HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: matthew@phantom.gatech.edu (Matthew DeLuca)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Rent Mir/Commerical SS Fred not build it.
Date: 28 Jan 1993 14:11:32 -0500
Organization: The Dorsai Grey Captains
NNTP-Posting-Host: oit.gatech.edu

In article <1993Jan27.184307.1@acad3.alaska.edu> nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu writes:

>The Russians alreay have Mir up in space, why not used it to build a
>American/US space station, or build a wing onto Mirt that is for US use..
>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.  

The short of the matter is that if all you are concerned with is the 
almighty dollar, what you suggest is a good idea.  If you are interested 
in a strong U.S. space program, however, it's a losing deal.
-- 
Matthew DeLuca
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!matthew
Internet: matthew@phantom.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: MLINDROOS@FINABO.ABO.FI (Marcus Lindroos INF)
Subject: Re: 2001/2010 Rocket Engines - What are they?
Organization: Abo Akademi University, Finland
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 12:02:47 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

Any idea what kind of engines the "Discovery" and "Alexei Leonov" of "2010 -
Odyssey Two" were using? Obviously, they have to be pretty fuel-efficient [=an
exhaust velocity of at least 25km/s] since neither craft seems to have much
room for fuel aboard. Ion engines seem to be out of the question but what about
a fusion-powered plasma motor? The visual appearance of the nozzles [=not
bell-shaped like those of the Space Shuttle or a nuclear engine] plus the 
fact that both vessels have clusters of small engines rather than three or 
four big ones all suggest that the exhaust jets produced by the engines 
contain little mass, but are being ejected at high velocities.
---
Does anyone know what the theoretical maximum exhaust velocity for an
"economical" fusion/plasma engine is, using standard propellants like methane,
water or hydrogen?   
> 
> MARCU$
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> . . . Fififinlandssvensk
>      
> Marcus Lindroos                             Internet:     mlindroos@abo.fi
> Computer Science
> Abo Akademi University
> Finland
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: tes@motif.uucp (Thomas E. Smith)
Subject: Re: Mars Observer Update - 01/20/93
Keywords: Mars Observer, JPL
Organization: Software Technology Branch - NASA/Johnson Space Center
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:31:27 GMT


Ron Baalke writes:
>Today the spacecraft is 58,313,994 km (36,234,636 miles) from Earth,
>traveling at a velocity of 12.9012 kilometers per second (28,859 miles
>per hour) with respect to Earth. One way light time is approximately 195
>seconds.

I wrote down this info on 12-30-92, and the velocity was 9.4083km/s. Is the
acceleration due to Mars's gravitational pull, or from the Earth dropping 
away from the probe because of the Earth's circular orbit?

-- 
____________________________________________________________________________
| It's not my damn planet, understand  | Tom E. Smith                      |
| Monkey Boy?!!       John Bigbootey   | tes@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov       |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: prb@access.digex.com (Pat)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Saving an overweight SSTO....
Date: 22 Jan 1993 18:04:45 GMT
Organization: UDSI
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

In article <19752@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn) writes:
>> Dani Eder writes:
>        Interesting idea.  Without a full orbital flight, the DC-1 will not
>be able to land at its launch site.  Any idea on how far downrange the DC-1
>would land, and whether this could be accomplished within the width of the
>continental USA?  If not, or a Florida launch is needed to get a 28.5 degree
>orbit, where in Africa would be a suitable landing site?  A quick look at a
>globe suggests launching from Hawaii would require landing somewhere the the
>northern half of south America. Return to the launch site would presumably be
>by another suborbital hop, although this unfortunately means that two
>refueling and launch sites are needed and two DC-1 flights are needed to put
>1 payload into orbit.
>



How about this.  ping pong around.   HawaII to Ecuador. Ecuador to Spain.
Spain to Tanzania.  Tanzania to India,  India to Australia,  Australia
to Hawaii.   

You bounce around and just keep meeting cargos.

pat







.
From: cshotton@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Chuck Shotton)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Galileo update?
Date: 27 Jan 1993 17:22:00 GMT
Followup-To: sci.space
Organization: Academic Computing

In article <27JAN199316252809@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>,
baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) wrote:
> 
> I don't think that would be a wise thing to do.  The motor firing has be
> done at a precise time with the spacecraft in the proper attitude.  If the
> hammering was done during the motor firing, and the antenna was to pop
> open, it could change the spacecraft attitude enough to really mess up the

What's to say it won't pop open anyway?

> orbit insertion.  Besides, the spacecraft will very busy as it is during
> the orbit insertion, collecting the probe data, performing a 1000 km Io flyby 
> and collecting science data on Jupiter.

Will there be an attempt to open the antenna AFTER Galileo is in orbit (on
the assumption that the firing may have jarred things loose)?
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Repeating message
Date: 24 Jan 93 14:31:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C1D4DD.3qp.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


-Path: cam!dove!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
-From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
-Newsgroups: sci.space
-Subject: Re: lunar base/life-support on freedom
-Message-ID: <C1Bw01.KFJ.1@cs.cmu.edu>
-Date: 23 Jan 93 22:25:11 GMT

This message has appeared at least three times. However, I only posted it
once, and my machine sent it to ISU only once. Apologies for any inconvenience.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: bill.edwards@almac.co.uk (Bill Edwards)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Soviet space disaster
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:59:00 GMT
Reply-To: bill.edwards@almac.co.uk (Bill Edwards)
Organization: Almac BBS Ltd. +44 (0)324 665371

In article <1993Jan18.091919.13190@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com>
dennisn@ecs.comm.mot.com (Dennis Newkirk) writes:

DN>Ah, how well the propaganda works. There was plenty of man on
DN>the moon talk from the Soviets up to 1969, and they weren't talking

It works so well, I'd forgotten all about the earlier man-on-the-moon
bold talk. :-)

Bill / Usenet: bill.edwards@almac.co.uk
---
 . DeLuxe./386 1.25 #9224 . 
                                                                                                            
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: edgar@sal.wisc.edu (Dick Edgar)
Subject: Re: Defuse Xray Experiment
Organization: Space Astronomy Lab, Madison WI
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:43:31 GMT

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.


Richard J. Edgar  (edgar@wisp4.physics.wisc.edu)
University of Wisconsin--Madison, Department of Physics
"It all depends, of course, upon whether or not it
depends or not, of course, if you take my meaning"
From: nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Biosphere 2 Oxygen..
Date: 28 Jan 93 10:57:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: acad3.1993Jan28.025729.1
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

Did you all say you were using potatos in your Biosphere..
I know they are high in nitrogen fixing as well as I think storing CO2 as
carbohydrates (I think?).. I know potatos were a prime reason for the growth of
the later industrial revolution..

I know my mom uses worms to break down her compost (fishheads, paper, misc veg
matter).. Talk to Jane about my mom and step dad (Im Michael).

I know my "parents" garden is nicely done.. Rabbit manuer provide fertilizer,
worms provide composte. Lady bugs provide alot.. Bees some more and a little
only knowledge helps alot.. Some local people have ways of turning bugs away
and such.. I wish someone would do a study of Native Alaskan medical/herbal
ways..

==
Michael Adams alias Ghost Wheel/Morgoth NSMCA@acad2.alaska.edu
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Biosphere 2
Date: 22 Jan 93 04:57:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C18opB.BAH.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: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
-Subject: Re: Bio-sphere II
-Date: 21 Jan 93 13:18:03 GMT
-Organization: University of Rochester

-I have read, however, that the Shuttle is pretty rank at the end of a
-flight.  Is this true?

During one of the STS-54 press conferences (near the end of the mission)
it was mentioned that there was an odor from the "wet trash" (banana peels,
food wrappers, etc.), but not from the new WCS. Apparently the trash bin
is supposed to be ventilated by a vacuum line (not sure whether there's a
pump involved, or whether they just run a pipe to the outside), and they
determined that there was a vacuum on the line, so they weren't quite sure
what the problem was.

I think the air from the WCS is run through a chemical filter and fed back
into the cabin.

Since they made a point of remarking on it, I'd guess there usually isn't
too much of a problem with odor.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk (Del Cotter)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Organic heat shielding.
Date: 26 Jan 93 10:59:53 GMT
Organization: Brunel University, West London, UK

In article <1juo8qINN3ul@digex.digex.com> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes:
>I think it was the S-IV  where to save weight
>they put the insulation outside the tank, because the cold made the
>metal stronger, thus saving weight.

That does sound unlikely; the increase in tensile strength would be small,
while the los of fracture toughness (ie. increased brittleness) would be
horrifying.

>Someone who has the saturn tech ref will be able to post for sure.

Please.
-- 
 ',' ' ',','  |                                                  |  ',' ' ',','
   ', ,','    |       Del Cotter       mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk      |    ', ,','  
     ','      |                                                  |      ','
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Precursors to Fred (was Re: Sabatier Reactors.)
Date: 27 Jan 93 16:58:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: iti.1993Jan27.165812.6931
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow

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.

  Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------139 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Xref: sparky sci.space:19675 sci.astro:14262 alt.sci.planetary:594
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Catch-22: (was Using off-the-shelf components)
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 21:57:24 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Keywords: space, electronics, new technology
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.

In <1993Jan28.143841.25475@cc.ic.ac.uk> atae@crab.ph.ic (Ata Etemadi) writes:

>This sort of pseudo-nationalistic attitude probably goes a long way 
>toward nurturing bad will between your respective countries. I would 
>very much doubt that you know anything at all about the Russian space 
>effort. 

Gosh, no.  And worse, I've just come back from listening to
Harry Stine and Art Bozlee, who know even less.


>For your information most people consider their launch 
>technology as approx. 10-15years ahead of the USA. Hence why they can 
>fly canned borsht.

Uh, huh.  Well, the Soviets/Russians have been flying canned foods
for the last 20 years.  In fact, they've been flying the same
launchers for the last 20 years.  Once they have something
that works, they don't throw it away the we do, and they're
perfectly satisfied with off-the-shelf food because they don't
have the kind of money to throw around that NASA does.
 

>Space-qualified has a very precise meaning namely, in the case of 
>the ESA, the component has to meet the criteria detailed in ESA PSS 
>01-701 etc.. which are part of a multi-volume set (I think its
>only 12 or so volumes :-)

Naturally.  If you don't have 12 volumes of requirements, 
you can't justify the staff it takes to write 12 volumes
of requirements (much less read them). 


>>Given a reliable, low-cost space transportation system, 1 and 2
>>become much less important.  And if you have a rotating space
>>station, with artificial gravity and earth-normal or near-normal
>>atmosphere, 3 ceases to be important as well, and you can buy
>>just about everything off the shelf.

>The components will STILL have to pass vibration, outgassing and
>ECM tests. Given beam transport technology, we could all go on 
>holiday on Mars with Mr Spock et al.. :-)

Funny, I've never had an airline ask me if my equipment was
"air-qualified," much less subject it to vibration, outgassing, 
or ECM tests.  That's the difference between a transportation
system and an expendable artillery shell.  

Or do you think the airlines are using beam technology, too?
From: nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Strength thru Space Research
Date: 26 Jan 93 02:37:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: acad3.1993Jan25.183717.1
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

This might be an old reason for space flight and all, so please no flames..


I know I have seen the effect when a "higher civilization" runs into a
"less civilized" culture and its effects.. 

I know for the sake of human culture I would rather be the "higher" than the
"lower". When we do finally run into/meet/hear of a "alien" culture in the
stars (SETI and such), we had better be higher or we will loose it..
Imagine human reservations, not a pretty sight, think of any culture that is
less storng than another and how it gets bulled around and even exterminated..

I knwo of the scientific and benefits of space research for the short time, but
what of the long term benefits?

If I sound like a UFO nut or crack pot, I hope I am not..

Quyanna for your time..
From: prb@access.digex.com (Pat)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Sabatier reactor? (was Re: Oxygen in Biosphere 2)
Date: 22 Jan 1993 18:09:27 GMT
Organization: UDSI
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com


I think there are two sabatier main chains.  they deal with CO2 processing.

CO2  + H  (iron catalyst + Heat)  -->  CH4 + H2O

CO2  (IRON catalyst and heat)  -->  O2 and C.

Its a real old well understood prociess.

BTW

Freedom decided not to use methane thrusters.  so instead they are
throwing out waste CO2  and importing hydrazine.  failure oriented
management wins again.  someone thought methane thrusters were
too risky.

pat
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Next  unmanned missions to Venus *+
Date: 26 Jan 1993 16:29 UT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1993Jan24.063904.27492@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, rkornilo@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ryan Korniloff) writes:
> 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??

The main constraint on the spacecraft's survival on the surface of Venus has 
been the temperature.  The Soviets often chilled the interior of their 
spacecraft before parachuting them down to the surface. 900F is about
2 to 3 times the temperature of your conventional oven.  Lead melts at
that temperature.  As a comparison, the Viking landers were sterilized by 
heating them to 235F for 24 hours.  Anything on the surface of Venus is 
literally being roasted.  
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     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: "richard attenborough" <richard.attenborough@canrem.com>
Subject: launches in may?
Reply-To: "richard attenborough" <richard.attenborough@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: sci
Date: 25 Jan 93 08:20:26 EST

Hi folks,
I am heading to Florida in MAY and am wondering if there are any scheduled
launches in that timeframe.
My appologies if this message is not appropriate for this message area.



 * KingQWK 1.05 * Life is best understood BACKWARDS but only runs FORWARDS.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: lwall@netlabs.com (Larry Wall)
Subject: Re: Making Orbit 93 - The Delta Clipper Program
Organization: NetLabs, Inc.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:47:31 GMT

In article <19862@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn) writes:
: The vehicle enters nose first.  The re-entry aerodynamics of the vehicle are
: derived from the very large body of data which is available on missile
: warhead re-entry aerodynamics.   The angle of attack of the vehicle is
: controlled to minimize thermal loading.  The vehicle has a 1200 to 1500
: nautical mile cross range.  Deacceleration is 1.1 g maximum during descent.
: On descent, the vehicle goes subsonic at 60,000 feet altitude, and the
: engines are then started and idled.  At 5000 to 10,000 feet altitude, the
: vehicle is rotated base down.

How do they guarantee they don't get upside-down-spraycan syndrome?

Not only are they going to have to pump hydrogen and oxygen from the
FAR ends of the tanks, but they have to make sure they don't get
bubbles in the line while rotating, and you can't do that if the tank
is less than half full without having inlets on the sides of the tank,
as well as top and bottom.  (Controlling slosh during rotation is no
picnic either.)  Anybody know how they plan to do it?  For instance,
with lots of smart inlet valves that know when to keep their mouths
shut?  Or maybe the engines are robust enough not to care about "burps"
when idling?

I suppose you could just pressurize above the triple points of H2 and O2,
and then you don't have to worry about it...  :-)

Larry Wall
lwall@netlabs.com
From: agae@palm.lle.rochester.edu (Andres C. Gaeris)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: 2001/2010 Rocket Engines - What are they?
Date: 22 Jan 93 21:48:23 GMT
Reply-To: agae@palm.lle.rochester.edu (Andres C. Gaeris)
Organization: UofR Laboratory for Laser Energetics

> In <1993Jan21.110438.1@fnalf.fnal.gov> higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
> 
> On the other hand, remember that Forbidden Planet, in the 1950's,
> began with the narrator's voice saying, "In the last decade of the
> 21st Century, Mankind reached the Moon."  Rober Heinlein was a bit

Well, considering the current public and governmental attitude to expensive
new space programs plus what is going worldwide with the space agencies,
the _Forbidden Planet_ writers were not really off of the mark.
I do not believe that Bill or I will reach the Moon in the next century
(except for some really good breakthroughs in longevity and geriatrics) and
sure that Bill and I carry a good quantity of Mankind around 8-)!
When I was a teenager I expected to visit the moons of Saturn or at least
Mars at my retirement age. Now my expectancies are with an orbital week-end
draining my savings account for the same period. The bonus side is that I
could possibly be one of the first guys in building a ICF pulse rocket,
but I would trade it for my Saturn's moon trip!

I fell like Mankind will not reach the Moon and the planets in a really
effective way till the end of the next century. The beginning of the next
century will be for PC technologies, 'ecologic'-cleansing, and New-Age
illiterates trying to subvert science and technology to their own pervert
agenda.

Sorry about this tirade. It is the result of reading three times 'Fallen
Angels' and seeing around what is going on with S&T policy.
(Next tirade: _How the U.N./Green technological police forced me to leave
Physics and go back to administer my family's convinience store_)

Andres C. Gaeris
A junior laser fusioneer goin' older and cynic but not wiser.
agae@lle.rochester.edu
From: samw@bucket.rain.com (Sam Warden)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Handling Antimatter
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:03:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: bucket.samw.728078623
Organization: Rick's Home-Grown Un*x

prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes:

>Is it possible instead of using Buckminsterfullerene to contain an 
>antiproton to use tetrane (C4H4 )  or cubane (C8H8)?  given the lower
>dalton numbers,  the enerfy density would be real high.  also
>given that these molecules are less stable,  it should be easier
>to liberate the energy when needed.
 
Far too easy, I'm thinking.  All these ideas for chemically-caged
antimatter amount to nuclear _primary_ explosives.  If we ever
get to where we can make this in bulk I expect it would be too
hazardous to use as a high-energy-density material, even in a
bomb!  Very _very_ dilute, it might be useful in the laborato
or as `bottled muons' for catalyzed fusion.

-- 
 
samw@bucket.rain.com (Sam Warden) -- and not a mere Device.
 
Newsgroups: sci.space