Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from beak.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Tue, 8 May 90 02:09:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Tue, 8 May 90 02:07:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #372 SPACE Digest Volume 11 : Issue 372 Today's Topics: Re: Apollo 12 Re: space news from March 26 AW&ST Truly presented space model by Canadian school (Forwarded) Re: trivia question Re: Manned mission to Venus B-70 Featured On Wings Re: Two communications satelllites to b Re: Two communications satelllites to be launched in May (Forwarded) Re: Apollo 11-17 Our Galaxy Re: SPACE Digest V11 #285 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 7 May 90 17:23:26 GMT From: hplabsb!dsmith@hplabs.hp.com (David Smith) Subject: Re: Apollo 12 In article <697@peyote.cactus.org> mosley@peyote.cactus.org (Bob Mosley III) writes: > The decision to >launch despite the weather came down from high up (read: The Trickster) as > >...The next launch window was sometime in March of 1970, which I believe >was the window that Apollo 13 used. Can you cite any authority for these statements? I have seen Pete Conrad on TV discussing the flight decision and its consequences. He had the final decision on whether to go ahead. He said nothing about anyone outside NASA, or political considerations. He said that if they put off the launch, they would have to wait a month -- not several months. about -- David R. Smith, HP Labs dsmith@hplabs.hp.com (415) 857-7898 ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 90 16:11:42 GMT From: usc!jarthur!aqdata!sullivan@ucsd.edu (Michael T. Sullivan) Subject: Re: space news from March 26 AW&ST :From article <1990May7.022614.12860@utzoo.uucp>, by henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer): > > satellites. When it came time to set up software and wiring for the > one-satellite Intelsat mission, the software people found it most > convenient to treat a single payload as the forward of two, while the > hardware engineers found that using the aft-payload wiring harness > was preferable. So the software sent a deploy-forward-payload signal, > and got no response. The hardware people were supposed to communicate > with the software people about the wiring revisions, and they thought > they had, but proper procedures weren't followed and the message did > not get through. The same mixup has been found on the Commercial Titan In simpler terms, the software people were using wire A, the hardware people hooked up wire B. Ah, the high-tech world of aerospace. -- Michael Sullivan uunet!jarthur!aqdata!sullivan aQdata, Inc. sullivan@aqdata.uucp San Dimas, CA +1 714 599 9992 ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 90 21:33:25 GMT From: trident.arc.nasa.gov!yee@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Truly presented space model by Canadian school (Forwarded) Debra J. Rahn Headquarters, Washington, D.C. May 7, 1990 (Phone: 202/453-8455) RELEASE: 90-65 TRULY PRESENTED SPACE MODEL BY CANADIAN SCHOOL NASA Administrator Richard H. Truly met today in Ottawa with representatives from the Highly Gifted and Talented Student program of the Manitoulin Island Board of Education, Ontario, Canada. Seventh grade student J.D. Wisner from C.C. Mclean Public School and Dianna Shaffer, program teacher, represented the students and faculty. As a part of their curriculum, Shaffer's students have spent the last year studying the development of NASA since its inception in 1958 and each student has completed one or two authentic scale models of a rocket, Skylab, the Space Shuttle and the Space Station. Wisner presented Admiral Truly with a scale model of Skylab. In recognition of the student's outstanding efforts to expand their knowledge and understanding of space exploration, Truly presented the school with a framed montage of photos from NASA's Space Shuttle mission 41G flown in October l984 whose crew included Canada's first astronaut, Marc Garneau. Also included with the photos were flags of the United States and Canada flown on that Space Shuttle mission. Truly was in Canada meeting with Dr. Larkin Kerwin, President, Canadian Space Agency, to discuss ongoing cooperative projects. Truly also met with Canada's Minister of Industry, Science and Technology, the Honorable Benoit Bouchard and Canada's Minister of Science, the Honorable William Winegard. ------------------------------ Date: 8 May 90 03:20:43 GMT From: uoft02.utoledo.edu!fax0112@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Subject: Re: trivia question In article <18783@lap.udel.EDU>, peters@udel.EDU (Shirley Peters) writes: > > I figure this would be the best place for a question like this... > > There was an astronaut named Scott something, he 'blasted into orbit' > sometime in 1962 (most likely this month.) Does anyone know the date? > > If anyone knows, please e-mail me. > > Thanx, Shirley > > Shirley Peters peters@udel.edu > I'd rather be sleeping! > -- > Shirley Peters peters@udel.edu > I'd rather be sleeping! > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think you are looking for Scott Carpenter aboard Aurora 7 launched May 24, 1962. He made only 3 orbits. Bob Dempsey Ritter Observatory ------------------------------ Date: 8 May 90 04:32:52 GMT From: usc!samsung!emory!mephisto!prism!ccoprmd@ucsd.edu (Matthew DeLuca) Subject: Re: Manned mission to Venus On the topic of terraforming Venus, for a pretty good sci-fi treatment of the topic, I would recommend reading Pamela Sargent's _Venus of Dreams_ and _Venus of Shadows_. There's supposed to be a third book in the series, but it has yet to show up on the shelves of the local B. Dalton. -- Matthew DeLuca Georgia Institute of Technology Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, Office of Computing Services for they are subtle, and quick to anger. ARPA: ccoprmd@prism.gatech.edu ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 90 16:49:11 GMT From: usc!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!nic.MR.NET!jhereg!wd0gol!newave!john@ucsd.edu (John A. Weeks III) Subject: B-70 Featured On Wings With all of the talk about the B-70, I thought I would pass on the following tidbit: "Wings" is showing the XB-70 show on Saturday May 12 at 8:00 PM CDT on the Discovery channel. Check your local listing. The B-70 footage on the F-15 show this week was a nice warm-up! -john- -- =============================================================================== John A. Weeks III (612) 942-6969 john@newave.mn.org NeWave Communications ...uunet!rosevax!bungia!wd0gol!newave!john =============================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: 5 May 90 17:11:00 GMT From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!bucc2!moonman@ucsd.edu Subject: Re: Two communications satelllites to b >/* Written 9:56 pm May 3, 1990 by quiche.cs.mcgill.ca!msdos in bucc2:sci.space */ >I would like to start a new discussion about a manned mission to Venus. >I know that given the inferno that's there, it sounds crazy, but Venus has >many advantages over Mars: >- 3 month flight instead of 9, and lower energy requirements to go there. >- 8 times the mass of Mars, which means that it can trap any spaceship more > easily than the red planet. >- Notwithstanding its athmosphere, Venus is the TRUE twin of our Earth, and > it should be therefore our main target from the cultural point of view. >- The athmosphere of Venus has the same quantity of oxygen as here. > >And for those that doubt about my seriousness, I am glad to tell that I >will be the first to volunteer to go there... After all our technology >can enable us to make life bearable even at 900 F and 90 athmospheres > >Mark S. >------- I have several problems with your proposal for a manned mission ( I assume you mean a landing mission, not an orbit-and-return mission like Apollo 8) to Venus. I have no argument with your first argument, that of time and energy. That's celestial mechanics, and not my cup of tea; your second argument, that of orbit acqusition, is similarly not my cup of tea. However, your third argument, that of a "TRUE twin", totally escapes me. None of the planets, pop science notwithstanding, is a sister of any other. Least of all, Venus to Earth. Mars is much more like the Earth, for a number of reasons: A>Evidence of liquid water having existed on Mars. B>The Martian sol (day) is about as long as ours, and its weather is similar to ours. C>It has evidence of at least a start of continental drift. D>It has at least a small magnetic field, protecting it from mean things like cosmic rays. Venus does not. As to your fourth argument, that of atmospheric composition, I'm afraid that both Venus and Mars are sorely lacking in molecular oxygen. Neither atmosphere is breatheable. Your fifth argument, that of survivability, is also flawed. Even the best probes-inanimate and probably better able to take more temperature/pressure stress than a mere human-have only lasted for around a day, at most. Mind you, I'm fully for manned space colonization and exploration. I simply would like to return after I make planetfall. Mars looks, at this point and IMHO, more survivable and interesting for a manned mission than Venus. Craig\The Moonman\Levin Bitnet {?}: moonman@bucc2.UUCP | uiucdcs\ Internet: moonman@bucc2.bradley.edu | noao>bradley!bucc2!moonman I'm just an undergrad. THEY don't | cepu/ care if I have opinions or not. | ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 90 15:53:06 GMT From: frooz!cfa250!mcdowell@husc6.harvard.edu (Jonathan McDowell) Subject: Re: Two communications satelllites to be launched in May (Forwarded) From article <1082@manta.NOSC.MIL>, by simpkins@manta.NOSC.MIL (Michael A. Simpkins): >> The Scout program is managed by NASA's Langley Research >>Center, Hampton, Va. > They > call them Blue Scout's, I think this name goes back to the early days > of the program. Is this true? This is a perennial problem. The 'Blue' in Blue Scout means USAF rather than NASA (the USAF people wear blue suits, OK?). But strictly, Blue Scout was a different variant of Scout, produced for USAF, which was used in 1960-1962. There was also a Blue Scout Jr which used Stages 2,3,4 of Scout as its stages 1,2,3. Blue Scout has long been abandoned. However common usage has often (technically incorrectly) referred to NASA Scouts with DoD payloads as "Blue Scouts". Formally, they are not. References: Joel Powell's articles in Spaceflight and JBIS in the 1970s and 1980s. - Jonathan McDowell ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 90 22:20:31 GMT From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!nic.MR.NET!jhereg!wd0gol!newave!john@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (John A. Weeks III) Subject: Re: Apollo 11-17 In article <48867@ames.arc.nasa.gov> mike@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Mike Smithwick) writes: > I would love to get some videotape of these old broadcasts sometime. Anyone > have contacts in the network tape libraries? The Arts & Entertainment Channel reran about 9 hours of the NBC Apollo 11 coverage last July. Having always watched CBS coverage, I was somewhat disappointed with NBC. The commentators didn't seem like they knew what was going on. It was nice to see the entire moon walk in one piece. The simulations that the networks use to show were exciting at the time, but they are quite boring now that we are used to the better quality video that NASA sends back from the shuttle. I wonder if we will ever be able to get video from the various Soviet space missions. -john- -- =============================================================================== John A. Weeks III (612) 942-6969 john@newave.mn.org NeWave Communications ...uunet!rosevax!bungia!wd0gol!newave!john =============================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 May 90 10:27:52 EDT From: LEONARD ABBEY Subject: Our Galaxy The ancestor of today's NGC catalog was William Herschel's catalog of non-stellar objects. He put this together in the last two decades of the 18th century. William's notation was, by today's standards, archaic. He divided non-stellar objects into seven general catagories, and numbered objects sequentially in each category. When an entry was refered to the class was written as a superscript to the object number (10^4 would be the tenth object in the Planetary Nebula class). Sir William's work was revised, and extended to the objects in the Southern Hemisphere by his son, John. John Herschel eventually cataloged nearly 8,000 objects, numbering them sequetially, in order of Right Ascension. This was completed by about 1860, and the work was published as the General Catalog of non-stellar objects. Entries were refered to by their GC number. Of course, this wasn't enough in the field of cataloging (people continued to discover new objects) and the whole shebang was edited and re-published as the New General Catalog by J. L. E. Dreyer, in 1888. The listing was essentially frozen at this time, and additional objects were listed in the Index Catalog, which was essentially an appendix to the NGC. When the NGC was issued, almost all of the objects retained the numbers which they had been assigned by Sir John Herschel. In the years after '88, a total of three Index Catalogs were issued, the last being in 1912, I think. This meant that almost every non-stellar object brighter than magnitude 16 was represented. Since that time the NGC has been relatively unchanged, save for the correction of errors. The latest printing of it is the NGC 2000, published by Sky Publishing Corporation last year. Our galaxy does not have an NGC number for the same reason that you do not know the lot and subdivision numbers of your front yard. Because you can already find it, you don't need to write it's identity down. Leonard Abbey, F.R.A.S. Georgia Tech Research Institute labbey@gtri01.gatech.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 May 90 17:55:13 +0100 From: D.W.Merrick%durham.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V11 #285 There has been a fair amount of discussion on E.T. life-forms and UFOs, so it might be instructive to consider two phenomena I have seen, and what they likely are: 1> whilst watching the night-sky a few years back one summer, there was a point source of light, say 4th magnitude, that traversed across the celestial sphere, but erratically: .. . ----> erratically --> . .. . .. ... ... . .. it must have taken quarter-half an hour to cross the sky. Can anyone find a suitable explanation for this (and no, it wasn't Venus *8-) 2> I was cycling down a hill one day, when a shadow about 2.5 x 1 metre (blockish) crossed my path. I was able to look up 15 seconds later, and there was nothing in the sky, and there had been no noise, though I didn't check for clouds - it strikes me as a very strange cloud if it were one! I propose these, as these are the sorts of things people might interpret as UFOs, and would be interested in any thoughts. ALSO, I gather that band-width for radio astronomy is constantly being erroded, and that this must be quite restricting in my opinion - what legal rights do the astronomers have, and are they likely to lose them (or even do lose them)? Thank you! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | MAC'S PLANK - THE BRIDGE BETWEEN QUANTUM AND CLASSICAL | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Behold and lo! an idiot! come again? an idiot, I say; do you not listen? | | | we must prepare to meet the idiot! are you listening? look, an idiot is | | coming, and you just fiff and faff like a falling leaf? get you hence, I | | hear him now! open the door at once, hurry! Are you not gone? ah! you | | have let him in, and Oh my god! the idiot has arrived; and I am he! | | | | - D.W.Merrick@durham.ac.uk... lowly maths student. | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------| | ...I am not responsible, nor my opinions! | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V11 #372 *******************