Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 05:00:05 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #313 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Wed, 14 Oct 92 Volume 15 : Issue 313 Today's Topics: BLACK HOLES CIS Mars mission plans Controversy over V-2 anniversary (3 msgs) Lecture Summary: What if SETI Succeeds, myth that we're prepared ( Lunar advertising, eyeball resolution (was Re: Laser Space Mirror) Pres Debate & military spending Roswell (2 msgs) SETI functional grammer (2 msgs) SETI positive? South Africa tests Satellite launch vehicle (2 msgs) SPS Using Electric Rockets for Science (was Re: Ion for Pluto Direct) V-2 anniversary Wernher von Braun (was Re: von_Brown_) What use is Freedom? (2 msgs) 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: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:34:49 GMT From: Hartmut Frommert Subject: BLACK HOLES Newsgroups: sci.space bill.nunnelee@the-matrix.com (Bill Nunnelee) writes: >-> 3) Is there a black hole close to our galaxy? >3.) There are probably many Black Holes within our galaxy, as they are >the natural result of the death of a massive star (I should know the >required number of solar masses, but I would have to look it up). There's still a vivid discussion on that point at the relativists and theoretists of stellar evolution, so that it is still open if stellar evolution leads to black holes at all. All we know is that in Einstein's GR there are Black Hole configurations as solutions. Also there was a suggestion some years ago to replace the black hole candidates at the centers of galaxies by just anisotropic stellar velocity distributions... and most *stellar* candidates could turn out to be Neutron (or some type of even stranger) stars (as most did BTW). -- Hartmut Frommert Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany -- Eat whale killers, not whales -- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 19:38:43 GMT From: Gerald Cecil Subject: CIS Mars mission plans Newsgroups: sci.space Could someone pls summarize current CIS robot plans for Mars exploration. Are there any plans to reattempt the Phobos missions with revised spacecraft/ software? Thanks. --- Gerald Cecil cecil@wrath.physics.unc.edu 919-962-7169 Physics & Astronomy, U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3255 USA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:10:44 GMT From: Hartmut Frommert Subject: Controversy over V-2 anniversary Newsgroups: sci.space clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones) writes: >Or get a grip. And put Peenemunde in your spell list. ^^^^^^^^^^ Its correct name is Peenemuende, or more accurately Peenem\"unde (in TeX). -- Hartmut Frommert Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany -- Eat whale killers, not whales -- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:21:32 GMT From: Hartmut Frommert Subject: Controversy over V-2 anniversary Newsgroups: sci.space prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >THe difference is that the designers didn't want it used. >the chicago people were petitioning truman, oppenheimer was drummed >out for being weak on the h-bomb. that is ethics. they built the bomb >for germany, they didn't want it used on japan. for dropping the bomb As I stated in a semi-recent posting, there is some evidence that some of the Peenemuende engineers, at least Wernher von Braun, did also NOT want their A-4 experimental rocket to be used as mass produced V-2 weapon. As I read long ago in a 60s book, they made some 65,000 modifications to delay mass production. -- Hartmut Frommert Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany -- Eat whale killers, not whales -- ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 20:26:18 GMT From: Josh 'K' Hopkins Subject: Controversy over V-2 anniversary Newsgroups: sci.space phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Hartmut Frommert) writes: >prb@access.digex.com (Pat) writes: >>THe difference is that the designers didn't want it used. >>the chicago people were petitioning truman, oppenheimer was drummed >>out for being weak on the h-bomb. that is ethics. they built the bomb >>for germany, they didn't want it used on japan. for dropping the bomb >As I stated in a semi-recent posting, there is some evidence that some of >the Peenemuende engineers, at least Wernher von Braun, did also NOT want >their A-4 experimental rocket to be used as mass produced V-2 weapon. As >I read long ago in a 60s book, they made some 65,000 modifications to delay >mass production. I've seen numbers like this too, but it's not clear to me whether they made so many modifications because they wanted to or because, never having built a ballistic missile, it took a few tries to get things right. >-- > Hartmut Frommert > Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany > -- Eat whale killers, not whales -- -- Josh Hopkins jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu The views expresed above do not necessarily reflect those of ISDS, UIUC, NSS, IBM FSC, NCSA, NMSU, AIAA or the American Association for the Advancement of Acronymphomaniacs ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 14:20:06 GMT From: Gary Coffman Subject: Lecture Summary: What if SETI Succeeds, myth that we're prepared ( Newsgroups: sci.space In article <92285.195231SAG101@psuvm.psu.edu> SAG101@psuvm.psu.edu (stuart goldman) writes: > an automobile. Look at the amount of recklessness and stupidity that occurs > on a daily basis there. Between drunk driving, speeding (not that I have > never speeded) and deaths on the road on a daily basis, and that's in two > dimensions. What would happen if everyone had access to an airplane? Then > they're succeptable to collision in three dimensions... then deal with space The reason there are so few midair collisions is not the superhuman pilots, sober as judges, or the omnipotent FAA. The reason is it's a lot harder to hit something with three degrees of freedom than something confined to two dimensions, and further confined by roads. It's the difference between hitting a sitting duck and a duck on the wing. As we move into space, the miss distances grow huge. You'd want to be more concerned about the beer cans they throw overboard. Those could eventually pose a real debris problem for craft in other trajectories. The odds of collision would be no greater than the odds that one ocean liner would run into the garbage of another on a different track, but the collision velocities would make the rare impacts spectacular. Gary ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 14:01:03 GMT From: Gary Coffman Subject: Lunar advertising, eyeball resolution (was Re: Laser Space Mirror) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Oct12.230209.1@fnala.fnal.gov> higgins@fnala.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes: >In article <1992Oct10.151428.8423@ke4zv.uucp>, gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes: >> I've heard of a proposal to "paint" the Coke logo on the Moon. Using a >> highly reflective "dust", say titanium dioxide smoke particles, sputtered >> onto the surface by an electron beam from a lunar orbiting satellite. >> The layer could be molecules thick [...] > >Gary, this isn't clear. How would "an electron beam" sputter >"titanium dioxide smoke particles" onto the surface? Well this was just something I overheard at a cocktail party for the Atlanta advertising community, not a technical presentation. I'd guess that the particles would be ionized and steered by some sort of accelerator system. Sort of like a cosmic air brush using electro painting techniques somewhat similar to what GM is using nowadays to paint cars. >Even with very good contrast (like 90% albedo stuff painted on the 5% >albedo Moon), you probably couldn't fit more than one or two dozen >"pixels" across the Moon. So much for the Coca-Cola logo. > >If we relax the requirements, and say that the advertising must be >readable with 7-power binoculars, we can do much more. Well I'm sure the old Coca Cola script logo is out, but the new Coke logo might still be visible to those with excellent vision, and certainly to anyone with binoculars. The free TV publicity it would generate might be worth the entire cost of the project even if no one ever bothered to read it directly. I'm sure admen read SF too. So this idea isn't new. What caught my attention was that it wasn't *junior* admen discussing it. Somebody may actually be working a spreadsheet on this. Or, it could have just been liquor talking, good booze though. :-) Gary ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 14:21:08 GMT From: "James B. Reed" Subject: Pres Debate & military spending Newsgroups: talk.politics.space,sci.space In article <1992Oct12.210721.24882@Princeton.EDU>, phoenix.Princeton.EDU!carlosn (Carlos G. Niederstrasser) writes: |> In yesterday's presidential debate all three candidates agreed that if we are |> to cut defense spending, we better start retraining and retooling so that money |> is not wasted and jobs are not lost... |> [stuff about space technology being easily convertible to military technology |> if needed, deleted] |> |> The possibilities are there... |> But the fact is that it is not really |> happening, defense workers are loosing their jobs, and the space budget is |> going down. Take a recent example, to save jobs Bush agreed to sell F15 to |> Saudi Arabia, a highly contraversial decision. How about if to save those same |> jobs the same money had been used for a space program tha M-D might be involved |> in. It's not being done because of economics. The Saudis offered their money for F15 fighters, they didn't offer a dime for space research or development. The "same money" was not available to save the same jobs for a space program. Now if the Saudis were to offer to fund an asteroid mining program (for example) I suspect that space capable countries and companies around the world would be falling all over themselves for a piece of the action. But don't hold your breath. -- James B. Reed | If at first you don't succeed, Intergraph Corporation | Find out why, jimreed@b23b.b23b.ingr.com | **THEN** try again. (205) 730-8874 | ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 14:30:17 GMT From: "Michael K. Heney" Subject: Roswell Newsgroups: sci.space In article henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <140532.2AD87F0D@paranet.FIDONET.ORG> Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin) writes: >>... Below is a reprint of an article which appeared in a "science" magazine >>about the crash recovery investigation being conducted by a retired Air >>Force Intelligence officer. Although there is *no* hard evidence that the >>vehicle recovered was an extraterrestrial spacecraft... > >Come now. If you're going to reprint stuff from Air&Space, have the decency >to at least summarize the whole article, rather than taking part of it out >of context. Much the most interesting thing in that article was the >observation that a crash of a hush-hush *US* project could easily account >for the fuss and the secrecy... especially since the location was ideal for >such a thing to happen. Roswell is in the middle of an area that includes >White Sands Missile Range, Los Alamos, and an airbase that then housed the >world's only operational nuclear-bomber force. > >It's silly to invoke crashed UFOs when Earthly causes provide quite an >adequate explanation. I have to agree most wholeheartedly with Henry. I read UFO Crash at Roswell a while back, and found it to be a wonder of circular reasoning and wishful thinking. It also seemed to be padded out by re-stating every premise and factoid/interview summary 3 times; of course, this may have been necessary to complete the circles noted above. I consider myself a skeptic when it comes to UFOs and ETs - I'll admit the possibility, and would be happy to believe in the face of *REAL* evidence. (As is NASA - else why SETI?) However, the author has no justification for making his grandiose claims about UFOs at Roswell based on the information he presents. At best, he has evidence for some sort of coverup then and there, but stretching that to "proof" of a UFO crash is silly. -- Mike Heney | Senior Systems Analyst and | Reach for the mheney@access.digex.com | Space Activist / Entrepreneur | Stars, eh? Kensington, MD (near DC) | * Will Work for Money * | ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 14:42:00 GMT From: Gary Coffman Subject: Roswell Newsgroups: sci.space In article <140532.2AD87F0D@paranet.FIDONET.ORG> Michael.Corbin@p0.f428.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Michael Corbin) writes: >The recent exchange about Roswell was interesting. Below is a reprint of an article which appeared in a "science" magazine about the crash recovery investigation being conducted by a retired Air Force Intelligence officer. Although there is *no* hard evidence that the vehicle recovered was an extraterrestrial spacecraft, the testimony collected by Randle and Schmitt does provide some compelling circumstance that it was very foreign. > >This is only the tip of the iceberg on information that R&S have collected. If you want more, let me know. > >This article was taken from Air&Space magazine October/November >1992. >Reprinted without permission. Prepared by Michael Keithly. > > >In a response to a letter of authenticity of the Roswell events >Kevin Randle replied. > >The events that took place near Roswell, New Mexico in July 1947 >are well documented. The question is no longer if something >happened, but what happened, and why it is still being hidden 45 >years later. Colonel (later Brigadier General) Thomas J. Dubose >was the chief of staff of the Eighth Air Force, the parent unit >of the 509th Bomb Group, at Roswell in July 1947. He has >repeatedly, on audio and video tape, that the balloon explanation >was designed to "get the reporters of Ramey's back" (Brigadier >Roger Ramey, Commanding Officer of the Eighth Air Force). In >other words, one of the officers who was there has said that the >balloon explanation was nothing more than a cover story. If I remember correctly, the 509th was the unit responsible for carrying and dropping the A bombs that ended WWII. They ran hundreds and hundreds of practice missions perfecting fuzing mechanisms and bombing techniques for A bomb delivery. Considering the time, and the sensitive nature of their payloads, I wouldn't be surprised if security were very tight in an accident, nor that cover stories would be released. Any payload they lost could very well glow in the dark. Gary ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 14:02:39 GMT From: Gary Williams x3294 Subject: SETI functional grammer Newsgroups: sci.space Has anyone ever worked on detailed grammer, syntax and vocabulary of messages that we could send to ETI's? I know that various plaques etc. have been bolted to spacecraft, but I'm interested in any work that has been done on defining 'languages' that we might use to send complex concepts out to 'them'. The only thing that springs to mind is Carl Sagan's description of the fictional message sent by his aliens in the book 'Contact'. This involved lots of pages consisting of pictures and numbers with the numbers referring to pages which defined the concept on that page etc. It involved lots of things like simple video sequences to define verbs etc. The more I think about it the more difficult it seems to get past simple verbs and mathematics - so much of our languages assume concepts held in common and so everything would have to be defined (how rigidly?) even if it seems obvious. The artificial intelligence people have probably come across the same sort of problems when attempting to describe the real world to their programs. Perhaps they have insights on how such a language might be constructed and what it should involve? -- GARY WILLIAMS, Computing Services Section, Janet: G.Williams@UK.AC.CRC MRC-CRC & Human Genome Mapping Centre, Internet: G.Williams@CRC.AC.UK Watford Rd, HARROW, Middx, HA1 3UJ, UK Tel 081-869 3294 Fax 081-423 1275 ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 20:40:01 GMT From: Josh 'K' Hopkins Subject: SETI functional grammer Newsgroups: sci.space gwilliam@crc.ac.uk (Gary Williams x3294) writes: >Has anyone ever worked on detailed grammer, syntax and vocabulary >of messages that we could send to ETI's? Right now I think we're still trying to determine ways to decide whether a given signal is of intelligent orgin and how to show basic concepts. >I know that various plaques etc. have been bolted to spacecraft, but >I'm interested in any work that has been done on defining 'languages' >that we might use to send complex concepts out to 'them'. Sagan's "Cosmos" has a picture of the message sent from Arecibo. >The more I think about it the more difficult it seems to get past simple >verbs and mathematics - so much of our languages assume concepts held in >common and so everything would have to be defined (how rigidly?) even if >it seems obvious. Saying this is very hard is an understatement :-) And rember that it may take a few centuries to say "Sorry, I didn't catch that..." I ran across a thought experiment once where the prototype teleporting machine ends up on an alien planet and won't come back. How do you tell the aliens to press the right (manual override) button and not the left (self destruct) button? I couldn't figure a way out. -- Josh Hopkins jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu The views expresed above do not necessarily reflect those of ISDS, UIUC, NSS, IBM FSC, NCSA, NMSU, AIAA or the American Association for the Advancement of Acronymphomaniacs ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 14:01:02 GMT From: Hartmut Frommert Subject: SETI positive? Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro :-)) sichase@csa2.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE) writes: >Calm down. There is no positive signal. It's just that NASA's big SETI ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ >project is scheduled to start on Oct. 12. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Isn't that a contradiction ? :-)) -- Hartmut Frommert Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany -- Eat whale killers, not whales -- ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 09:46:24 +0200 From: glngar01@uctvax.uct.ac.za Subject: South Africa tests Satellite launch vehicle Newsgroups: sci.space Don't know if it's known internationally *yet*, but South Africa successfully tested a solid-fuel rocket motor with ballistic potential recently... The test took place at the Rooi Els test range of Somchem, a subsidiary company of Denel (formerly Armscor). The burn lasted 58 seconds and produced enough thrust to put a 800kg+ satellite in a polar orbit at a height of 400-800km. Comparable costs are half that of a similar US launch and South Africa hopes that within the next few years to be launching up to 70 satellites annually. (Incidentally, which other nations/groups of nations have viable satellite programs??) _______________________________________________________________________________ Gary Glen-Young 'The token South African' E-mail:glngar01@uctvax.uct.ac.za ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- God made men BIG&small, then Samuel Colt made them all equal,*NOW* Gaston Glock has made some of us better than others. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:15:45 GMT From: Frank Crary Subject: South Africa tests Satellite launch vehicle Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1992Oct13.094624.203094@uctvax.uct.ac.za> glngar01@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes: > The test took place at the Rooi Els test range of Somchem, a subsidiary > company of Denel (formerly Armscor). > The burn lasted 58 seconds and produced enough thrust to put a 800kg+ satellite > in a polar orbit at a height of 400-800km. Supprising: I'd have expected some technological heritage from the Isreali Jerico rocket, but this doesn't seem to be the case. > (Incidentally, which other nations/groups of nations have viable satellite > programs??) United States, Commonwealth of Independent States (or at least Russia, Ukraine and Kazakstan), People's Republic of China, Japan, European Space Agency, India, Isreal, (Iraq used to be close.) Frank Crary CU Boulder ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 14:27:10 GMT From: Gary Coffman Subject: SPS Newsgroups: sci.space In article <9210120102.AA29644@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov> roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts) writes: > >Could you please make an estimate of the desired characteristics of such a >device? I come across reports of some pretty spectacular electronic >components from time to time, so it would be useful to know what to look >for. I believe the fastest diode I ever read about could switch at about >10^14 Hz, which sounds like it would be in the right ballpark for far >infrared rectification, but I don't recall any of its other properties. There are several factors that go into making a good high frequency rectifier. It must have a very high front to back ratio. It's forward resistance should be low. It's voltage threshold should be low. It's junction capacitance must be very low. It's majority charge carriers should have high mobility. And it must be capable of handling the required current. Those are hard requirements to meet in one device. Note that switching power supplies rarely exceed switch frequencies in the hundreds of *kilohertz* because of these limitations. Basically, low junction capacitance and high current handling are diametrically opposed design constraints. Gary ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 07:48:23 GMT From: Steve Linton Subject: Using Electric Rockets for Science (was Re: Ion for Pluto Direct) Newsgroups: sci.space |> |> The really big problem with ion propulsion to the outer planets is that a |> adequate power source does not exist. You cannot use solar panels for that |> kind of mission much beyon the orbit of Mars -- they would need to be |> *very* large. A nuclear reactor is about the only source you could use to |> power the engines, and aside from the obvious political problems of trying |> to launch the reactor, I don't think the technology is ready for this kind |> of long duration mission. What about a foil mirror to concentrate light on a relatively small solar array? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 14:22:09 GMT From: Rudi Rynders Subject: V-2 anniversary Newsgroups: sci.space ###/ hpdmd48:sci.space / techno@zelator.in-berlin.de (Frank Dahncke) / 10:37 am Oct 4, 1992 / ###In <28165@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes: ### ###>Trivia question: Which city was targeted and hit by the most number ###>of V-2s? ### ###Amsterdam, Holland. ### ### Techno ###-- ###| techno@zelator.in-berlin.de ||| Please do not e-mail from outside Germany ! | ###| techno@lime.in-berlin.de / | \ Hardcore ST user ! ====================== | ###| Nothing that's real is ever for free, you just have to pay for it sometime. | ###| (Al Stewart) | ###---------- You can be sure that is was NOT Amsterdam. I witnessed many launchings of V-2's during 1944 and the first half of 1945 from around The Hague, and while some malfunctioning ones landed in The Hague, I can not remember any falling on Amsterdam. Furthermore Amsterdam is more than 90 degrees from the bearing for England from most launching sites. London was the biggest target within the actionradius of the V-2, and it took quite a few hits. However since this is a trivia question , the poser is probably thinking of one the industrial cities in southern England. Rudi Rynders (rrr@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:50:37 GMT From: Hartmut Frommert Subject: Wernher von Braun (was Re: von_Brown_) Newsgroups: sci.space pstc@igc.apc.org (Public Service Telecommunications Consortium) writes: >I'll have to ht some books on Von Braun's Gestapo role and title, >but I do remember, years ago, one of his sidekicks, in an >interview in the old (long-gone) Herald Tribune in New York, >stating that "Dr. von Braun was a major in the Gestapo, but, >of course, the title was strictly honorary." Whoever this stated was wrong. Probably he had some military rank, but he was not in Gestapo (instead, he was occasionally imprisoned by them for a few days). >In this same >interview, the same sidekick spoke of Dr. von Braun's desire >to become fully Americanized and was seriously considering >changing his name. Henceforth, he would _not_ be Werner von ^^^^^^ Instead of this (common, at least in Germany) name, his first name was Wernher (which is quite unusual). ^ >_Braun_ but, instead, Werner von _Brown_. -- Hartmut Frommert Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany -- Eat whale killers, not whales -- ------------------------------ Date: 13 Oct 92 14:47:26 GMT From: Gary Coffman Subject: What use is Freedom? Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1469100023@igc.apc.org> mwgoodman@igc.apc.org (Mark Goodman) writes: > >I have followed this thread with some amusement. The answers >offered to the question "What good is Fred?" seem to focus on the >question of its size. What does that have to do with anything? > >The question ought to be: "What useful things can you do with >Fred?" Size may be an issue, but in the tradeoff of capability >versus cost, bigger is not obviously better. > >So does anyone care to venture an answer to the question as I have >posed it? Fred is a very large engineering test bed designed to gather experience in constructing and operating large habitable structures in space. It has minor uses as a science platform in addition, but that's strictly secondary. Politically, the reason for Fred is to keep an aerospace engineering capability alive in the US during a time of reduced military spending. Gary ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 19:29:11 GMT From: Gerald Cecil Subject: what use is Freedom? Newsgroups: sci.space In article 091092154527@l30346.mdc.com, Cohena@mdc.com (Andy Cohen) writes: >In article <1992Oct7.031717.19507@den.mmc.com>, whitmeye@den.mmc.com >(Richard Whitmeyer) wrote: >> OK, I do have some questions, >> 2. Any plans for one in polar orbit? >2...no plans at all for polar orbit....polar orbits are VERY expensive >.....just imagine the resources needed for putting all that mass into such >an extreme orbit... unless of course the components could be lifted off >from a different part of the globe.....which they can't at this time Actually, you just need to get to the mid 50's lat to cover most of the land. Trivial for a Kennedy launch (<15% payload loss), and would then be accessible to CIS (which are locked out of meaningful participation at 28.5 deg inclination). We discussed this ad nauseum last summer. >> 5. How visible will this thing be from the ground? >5. I'm told that when the sunlight hits it, the reflection will be >extreme.... I've been told that when it goes by at night it will be very >hard to miss. I've also heard it will be visible during daylight too.... At 28.5 deg inclination not many US taxpayers will be able to see their $100 billion creation. Move to Hawaii (I enjoyed living there.) --- Gerald Cecil cecil@wrath.physics.unc.edu 919-962-7169 Physics & Astronomy, U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3255 USA ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 313 ------------------------------