HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Metric again
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:57:47 GMT

In <92316.135316RFRANCIS@ESTEC.BITNET> RFRANCIS@ESTEC.BITNET (C R Francis) writes:

>In article <sturges-091192110833@158.185.20.239>,
>sturges@master.lds-az.loral.com (Jim Sturges) says:
>>
>>From the society for the preservation of purity in language.....
>>
>>ALL measuring systems are "metric." What we're talking about is the
>>difference between SI and English?
>>

>Strangely enough the system you call English is not used in England.  The
>system slowly being phased out in the UK is called Imperial, and is slightly
>different from the US 'English' system (eg some units of volume have the same
>name but different size).

We know that.  Of course, the language we call English isn't really
the one that is spoken in England, either.  The same sorts of 'subtle'
differences have crept in as exist in the two measurement systems.

-- 
"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.
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Space suit research?
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 22:40:31 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <Bxy643.4o2@access.digex.com> prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes:
>Okay.  I know commercial jets routinely push 40,000 ft, maybe a bit more.
>the cabins are usually only pressurised to 10 PSI. and they use air cooling
>on lots of stuff.  they also have gear in unpressurised bays that seem
>to cope...

I don't know for sure, but I believe almost all of their avionics are in
pressurized bays.  There isn't much unpressurized space in a pressurized
airliner, except at the extreme nose and tail.

>Military jets run up to 70,000 ft and over 100,000 on special
>trajectories, but if they dont use air cooling then that would explain it.

Very few military jets ever get up to 70,000ft.  50,000 is a more typical
ceiling for reasonable configurations.  Only the specialized ones can even
reach 70,000 except in a ballistic trajectory.

>I think the blackbirds cruise at 100,000 ...

This is popular mythology, but so far as I know it has never been confirmed.
The openly-admitted Blackbird altitude records are in the 70-80 range.

>Actually could a blackbird pilot get astronauts wings?  on some sort of ballistic shot????

It's most unlikely.  All of the altitudes we're talking about are *way*
below "astronaut wings" altitude.  And the Blackbird is not particularly
well-suited to ballistic trajectories; the ballistic-trajectory altitude
record is held by the F-15, not the Blackbird, and it's only about
100,000ft.

>>>ALSO in apollo were EVA's part of the planned mission? 
>>Yes, both on early flights for testing, and on the later lunar missions
>>for recovery of film canisters from the SM survey-equipment bay...
>
>i thought they needed to get something out of the SM on the trip home.

Please read what I wrote, Pat!  On the later lunar missions the SM had one
bay full of remote-sensing equipment, and they needed to recover film from
it.  There were no such EVAs on the earlier lunar missions.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: higgins@fnalf.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: *Angle of Attack*: have you read it?
Date: 17 Nov 92 16:57:53 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

Suddenly I have a desire to know everything I can about *Angle of
Attack*, a new book by Mike Gray, the screenwriter who penned *The
China Syndrome*.  I may have a chance to meet the author this week.

The book is the story of Harrison Storms, the head of North American
Aviation's space division during the development of the Apollo command
module (NAA also developed one of the Saturn V stages, I think). 
Storms was canned in the wake of the Apollo fire investigation, much
disucssed here in the past week.

I know John Mechalas of Purdue has read the book.  Anybody else want
to comment on it?  Is it worth buying?  Is there more to it than I
have described?  Does the author think Storms was a scapegoat for
other peoples' mistakes?  I'd appreciate hearing from anybody who's
read it, or even getting pointers to reviews.


Engineer of Hijacked Train:      Bill Higgins
"Is this a holdup?"                 
                                 Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
Masked Gunman:                      
(Hesitates, looks at partner,    Bitnet: HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET
looks at engineer again)         SPAN/Hepnet/Physnet: 43011::HIGGINS
"It's a science experiment!"     Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
From: sichase@csa3.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Solar Sailing
Date: 20 Nov 1992 12:59 PST
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.198
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <N4HY.92Nov20111535@wahoo.UUCP>, n4hy@wahoo.UUCP (Bob McGwier) writes...
> 
>I have a local high school student asking me for information on Solar
>sailing.  I have programs that will allow him to manipulate the sail
>if I knew how to calculate `thrusts' etc. from the photon pressure.
>Any details you care to send, primarily references, that will allow me
>to help this very bright student, I would appreciate it.
> 
>Please use EMAIL.  I will summarize replies that contain useful information.

I tried to E-mail, and failed.  Here's some incomplete information
which might be useful.

It's fairly straightforward to calculate the force on your sail
from solar radiation pressure.  Here's a back-of-the-envelope calculation
which ignores some details. Consider an individual photon hitting
your sail.  It has total momentum p = h*lambda, where h is planck's constant
and lambda is the wavelength.  By totally reflecting off your sail,
you get a total momentum change of dp = 2*p.  To calculate the total
pressure from the Sun on a sail of area A at distance D from the Sun,
you need only to know the total solar luminosity, L = 3.8x10^26 Joules/sec.
If your sail makes an angle theta with respect to the Sun, it has
an effective area of A*cos(theta), and intercepts a total fraction f
of the light, where 

	f = A*cos(theta)/(4*pi*D^2),

so a total photon energy of E = f*L hits it.  Now, for a photon, E = pc,
where c = 3x10^8 m/s, so you can find the total momentum of the light 
hitting your sails and p = E/c, and then your total momentum change per
second is 2*p.  Your acceleration is then 2*p/m, where m is your ship's
mass, directed away from the Sun.

There is more to Solar sailing, however, than just the radiation pressure.
The Solar wind contains massive particles which will also hit your
sail.  I don't have data handy for what the flux is, but you would
need to look it up and make some kind of correction for it.  It might
even dominate!  It will be much harder to calculate the effects of 
the proton wind on your sail, since the protons will pass through your
sail, imparting only some of their kinetic energy.  It gets messy, as
the energy loss fraction will depend upon the atomic composition of your
sail and the energy distribution of the protons.  I can work up some
estimates if you want them.

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"It is not a simple life to be a single cell,
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		 although I have no right to say so, having
				 been a single cell so long ago myself that I 
				 have no memory at all of that stage of my 
				 life." - Lewis Thomas
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Space suit research?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:39:24 GMT

In article <vento-201192160142@elwood.lerc.nasa.gov> vento@mars.lerc.nasa.gov (Dan Vento) writes:
>> Actually, Vail or Aspen at ~10 psi average, would be a better example
>> than Denver (~12 psi...) I have never understood why NASA doesn't
>> consider this fact relevant.

>Another reason that NASA does not like low pressure high oxygen (e.g. 5 psi
>pure oxygen) is the danger of fires in the crew cabin while in orbit. Most
>materials don't burn easily in low g in "normal" air. Enriched oxygen
>environments can be a serious problem for materials flammability.

I wasn't suggesting enriched oxygen: A 10 psi, 20% oxygen atmosphere
should be perfectly acceptable. That's less oxygen than at sea level,
but certainly enough to support people (even physically active people).
Since there are cities with this sort of partial pressure of oxygen,
and people, in fact, go there to be physically active (ski), I'd say
there is considerable evidence that this isn't a health problem.

                                              Frank Crary
                                              CU Boulder

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: hathaway@stsci.edu
Subject: Clinton's address (was Re: Feynmann's legacy) 
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: sci,na
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:32:35 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.174422.23548@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
..
>>programs are writing letters to Clinton/Gore '92, rather than just sitting
>>around moaning. :-) 
> 
> I hope so too. The address is:
> 
> President Elect Bill Clinton
> PO Box 615
> Little Rock AR 72203
> 
>   Allen
> 
> -- 
> +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
> |  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
> +----------------------158 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+


For such a together dude, why doesn't Clinton (and Gore) have an e-mail 
address and access to the NET???  They'll Never know what's going on 
unless they be on-line.  They should at least be FAQed in. 

Wm. Hathaway 

Newsgroups: sci.space
From: pgf@srl01.cacs.usl.edu ("Phil G. Fraering")
Subject: golden oldie: jep on "Shuttle's and laser launching system"
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: [via International Space University]
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 22:10:00 GMT

From Jerry Pournelle, on 15 Dec. 1981 (yah, I think I'll start
doing the date on these:

Art Kantrowitz is the new Chairman of the L-5 Society and will
be writing on laser launch systems for the L-5 News.
(Subscribe by sending $20 to L-5 1060 E Elm Tucson AZ 85719)

(I don't get paid nothing nohow for L-5 News)

	NASA has a decision to make: operate stuff, or develop
advanced technology?  There's a conflict.  Worth thinking about.

---------------------------


-- 
Phil Fraering
"...drag them, kicking and screaming, into the Century of the Fruitbat."
<<- Terry Pratchett, _Reaper Man_
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Subject: Re: Hubble's mirror
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 06:30:13 GMT


-From: mario@cs.man.ac.uk (Mario Wolczko)
-Subject: Re: Hubble's mirror
-Date: 17 Nov 92 12:18:39 GMT
-Organization: Dept Computer Science, University of Manchester, U.K.

-In article <BxqDzI.B1q@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
-> The *only* test that would have detected the error [an end-to-end test]
-> [would have been difficult due to problems]
-> like gravitational distortion of the primary
-I've seen this mentioned a few times, and it has me confused.
-Any idea why an end-to-end test would have been more susceptible to
-gravitational problems than the null corrector test?  Couldn't both be
-performed with the primary flat on its back?  

The HST primary mirror had to be ground and tested lying flat on a special
actively-controlled support bed to compensate for gravitational sag. I *think*
the secondary mirror did too. Testing the two mirrors together, I suppose
they could have supported the primary in this way, but unless they invented
a whole new support structure just for the test, the secondary would have
sagged. In a fully integrated test (mirrors installed in truss, instruments
installed), neither mirror would have been properly supported, and the truss
itself would tend to sag. In retrospect, an error as large as the one in the
primary could still have been detected, but the test would come nowhere near
determining whether the optics would meet the specs in microgravity.

-And why are there more risks of surface contamination?

I don't know, but I suspect the military telescope testbed that was
available did not meet the "clean room" requirements. (Evidently the big
spy telesopes don't require as precise a test, and don't need to see the
same UV wavelengths as HST.)

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: higgins@fnalo.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Minority Kids into Techies (was Re: Free Middle/High School Broadcasts)
Date: 17 Nov 92 00:48:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: fnalo.1992Nov16.184820.1
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

In article <1992Nov16.223518.16994@nhgs.vak12ed.edu>, pgolden@nhgs.vak12ed.edu (Patrick S. Golden) writes:
> REACHING FOR THE STARS
> 
> A free, nationwide distance-learning program designed to  
> encourage young minority and female middle and high-school  
> students to pursue careers in science and engineering

I agree it's a damned shame more females, and members of American minority
groups, don't take up these professions.  But sometimes I wonder...

Would it be simpler to ask white males, politely, *not* to become
engineers?  Or it might be even more effective to pay them.  "You
don't want to be a scientist, kid!  Here's some cash.  Sign here and
we'll help you become a tobacco farmer instead."

This would help make room for the ambitions of young people of other
races, genders, or ethnic heritages to enter techie professions.

Or maybe we could promote new toys for white boys.  How about a
Talking G.I. Joe that says, "Math class is haaaarrrd...?"

     O~~*           /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
   - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /       \                          (_) (_)                    / | \
 |       |     Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 \       /     Bitnet:     HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET
   -   -       Internet:  HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
     ~         SPAN/Hepnet:      43011::HIGGINS 
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: strider@clotho.acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore)
Subject: Re: FTS
Organization: The Voice of Fate
Distribution: sci
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 15:48:14 GMT

In article <BxowF6.Mzs.1@cs.cmu.edu> roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:
>
>-From: benson@gemed (Mark Benson 5-4228)
>-Subject: Re: Automated space station construction
>-Date: 9 Nov 92 22:06:20 GMT
>-Organization: GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee,  WI
>
>
>-Yes, I believe so.  SSF had (and I believe still has) a program for the
>-Flight Telerobotic Servicer (FTS).  Under Phase B of the contract, various
>-options were studied, ranging from basically remote control to releatively
>-sophisticated, knowledge / rule based AI for functions ranging from task 
>-planning and collision avoidance functions.  Among these possible levels was
>-a basic "learn and play" mode, where the operator would do the first one, and 
>-then basically just monitor the subsequent 'n' executions of the activity.
>-I was working for Martin-Marietta at the time, and heard they won the
>-contract.  Haven't heard much since.
>
>-In fact, at the time, there was such a thing as the NASA / NBS Standard 
>-Reference Model (NASREM), describing various levels of control over such
>-a system, from task planning and resource scheduling down to individual joint
>-motions and limit checks (kinematics).  
>
>I believe the FTS has been cancelled, or at least deferred. Some time ago,
>the person who was in charge of the NIST part of the project said funding
>had been cut off.
>
>John Roberts
>roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
>
	Yes, the FTS program has been cancelled, for a variety of reasons.
Some of th lead work was being done here at RPI.  An ex of mine was doing
some of the work on the arm end.  I don't know what exactly happened to her
notes.  When she left the grad program was just before the FTS was cancelled.

It looked interesting and there had been an outside chance that if the FTS
had flown on a test flight in 93, she would have been a payload specialist.
That is one regret she has... not being able to fly...



Newsgroups: sci.space
From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Back to the Moon bill
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov 17 1992
Date: 19 Nov 92  10:20:50

        Since the initial proposal for a bill that would get America 
back to the Moon in this decade was announced, considerable momentum 
for the Lunar Resources Data Purchase Act (the "Back to the Moon" Bill) 
has been generated.  The Back to the Moon bill would authorize the NASA 
Administrator to purchase a geochemical map of the Moon from the lowest 
qualified U.S. bidder by December 31, 1996.
        Why is this important? The United States last launched a 
dedicated lunar mission in December of 1972, twenty years ago. Since 
that time, the government has spent millions on paper studies of lunar 
missions, but has spent no money on actually going there. The Back to 
the Moon bill would get America back to the Moon by 1996. All other 
initiatives have stalled in Congress, which is understandably leery of 
giving NASA money for lunar probes, and which sees a new start for lunar 
exploration as being the "nose of the camel in the tent", as a new start 
for solar system exploration may develop into a new Apollo program. 
        On the other hand, the Back to the Moon bill would stimulate the 
private sector to map the Moon. There may be valuable resources located 
in the areas of the Moon not explored by the Apollo astronauts or 
scientific probes, which focused on the equatorial belts of the Moon. 
Some theorize that water ice exists in deep craters at the lunar poles. 
The Back to the Moon Bill, if passed, would provide hard data on lunar 
resources. However, it will take passage of the Back to the Moon Bill 
to get America moving again to explore the lunar surface.     
        Among the important recent developments:
 
        Interest among the California congressional contingent has been 
expressed. Assuming the final draft of bill is politically viable, it is 
likely that it will be introduced in the 103rd Congress, and with some 
effort on the part of the space movement, passed sufficiently early so 
that hardware for lunar missions is created in 1994.
        Public hearings on the Back to the Moon Bill are tentatively 
scheduled to take place in the Los Angeles area in February, 1993.
        Some lunar scientists are responding positively to the prospect 
of obtaining new lunar data. Others are considering participating in 
bidding process to fly the lunar mapper. Others, however, are concerned 
about the possibility of the privatization of a formerly governmental field.
        The Back to the Moon Bill is receiving positive feedback from 
National Space Society chapters and newsletters, as well as by the "
experts" in the Beltway. 
        Space activists should have a major role in the passage of this 
bill. We need volunteers to deal with local congresspersons, with the 
media, and with other grassroots organizations. Please support this 
effort, by helping to pass the Back to the Moon Bill. For more 
information, please contact San Diego L5 at 619/295-3690, or 
David Anderman at 714/524-1674.

--- Maximus 2.00
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: fogarty@sir-c.jpl.nasa.gov (Tim Fogarty)
Subject: Re: SATELLITE PHOTO
Organization: JPL, Space Imaging Radar Software Group
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 01:55:49 GMT


In article <16NOV92.12028663.0072@VM1.MCGILL.CA>, IEGS@MUSICB.MCGILL.CA (IEGS000) writes:
|>
|>COULD SOMEONE HELP ME: SUPPOSE A HURRICANE JUST BLEW IN! WHERE CAN I
|>FIND A SATELLITE PHOTOS OF IT'S PROGRESS?
|>PLEASE REPLY TO MC.BER
|>

CNN

--
Tim Fogarty
Sys Man and Sys Admin for the EGSE in the POCC at JSC for SRL-1, STS-59
FOGARTY@SIR-C.JPL.NASA.GOV
From: ken@sugra.uucp (Kenneth Ng)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: What kind of computers are in the shuttle?
Date: 19 Nov 92 04:39:39 GMT
Organization: Private Computer, Totowa, NJ

In article <18741@ksr.com: jfw@ksr.com (John F. Woods) writes:
:Rad-hard SRAM, 50 bits of ECC for each 32 bits of memory, *and* a background
:scrub cycle every two seconds.  They didn't buy this at "BACK OF THE TRUCK
:PEECEES, LIMITED", nosir!

Good grief, 50 bits ECC for 32 bits of memory?  How many bits wrong can it
correct and detect?

-- 
Kenneth Ng
Please reply to ken@eies2.njit.edu for now.
Apple and AT&T lawsuits: Just say NO!
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: coley@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Chris Coley)
Subject: Saturn V for Freedom deployment
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:03:20 GMT

My name is Chris Coley, and I am an undergraduate student at Purdue Univesity
studying Aerospace Engineering.  I am currently working on a research report
proposing the use of a Saturn V derived heavy launch vehicle, instead of the 
Space Shuttle, for the deployment and resupply of Space Station Freedom.  I
would like to know if there are any resources available that I could use for 
this topic.  Any information would be greatly appreciated.  Thank You.  

login: coley@gn.ecn.purdue.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: phoenix.Princeton.EDU!carlosn (Carlos G. Niederstrasser)
Subject: Re: Shuttle replacement
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 03:40:10 GMT

Talking about the possible merits of HL-20, DC-Y, NASP, etc is a good thing.   
Whatever program you support lets make sure is flying before the shuttle stops.   
In my opinion giving a more or less specific date such as 2005 for the shuttle  
to stop is a bad mistake, if we don't have realtively certain dates for any  
replacements.

Let us not forget history.  Twenty years ago 3 (or more) fully operational  
Saturn V were left as museum pieces accross the country.  As much as I would  
like to see Columbia at KSC, let's try not to shoot ourselves in the foot again  
and let go of our heaviest capacity lift vehicle.  (notice I said heaviest and  
not heavy :)

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |
|                                 |   and the reality of tomorrow   |
| carlosn@phoenix.princeton.edu   |---------------------------------|
| space@phoenix.princeton.edu     |    Ad Astra per Ardua Nostra    |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |
From: wlmss@peg.pegasus.oz.au
Newsgroups: sci.space
Date: 19 Nov 92 21:40 EST
Subject: Re: Galileo HGA: Hypothesis
Nf-ID: #R:1992Nov10.140620.8359@cc.umontre:1668166106:peg:246900037:000:455
Nf-From: peg.pegasus.oz.au!wlmss    Nov 19 21:40:00 1992


 
 
        Another naive query about Galileo's HGA problem.
 
        Can it send data at a high rate but with little power?
 
        If so, what if a relay craft were sent after it to gather and
        send information back at the intended rate?
 
        Would this work?
 
 
      o < < < < < < < < < < < <  )-x  . . . . )-G
 
      earth                     relay       Galileo
 
 
 
 
                                             Lawrie Williams


Newsgroups: sci.space