waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
yamauchi@ces.cwru.edu (Brian Yamauchi) writes:  >Any comments on the absorbtion of the Office of Exploration into the >Office of Space Sciences and the reassignment of Griffin to the "Chief >Engineer" position?  Is this just a meaningless administrative >shuffle, or does this bode ill for SEI?  >In my opinion, this seems like a Bad Thing, at least on the surface. >Griffin seemed to be someone who was actually interested in getting >things done, and who was willing to look an innovative approaches to >getting things done faster, better, and cheaper.  It's unclear to me >whether he will be able to do this at his new position.  >Does anyone know what his new duties will be?  First I've heard of it. Offhand:  Griffin is no longer an "office" head, so that's bad.  On the other hand:  Regress seemed to think: we can't fund anything by Griffin, because that would mean (and we have the lies by the old hardliners about the $ 400 billion mars mission to prove it) that we would be buying into a mission to Mars that would cost 400 billion. Therefore there will be no Artemis or 20 million dollar lunar orbiter et cetera...  They were killing Griffin's main program simply because some sycophants somewhere had Congress beleivin that to do so would simply be to buy into the same old stuff. Sorta like not giving aid to Yeltsin because he's a communist hardliner.  At least now the sort of reforms Griffin was trying to bring forward won't be trapped in their own little easily contained and defunded ghetto. That Griffin is staying in some capacity is very very very good. And if he brings something up, noone can say "why don't you go back to the OSE where you belong" (and where he couldn't even get money for design studies).
: Andy Cohen <Cohen@ssdgwy.mdc.com> writes: : >the Single Launch Core Station concept.  A Shuttle external tank and solid : >rocket boosters would be used  to launch the station into orbit.  Shuttle : >main engines would be mounted to the tail of the station module for launch : >and jettisoned after ET separation.  Karl Dishaw (0004244402@mcimail.com) replied: : Why jettison the SSMEs?  Why not hold on to them and have a shuttle  : bring them down to use as spares?  One performance reason comes to mind: if you jettison the SSME's, you don't have to drag them with you when you perform your circularization burn(s).  On-orbit, SSME's are just dead weight, since we don't have an SSME H2/O2 pressurization mechanism which works in zero-G.  This means that you can't use them for re-boost or anything else.  Dead weight has a couple of advantages, but more disadvantages.  Throw-away SSME's might let us use some of the old SSME's which are not- quite-man-ratable.  But I doubt we'd do that; the cost of a launch failure is too high.  -- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office       kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368
rborden@ugly.UVic.CA (Ross  Borden) writes:  > In article <734850108.F00002@permanet.org> Mark.Prado@p2.f349.n109.z1.permane > > > >One could go on and on and on here, but I wonder ... how > >many people read sci.space and of what power/influence are > >these individuals? > > > 	Quick!  Everyone who sees this, post a reply that says: >  > 			"Hey, I read sci.space!" >  > Then we can count them, and find out how many there are! :-) > (This will also help answer that nagging question: "Just what is > the maximum bandwidth of the Internet, anyways?") >   As an Amateur Radio operator (VHF 2metres) I like to keep up with what is  going up (and for that matter what is coming down too).   In about 30 days I have learned ALOT about satellites current, future and  past all the way back to Vanguard series and up to Astro D observatory  (space).  I borrowed a book from the library called Weater Satellites (I  think, it has a photo of the earth with a TIROS type satellite on it.)   I would like to build a model or have a large color poster of one of the  TIROS satellites I think there are places in the USA that sell them. ITOS is my favorite looking satellite, followed by AmSat-OSCAR 13  (AO-13).   TTYL 73 Jim
For some reasons we humans think that it is our place to control everything.  I doubt that space advertising is any worse than any other kind advertising, but it will be a lot harder to escape, and is probably the most blatant example yet of our disregard for the fact that we are  not in fact creaters of the universe.  Annoying little species, aren't we?
>|Also, ask any electric-guitar enthusiast which type of amp they prefer, and >|they'll tell you tube-type, since tubes have lower distortion and noise >|than transistors.  'Course, most of your electric guitar types just say >>"Tubes sound better, dude." :-)  >Of course,  they then  turn up the REverb, the Gain,  add in the analog >delay line  and the Fuzz box.  I'd think they wouldn't notice the >distortion.   Oh I forgot the phase shifters.  It is kind of absurd, isn't it?  Some players even want more distortion, especially the Hendrix fans :-)  But there are a lot of them out there that can only afford the amp, or who like playing music without distortion. Then there are your hard-core Hendirx fans that want particular *types* of distortion, i.e., they make it, not their amps.  >>Also, transistors have the advantage in both waste-heat and energy-use, >>mainly because of the heaters on the cathodes of the tubes.  >Ah,  but how do they compare to Mechanical systems :-)  I didn't see a thing about waste-heat from Babbage, and haven't seen one of those mechanical TV's in a while, so it's anybodie's guess :-)  -Tommy Mac ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom McWilliams 517-355-2178 wk   \ They communicated with the communists, 18084tm@ibm.cl.msu.edu 336-9591 hm \ and pacified the pacifists. -TimBuk3
In article <1993Apr21.001555.1@aurora.alaska.edu> nsmca@aurora.alaska.edu writes:    Other idea for old space crafts is as navigation beacons and such..    Why not??  Because to be any use as a nav point you need to know -exactly- where it is, which means you either nail it to something that doesn't move or you watch it all the time.  Neither of which is possible on a deactivated spacecraft.  Then you have to know exactly how far away from it you are; this may or may not be possible with the hardware on board.   Apart from which, there is absolutely no need for navigation beacons.
Given that what i described for the HST  seemed to be the SMT,   and given the mass amrgins on the discovery mission  is tight enough that  spacewalking has to be carefully constrained.....  No EDO pallets,  no spare Suits, no extra MMU's.     WHy not do this?  	Quick Test  Goldins philosophjy  of faster cheaper, better.  Build a real fast Space TUg,  to handle the re-boost  of the HST  using clean Cryo fuels,  and get it ready before the  HST mission.  If NASA  could build Mercury in 13 months,  they should be able to make an SMT in 9.     How much would it need?  Guidance package.  Use a  Voyager spare.     Thruster gear,  Use H2O2,  or LOX/LH.  Bus  Use a Commsat.  Grapple fixture.   Use a stripped down Canadarm.  Comms package.   SPare  X-band  omni  gear.
Reported yesterday in the Washington Post (Kathy Sawyer, writer):  The article plays down the Russian role in US space.  Gibbons (science advisor to Clinton) sent Goldin a letter indicating NASA should not limit redesign options to those compatible with Mir orbit.  The White House thinks expectations for Russian cooperation have been raised too high.  The article reports that some think the spending and schedule limits for space station are so stringent that the redesign is nearly impossible.  That's why some think Goldin has begun looking at  Russian hardware.  Goldin states NASA will present all options to the administration  which will then have decision making power.  Goldin and the White House have totally ruled out using Energia to boost the station.
In article <1993Apr30.000050.1@aurora.alaska.edu> nsmca@aurora.alaska.edu writes: >Why not build a inflatable space dock.  If you're doing large-scale satellite servicing, being able to do it in a pressurized hangar makes considerable sense.  The question is whether anyone is going to be doing large-scale satellite servicing in the near future, to the point of justifying development of such a thing.  >...inflate the dock with a gas (is does not have to be oxygen, just neeeds to >be non-flameble, non-damaging to the satellite and abel to maintain heat)...  You'd almost certainly use air.  Given that you have to pressurize with *something*, safety considerations strongly suggest making it breathable (even if the servicing crew is using oxygen masks for normal breathing, to avoid needing a ventilation system, it's nice if the hangar atmosphere is breathable in a pinch -- it makes mask functioning much less critical).
I can tell you that when AMSAT launched some birds along a Spot satellite (French), that during installation of some instruments on Spot 2, there heavily armed legionaires who had a `take no prisoners' look on there faces. Spot satellites are completely capable of doing some very good on orbit surveillance.  BMc --
In article <1rmh4eINN95h@gap.caltech.edu> kwp@wag.caltech.edu (Kevin W. Plaxco) writes:  > resolving power of the optics.  BATSE is an altogether different > beast, effectively just 8 coincidence counters, one on each corner of  > the craft.  Positional information is triangulated from the  > differential signal arrival times at each of the detectors.  Obviously not.  Count rates are too low and signal rise times too long for this to be possible.  The CGRO, is, what, 10 meters long?  You'd need to time to an accuracy of nanoseconds to do this.  What BATSE actually does is measure the relative strength in each of the detectors (also as a function of photon energy).  Each of the detectors does not have isotropic response.  To do this right one must model the scattering of photons in the material around each detector, and even scattering of photons off the Earth's atmosphere back onto the spacecraft.  I believe they have now reduced the error to about 2 degrees.
In article <1993Apr26.193924.1189@bnr.ca> jcobban@bnr.ca (Jim Cobban) writes: >Having read in the past about the fail-safe mechanisms on spacecraft, I had >assumed that the Command Loss Timer had that sort of function.  However I >always find disturbing the oxymoron of a "NO-OP" command that does something. >If the command changes the behavior or status of the spacecraft it is not >a "NO-OP" command. > >Of course this terminology comes from a Jet Propulsion Laboratory which has >nothing to do with jet propulsion. >
In article <schumach.734984753@convex.convex.com> schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) writes:  >Would the sub-orbital version be suitable as-is (or "as-will-be") for use >as a reuseable sounding rocket?  DC-X as is today isn't suitable for this. However, the followon SDIO funds will. A reusable sounding rocket was always SDIO's goal.  >Thank Ghod! I had thought that Spacelifter would definitely be the >bastard Son of NLS.  So did I. There is a lot going on now and some reports are due soon  which should be very favorable. The insiders have been very bush briefing the right people and it is now paying off.  However, public support is STILL critical. In politics you need to keep constant pressure on elected officials.    Allen
In article <C659w7.IyD@fs7.ece.cmu.edu>, loss@fs7.ECE.CMU.EDU (Doug Loss) writes: > In article <JPG.93Apr27135219@holly.bnr.co.uk> jpg@bnr.co.uk (Jonathan P. Gibbons) writes:  >>I would appreciate any thoughts on what makes a planet habitable for Humans. >>I am making asumptions that life and a similar atmosphere evolve given a range >>of physical aspects of the planet.  The question is what physical aspects >>simply disallow earth like conditions. >> [deleted]  >> >    Dandridge Cole and Isaac Asimov collaborated on a book titled, > "Habitable Planets for Man" (I think) in 1964.  It should be available > in most good libraries, or through inter-library loan. >
In article <1993Apr15.051746.29848@news.duc.auburn.edu>, snydefj@eng.auburn.edu (Frank J. Snyder) writes: > I am looking for any information concerning projects involving Solar >  Sails. [...] > Are there any groups out there currently involved in such a project ?  Sure.  Contact the World Space Foundation.  They're listed in the sci.space Frequently Asked Questions file, which I'll excerpt.      WORLD SPACE FOUNDATION - has been designing and building a solar-sail     spacecraft for longer than any similar group; many JPL employees lend     their talents to this project. WSF also provides partial funding for the     Palomar Sky Survey, an extremely successful search for near-Earth     asteroids. Publishes *Foundation News* and *Foundation Astronautics     Notebook*, each a quarterly 4-8 page newsletter. Contributing Associate,     minimum of $15/year (but more money always welcome to support projects).  	World Space Foundation 	Post Office Box Y 	South Pasadena, California 91301  WSF put together a little paperback anthology of fiction and nonfiction about solar sails: *Project Solar Sail*.  I think Robert Staehle, David Brin,  or Arthur Clarke may be listed as editor.  Also there is a nontechnical book on solar sailing by Louis Friedman, a technical one by a guy whose name escapes me (help me out, Josh), and I would expect that Greg Matloff and Eugene Mallove have something to say about the subject in *The Starflight Handbook*, as well as quite a few references.   Check the following articles in *Journal of the British Interplanetary Society*:  V36 p. 201-209 (1983) V36 p. 483-489 (1983) V37 p. 135-141 (1984) V37 p. 491-494 (1984) V38 p. 113-119 (1984) V38 p. 133-136 (1984)  (Can you guess that Matloff visited Fermilab and gave me a bunch of reprints? I just found the file.)  And K. Eric Drexler's paper "High Performance Solar Sails and Related Reflecting Devices," AIAA paper 79-1418, probably in a book called *Space Manufacturing*, maybe the proceedings of the Second (?) Conference on Space Manufacturing.  The 1979 one, at any rate.
msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader) writes:   >Thanks again.  One final question.  The name Gehrels wasn't known to >me before this thread came up, but the May issue of Scientific American >has an article about the "Inconstant Cosmos", with a photo of Neil >Gehrels, project scientist for NASA's Compton Gamma Ray Observatory. >Same person?  No. I estimate a 99 % probability the Gehrels referred to is Thomas Gehrels of the Spacewatch project, Kitt Peak observatory.  Maybe in the 24th century they could do gamma ray spectroscopy on distant asteroids with an orbiting observatory, but here in the primitive 20th we have to send a probe there to get gamma ray spectroscopy done.  >Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto	"Information! ... We want information!" >utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com				-- The Prisoner  You have the info on Mayan Television yet?  >This article is in the public domain.
In article <1rnaih$jvj@access.digex.net>, prb@access.digex.net (Pat) writes: >  > Given that what i described for the HST  seemed to be the SMT,   and given > the mass amrgins on the discovery mission  is tight enough that  spacewalking > has to be carefully constrained.....  No EDO pallets,  no spare Suits, > no extra MMU's.    >  > WHy not do this? >  > 	Quick Test  Goldins philosophjy  of faster cheaper, better. >  > Build a real fast Space TUg,  to handle the re-boost  of the HST  using > clean Cryo fuels,  and get it ready before the  HST mission. >  > If NASA  could build Mercury in 13 months,  they should be able to make > an SMT in 9.    >  > How much would it need? >  > Guidance package.  Use a  Voyager spare.    >  > Thruster gear,  Use H2O2,  or LOX/LH. >  > Bus  Use a Commsat. >  > Grapple fixture.   Use a stripped down Canadarm. >  > Comms package.   SPare  X-band  omni  gear. >  > pat
Commericial support for exploration examples:  Also much if Baranovs exploration and Utilization of Alaska (Russian America, also included parts of Washington state, Oregon, and N. California) was doen by private funds (yes some royal governmental funds at times..)..
u9263012@wampyr.cc.uow.edu.au (Walker Andrew John) writes: 	   Also,if they did come from the Oort cloud we would expect to    see the same from other stars Oort Clouds.
In <1993Apr22.130923.115397@zeus.calpoly.edu> dmcaloon@tuba.calpoly.edu (David McAloon) writes:  > ETHER IMPLODES 2 EARTH CORE, IS GRAVITY!!!  If not for the lack of extraneously capitalized words, I'd swear that McElwaine had changed his name and moved to Cal Poly.  I also find the choice of newsgroups 'interesting'.  Perhaps someone should tell this guy that 'sci.astro' doesn't stand for 'astrology'?  It's truly frightening that posts like this are originating at what are ostensibly centers of higher learning in this country.  Small wonder that the rest of the world thinks we're all nuts and that we have the problems that we do.  [In case you haven't gotten it yet, David, I don't think this was quite appropriate for a posting to 'sci' groups.]  --  "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live  in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
I read it refered to as the "parabolic cross-section" rule; the idea was that if you plot the area of the fuselage cross- section as a function of the point fore-and-aft along the  fuselage, a plot that is a **paraboloid** minimizes somethin'  or 'nother (to be technical about it).
INteresting question about Galileo.  Galileo's HGA  is stuck.     The HGA was left closed,  because galileo  had a venus flyby.  If the HGA were pointed att he sun,  near venus,  it would cook the foci elements.  question:  WHy couldn't Galileo's  course manuevers have been designed such that the HGA  did not ever do a sun point.?  After all,  it would normally be aimed at earth anyway?  or would it be that an emergency situation i.e. spacecraft safing and seek might have caused an HGA sun point?
Does anyone have any Russian Contacts (Space or other) or contacts in the old USSR/SU or Eastern Europe?  Post them here so we all can talk to them and ask questions.. I think the cost of email is high, so we would have to  keep the content to specific topics and such..  Basically if we want to save Russia and such, then we need to make contacts, contacts are a form of info, so lets get informing.  == Michael Adams, nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu -- I'm not high, just jacked
In article <C66E1G.KM9@well.sf.ca.us> metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern) writes: >> ...the temperature of the (night) sky as seen from space? >     You'll find that in Allen, C.W., "Astrophysical Quantities", Athlone >Press, Dover, NH, 3rd edition, pp. 268-269 (1973)...  #@$#%$!!  I *have* a copy of Allen, and it never occurred to me to look in there...  I must be getting old...  I'll look it up when I get home. Thanks.  >... the temperature is 3 degrees K.  I'd remembered a rather higher number, but that may have been for the lunar nearside, where the Earth is a significant heat source.
>If all the ecomomists in the world were laid end to end . . .  >Punchline #1: they would all point in different directions.  >Punchline #2: they wouldn't reach a conclusion.  Punchline #3: it would be a good idea just to leave them there.  -Tommy Mac ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom McWilliams 517-355-2178 wk   \\ As the radius of vision increases, 18084tm@ibm.cl.msu.edu 336-9591 hm \\ the circumference of mystery grows.
I have two books, both NASA Special Publications, on the Voyager  Missions. One is titled "Voyages to Jupiter" the other "Voyage to Saturn"  These were excellent books put together after the encounters with each  planet.   The question is: Did NASA ever put together a similar book for either the  Uranus encounter or Neptune? If so, what SP number is it and where can it  be obtained? If not, why didn't they?
In article <C5MtyJ.12q@well.sf.ca.us> collins@well.sf.ca.us (Steve Collins) writes: >The difficulties of a high Isp OTV include... >If you go solar, you have to replace the arrays every trip, with >current technology.  You're assuming that "go solar" = "photovoltaic".  Solar dynamic power (turbo-alternators) doesn't have this problem.  It also has rather less air drag due to its higher efficiency, which is a non-trivial win for big solar plants at low altitude.  Now, you might have to replace the *rest* of the electronics fairly often, unless you invest substantial amounts of mass in shielding.  >Nuclear power sources are strongly restricted >by international treaty.  References?  Such treaties have been *proposed*, but as far as I know, none of them has ever been negotiated or signed.
I am a newbie to the net, and I am trying to get some information for a paper I am working on to get back into college.  If anyone can send me data on Solar coronal holes and recurrant aurora  for the past thirty years it would be a big help.  Or, if you have information on more esoteric things like Telluric current, surge bafflers power companies use, or other effects sporatic aurora have on the Earth's magnetic field, I'd be eternally gratefull.  Please send  anything interesting to me at         Marty Crandall-Grela         Van Vleck Observatory         Wesleyan University         Middletown,Ct 06487  or e-mail it to me at mcrandall@eagle.wesleyan.edu  Thank-you in advance,      Marty
I thought that under emergency conditions,  the STS  can put down at any good size Airport.  IF it could take a C-5 or a 747, then it can take an orbiter.   You just need a VOR/TAC  I don't know if they need ILS.  pat
an image of the moon has been caught in a weather satellite images of the earth. it appears in both the 0430-1500UT ir and visual images of the earth. the GIF images can be down loaded from vmd.cso.uiuc.edu and are named CI043015.GIF and CV043015.GIF for the IR and visual images respectively.  pretty cool pictures;  in the ir it's saturated but in the visual image details on the moon are viewable.  the moon is not in the 1400UT images.
In article <1993Apr20.164655.11048@head-cfa.harvard.edu>, willner@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) writes: >  > The NASM photo archives are open to the public.  All (or almost all) > still pictures in the collection are available for viewing, but I > don't know about films.  At least it might be worth a try.  I'm not > sure if appointments are necessary, but I think not. > Is posible to make copies of these photographs (or any other aerospace photographs at NASM) if you pay a copyright fee?