Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson Received: from hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/tm2b/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Wed, 3 Jul 91 04:43:26 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Precedence: junk Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU Date: Wed, 3 Jul 91 04:43:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: SPACE Digest V13 #769 SPACE Digest Volume 13 : Issue 769 Today's Topics: ESA Press Release No.21 Re: Launch failure today Re: Access to Space Re: future astro funding Re: IGY and the dawn of the Space Age Re: Fred's Operatic Death Magellan Update - 06/19/91 Re: Fred's Operatic Death Re: Fred's Operatic Death Heroism Administrivia: Submissions to the SPACE Digest/sci.space should be mailed to space+@andrew.cmu.edu. Other mail, esp. [un]subscription requests, should be sent to space-request+@andrew.cmu.edu, or, if urgent, to tm2b+@andrew.cmu.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: Wed, 19 Jun 91 09:09:03 SET To: space+%andrew.cmu.edu@vma.cc.cmu.edu From: MSKALA%ESRIN.BITNET@vma.cc.cmu.edu Comment: CROSSNET mail via MAILER@CMUCCVMA Subject: ESA Press Release No.21 ESA Press Release No.21; Paris, 18 June 1991 ESA/NASDA AGREEMENT OM MUTUAL ACCESS TO ERS-1 AND J-ERS-1 DATA A cooperation agreement between the European Space Agency (ESA) and the National Space Development Agency of Japan (NASDA) will be signed on Thursday, 20 June 1991 at 11 a.m. in the ESA pavilion at the Paris Air Show in Le Bourget, by Mr. Jean-Marie Luton of ESA, and Mr. Masato Yamano, President of NASDA. This agreement deals essentially with mutual access to data from two Earth Observation satellites, ESA's ERS-1 and Japan's J-ERS-1, whose launch dates should be in late July 1991 and early 1992 respectively. The distinctive feature of this agreement is that it applies the principle of reciprocity, enabling the signatories to have direct access to data from both satellites, via the ESA and Japanese networks of ground stations. for anyone interested, there's a NASDA PR Telephon number: (81.3) 5470-4283 Y ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jun 91 07:12:23 GMT From: sequent!muncher.sequent.com!szabo@uunet.uu.net Subject: Re: Launch failure today In article <1991Jun19.024459.15721@helios.physics.utoronto.ca> neufeld@aurora.physics.utoronto.ca (Christopher Neufeld) writes: > Well, I just saw a throwaway bite on the evening news relating to the >destruction by range safety of an unmanned rocket. The footage had a >round decal with Orbital Sciences Corporation on it... "prospector". The Joust suborbital vehicle for microgravity experiments. I believe NASA calls the series "Prospector" (I might easily have the names backwards). OSC has had tons of problems with it. Not good news. Fortuneately, it looks like the payload itself was recovered intact. -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com Embrace Change... Keep the Values... Hold Dear the Laughter... These views are my own, and do not represent any organization. ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 19 Jun 91 07:03:26 GMT From: sequent!muncher.sequent.com!szabo@uunet.uu.net Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc. Subject: Re: Access to Space References: <31548@hydra.gatech.EDU>, <1991Jun18.215511.29612@sequent.com>, <31559@hydra.gatech.EDU> Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu In article <31559@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@prism.gatech.EDU (Matthew DeLuca) writes: > >If you couldn't talk to Europe instantaneously, would the demand for >computers in Europe be less? Nobody in Europe would be able to buy a symmetric parallel processing computers. They don't make them. Sequent and our arch-competitor in the U.S. Pyramid do. Wealth has been created. Over many industries, _gobs_ of wealth has been created by being able to communicate information on new products and services, news, science and culture from continent to continent. Anyway, judging from the rest of your post you are interested in personally attacking me, not in thinking about the issue or in contributing towards progress in space. That's my lot in life for posting uncomfortable facts and opinions. I may cringe at your insults, but it is the space program itself that suffers from the attitude you have exhibited. -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com Embrace Change... Keep the Values... Hold Dear the Laughter... These views are my own, and do not represent any organization. ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 17 Jun 91 17:01:55 GMT From: ssc-vax!bcsaic!hsvaic!eder@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Dani Eder) Organization: Boeing AI Center, Huntsville, AL Subject: Re: future astro funding References: <1991Jun14.013850.24505@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu In article <1991Jun14.013850.24505@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> nelson@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Robert W. Nelson) writes: > >(3) NASA funding will not increase significantly beyond inflation. >The budget agreement made last October does not allow for savings >in military funds to be transferred to domestic programs. Congress >is not going to cut veterans, and I strongly doubt that HUD will >be cut considerably. > >With two giant programs coming on line in NASA, and without significant >increases in the total NASA budget, it seems to me that all other >"nonessential" programs within NASA, including Space Science and >Applications, will have to take deep cuts. I don't see any other >way around this. If you see a hole in my reasoning I'd like to know. The veterans of WWII are now in the 64+ age bracket (age 18 in 1945 is 64 now). This means that they are or soon will be in a peak dying off period. Once they are dead they no longer need VA hospitals. Therefore there should be a large drop in the need for VA hospital funding, as a major chunk of veterans are in their peak hospitalization period, and we thankfully have not created a large number of new veterans since then. Dani Eder ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 19 Jun 91 15:10:12 GMT From: rex!rouge!dlbres10@g.ms.uky.edu (Fraering Philip) Organization: Univ. of Southwestern LA, Lafayette Subject: Re: IGY and the dawn of the Space Age References: <1991Jun17.235158.16273@sequent.com> Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu In article <1991Jun18.192120.27711@sequent.com> szabo@sequent.com writes: >Explorer was a JPL satellite with James Van Allen's instruments. It was >launched on Von Braun's Jupiter C. At that time both Huntsville and >JPL were part of the U.S. Army. Huntsville's mission was building >IRBM's and ICBM's. There is a famous photo of Von Braun, Van Allen, and >William Pickering of JPL holding aloft a model of the first U.S. satellite >in triumph. The teamwork between explorers and rocket builders has gone >downhill since then.... Notice the way he says it as if Von Braun was just a 'rocket builder' and not an explorer. Nick, please stop all this 'aggresive terminology assignment' to people, it just makes more and more people want to _not_ read what you have to say. Phil Fraering dlbres10@pc.usl.edu "Life. Don't talk to me about _ _." life ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 19 Jun 91 16:28:53 GMT From: agate!spool.mu.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.arc.nasa.gov!skipper!shafer@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Mary Shafer) Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards AFB, CA Subject: Re: Fred's Operatic Death References: <1991Jun14.083756.1@vf.jsc.nasa.gov>, <1991Jun17.055344.8332@sequent.com> Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu I wrote: >In article <1991Jun18.170059.15059@watdragon.waterloo.edu> jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes: >>> 'Do NASA employees post self-serving propaganda (also 'should NASA...')' >>> argument deleted. > >>I have the damned feeling I've seen this thread before. How did the >>tiff that ended with Ms Shafer briefly leaving sci.space start? > >Wit Nick Szabo claiming that NASA employees should only post stuff that >Nick thought was OK. That is, it was OK for the informational stuff >to appear, but if one disagreed with Nick ..... Nick has informed me that "Public employees slandering [him] on the net are cruising for a bruising." It was not my intent to slander Nick and if his feelings, amour propre, or net reputation were damaged by my comment, I apologize and retract my comment. -- Mary Shafer shafer@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov ames!skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov!shafer NASA Ames Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA Of course I don't speak for NASA "Turn to kill, not to engage." CDR Willie Driscoll ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 20 Jun 91 07:46:15 GMT From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov!baalke@decwrl.dec.com (Ron Baalke) Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory Subject: Magellan Update - 06/19/91 Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu Crossposted by: Ron Baalke from NASAMAIL P board (All NASAMAIL board P items are O.K. for unlimited distribution per JPL PIO, unless the postings indicate otherwise) MAGELLAN STATUS REPORT June 19, 1991 The Magellan spacecraft and its radar system are performing normally. All star calibrations and momentum wheel desaturations were successful. The weekly command sequence was uplinked to the spacecraft Tuesday and begins execution today. It continues the two 55- minute periods in each orbit of hiding behind the high-gain antenna for thermal control and mapping of the area from 45 degrees south latitude to the south pole. Next week's sequence will shift again to left-looking radar mapping, and reduce the hide periods to 32 minutes each as controllers begin to fill in the superior conjunction gap, the area not mapped in the first cycle when Earth and Venus were on opposite sides of the sun. _____ ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 301-355 | "Imagination is more /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | important than knowledge" |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | Albert Einstein ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 19 Jun 91 20:46:58 GMT From: news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watserv1!watdragon!watyew!jdnicoll@uunet.uu.net (James Davis Nicoll) Organization: University of Waterloo Subject: Re: Fred's Operatic Death References: <1991Jun18.170059.15059@watdragon.waterloo.edu>, shafer@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes: >I wrote: > >>In article <1991Jun18.170059.15059@watdragon.waterloo.edu> jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes: >>>> 'Do NASA employees post self-serving propaganda (also 'should NASA...')' >>>> argument deleted. >> >>>I have the damned feeling I've seen this thread before. How did the >>>tiff that ended with Ms Shafer briefly leaving sci.space start? >> >>Wit Nick Szabo claiming that NASA employees should only post stuff that >>Nick thought was OK. That is, it was OK for the informational stuff >>to appear, but if one disagreed with Nick ..... > >Nick has informed me that "Public employees slandering [him] on the >net are cruising for a bruising." > >It was not my intent to slander Nick and if his feelings, amour propre, >or net reputation were damaged by my comment, I apologize and retract >my comment. Physical punishment for slander? US jurisprudence is getting tougher than I thought. Given the nature of the USENET, wouldn't it be libel, rather than slander? Perhaps Mr Szabo could help me on this: is flogging the punishment for that, too? From The American Heritage Dictionary: Assault: noun. 1: A violent physical or verbal attack 2: An unlawful attempt or threat to injure another violently 3: Rape verb. 1: To Attack violently James Nicoll ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 19 Jun 91 19:12:08 GMT From: aio!vf.jsc.nasa.gov!kent@eos.arc.nasa.gov Organization: NASA Johnson Space Flight Center Subject: Re: Fred's Operatic Death References: <0094A42A.866932C0@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>, <1991Jun17.222205.15504@sequent.com>, <1991Jun19.162817.7780@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov> Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu In article <1991Jun19.162817.7780@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov>, ddc@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Douglas Creel) writes: >> >>Good for you. Fighter pilots have a vital role in defense, and >> >>Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com Fighter pilots > > A tiny fraction of the defense budget? The ATF program will wind up costing > upwards of $90 billion. A similar program for the Navy will probably cost Fighter pilots, not Aircraft. Fligter pilots don't get paid a whole lot. They are a very small portion of the DOD budget. Astronauts are a very small part of the NASA budget. The Shuttle is a large part. -- Mike Kent - Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company at NASA JSC 2400 NASA Rd One, Houston, TX 77058 (713) 483-3791 KENT@vf.jsc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Return-path: X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail Date: 19 Jun 91 18:38:42 GMT From: agate!spool.mu.edu!mips!cs.uoregon.edu!ogicse!sequent!muncher.sequent.com!szabo@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc. Subject: Heroism References: <0094A42A.866932C0@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>, <1991Jun17.222205.15504@sequent.com>, <1991Jun19.162817.7780@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov> Sender: space-request@andrew.cmu.edu To: space@andrew.cmu.edu In article <1991Jun19.162817.7780@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov> ddc@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Douglas Creel) writes: >[projects using fighter pilot] >A tiny fraction of the defense budget? The ATF program will wind up costing >upwards of $90 billion. Do the arithmetic. The defense budget over the lifetime of ATF will likekly be on the order of $9,000 billion. Of that, 1% will be for ATF using your figure. 1/100 probably qualifies as a tiny fraction. On the other hand, astronaut programs consume close to 50% of the NASA budget, and are demanding further increases. If we count the science programs that have been constrained to fit the astronaut programs (eg Hubble, Galileo, Astro, etc.) we are talking about the bulk of NASA efforts. Meanwhile, for those two groups that use space to solve problems on Earth -- commercial space and defense -- the amount spent on astronaut-related programs is less than 5%, and then only when the flights are subsidized more than 50% by NASA. Earth customers of space are obtaining very few benefits from astronauts. For this reason, I do not see astronauts as heroes risking their lives to do an essential job. Rather, they are people like you and me who want to go into space, and are willing to spend billions of dollars of other people's money to do so. I do not consider that heroic. -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com "What are the _facts_, and to how many decimal places?" -- RAH ------------------------------ End of SPACE Digest V13 #769 *******************