Date: Sat, 13 Feb 93 18:37:07 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #177 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 13 Feb 93 Volume 16 : Issue 177 Today's Topics: Are Landsat Satellites receivable? extreme responses to Challenger transcript (2 msgs) flashlights aboard the shuttle? HRMS/SETI Update? Nobody cares about Fred? (was Re: Getting people into Space Program!) parachutes on Challenger? Pegasus orbit PEGASUS QUESTION Solar Sail Nits SSF Petition SSTO news (3 msgs) U.S., Russian Rovers Take Their First Run Together wind on the moon? World View Imaging Corp. 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: 12 Feb 1993 22:29:12 GMT From: Doug Mohney Subject: Are Landsat Satellites receivable? Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1lh6ie$ck6@s1.gov>, jtk@s1.gov (Jordin Kare) writes: >Just for the net's amusement, I was at a conference on Geological >Remote Sensing this past week, and the Russians had a booth there >offering their satellite imagery for sale. As of that meeting, they >announced that they were offering declassified photo imagery with >2 meter (yes, 2 meter) resolution for sale; the price was approx. >$2500 for a 20 km x 20 km image. Do you think they could get some pics of certain areas in Nevada photographed? Certain U.S. classified government areas? *heh*. Or would the import of said pictures with possible views of experimental aircraft be prohibited under some funky law to spoil my fun? "Yes, night, IR, we're looking for a really hot object sitting on the ground... yah, let me see if this coordinates with the 'sky ripping apart' noise times...." I have talked to Ehud, and lived. -- > SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU < -- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Feb 93 19:26:28 PST From: Jason Cooper Subject: extreme responses to Challenger transcript Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy,comp.org.eff.talk > Let me see if I've got this. As an anonymous poster, you think he is > entitled to post any sort of stupid drivel that he cares to, but that > people ought not to be permitted to post flames toasting him for being > an idiot? Sorry, if he doesn't like the flames (or knowing what > peoples' opinions of him are -- no 'flame' required; he's an idiot), > then he has the options of not acting like an idiot or of hitting 'N' > himself. Seems more than equitable to me. > > -- > "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live > in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for m I never said you SHOULDN'T flame him; I said that there's no reason TO flame him. If you don't like his ideas, hit 'N'. If you do, read. Just because you don't like a guy's ideas is no reason to call him an IDIOT. By doing so you're proving that that's exactly what YOU are. Jason Cooper ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Feb 93 19:29:19 PST From: Jason Cooper Subject: extreme responses to Challenger transcript Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy,comp.org.eff.talk > > Let me see if I've got this. As an anonymous poster, you think he is > > entitled to post any sort of stupid drivel that he cares to, but that > > people ought not to be permitted to post flames toasting him for being > > an idiot? Sorry, if he doesn't like the flames (or knowing what > > peoples' opinions of him are -- no 'flame' required; he's an idiot), > > then he has the options of not acting like an idiot or of hitting 'N' > > himself. Seems more than equitable to me. > > > > -- > > "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live > > in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for I must add, as a second message, that if he was posting that because he gets high on watching others freak, you're doing a DAMN good job of satisfying him! Jason Cooper ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 93 15:47:23 GMT From: Frank Reid Subject: flashlights aboard the shuttle? Newsgroups: sci.space What kind of flashlights are used aboard the shuttle? Are there special NA$A $pace-qualified fla$hlight$, or do they use something more mundane? -- Frank reid@ucs.indiana.edu ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 93 22:34:03 GMT From: Rod Beckwith Subject: HRMS/SETI Update? Newsgroups: sci.space Hello all, Is there any new or compelling information from this project. They (NASA) has had quite a few months to observe..........what's going on? I feel they should post updates just as the other programs do. It would be nice to know what we are getting for our MONEY! Let me know by email or post. Thanks, Rod -- Rod Beckwith |$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$| The Datacom I/S |"The great obstacle of progress is not ignorance,| Nite rodb@corp.sgi.com|but the illusion of knowledge." | Net |$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$| Knight ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 93 04:04:24 GMT From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey Subject: Nobody cares about Fred? (was Re: Getting people into Space Program!) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993Feb12.134548.15175@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: > In article henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > >>The question is, if only $4G is available, is it more important to keep a >>small fraction of them employed, or to get a functional space station? > > Come now Henry, NASA spent over $8 billion designing a space station > which couldn't have ever been built. It should be obvious that very > few people actually care if a space station is ever built. This is massively unfair to both the leadership of NASA and the troops in the trenches-- including all the people on the Net who are working on SSF and things that support it. You may hold the opinion that they are deluded, wasteful, or foolish. But they are NOT apathetic. The real people working on this thing *really want to see it fly*. Managers who have gone before Congress again and again for ten years to fight for Fred are not doing it to make contractors fatter. They're doing it because they believe America needs a space station. You want to change things. I think insulting people is a mighty poor way to do it. If you want them to come around to your way of thinking, you need to earn their respect. O~~* /_) ' / / /_/ ' , , ' ,_ _ \|/ - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / / / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap! / \ (_) (_) / | \ | | Bill Higgins Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory \ / Bitnet: HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET - - Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV ~ SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 93 16:13:05 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: parachutes on Challenger? Newsgroups: sci.space In <1425@taniwha.UUCP> paul@taniwha.UUCP (Paul Campbell) writes: >In article <1993Feb5.231836.23346@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >>some training jets, the front seat has to go *first*. There is a >>story, perhaps untrue (my memory isn't good enough to recall where I >>heard it), of a pilot-instructor who got himself cut in half by >>reaching up over a student to pull down his handle after the student >>blacked out. The student got out. The instructor got a (posthumous) >>medal. >How could they tell if there's no one around who was concious at the time? Ever hear of radio? -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 93 07:58:55 PST From: Frank Knight <15160@rhodes.aero.org> Subject: Pegasus orbit Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1le72fINNdf@gap.caltech.edu>, palmer@cco.caltech.edu (David M. Palmer) writes: > I called up Orbital Sciences Corp. and got preliminary orbit > data on the launch of the Brazillian satellite: > > > PRELIMINARY: > Perigee x Apogee: 405 x 416 nautical miles > Target: 405x405 nm (cirrcular) > > Inclination: 24.98 degrees > Target: 25 degrees > > Next flight, launching ALEXIS, expected in April. > Yes, but I believe this was from the Pegasus IMUs. NORAD track was more like 398 nm x 417 nm, if I'm remembering the numbers correctly. But this is still pretty close. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Frank Knight Tele: (310)-336-1917 The Aerospace Corporation FAX: (310)-336-1314 PO Box 92957 (MS M5-120) Email: Los Angeles, CA 90009 KNIGHT@DIRAC2.DNET.NASA.GOV or 15160@RHODES.AERO.ORG ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1993 02:37:55 GMT From: Gary Coffman Subject: PEGASUS QUESTION Newsgroups: sci.space In article Lawrence Curcio writes: >Why a winged rockets? > >(Just thought I'd come right out and ask :) Lift is more efficient than thrust. The bulk of a rocket's fuel is expended getting out of the atmosphere. If you can eliminate some of that fuel by using aerodynamic lift, you can carry more payload to orbit. Gary -- Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it, | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary Destructive Testing Systems | we break it. | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary 534 Shannon Way | Guaranteed! | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary Lawrenceville, GA 30244 | | ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 93 16:09:06 GMT From: fred j mccall 575-3539 Subject: Solar Sail Nits Newsgroups: sci.space In 18084TM@msu.edu (Tom) writes: >>>Further nit: If light has momentum and protons have a wavelength, >>>how do you classify one as wind and not the other? They are both >>>"stuff emitted from the sun at supersonic velocities" after all. >>>(Yes, I know the light gives greater momentum, and that the def. of >>>solar wind is "Protons from the sun". But it is a rather arbitrary >>>def., isn't it?) >>Can you say "rest mass"? >Sure: "Rest mass" :-) Let me try a sentence: "A photon has a rest-mass >based on momentum, since it *never rests*." BTW, neither does a solar- >wind proton, at least not where we mess with them. When it rests, it's >just a 'plain-ol' proton, or 'interstellar hydrogen', not 'solar >wind'. Cute sentence. Now repeat after me. "Solar wind is made up of only things which have a rest mass greater than zero." >So, you've got a good basis for the fundamental difference in photons >and protons, besides just their behavior or appearance, but that doesn't >mean the definition of 'solar wind' is any less arbitrary when you base >it's definition upon one specific particle. 'Wind' is made up of particles which have rest mass, just like 'wind' in the atmosphere doesn't include sunlight because 'wind' is made up of particles which have rest masses. Now, if that seems arbitrary to you, then the only further follow-up would seem to be that *ALL* words have 'arbitrary' meanings, because they were defined long ago to mean what they mean and no amount of complaint will change that. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1993 23:44:25 GMT From: tomas o munoz 283-4072 Subject: SSF Petition Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space This message is posted on behalf of the Space Station Freedom Fighters. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. ======================================================================== Dear Citizen: Space Station Freedom Fighters is a grassroots movement dedicated to ensuring the completion of Space Station Freedom and AmericaUs future in space. We want Congress to understand that the American people support continued, vigorous exploration of space. You can make a difference. How? Follow these simple instructions: 1. Make copies of this blank petition and distribute the copies to your friends, neighbors, and relatives. 2. Send copies to your friends and relatives in other states. 3. Collect as many signatures as you can, but send the petitions to the Freedom Fighters even if they contain only one signature. Our movement's goal is to submit to Congress at least one million signatures. 4. Make a copy of your signed petitions to show your friends that you've done your part! 5. Return the signed petitions to: Space Station Freedom Fighters 16582 Space Center Blvd. Houston, Texas 77058 6. Watch the news. When we present the petition you'll know you help save Space Station Freedom and AmericaUs future in Space! Thanks for your support! Space Station Freedom Fighters ============================================================================= PETITION FOR SPACE STATION FREEDOM We the people of the United States of America petition the Congress and President of the United States in support of Space Station Freedom. We respectfully demand full, stable, multi-year funding necessary to establish, in orbit, the Permanently Manned Capability Space Station Freedom and to do so by the end of the decade. Signature Name (Print Neatly) Address City, State Zip Code _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Returned signed petitions to: Space Station Freedom Fighters 16582 Space Center Blvd. Houston, TX 77058 Fax (713) 488-7903 Reproduction of this petition, as is, is permitted and enthusiastically encouraged. -- ======================================================================== Tom Munoz | munoz@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov Thought for the day [plagiarized from someone else]: Engineers think equations are an approximation of reality. Physicists think reality is an approximation of the equations. Mathematicians never make the connection. ======================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1993 00:21:47 GMT From: gawne@stsci.edu Subject: SSTO news Newsgroups: sci.space In article , schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) writes: > There wouldn't be anyone in NASA who would like to see SSTO fail, > would there? Nahh, of course not. Silly me. > (For the record: I believe that this is an honest foul-up and not > an instance of NASA trying to delay DC-X. Better evidence would be > required to convince me that any NASA official would attempt such > a thing.) It's not exactly a NASA official being quoted, but consider this tidbit from today's "What's New": from: WHAT'S NEW Friday, 12 Feb 1993 Washington, DC [concerning funding for SSF:] Congressman Brown told reporters he will urge President Clinton to restore full funding when he meets with him later today. To scientists who oppose the station, Brown said the science aspect was always overrated; the space station, he said, "is like building the pyramids, it will glorify the nation." What alternative cuts would he suggest? "I would cut $3.5B out of the Strategic Defense Initiative." [remainder deleted] Now I know that SDIO is the sponsor of DC-X. Is that $3.5B a close approximation of DC's budget? -Bill Gawne, Space Telescope Science Institute "Forgive him, he is a barbarian, who thinks the customs of his tribe are the laws of the universe." - G. J. Caesar ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1993 00:03:33 GMT From: kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov Subject: SSTO news Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space : >Rich Kolker (rkolker@sccsi.com) wrote: : >: MacDAC is renting the White Sands range and a static test stand at : >: it from NASA. That is NASA's only connection (at this point) to DC. I replied: : >"NASA's only connection" and we're causing a schedule slip! Boy, am I : >embarrassed! With sarcasm on high, Richard A. Schumacher (schumach@convex.com) shot back: : There wouldn't be anyone in NASA who would like to see SSTO fail, : would there? Nahh, of course not. Silly me. No, there probably isn't anybody in NASA who would like to see SSTO fail. In fact, most of the people I've talked to about it haven't even heard of the Delta Clipper project. But they've been unwaveringly interested in it and enthusiastic about the prospects. You see, most of us in NASA truly want better access to space. (Imagine that.) Contractors may be a different matter, but most people work in the space program *not* just because the pay is good. Most of us are here because we care. Richard A. Schumacher (schumach@convex.com) continued parenthetically: : (For the record: I believe that this is an honest foul-up and not : an instance of NASA trying to delay DC-X. Better evidence would be : required to convince me that any NASA official would attempt such : a thing.) Sigh. We civil servants are much maligned. -- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (713) 483-4368 "[I swear] I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." -- Standard Form 61, Appointment Affidavits, the oath taken by all new Federal employees. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1993 13:48:17 GMT From: "Richard A. Schumacher" Subject: SSTO news Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space >Rich Kolker (rkolker@sccsi.com) wrote: >: MacDAC is renting the White Sands range and a static test stand at >: it from NASA. That is NASA's only connection (at this point) to DC. >"NASA's only connection" and we're causing a schedule slip! Boy, am I >embarrassed! There wouldn't be anyone in NASA who would like to see SSTO fail, would there? Nahh, of course not. Silly me. (For the record: I believe that this is an honest foul-up and not an instance of NASA trying to delay DC-X. Better evidence would be required to convince me that any NASA official would attempt such a thing.) ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 1993 22:54 UT From: Ron Baalke Subject: U.S., Russian Rovers Take Their First Run Together Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary,comp.robotics From the "JPL Universe" February 12, 1993 U.S., Russian rovers take their first run together By Karre Marino A lunchtime crowd gathered Jan. 29 for a demonstration of the Russian planetary rover, called Marsokhod, and JPL's mini-rover, Rocky IV, both of which will head for Mars in separate missions in late 1996. The demonstration was spur of the moment, according to Donna Pivirotto, the Microrover team leader. "It was really just a bit of fun for everyone," she said. "We exchanged information and essentially were able to verify for the Russians that they were on the right track. "We actually came away with a general feeling that they think what we're doing is very interesting, but at the same time, they didn't appear to want to use our technology. They'd prefer we give them money or buy their products." The rovers were strikingly different in appearance, as the Russian effort, at 80 kilograms, was several times larger than the JPL prototype, which weighs 7 kilograms. Marsokhod (Russian for Mars rover) is 60 centimeters (24 inches) wide by 90 centimeters (36 inches) long, and has six cone-shaped titanium wheels. It runs on RTG (nuclear) power of 20 watts. Rocky IV is 61 centimeters (24 inches) long by 38.5 centimeters (15 inches) wide by 36 centimeters (14 inches) high. It has six 13- centimeter (5-inch) diameter wheels made of strips of stainless steel foil, which offer stability and mobility; cleats provide traction. Rocky runs on 5 watts of solar energy, which is used during the day to power the electronics, stored inside a warm electronic box. At night, the electronics are turned off, and the keep-alive batteries run the unit, Pivirotto explained. "The idea is that the electronics get warm enough during the day and while they cool down at night, it doesn't cause problems. Batteries also enable us to run science instruments at night, or if Rocky is driving along and goes into a shadow, the batteries -- which are non-rechargeable flashlight types -- drive us out. They also aid in climbing, providing an added boost to get over a big rock." The microrover uses Ackerman steering, Pivirotto noted. "It's like your car; one wheel turns the same way the other wheel turns. It tracks without skidding." However, Marsokhod uses skid steering; the left and rightside wheels turn in opposite directions. The rover can turn sharply, but it takes more energy to do so, she said. Rocky, which is controlled by a Macintosh Powerbook, features sensors that help it avoid cliffs, dropoffs or excessive slopes (though the rover can ascend slopes of 26 degrees). An on-board visible infrared spectrometer and color camera will record and send back images and rock spectra, while a chipper is designed to remove a thin layer of rock surfaces and may determine if Mars' "rocks" weather as Earth's rocks do. A soft-sand scoop takes soil samples, and a video and radio modem transmit data and images. The rover can also place a seismometer on the surface. Pivirotto noted that just as the two rovers designs are different, so too are the nations' approaches to testing and building prototypes. "(The Russians) are very empirical in their work. Their philosophy is not one of system engineering -- as ours is. They don't have much analysis. They build it and try it, which means they'll make lots of changes. We do more requirements, design and analysis before we build." The Russian philosophy, she admitted, has led to failure with all of their Mars missions, but success with each Venus mission. "The problem seems to be in the design of the landing system. That's why they expressed interest in our dynamicists talking to theirs." Information exchange was not the only success of the demonstration here. The exercise itself gained high marks. Both rovers made impressive runs, up stairs and across constructed barriers, as audience members applauded. Then the prototypes headed for the pit behind Visitor Control, maneuvering over grass, boulders, pebbles -- and, at times -- each other. (The large Marsokhod ran into a small Russian lunar rover.) As expected, Marsokhod handled the large boulders with ease, while Rocky IV struggled; of course, a few times, seeming to have a mind of its own, and being the innovation of Americans, the micro-rover simply went around a large boulder that seemed like so much bother! Rocky IV is part of the Mars Environmental Survey (MESUR) project, which will place a network of landers, each equipped with a seismometer, in varying locations on the Martian surface. Recordings of Marsquakes by seismometers at different locations will help determine the internal structure of the Red Planet. Deployment of the network is planned for three Mars launches. The demonstration continued what have been informal discussions between American and Russian scientists and engineers, as they explore possible opportunities for future cooperation between the two nations in planetary studies. The seven-member Russian team was curious about more than scientific data, said Pivirotto. "They wanted to know about our lifestyle. They thought it was interesting that I owned my own home. They were also big fans of pizza and Budweiser." ### ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Never yell "Movie!" in a /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | crowded fire station. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1993 18:29:23 GMT From: "Ray Swartz (Oh, that guy again" Subject: wind on the moon? Newsgroups: sci.space In article , ldsoderb@susssys1.reading.ac.uk (David S. Oderberg) writes: >Is there anyone out there - perhaps from JPL? - who might solve the >following problem. I am aware that there is supposed to be no wind >on the moon, since there is no atmosphere. There is certainly >no wind capable of blowing a flag. On the well-known "one small >step for man" film, the flag stands bolt upright, held up, it >is said, by wire supports. > >So far so good. But I _also_ recently saw film, said by the presenter >(a non-NASA physicist) to be NASA film of an Apollo mission, 11 if I >recall (not sure), in which the US flag FLUTTERS as if in a strong >breeze. It well and truly WAVES and FLAPS as surely as it would have >had it been in a strong breeze on Earth. I cannot recall for certain >whether it was a colour film, but I _think_ so. It was of higher >quality than the "one small step" grainy b&w film. If you notice, that film was shot from above, and throughout the 5 or so seconds, from an increasing height. What this film shows is the flag reacting to the rockets on the lunar module as the module was taking off from the lunar surface. In a sense, the rocket exhaust could be considered a "wind", of a very short duration. Other than at that event, the flag was quite stationary in all of the films I saw (and I NEVER pass up an opportunity to see them). Raymond L. Swartz Jr. (rls@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu) ================================================================================ Excel in everything -- specialization is for insects!! (paraphrase of R.H.) Fantasy: Wave soaring over Olympus Mons on Mars ================================================================================ ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 1993 22:23:51 GMT From: Doug Mohney Subject: World View Imaging Corp. Newsgroups: sci.space From the NY Times, February 12, 1993, page D3: Worldview Imaging Corp, based in Oakland, CA, has been licensed by NOAA and DoD to launch a series of photo sats with resolution under 3 meters. If all goes as planned, the first small sat (doesn't say how small) will go up in 1996, with more satellites gradually added. Founded by Walter Scott (I wonder if Jordan K. knows him), a former head of "Brilliant Eyes/Brilliant Pebbles" initiatives at Livermore AND Doug Gerull, an exec at Intergraph Corp. Eventually, you'll be able to directly dial up images and view 'em on your PC/ workstation. No pricing numbers yet. Of course they have to build & launch the sat first :) I have talked to Ehud, and lived. -- > SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU < -- ------------------------------ id AA00521; Sat, 13 Feb 93 02:13:28 EST Received: from crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu by VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU id aa23682; 13 Feb 93 2:10:31 EST To: bb-sci-space@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!bogus.sura.net!udel!gatech!emory!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!van-bc!tradent!lord From: Jason Cooper Newsgroups: sci.space Subject: ** LASER AIMING ** Message-Id: Date: Thu, 11 Feb 93 22:06:32 PST Organization: TradeNET International Trade Corp. Lines: 16 Sender: news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU I know that this is probably not the perfect place for this, but since I am getting the most help on my Bussard Ramscoop project from here, I'll ask here. Does anybody in this group know of a way to direct a laser beam, by mechanism or otherwise, to any given point to, say, within 45 degrees of straight on x or y axis? I'm talking about something with the CAPABILITY of pointing the laser at a given point within that angle. What I need this for is to aim a laser at any large object headed for the ramscoop, so as to destroy that object (hopefully, into particles small enough to ionize). I seem to remember seeing a system of mirrors somewhere capable of such a thing, but can't remember the configuration. Something like the way an electron beam is aimed in a TV, but with a laser (not that the methods are related, but the results are the same). Jason Cooper Thanks! ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 177 ------------------------------