Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from corsica.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Fri, 1 Sep 89 03:24:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Fri, 1 Sep 89 03:24:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V10 #10 SPACE Digest Volume 10 : Issue 10 Today's Topics: Face on Mars Re: Analysis of Martian "Face" Announced Re: Voyager, etc. info sources Re: PHONE TREE ALERT Re: Voyager: Tape recorder? Re: PHONE TREE ALERT Re: Pluto fly-by Voyager II images available ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 23 Aug 89 17:48:56 GMT From: ssc-vax!shuksan!tahoma!jpg3196@beaver.cs.washington.edu (James P. Galasyn) Subject: Face on Mars In article <9301@chinet.chi.il.us>,arf@chinet.chi.il.us(Jack Schmidling) writes: > The "face on Mars" thing came up last night on The Amateur > Radio Forum and a real, anti-establishment type kept > insisting that it is a cover-up. I read enough of the > recent postings to write it off as a "natural artifact" but > didn't save any of the postings because I thought it was a > dead issue. > > Well now I have got to convince this nut and would > appreciate it if someone would send me something to satisfy > him. Call me gullible. After all the reflex-flaming and snide commentary on the net, I went out and bought a copy of Hoagland's _The Monuments of Mars_. I read about half of it last night, and it seems to me the issue is worthy of deeper investigation. I was not impressed by the abstract posted here awhile back. A couple year ago, _Omni_ printed an article about the Face, full of beautiful computer-enhanced images of the thing, but I figured that it could be an accident if that's all there was: a Face in the desert. Also, it was _Omni_. But Hoagland claims to have found a whole city, for Christ's sake. And he makes a good enough argument that he should be taken at least as seriously as Pons and Fleishmann. At least in the eyes of this naive young EE. His presentation is breathless and eager, with lots of exclamation points, but his enthusiasm is infectious; if he is right, this would be the single greatest archeological find in history. And he details his own experiences with the "conspiracy." *QUITE* interesting assertions about face-to-face meetings with Carl Sagan. He has put an enormous amount of work into this. He and a large team of pretty respectable (IMHO) names have built lots of cool computer models. I'm no planetary geologist, but there are some odd things down there: bilaterally symmetrical structures sitting on the lips of large craters, a five-sided pyramid with the Golden Ratio built into it, and the Face. The structure he identifies as "The City" has right angles in it, and if you stand in the "City Square" and look at the Face, the summer solstice sunrise (500,000 years ago) occurs directly over the Face and this other weird bilateral structure sitting on a crater lip. This could all be coincidence, but it seems to me that we should not dismiss this phenomenon before we have given it serious consideration. . DEATH . .. . . . All that is true is inexpressible. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 89 02:43:20 GMT From: zephyr.ens.tek.com!wrgate!teklds!mrloog!dant@uunet.uu.net (Dan Tilque;6291545;92-101;OPUS_SW;) Subject: Re: Analysis of Martian "Face" Announced Bernd Stramm writes: >MacLeod writes: >>...we may be looking at a new astrophysically- significant form of >>energy. > >A new form of energy?? So how would you measure it, to know it's >even there? The same way Star Trek does in about every third episode: [Enterprise comes upon a space going something-or-other] Kirk: Analysis, Mr Spock. Spock: It appears to be composed of pure energy, Captain. Kirk: Energy? What kind? Spock: Unknown, Captain. We have never encountered it before. --- Dan Tilque -- dant@twaddl.LA.TEK.COM ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 89 00:52:14 GMT From: terry@astro.as.utexas.edu (Terry Hancock) Subject: Re: Voyager, etc. info sources In article <5257@mtuxo.att.com> erw@mtuxo.att.com (XT154-E.WENDLER) writes: > >I'm interested in sources for technical information (navigational techniques, >etc.) about and photos from the Voyager missions as well as Pioneer. Is JPL >the best place to go, and if so, is there an address/person to write? Or >NASA, or a third party? > The Following is a summary from a "NASA Facts" publication, including addresses for all the major NASA installations (as of 1983, I assume they haven't started new ones), and what they specialize in: NASA Headquarters Washington, D.C. 20546 Ask them questions about policy, money, and things of political nature. I wouldn't suggest them for other questions, just because they probably get too much mail as it is. Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, California 91103 They are the "heavies" in planetary research probes and other unmanned projects (they also had a lot to do with IRAS). They run Voyager, Pioneer, Magellan, and will run Galileo, Cassini, CRAF, etc. etc.. For images, probe navigation, and other info about unmanned exploration, this is the place to go. (Answers poster quoted above). Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035 Some aeronautical research, atmosphere reentry, Mars and Venus planetary atmospheres. "Lead center" for Helicopter research, V/STOL, etc. (Their program may have changed since this publication, remember). Arc Dryden Flight Research Facility Edwards, California 93523 Aircraft, mostly. Tested the shuttle orbiter landing characteristics. Developed X-1, D-558, X-3, X-4, X-5, XB-70, and of course, the X-15. They are also where the recent Pegasus vehicle is being tested. Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 Earth orbiting unmanned satellites and sounding rockets. Developed LANDSAT. John F. Kennedy Space Center Florida 32899 Space launch center. You know this one. Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia 23365 Original NASA site. Specializes in theoretical and experimental flight dynamics. Viking. Long Duration Exposure Facility. Lewis Research Center Cleveland, Ohio 44135 Aircraft/Rocket propulsion. Space power generation. Materials research. Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058 JSC manages Space Shuttle, ground control of manned missions. Astronaut training. Manned mission simulators. Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama 35812 Development, production, delivery of Solid Rocket Boosters, External Tank, Orbiter main engines. Propulsion and launchers. Wallops Flight Center Wallops Island, Virginia 23337 Aeronautical research, sounding rockets, Scout launcher. NASA also suggests that for general questions about NASA, you should write to the installation which is closest to you. This is okay, but I suggest that if you're asking about something specific, you're better off asking the installation that's in charge of the project. ********************** Terry Hancock terry@astro.as.utexas.edu ********************** ------------------------------ Date: 26 Aug 89 17:59:36 GMT From: att!mtuxo!mtgzx!dls@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (d.l.skran) Subject: Re: PHONE TREE ALERT In article <26466@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, web@garnet.berkeley.edu (William Baxter) writes: > Call Congressman Robert Roe (D-NJ) at 202/225-5751. Ask him, as > chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, to hold > hearings on HR2674, the Space Transportation Services Purchase Act of > 1989, as soon as possible. > I wish to once again remind the net that although this may(or may not) be a good idea, it is not an official phone tree alert requested by the NSS Legislative Committee and Phone Tree Coordinator Kevin Griffen(sic). Dale Skran ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 89 23:37:59 GMT From: bfmny0!tneff@uunet.uu.net (Tom Neff) Subject: Re: Voyager: Tape recorder? Perhaps NASA should switch to DECtape. I once mislaid an O/S release tape which was then placed on the greasy and dusty louvered surface of an A/C unit for a YEAR until someone found it and gingerly dropped the disgusting thing onto my desk. (Thanks a lot pal.) Just out of curiosity I vacuumed it off and respooled it while running a Windex cloth over the tape as it wound by. Perfectly readable, no errors. I don't think there's anything you can DO to DECtape. :-) Besides don't we miss random access tape? -- "We walked on the moon -- (( Tom Neff you be polite" )) tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 89 18:01:36 GMT From: bfmny0!tneff@uunet.uu.net (Tom Neff) Subject: Re: PHONE TREE ALERT In article <5172@mtgzx.att.com> dls@mtgzx.att.com (d.l.skran) writes: >In article <26466@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, web@garnet.berkeley.edu (William Baxter) writes: >> Call Congressman Robert Roe (D-NJ) at 202/225-5751. ... >I wish to once again remind the net that although this may(or may not) >be a good idea, it is not an official phone tree alert requested by >the NSS Legislative Committee and Phone Tree Coordinator Kevin Griffen(sic). First of all, # # # # #### #### ## ##### ###### #### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ###### # # # # # # # ##### #### # ## # # # # # # ###### ##### # # ## ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #### #### # # # # ###### #### and second of all, what does it imply about the collective IQ of NSS members to suggest that they can't tell the difference themselves at this point? Baxter's postings reflect concrete advocacy. Skran's are irrelevant intramural politics. -- "We walked on the moon -- (( Tom Neff you be polite" )) tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 89 19:13:43 GMT From: terry@astro.as.utexas.edu (Terry Hancock) Subject: Re: Pluto fly-by In article <1989Aug25.183710.3054@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: > >Infinite -- we cannot reach Pluto with current technology without a Jupiter >flyby. I'd guess a Jupiter-Pluto mission at perhaps 7-8 years, but I don't >have real numbers handy. Remember, also, that Jupiter will be in the right >place only about once every 8 years (its orbital period). > 1> Depends on what you mean by "current technology" -- Ion drives capable of doing this (with the appropriate power source), do exist and have undergone vacuum chamber testing. That they have not been used for main thrust on a spaceprobe has more to do with senseless conservativism than with any real technical challenge. (Some people are distrustful of letting a probe use such "new and unproven technology" -- of course it wouldn't be such a big risk if we had a larger exploratory program than we do, but as it is, losing one probe would be catastrophic to the program). 2> Minor correction, Jupiter's orbital period is 11.862 years (closer to 12), not 8 years! > >Unfortunately this doesn't work, because the whole basis of gravity assist >is that the gravity-assist planet is moving with respect to your target. >You can't do it with the Sun. (Although there are some related tricks.) >-- >V7 /bin/mail source: 554 lines.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology >1989 X.400 specs: 2200+ pages. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu It's probably true that the Sun can't be used for the traditional "gravity assist" maneuver, but there are three advantages I can think of to doing the Sun flyby maneuver: 1> Solar Power (note aforementioned Ion drives -- power is the problem for outer solar-system work, so do your accelerating in the inner solar system -- both accelerating toward the Sun and away from it). Admittedly this makes for some nasty orbital computations (continuous boost, particularly over such a non-linear path), but we're up to that. 2> Change of direction -- suppose you just made a Jupiter flyby to improve your orbital energy --you can widen the windows to Pluto (or anywhere else for that matter) by flying past the Sun in the appropriate orbit (your final trajectory is very sensitively dependent on your trajectory toward and away from the Sun. Essentially this eliminates the need for Jupiter to be in the "right place" -- occasionally it will be in the "wrong place," but you clearly have more options this way. 3> Science -- shouldn't forget this one, somebody will have instruments they'd like to have close to the Sun. Note that there is detriment to outer solar-system payloads, because they will have to be extensively shielded from solar radiation (particularly optics, which may be warped by overheating, if your not careful). Basically you need some sort of highly- efficient reflective sun-shade, and possibly an active cooling system. This would probably be ejected after leaving the inner solar system (to allow freedom of motion and view for the protected instruments). ************************ Terry Hancock terry@astro.as.utexas.edu ************************* ************************* ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 89 21:16:38 GMT From: agate!shelby!portia!hanauma.stanford.edu!joe@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Joe Dellinger) Subject: Voyager II images available Hanauma.stanford.edu (IP number 36.51.0.16) has available a sampling of voyager images of Neptune. (Anonymous ftp, go into "pub", go into "neptune", grab "README" first.) These images were digitized off the NASA-JPL feed on Stanford cable TV. They are copyright by NASA-JPL. ------------------------------- So it is all right to grab them to pin up on the wall, show your family and friends, whip up public support for unmanned space exploration, etc, but it is not all right to use them in the paper you are sending to Nature explaining your theory about the surface of Triton (unless JPL says it's OK, of course). Each of the files consists of 1 or more 8-bit grayscale images, 640 by 480 pixels. Do not send me mail asking whether I have them available in your favorite format. I don't. The images were digitized using "ProViz" on a Mac II, and saved on a UNIX AUF partition as Encapsulated Postscript. The postscript text was deleted; only the binary data is in the file. Note that this data does not contain anywhere near as much information as the original Voyager data; it is only as good as what you could see on TV. It is, however, better than what you are likely to have seen in the newspapers. Finally, please don't ask me to post these images; they're too big. Please also don't ask me to e-mail them to you; I just don't have time (sorry!). (Exceptions can, of course, be made if you have a useful public-domain graphics subroutine to donate to the cause of a public-domain program for displaying Postscript^TM (ghostscript, actually) on any kind of device!) Share and Enjoy. \ /\ /\ /\/\/\/\/\/\/\.-.-.-.-.......___________ \ / \ / \ /Dept of Geophysics, Stanford University \/\/\.-.-....___ \/ \/ \/Joe Dellinger joe@hanauma.stanford.edu apple!hanauma!joe\/\.-._ ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V10 #10 *******************