Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from hogtown.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 ; Sat, 27 Apr 91 01:41:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Sat, 27 Apr 91 01:40:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #469 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 469 Today's Topics: Re: Saturn V and the ALS Re: Dan Quayle on Mars (was: "Face" on Mars) Magellan scientists study surface of Venus (Forwarded) Re: NASA & Executive Branch Re: "Bussard Ramjets" AKA duct space drives MONTHLY SOLAR TERRESTRIAL REVIEW - MARCH 1991 Administrivia: Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to space+@andrew.cmu.edu. Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests, should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 Apr 91 18:52:02 GMT From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!news.cs.indiana.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!en.ecn.purdue.edu!irvine@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (/dev/null) Subject: Re: Saturn V and the ALS In article <1991Apr26.172912.3019@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > >BUT, engines could be made that burn less fuel and therefore lift > >even more to orbit. Maybe rocketdyne could modify the F-1 to > >bring it up to date. > > Why bother? It works fine as it is. Fuel costs are a negligible fraction > of launch costs, and the Saturn V's payload to orbit is adequate for most > any foreseeable project. The engines do NOT work fine if they help contribute to $1500+/lb to orbit (optimistic estimate). I suggested lowering the amount of fuel NOT because kerosene is expensive (it's not), but to open up more VOLUME and LIFT for payload, thus dropping costs! the payload SIZE is wonderful (though it could be better :) ), its COST is terrible. We need to get cost per pound down below $1000/lb (preferably $200/lb). > > If you insist on "improving" half the subystems, *then*, yes, reviving the > Saturn V will be extremely expensive. The way to do it cheaply is to > firmly refuse to redevelop anything unnecessarily. You missed my whole point. The Saturn V is too expensive as it iS! We neeD launcher that gives us a large payload AND cost less than $1000/lb or there will never be a use for it or any other "heavy launcher!" -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Brent L. Irvine | These are MY opinions | | Malt Beverage Analyst | As if they counted...:) | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 26 Apr 91 18:37:07 GMT From: pyramid!lstowell@hplabs.hpl.hp.com (Lon Stowell) Subject: Re: Dan Quayle on Mars (was: "Face" on Mars) In article <4706@orbit.cts.com> schaper@pnet51.orb.mn.org (S Schaper) writes: >I believe that the evidence is that Quayle is actually quite intelligent, the >respected senator, and all that. He had a good reputation. When he hit the >national scene, the Politically Correct crowd, hating his views, concocted >this whole image for him, which he does help out with his gaffes and slips of >the tongue. But the face on Mars looks more like Margaret Thatcher than Dan Quayle... >:-) ------------------------------ Date: 26 Apr 91 09:06:57 GMT From: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee) Subject: Magellan scientists study surface of Venus (Forwarded) Paula Cleggett-Haleim Headquarters, Washington, D.C. April 26, 1991 (Phone: 202/453-1547) Jim Doyle Jet Propulstion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. (Phone: 818/354-5011) RELEASE: 91-63 MAGELLAN SCIENTISTS STUDY SURFACE OF VENUS Magellan scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Pasadena, Calif., are studying the surface features on Venus caused by wind in the planet's dense atmosphere, Project Scientist Steve Saunders said today. The movement of dust and sand is an important geological process on planets with atmospheres, he said. The surface pressure of Venus' atmosphere is 90 times that of Earth's. Soviet landers and the U.S. Pioneer probes measured wind speeds near the surface of Venus at 2 to 4 miles per hour (1 to 2 meters per second). Based on theory and laboratory experiments, that wind speed is very close to the speed required to move sand grains on Venus, Saunders said. Accumulations of blown sand and dust can blanket large regions and produce visible patterns in the Magellan radar images, he stated. "The most prominent wind features in the Magellan images of Venus are wind streaks," Saunders said. "Streaks form in the lee of topographic obstacles by the deposition or removal of sand and dust and can be used as indicators of the direction of the most intense winds," he stated. Many large impact craters on Venus have nearby wind streaks that may have been caused by the violent winds generated during the impact event or that may be the result of a slower process of subsequent wind movement of the fine impact debris. Magellan has mapped more than 78 percent of the planet and by the time the primary mission cycle ends May 15, will have mapped about 84 percent, project officials said. Project Manager Tony Spear said a newly adopted strategy to protect the spacecraft from the heat of direct sunlight has been successful in cooling the spacecraft. Magellan has been growing warmer as a result of changes in the geometry of Venus, Earth and the sun and the time the spacecraft spends broadside to the sun. A strategy, called "two-hide" which results in slightly shorter imaging swaths, protects the spacecraft by hiding it behind the large antenna and by turning the solar panels away for periods of time to reduce reflection. The Magellan project is managed by JPL for the Office of Space Science and Applications. - end - Two photographs, one showing wind streaks near the crater Mead and the other depicting an area of lava flow on Venus, are available from NASA's Audio Visual Branch at 202/453-8373. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Apr 91 13:19:45 GMT From: abvax!iccgcc!herrickd@uunet.uu.net Subject: Re: NASA & Executive Branch In article <1991Apr17.161821.18579@dsd.es.com>, bpendlet@bambam.dsd.es.com (Bob Pendleton) writes: > > Oh sure they talked about checks and balances, but never about the > mechanisms for enforcing the checks and balances. I doubt I ever had a > teacher who understood how it worked. Yes, the final check is the jury of twelve. > >> If Henry has to start telling posters how our government works, then we are >> in big trouble. I'm sure few of us can tell him how his works! > > We are already in big trouble. US public grade and secondary schools > don't teach. Few of the teacher can teach and the ones that can teach > aren't allowed to. > > How does this relate to sci.space? If you want the US to be a presence > in space, we'd better fix our %#@&ing schools. > Fixing the public school system is a slow painful process, if it is possible at all. My children, and your children are an urgent issue. Get them out of the public school system into an educational system that works. NOW! dan herrick herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ------------------------------ Date: 26 Apr 91 14:52:55 GMT From: agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!abvax!iccgcc!herrickd@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Subject: Re: "Bussard Ramjets" AKA duct space drives In article <758@newave.UUCP>, john@newave.UUCP (John A. Weeks III) writes: > > You better hope that you either have a uniform distribution of hydrogen, > or you have some way to predict the density. Consider what would happen > if the hydrogen density suddenly increased and your engine was not expecting > it. You would end up with either a power surge or a "major malfunction". > That's an interesting question. Here is a naive response in hope that someone better informed will set me straight: Isn't it reasonable to expect that hydrogen density variations in space will be comparable to the density variations we experience in the tellurian atmosphere? One or two very bumpy airplane rides suggest there are drastic variations in mass flow input to production jet engines. dan herrick herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Apr 91 20:00:26 MDT From: oler <@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU:oler@HG.ULeth.CA> (CARY OLER) Subject: MONTHLY SOLAR TERRESTRIAL REVIEW - MARCH 1991 X-St-Vmsmail-To: st%"space+@andrew.cmu.edu" --- MONTHLY SOLAR TERRESTRIAL REVIEW --- March 1991 Report Issued In-Part from Data Released by the Space Environment Services Center Boulder Colorado -------- MONTHLY ACTIVITY SUMMARY AND SOLAR CYCLE OUTLOOK MAY 1991 - OCTOBER 1991 We are now in month 55 of solar cycle 22. Solar activity skyrocketed in March, corresponding to the predicted pulse of activity which was expected for this period late in 1990. There were 123 energetic events in March, the largest number of events in any calendar month this solar cycle. There were 35 major flares, 20 of which attained class X ratings (the most powerful x-ray classification given to solar flares). Regions 6538, 6545 and 6555 were the major producers of flare activity this month. Despite the high number of solar flares which occurred in March, solar indices dropped compared with February's values. This drop contributes further emphasis to the belief that July 1989 was indeed the maximum of this solar cycle as far as sunspot numbers are concerned. There were a number of major events during the first half of the month, including an optically uncorrelated long-duration class X7 event on 04 March at 14:03 UT and an X5/3B at 07:55 UT on 07 March. The highlights of the month, however, began on 22 March with an X9/3B flare at 22:47 UT from Region 6555. Large radio bursts across the spectrum and a strong Type II radio sweep were associated with this flare. The X9 was followed about four hours later by an M6/2B from the same region, which lasted for nearly three and a half hours. These two flares are believed responsible for what is arguably the largest proton event at greater than 10 MeV of this solar cycle. A peak of 43,000 p.f.u. (particle flux units) at greater than 10 MeV occurred at 03:50 UT on 24 March; the greater than 100 MeV proton flux briefly reached 100 p.f.u. at the same time. This time also marked the passage of a powerful interplanetary shockwave believed to have been spawned by the X9 flare. A magnetic SSC (Sudden Storm Commencement) measuring 184 gammas at Boulder occurred at 03:42 UT on 24 March (more northern middle latitudes also reported an SSC of around 180 gammas at this time - as did the southern parts of the southern hemisphere). Geomagnetic conditions were at severe to minor storm levels at all latitudes from the SSC through 26 March. A second shock, most likely related to the long-duration M6 flare, was observed at about 19:20 UT on 24 March. At that time, the GOES 6 satellite began repeated crossings of the magnetopause into the solar wind. By about 20:00 UT, the magnetopause was compressed well within the GOES geosynchronous orbit, and remained there until approximately 22:10 UT on 24 March. This geomagnetic storm was the second largest of this solar cycle, exceeded only by the major storm of March 13-14, 1989. In comparison, the planetary magnetic A-index for this most recent major storm was 115, while the planetary magnetic A-index for the March 1989 storm 246. The March 1989 storm was therefore a quite a bit more powerful than this most recent storm. This storm was associated with intense auroral activity that was viewed well into the low latitude regions. Reports of auroral activity from northern Texas to Georgia and South Carolina were received during this period. Among the other effects of this activity was a Polar Cap Absorption (PCA) event of more than 20 dB at 02:55 UT on 24 March, a Forbush decrease of greater than 10 percent seen on the Thule neutron monitor, and geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) observed throughout much of Canada and the northeastern U.S.. Reports of electrical power transformer damage has also been reported in the northeastern U.S. during this period. Radio propagation conditions were severely disturbed during the major geomagnetic storm of last March. The combined effects of the PCA and ionospheric storming produced the most intense widespread HF blackout conditions observed since the major storm of March 1989. Polar and high latitude regions experienced continuous radio blackout conditions for days while the middle latitude regions experienced frequent blackout to near blackout conditions. Some of the best auroral backscatter communications observed on the VHF bands since the major storm of March 1989 were observed during this recent storm. Widespread auroral backscatter was reported around the world, in both the northern and southern hemispheres on 24-26 March. VHF auroral backscatter communications were possible into the low latitude regions during this period. SIX MONTH SOLAR CYCLE OUTLOOK This pulse of solar activity which was observed from January to March of this year represents the predicted pulse of activity which was anticipated late last year. There was a concern that the activity would persist and perhaps peak in April, but it has become apparent that the pulse of activity peaked in March and began to diminish in April. Solar activity is expected to decline to more moderate levels over the summer months. Major flaring will occassionally be observed, but the frequency of major flaring is expected to drop substantially over what was observed during March. The average solar flux and sunspot numbers are expected to drop over the summer as we begin a slow decline back towards a minimum in solar activity expected sometime in 1996. However, expect many more periods of high solar activity throughout this year and into next year. Geomagnetic activity between November 1990 and late February 1991 was more stable and quiet than has been observed in over two years. Similar conditions are expected over the summer months. Generally quiet to unsettled geomagnetic activity is expected. However, there is a risk for periods of geomagnetic storming due to transient solar activity and recurrent coronal activity. A slight risk exists for another major geomagnetic and auroral storm over the summer months due primarily to transient solar activity, although models are less confident about this than they were about the occurrence of a major storm with the last pulse of activity which occurred in March. Over the next six months, auroral activity is expected to remain about as active as it has been since late last year. Although a slight risk does exist for another major auroral storm over the summer months (as was mentioned above), confidence levels are not as high as they were for the March event. HF radio propagation conditions are expected to benefit from increased ionospheric stability during the summer months, thereby presenting more stable conditions for DX during these months. However, predicted reduced solar indices are expected to decrease the daily MUFs over all areas. The predicted reduction in MUFs may cause the frequency of 6 meter openings to decline as well. The seasonal increase in static and noise over the summer months will also play a factor in HF propagation conditions. VHF propagation conditions are expected to remain generally normal throughout the summer. No significant periods of DX are expected, except during local periods of favorable sporadic E. The frequency of possible sudden ionospheric enhancements (SIDs) is expected to decline over the summer, although a risk does exist for periods of SID enhancements due to transient solar activity. The frequency of auroral backscatter communications is not expected to change signficantly over the high latitude and northerly middle latitude regions. The potential for auroral backscatter communications should remain nearly constant throughout the summer for these areas. For the lower latitudes, the probability for experiecing auroral backscatter communications is reduced. RECENT SOLAR INDICES (PRELIMINARY) OF THE OBSERVED MONTHLY MEAN VALUES Updated for March, 1991 Sunspot Numbers Radio Flux Geomagnetic ------------------------------------ ------------- ----------- Observed Ratio Smooth Values Ottawa Smooth Smooth SESC RI RI/SESC SESC RI 10 cm Value Ap Value ------------------------------------ ------------- ----------- YEAR = 1989 Jan: 203.2 161.6 .80 189.2 141.9 235.4 190.2 19 16.7 Feb: 211.0 164.5 .78 196.0 144.7 222.4 194.0 15 17.0 Mar: 176.8 131.0 .74 204.1 149.4 205.1 199.7 41 17.6 Apr: 172.3 129.3 .75 209.9 153.1 189.6 204.4 23 18.2 May: 207.0 138.4 .67 216.4 156.5 190.1 209.3 16 18.8 Jun: 297.3 196.0 .66 220.1 157.9 239.6 213.1 17 19.2 Jul: 193.9 126.8 .65 221.1 158.1 181.9 212.6 8 19.1 Aug: 243.0 166.8 .69 221.5 157.4 217.1 209.7 20 19.3 Sep: 240.7 176.8 .74 221.3 156.3 225.9 207.2 17 18.8 Oct: 217.4 158.5 .73 223.2 157.1 208.7 206.3 21 18.3 Nov: 255.0 173.0 .68 223.4 157.3 235.1 206.1 19 18.4 Dec: 217.8 166.1 .76 217.3 153.3 213.0 203.3 16 18.4 YEAR = 1990 Jan: 239.3 179.4 .75 212.4 150.3 210.1 200.4 14 18.6 Feb: 184.7 128.4 .71 213.9 152.5 178.3 200.5 23 18.8 Mar: 198.6 140.8 .71 212.7 151.7 188.8 198.7 23 18.6 Apr: 196.1 139.8 .71 210.5 149.0 185.3 195.6 27 18.3 May: 187.7 132.0 .70 208.1 146.7 189.7 192.4 16 17.6 Jun: 168.9 105.2 .62 205.3 143.4 170.9 189.9 16 16.8 Jul: 204.3 147.0 .72 203.8 140.0 180.7 190.3 14 16.2 Aug: 269.4 199.9 .74 206.3 139.9 222.6 193.7 19 15.3 Sep: 186.4 124.7 .67 211.1 141.5* 177.4 198.1* 14 14.8* Oct: 219.0 145.2 .66 182.0 15 Nov: 196.1 130.5 .67 184.3 9 Dec: 208.0 128.5 .62 204.9 7 YEAR = 1991 Jan: 213.5 136.9 .64 228.0 8 Feb: 270.2 167.5 .62 242.0 9 Mar: 227.9 140.6* .62* 228.9* 23* * = Preliminary estimates The lowest smoothed sunspot number for Cycle 21, RI = 12.3, occurred in September 1986. The preliminary sunspot maximum for this cycle (cycle 22) remains July 1989, with a peak smoothed sunspot number of 158.1. DAILY SOLAR DATA FOR MARCH, 1991. GENERAL DAILY SOLAR STATISTICS _____________________________________________________________________________ | | Radio Flux | | Sunspot | Flares | | | Ottawa | Sunspot | Area | X-Ray Optical | |Date | 10.7 cm | Number | mil.sq.km. | C M X | S 1 2 3 | |-------|-------------|-----------|------------|--- --- --- | --- --- --- --- | |01 Mar | 218 | 203 | 6,030 | 9 1 0 | 7 0 1 0 | |02 Mar | 211 | 210 | 5,760 | 7 2 0 | 11 4 0 0 | |03 Mar | 211 | 136 | 2,400 | 3 3 0 | 6 1 0 0 | |04 Mar | 233 | 130 | 1,680 | 2 6 1 | 2 1 1 0 | |05 Mar | 213 | 146 | 2,490 | 4 4 3 | 11 0 2 2 | |06 Mar | 209 | 153 | 3,720 | 9 4 0 | 11 3 0 0 | |07 Mar | 213 | 188 | 3,840 | 7 9 2 | 22 4 1 1 | |08 Mar | 214 | 211 | 3,660 | 6 3 1 | 15 3 1 0 | |09 Mar | 217 | 263 | 3,690 | 1 4 0 | 12 1 1 0 | |10 Mar | 225 | 248 | 4,920 |12 0 0 | 12 3 0 0 | |11 Mar | 223 | 226 | 4,620 |14 1 0 | 14 2 0 0 | |12 Mar | 231 | 248 | 5,940 |13 0 1 | 16 0 2 0 | |13 Mar | 241 | 231 | 5,070 | 9 2 2 | 8 2 3 0 | |14 Mar | 244 | 261 | 4,230 |14 1 1 | 22 2 0 0 | |15 Mar | 244 | 288 | 5,130 |12 4 0 | 24 5 0 0 | |16 Mar | 257 | 343 | 5,580 | 7 4 1 | 22 2 2 0 | |17 Mar | 250 | 283 | 5,280 |13 7 1 | 28 7 3 0 | |18 Mar | 276 | 267 | 6,300 | 4 6 0 | 33 8 1 0 | |19 Mar | 262 | 230 | 6,600 | 5 4 0 | 7 2 2 0 | |20 Mar | 250 | 264 | 9,150 |13 6 0 | 9 9 0 0 | |21 Mar | 252 | 227 | 7,980 |11 7 1 | 15 7 3 0 | |22 Mar | 258 | 269 | 9,390 |10 4 1 | 26 7 0 1 | |23 Mar | 233 | 274 | 8,280 | 6 8 0 | 18 5 3 1 | |24 Mar | 260 | 281 | 9,120 | 6 5 0 | 27 3 2 1 | |25 Mar | 237 | 251 | 8,970 |11 1 2 | 18 4 0 2 | |26 Mar | 230 | 248 | 8,520 |11 1 1 | 13 4 0 1 | |27 Mar | 204 | 218 | 7,680 | 6 1 0 | 11 1 0 0 | |28 Mar | 199 | 188 | 7,800 | 5 0 0 | 6 0 0 0 | |29 Mar | 191 | 184 | 6,900 | 5 1 1 | 16 1 0 1 | |30 Mar | 199 | 217 | 7,320 | 4 1 0 | 10 2 0 0 | |31 Mar | 192 | 178 | 5,730 | 5 3 1 | 13 0 2 0 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- DAILY PLANETARY GEOMAGNETIC ACTIVITY AND PROTON FLUENCE VALUES FOR MARCH 1991 ____________________________________________________________________________ | Date | Ap | Planetary K-index | >10 MeV | >100 MeV | Notes | |---------|-----|-------------------|---------|----------|-------------------| |01 March | 13 | 2-2-2-3-3-3-3-3 | 1.7 E+4 | 3.0 E+3 | | |02 March | 10 | 3-2-1-2-3-3-2-2 | 1.7 E+4 | 3.3 E+3 | | |03 March | 7 | 2-1-2-2-2-2-2-2 | 2.1 E+4 | 3.1 E+3 | | |04 March | 8 | 1-1-1-1-2-2-3-2 | 3.7 E+4 | 2.8 E+3 | | |05 March | 23 | 2-3-5-4-4-4-3-3 | 3.5 E+4 | 2.2 E+3 | | |06 March | 23 | 2-4-3-4-3-4-4-4 | 2.8 E+4 | 2.2 E+3 | | |07 March | 26 | 3-4-4-4-4-3-4-4 | 1.6 E+4 | 2.8 E+3 | | |08 March | 17 | 3-4-4-4-4-3-4-4 | 1.4 E+4 | 2.5 E+3 | | |09 March | 24 | 4-4-3-4-4-4-3-4 | 1.7 E+4 | 2.6 E+3 | SI 33 nT = 2246UT | |10 March | 20 | 5-5-3-4-3-2-2-1 | 1.8 E+4 | 2.2 E+3 | | |11 March | 7 | 1-1-2-2-2-2-2-2 | 1.6 E+4 | 2.2 E+3 | | |12 March | 16 | 2-2-3-3-3-3-4-4 | 4.7 E+4 | 2.2 E+3 | Pro. Enh.= 1800UT | |13 March | 24 | 6-3-4-2-2-4-2-1 | 4.7 E+5 | 2.2 E+3 | | |14 March | 9 | 2-2-2-3-2-1-2-1 | 3.6 E+5 | 1.7 E+3 | | |15 March | 8 | 2-1-1-2-3-3-2-1 | 1.3 E+5 | 1.5 E+3 | | |16 March | 9 | 1-1-1-2-2-3-4-2 | 7.3 E+4 | 1.5 E+3 | | |17 March | 12 | 2-4-2-3-3-3-3-3 | 6.7 E+4 | 1.6 E+3 | SI 12 nT = 2035UT | |18 March | 9 | 3-2-2-2-2-2-2-1 | 4.2 E+4 | 1.4 E+3 | | |19 March | 14 | 1-2-2-3-4-3-3-3 | 2.3 E+4 | 1.6 E+3 | | |20 March | 13 | 2-3-3-4-2-2-2-2 | 1.4 E+4 | 1.6 E+3 | | |21 March | 18 | 1-1-2-3-5-3-3-2 | 9.6 E+3 | 1.5 E+3 | SI 25 nT = 0600UT | |22 March | 19 | 2-3-4-4-3-3-3-4 | 1.1 E+4 | 1.6 E+3 | | |23 March | 13 | 3-3-1-3-3-2-2-2 | 1.7 E+8 | 4.3 E+5 | Pro.Evnt.= 0820UT | |24 March | 115 | 3-8-8-6-4-4-7-7 | 5.5 E+8 | 9.4 E+5 |SSC 184 nT= 0342UT | |25 March | 92 | 6-8-5-6-6-5-5-6 | 2.4 E+7 | 8.2 E+3 |Severe Storm ; PCA | |26 March | 83 | 6-6-7-6-6-5-5-4 | 1.2 E+7 | 1.4 E+4 | | |27 March | 32 | 3-4-4-4-4-4-4-5 | 7.4 E+6 | 6.6 E+3 | | |28 March | 20 | 3-4-4-3-4-3-3-2 | 3.8 E+6 | 3.3 E+3 |PCA Ended = 2300UT | |29 March | 6 | 1-1-1-2-2-2-2-2 | 1.0 E+6 | 3.0 E+3 |Pro.Evnt. = 2120UT | |30 March | 27 | 2-3-3-4-5-5-4-4 | 1.2 E+6 | 1.8 E+3 |Prot.Ended= 1215UT | |31 March | 10 | 2-2-2-3-2-2-2-3 | 2.0 E+5 | 1.4 E+3 | | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTES: Ap represents the planetary magnetic A-index for the day indicated. > 10 MeV represents the proton fluence for protons greater than 10 MeV. > 100 MeV represents the proton fluence for protons greater than 100 MeV. ** End of Review ** ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #469 *******************