-200193091122@il02-200-8.comm.mot.com>, CKS002@email.mot.com
> (Ken Sommer) writes:
> |>Given the high quality of audio via satellites for normal 
> |>phone calls,  why is the audio from the shuttle still so poor?
[true stuff deleted] 
> 3) Microphones are either built into a helmet or strapped around their heads
> and not optimally placed for voice pickup.  (Do they use bone conduction or
> something?)  

No bone conduction.  They tried it.  It was worse.  Most of the mikes that
I've seen are actually transducers buried deep in a solid lump with a thin
plastic tube carrying the sound waves to it - not the best technology - but
reliable...

Crewmembers are pretty bad about mike placement as well.

bcnu - grungy (John Gladu)
former Space Suit Technician
Subject: Re: Re : To the moon..... 
Distribution: world
Organization: None
Reply-To: chris@chrism.demon.co.uk
X-Mailer: Simple NEWS 1.90 (ka9q DIS 1.19)
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 20:31:40 +0000

In article <PAULI.RAMO.93Jan24190410@vipunen.hut.fi> Pauli.Ramo@hut.fi writes:

>In article <74006@cup.portal.com> BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn)
>
>The *thrust* is not a problem, after getting to LEO. If you have less
>thrust, it only takes a little longer to get to the Moon. In fact, you
>could make both TLI and LOI with only one OMS (or even RCS) engine, if
>you had enough fuel to it and it lasted a long continuous firing. The
>problem is the amount of fuel needed.
>
>There is a simple equation to calculate the amount of velocity change
>for a given amount of fuel and mass of vehicle:
>
>        dv = ln (m/m0) * I
>
>where
>dv = velocity change
>m  = initial mass (with full tanks)
>m0 = mass without fuel (empty tanks & payload)
>I  = the impulse of the engine used
>
>With chemical rockets, I is some thousands of m/s. For example, the impulse
>of SSME is about 4400 m/s. With SRB's it is lower.
>
>For a complete trip to moon and back, you must sum the velocity changes 
>needed in it's various parts together and use that to calculate your 
>fuel requirements. Unfortunately, I don't have the exact requirements
>for TLI, LOI, TEI and EOI on hand (maybe someone can help me here), but
>even LEO requires a total velocity change in the order of 9000 m/s.
>
>Thus, to only get to LEO with a single stage booster equipped with SSME's,
>you had to have the mass ratio of about 7.73:1. That means that of the
>initial mass of the vehicle, 87% had to be used as fuel just to get to
>LEO, and the remaining 13% would include all the tanks and engines for
>the fuel.
>
>If someone has the velocity change requirements for the rest of our trip
>to moon, we can continue this little number game.
>
>        Pauli
>--
>Disclaimer fault - lawyers dumped
>

Your equation is too simplistic - it only really applies either in the
absence of gravity, or if the velocity change occurs instantaneously
(ie, an "impulse").  If the fuel is burned over a finite time, you
have to take into account the losses due to gravity and (if in atmosphere)
friction.

For example, if you have a rocket on a launch pad, and that rocket
produces <1g of acceleration, it can burn all its fuel, but its velocity
will stay at zero!

Best wishes,

Chris
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Chris Marriott                           | chris@chrism.demon.co.uk    |
| Warrington, UK                           | BIX: cmarriott              |
|                                          | CIX: cmarriott              |
| Save the whales.  Collect the whole set. | CompuServe: 100113,1140     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:17:43 CST
From: <U57053@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Shuttle lauches & viewing

To all,
    I am planning on creating a summer vacation around a launch of the Space
Shuttle. However, I need to know a few things.
    One, I know there will be approx. 8 launches this year, are any of them in
August? Or does someone have a list of projected dates?
    Two, How reliable do you think a lunch date is?
    Three, How early in advance should I reserve viewing passes from launch
date?
    Any help will be GREATLY APPRECIATED!!!!!!!!!

                                                   Thanks!
                                                    Dan Kwiatkowski
                                                u57053@uicvm.cc.uic.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: nsx@test.cba.ufl.edu (Mark Sterling)
Subject: Re: Can You See A Shuttle Launch From Orlando?
Keywords: well . . . . .
Organization: University of Florida
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:51:42 GMT

In article <11825@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> wasser@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Steve Wasser) writes:


>Take two (my apologies):
>I've been wondering: what is the farthest from KSC anyone
>has been able to observe a shuttle launch?  I suppose we
>should separate daytime and nighttime launches.

> Steve Wasserbaech

You can see day launches from West Palm Beach on clear days.  If fact, I 
remember watching a launch 6 years ago today....

Mark
NSX@chip.cba.ufl.edu
From: jmtroan@eos.ncsu.edu (JOHN MICHAEL TROAN)
Subject: Re: patches
Keywords: Shuttle, patches
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Distribution: sci.space.shuttle 
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 23:27:24 GMT

In response to the request for getting shuttle patches:

I personally have been ordering them from AB Emblems and Caps in Weaver-
ville, North Carolina.  Their number is 1(800)438-4285.

If I understand correctly, I think these guys make the matches for NASA
(if I have my info wrong, don't trash my mailbox).  Overall the patches
have been of great quality (most of them are fully-embroidered).

They currently have all missions (1-55) except STS-51 in stock.

John...