Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 05:00:05 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #134 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 22 Aug 92 Volume 15 : Issue 134 Today's Topics: ACRV/Soyuz P Asteroid report Balloon Launches Electric Tethers Galileo Update - 08/21/92 Inflatable Space Stations - Why Not ? (2 msgs) Meteorite/Fireball object spotted? Private space ventures (4 msgs) Satellites in polar orbits - which/how many Soyuz as ACRV Space probe information To anyone who is interested in science What about Saturn?/Future not Past With telepresence, who needs people in Earth orbit? (3 msgs) With telepresence, who needs people in orbit? Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Aug 92 12:52:22 GMT From: "Allen W. Sherzer" Subject: ACRV/Soyuz P Newsgroups: sci.space In article amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk writes: >The private >measures Allan and others, including myself are suggesting will be >coming on line in the early years post-2000. Except for the posibility of Delta Clipper, I'm not as optimistic. We currently have a space program which doesn't consider reducing cost to orbit to be a worthy goal. Maybe Goldin will change that. >The shuttle will >continue working until it is driven from the skies by economics. But it isn't economics which keeps it there, it's government dictate. Unless we make space a market and subject it to market forces, costs will never come down. >Guinness is good for you Ah yes, 'Guinness, the beer you eat with a fork'. I envy you living over there where you can get it on tap; the way God intended man to drink Guinness. Allen -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they | | aws@iti.org | put a man on the Moon?" | +----------------------245 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 1992 13:41:13 GMT From: Jeff Bytof Subject: Asteroid report Newsgroups: sci.space >Recently, an associate mentioned there was a report of a rather large >asteroid (or some object) approaching or within our solar system, and >with a trajectory currently in our direction. And that radio signals >have been transmitted from said object. I believe the object you're referring to is the Galileo spacecraft, due for a last close flyby of Earth this Dec. Its last port of call some months ago was the asteroid Gaspra. Please watch sci.space.news for updates. Jeff Bytof rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 17:10:52 GMT From: "Paul A. Voytas" Subject: Balloon Launches Newsgroups: sci.space In a previous article, 18084TM@msu.edu (Tom) says: >I don't know if this is a wacko idea or what: > >Has there ever been any proposal or even thought of using lighter-than-air >platforms for launching small payloads? It seems to me that with a >dirigible designed to fly relativly fast, you could get pretty good cost >savings with it, as you could get both velocity and altitude advantages. > >-Tommy Mac Wacko or not, something like it was tried. The Air Force had a project (called FARSIDE) in the early sixties (I think) that used balloon launched rockets called ROCKOONS. The idea was to lift the rockets up 20 miles or so and then launch them through the balloon. At least two rockets were launched this way. Descriptions of schemes to have a floating spaceport in the stratosphere are also seen from time to time. These would be huge floating structures with runways for single stage to orbit type of vehicles. Of course, you have to get everything up there in the first place.... PAV ------------------------------ Date: 20 Aug 92 17:54:54 GMT From: Dani Eder Subject: Electric Tethers Newsgroups: sci.space evert@CPSnet2.cps.edu (Mike Evert) writes: >As I understand it, if a current is put into the tether, then that >would cause the tether and spacecraft to gain kenetic energy and rise >to a higher orbit. The opposite will happen if current is drawn from >the tether. Would the acceleration always be in one direction and its >reverse only? I don't know if this would be in the direction of orbit >or perpindicular to magnetic field. Is it possible to use the tether >for lateral motion? The formula for the force developed in the tether is the same as the force on any other current carrying wire in a magnetic field: F = IL x B Where all the components above are vectors, and the x stands for cross product. This means the force is proportional to the current I, the length of the wire L and the magnetic field strength B (in Newtons, Amperes, meters, and Teslas respectively). The direction of the force is perpendicular to the current direction and the magnetic field. The magnetic field is approximately a dipole tilted about 10 degrees from due north-south, and you can mount the current carrying wire in other orientations than straight up-and-down, so you have some measure of control in thrust direction, but it is not a simple thing to picture. Note that the power consumed in an electric tether is mostly I^2R resistance losses, plus the power to run the plasma contact devices at the ends. For a given number of watts of input power for thrust generating, you can play with the wire diameter and length to look for the least amount of weight and most thrust. You can control current I, and length L. Field B is a given. It turns out generally that you want a wire in the km length range, but not hundreds of km. So if this is a propulsion system attached to a really long tether, it may only cover a short segment of the total length. Another real world restriction to this propulsion system is that it uses the ionosphere to close the current loop. As you go up in altitude, you have less ions to work with, so eventually you can't keep the current flowing. Also, the field strenth of the Earth's magnetic field falls off like radius cubed, so that also falls off with altitude. Thus, this propulsion system is limited to low and medium earth orbits. Dani -- Dani Eder/Boeing/Advanced Civil Space/(205)464-2697(w)/232-7467(h)/ Rt.1, Box 188-2, Athens AL 35611/Member: Space Studies Institute Physical Location: 34deg 37' N 86deg 43' W +100m alt. ***THE ABOVE IS NOT THE OPINION OF THE BOEING COMPANY OR ITS MANAGEMENT.*** ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 02:31:07 GMT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Galileo Update - 08/21/92 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro Forwarded from Neal Ausman, Galileo Mission Director GALILEO MISSION DIRECTOR STATUS REPORT POST-LAUNCH August 14 - 20, 1992 SPACECRAFT 1. On August 17, a NO-OP command was sent to reset the command loss timer to 264 hours, its planned value for this mission phase. 2. The AC/DC bus imbalance measurements exhibited some change. The AC measurement decreased 1 DN and reads 3.1 volts. The DC measurement has ranged from 118 DN (13.8 volts) to 132 DN (15.5 volts) and now reads 123 DN (14.4 volts). These measurement variations are consistent with the model developed by the AC/DC special anomaly team 3. The Spacecraft status as of August 20, 1992, is as follows: a) System Power Margin - 69 watts b) Spin Configuration - Dual-Spin c) Spin Rate/Sensor - 3.16 rpm/Star Scanner d) Spacecraft Attitude is approximately 8 degrees off-sun (lagging) and 43 degrees off-earth (lagging) e) Downlink telemetry rate/antenna-40 bps (coded)/LGA-1 f) General Thermal Control - all temperatures within acceptable range g) RPM Tank Pressures - all within acceptable range h) Orbiter Science- UVS, EUV, DDS, MAG, EPD, and HIC are powered on i) Probe/RRH - powered off, temperatures within acceptable range j) CMD Loss Timer Setting - 264 hours Time To Initiation - 184 hours UPLINK GENERATION/COMMAND REVIEW AND APPROVAL: 1. The EE-9 (Earth-Earth #9) Sequence Final Profile Design was approved by the Project on August 17, 1992. This sequence covers spacecraft activities from November 23, 1992 to December 5, 1992. 2. The dual Drive Actuator (DDA) pulse mini-sequence No. 3 memory load was approved for generation by the Project on August 20, 1992. This mini-sequence covers spacecraft activities from September 8, 1992 to September 11, 1992. This mini-sequence will include two 2-second DDA motor turn on pulses, one shortly after turning to a 45-degree off-sun attitude and the other just before returning to a near sun-pointed attitude. GDS (Ground Data Systems): 1. The September 1992 D1.0 software delivery activities are continuing. A total of 28 program sets implementing 75 Software Change Requests (SCRs) and correcting 181 Failure Reports (FRs) are planned for the D1.0 delivery. The D1.0 deliveries will continue thru October 1992 and will provide updates to uplink capabilities needed for Jupiter sequence planning and developments activities as well as updates to downlink capabilities needed for Earth 2 support. TRAJECTORY As of noon Thursday, August 20, 1992, the Galileo Spacecraft trajectory status was as follows: Distance from Earth 88,904,600 miles (.96 AU) Distance from Sun 153,145,300 miles (1.65 AU) Heliocentric Speed 51,000 miles per hour Distance from Jupiter 656,795,900 miles Round Trip Light Time 16 minutes, 4 seconds SPECIAL TOPIC 1. As of August 20, 1992, a total of 8110 real-time commands have been transmitted to Galileo since Launch. Of these, 3232 were pre-planned in the sequence design and 4878 were not. In the past week, 1 real time command was transmitted and pre-planned in the sequence design. In addition, 5427 mini-sequence commands have been transmitted since March 1991; 3269 were pre-planned and 2158 were not. In the past week, no mini-sequence commands were transmitted. Major command activities this week included commands to reset the command loss timer. ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Optimists live longer /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | than pessimists. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:53:25 GMT From: GILES JR G E Subject: Inflatable Space Stations - Why Not ? Newsgroups: sci.space The LEO environment contains lots of trash. Thin skins might not survive in this environment. Gary Giles ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:20:59 GMT From: "Allen W. Sherzer" Subject: Inflatable Space Stations - Why Not ? Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Aug21.135325.18668@ornl.gov> geg@ornl.gov (GILES JR G E) writes: >The LEO environment contains lots of trash. Thin skins might not >survive in this environment. by itself the kevlar skin of an inflatable station isn't strong enough. However, a shield can be included without much loss of volume. In addition, leaks are easially repaired if they happen. The LLNL design has two envelopes for added protection. The outer one in pressurized at 3.5 PSI and the inner envelope (where the crew resides) is at 7 psi. Allen -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they | | aws@iti.org | put a man on the Moon?" | +----------------------245 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 07:08:32 GMT From: Harm Munk Subject: Meteorite/Fireball object spotted? Newsgroups: sci.space LJ10717@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes: >Hello, >I just recently heard over NPR (National Public Radio) that a possible >"meteorite" was spotted over Europe somewhere. I missed the information on >exactly where it was spotted. However, the object was accompanied by large >tremors covering a 12 mile stretch and a flood of calls to authorities who >have already confirmed that the "fireball" object was NOT >military test aircraft, abnormal weather patterns, an earthquake OR >anything else identifiable, at this point. >If anyone has specifics to this event please post or email. Thank you. >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Diamond - lj10717@lmsc5.is.lmsc.lockheed.com >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Wednesday evening, at around 22:30 local time (20:30 UT) in the northern part of the Netherlands, a loud, explosion-like noise was heard. At the time, the air space over this area was closed (it is controlled by a military air base), and no other military or civilian air activity was going on. Also, no reports of accidents were reported. The European Space Organisation reported no space junk entering the atmosphere at that time in that area. The Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute has six seismic measuring stations in and near that part of Holland to measure seismic activity in the gas fields in the northern parts of Holland. All six stations registered the explosion, and the seismograms indicate that it was a sound wave and not a seismic wave. From the order of reception of the sound waves it was concluded that something caused a shock wave above or near the town Joure in Friesland (a province in the Netherlands). Eye witnesses said that they saw a 'pillar of fire in the sky'. Alas, at the time that part of the Netherlands was heavily overcast, so whatever these people saw was filtered by the clouds. At this moment, the best guess is that a meteorite of approximately 30 cm diameter entered the atmosphere and exploded at a height of 10 kilometers above the town of Joure. Up to this moment, no fragments have been found. +----------------------------------------+------------------------------------+ | Harm Munk | Building WAY 11 | | Philips Research Laboratories | P.O. Box 80 000 | | Knowledge Based Systems | 5600 JA Eindhoven | | | The Netherlands | | #include | tel. +31 40 74 46 59 | | | email: munk@prl.philips.nl | +----------------------------------------+------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 02:26:20 GMT From: Simon Demler Subject: Private space ventures Newsgroups: sci.space > [It bugs me that there are people like H Ross Perot, who > themselves have enough cash to finance their own space > programs, but that none, so far, has underwritten one.] Does it also bother you that these people could be spending some money on the drought problems in Africa rather than on some space program...You must be one of those space for the sake of space of types... Come on get real...there are MUCH larger problems that need solving on this planet before trying to get peoples private wealth for space purposes.. ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 15:29:18 GMT From: Stephen J Kenny Subject: Private space ventures Newsgroups: sci.space > >Come on get real...there are MUCH larger problems that need solving >on this planet before trying to get peoples private wealth for space >purposes.. > WHAT?? Did I miss something here? I see nothing at all wrong with cultivating and/or harvesting private peoples' wealth for space development, exploration etc. Considering the APPALLING state of the funding game in D.C., it's amazing NASA gets anything done at all. My god, we could even make NASA a tax shelter...just think of the revenue generated from corporations alone. Furthermore, you are correct in sayng there will always be problems "on this planet". But when in the entire course od history have we, as a race, EVER tidied up our yards before trashing our neighbors. Human history is replete with such examples. Space for space sake is fine by the way. Curiosity and the subsequent search for knowledge are more than justification for investigating.... ------------------------------------------------------------- "Away..we go...so fast...." | sjk@kepler.unh.edu - Autosexual | s_kenny@unhh.unh.edu Be Bop Deluxe | Stephen J. Kenny ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 14:24:35 GMT From: nicho@VNET.IBM.COM Subject: Private space ventures Newsgroups: sci.space In <8780.2339210127@kcbbs.gen.nz> Simon Demler writes: >Does it also bother you that these people could be spending some money >on the drought problems in Africa rather than on some space program Nope, it doesn't bother me at all. The planet is overpopulated as it is. Besides, how do you fix a drought ??? ----------------------------------------------------------------- ** Of course I don't speak for IBM ** Greg Nicholls ... nicho@vnet.ibm.com or nicho@cix.compulink.co.uk voice/fax: 44-794-516038 ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 17:06:04 GMT From: games@max.u.washington.edu Subject: Private space ventures Newsgroups: sci.space In article <8780.2339210127@kcbbs.gen.nz>, Simon_Demler@kcbbs.gen.nz (Simon Demler) writes: >> [It bugs me that there are people like H Ross Perot, who >> themselves have enough cash to finance their own space >> programs, but that none, so far, has underwritten one.] > > Does it also bother you that these people could be spending some money > on the drought problems in Africa rather than on some space program...You > must be one of those space for the sake of space of types... > > Come on get real...there are MUCH larger problems that need solving > on this planet before trying to get peoples private wealth for space > purposes.. This troubles me. Trying to convince someone to spend his or her dollars on a particular project is the american way (car salesmen, investment brokers, even probably you when you try to sell a particular approach to anything to your boss), but condeming someone for either choosing or not choosing to spend or not spend thier money on a particular project is not right. Why pick on Perot. Why not Bill Gates. Well, the fact is that Gates (for example) doesn't spend his money on non computer related investments. Period. He is not obligated to choose to solve the drought problems in africa. Neither am I for that matter. If I can convince Mr. Perot that it is in his best interest to solve the drought problem in africa, then he will do so, If I can convince him that it is in his best interest to start a space program, then he will do so. Actually I have heard that he leans towards throwing his wealth at a mag-lev system for the U.S., but the political climate isn't supportive enough (yet). In fact, there are others that might even be better candidates, like the prince of that little island who has 29B and is the worlds richest man. Why don't we pick on him? Also don't forget that most of these guys have large portions of their wealth tied up in other investments. If you need 2B to do something, unless you can turn someone worth 2.1B into an absolute fanatic on your topic don't expect to see them invest 99% of thier fortune in your scheme. If you need 2B you better find someone with 15B or better, or more like 10 people with 2B each. john. ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 08:42:12 GMT From: Mark Sproul Subject: Satellites in polar orbits - which/how many Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Aug20.191642.21620@henson.cc.wwu.edu>, grege@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Gregory M Ellis) writes: > On a recent camping trip in the North Cascades we observed what appeared to > be several satellites (approx. 8 in an hour) moving in a south-to-north > polar orbit and all on roughly he same track. They appeared to be way too > high for aircraft. What were they? > There are a number ameature radio satellites, weather satellites and military satellites in polor orbits. I am active in the amateur radio stuff and there are between 5 and 8 of them at the present time. I am not sure exactly. ------------------------------------- Mark Sproul - KB2ICI ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 13:49:08 GMT From: Chris Jones Subject: Soyuz as ACRV Newsgroups: sci.space In article , jch+@cs (Jonathan Hardwick) writes: >mll@aio.jsc.nasa.gov writes >> Also, Soyuz will need to be certified for a >> possible water landing. We do not have areas like the steppes of Asia >> to land in like the Russians. > >Uhhh, this may be stupid, but why not just land on the steppes of >Asia, or any other flat land surface that happens to be within reach >when an emergency hits? It's not like the capsule would be reused, >nor need we worry about the Russians getting their hands on new >technology :-) Heck, they'd probably appreciate the return of their >raw materials. As has been pointed out already, Soyuz IS capable of water landings. The cosmonauts practice this all the time, two or three Zond reentry capsules (which are basically Soyuz descent modules) made water landings, and at least one crewed Soyuz capsule has landed in a lake. -- Chris Jones clj@ksr.com ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 14:07:20 GMT From: George Hastings Subject: Space probe information Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro There are a number of programs that can do the calculations you're looking for. I don't know about getting them here, but you can find a number of SHAREWARE programs for caluculating orbits, trajectories, gravitaitonal effects, and satellite positions on CompuServe in the Astronomy Forum or in the Spaceforum. Call 800-555-1212 for CompuServe's tollfree number f you aren't already a user. -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 14:43:33 GMT From: George Hastings Subject: To anyone who is interested in science Newsgroups: sci.space marina@tk.mainet.msk.su writes: > > We apply to everybody who is interested in future Russian > science; who would like to assist it to integrate in the World > science society. > We need information about Foundations and other organizations > those are interested in attraction russian science > organizations into a science research but also about conditions > of participation russian scientists in this projects. Besides > we would like to know about questions of finance. > We hope on establishment of interaction and development of > international cooperation. > > Best regards. > M. Naumenko > > Have you sent any requests to the main N.A.S.A. research centers that are doing aeronautics research? If you haven't contacted them yet, you should send letters to the PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE at each of the following NASA Centers: NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH NASA Ames Research Center Mountain View, CA -- ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 14:50:06 GMT From: Robert Rubinoff Subject: What about Saturn?/Future not Past Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Aug20.173536.21955@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Frederick.A.Ringwald@dartmouth.edu (Frederick A. Ringwald) writes: >In article <1992Aug20.014256.1@fnalo.fnal.gov> >higgins@fnalo.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: >> This may seem futuristic to some, but no more so than magnetic >> confinment fusion devices would have seemed in the 40's, and they were >> actually built for the first time in the 50's. >Surely you're joking, Mr. Higgins. Magnetic confinement fusion devices >don't work so great, in the early '90s! He didn't say they *worked* in the 50's, just that they were *built* in the 50's; I think this is in fact correct. Actually, they *work* just fine, in the sense of creating magnetic fields that can (briefly) contain fusion reactions. They just don't work well enough to be produce more power than they use. Robert ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 12:37:36 GMT From: Gerald Cecil Subject: With telepresence, who needs people in Earth orbit? Newsgroups: sci.space In article <171u2uINNfsq@agate.berkeley.edu> gwh@soda.berkeley.edu (George William Herbert) writes: >Have you talked to someone who builds or works with space robotics? No, I was hoping that there might be someone out there who would counteract hype from virtual-reality types. >When anyone suggests replacing humans in the short term, they laugh. >Space robotics aren't as strong, for the most part, have less degrees >of freedom _and_ less limbs, less end effector dexterity, and more >likely failure points than a man in space. They're safer, but often >can't do the job. (note that an astronaut in EVA can't do everything >either. both together are much more capable.) OK, fine. But the only current `job' for SSF is apparently biological research on the long-term effects on microgravity, which means loading rats into a centrifuge. I submit that that can be done with a conveyor belt. Sure, you need people to (dextrously) put the station together (or at least to install the rats in their cages), but after that its all BF Skinner (push the bar, get the food pellet, wait for the scalpel). >Or are you just trying to start a flamewar? Well, I'm certainly getting sick of some of the topics that have been battered to death here. We seem to be going round and round on how to supply SSF or get the crew away when things fall apart. I'd still like to see a discussion of *why*, in the present scheme of things, people are necessary for Earth orbit operations. Seems to me you could (in the spirit of many discussions in this group) free up a lot of $ (possibly some small fraction of which could be used to improve the dexterity of robots.) This is, after all, sci.space, not sci.humansinspace.waiting4Soyuz -- Gerald Cecil cecil@wrath.physics.unc.edu 919-962-7169 Physics & Astronomy, U North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3255 USA -- Intelligence is believing only half of what you read; brilliance is knowing which half. ** Be terse: each line cost the Net $10 ** ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 12:55:01 GMT From: "Allen W. Sherzer" Subject: With telepresence, who needs people in Earth orbit? Newsgroups: sci.space If and when we ever get it, come back and ask us again. For myself, I will juge it to be here when you allow a surgeon to do a heart bypass on you by teleoperation with a 1/10 second delay. If you live, we can talk about it. Allen -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they | | aws@iti.org | put a man on the Moon?" | +----------------------245 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 15:19:12 GMT From: Frank Crary Subject: With telepresence, who needs people in Earth orbit? Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Aug21.123736.1575@samba.oit.unc.edu> cecil@physics.unc.edu (Gerald Cecil) writes: >OK, fine. But the only current `job' for SSF is apparently biological >research on the long-term effects on microgravity, which means loading >rats into a centrifuge. I submit that that can be done with a conveyor >belt. You might want to bounce this idea off a lab biologist: Experimental animals require _alot_ more than picking them up, putting them in the experiment and then putting them back in a cage. For example, they will sometimes actively resist being taken out of their cage (or put back in it), get away from who (or what)ever is carrying them back and forth, escape from their cages (requiring a very different sort of work to find again, etc... Frank Crary CU Boulder (even though I'm currently using a Berkeley account...) ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 92 15:26:13 GMT From: Gerald Cecil Subject: With telepresence, who needs people in orbit? Newsgroups: sci.space In article 14146@iti.org, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: >If and when we ever get it, come back and ask us again. For myself, >I will juge it to be here when you allow a surgeon to do a heart bypass >on you by teleoperation with a 1/10 second delay. If you live, we can >talk about it If we restricted ourselves to things that exist, this newsgroup would be pretty thin. What *will* the crew of SSF be doing, other than keeping themselves alive (& putting rats into centrifuges)? Are there NASA plans for teleoperation of SSF before permanent occupation? --- Gerald Cecil 919-962-7169 Dept. Physics & Astronomy U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3255 USA -- Intelligence is believing only half of what you read; brilliance is knowing which half. ** Be terse: each line on the Net costs $10 ** ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 134 ------------------------------