Date: Wed,  4 Nov 92 05:02:59    
From: Space Digest maintainer <digests@isu.isunet.edu>
Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu
Subject: Space Digest V15 #376
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Wed,  4 Nov 92       Volume 15 : Issue 376

Today's Topics:
                           Comet Collision
                   Environmental/space inforamtion
                           Hubble's mirror
                           low earth orbits
                        NASA Coverup (3 msgs)
                          Pumpkins to Orbit
              requesting help with plant growth research
                  Russian Engines for DC-Y? (2 msgs)
                     STS-53 Press Kit (Forwarded)
 Surveyor landings (was Re: QUESTIONS: Apollo, Earth, Moon) (2 msgs)
                        the Happyface on Mars
                        UN Space/Moon Treaty?
                 VIDEOTAPE OF OCT 9 FIREBALL (2 msgs)
                              Why Vote?
                     X-15 plastic model (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 <your name>" 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, 3 Nov 1992 21:53:32 GMT
From: Peter Monta <monta@image.mit.edu>
Subject: Comet Collision
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <Bwxqxw.sq.1@cs.cmu.edu> amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk writes:

> ...
> There is an exponential because of the unpredictable  
> interactions between areas of knowledge. A discovery in surface  
> chemistry leads to a new chip that allows an instrument that lets  
> physicists study an effect that leads to a new instrument that lets  
> biologists unravel new secrets of the mind... and so on.
>
> ...
> My own feelings are that 2020 is about the limit  
> at which things start getting very strange: the exponential will be  
> essentially vertical with respect to human perceptions of time.
> ...

Yes, Vernor Vinge makes these points most eloquently in _The Peace
War_ and especially in the sequel _Marooned in Real Time_.  He does 
not posit strong AI, but powerful automation and some new physics
are the rule.

Don't want to give much away, but he also deals with the other side
of the vertical line; there is a description of what life is like
just short of "singularity".  Much entertaining speculation, and some
of the characters are riveting.

Peter Monta   monta@image.mit.edu
MIT Advanced Television Research Program

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 18:02:12 GMT
From: "Carlos G. Niederstrasser" <phoenix.Princeton.EDU!carlosn@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Environmental/space inforamtion
Newsgroups: sci.space

A friend of mine needs books on how space has affected environmental sciences  
on the earth.  For example landsat imaging, UARS, etc.  Any ideas would be  
appreciated.


--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |
|                                 |   and the reality of tomorrow   |
| carlosn@phoenix.princeton.edu   |---------------------------------|
| space@phoenix.princeton.edu     |    Ad Astra per Ardua Nostra    |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 21:39:06 GMT
From: "Donald H. Locker" <dhl@mrdog.msl.com>
Subject: Hubble's mirror
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

Now that I know a little about mirror-making, I'd like to hear again
how the Hubble mirror contractor messed up the figure of the main
mirror.  I understand it has spherical aberration, but wonder how
[Rockwell?] managed to do that.

Thanks for any info.
-- 
Donald.                                Speaking only for myself.

"You can't set glasses or a book on a door or a bathroom!" - djl

------------------------------

Date: 2 Nov 92 19:53:01 GMT
From: Bruce Watson <wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM>
Subject: low earth orbits
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <u926135.720674864@tasman| u926135@tasman.cc.utas.edu.au (Adrian Hassall Lewis) writes:
|I admit that this is a bit of a dumb question, but I have had absolutely
|no luck trying to find an explanation in any textbook on space dynamics.
|
|The question:  Why is 28.5 degrees such a common orbit?
|
|I can understand the US launching to this inclination as the KSC is at 28.5N,
|but I've read that the ESA also launches to this orbital plane as well.  Isn't
|it most efficent for them to launch to a 1 degree orbit?  Is it something to do
|with GTO? and if so, what?
|
What payload did ESA launch into 28.5 from Kourou? That inclination is not
very useful--US does it to maximize payload using the earth's rotation.
ESA launches due eastward (unless there is population in that direction)
for geostationary satellites and northward for sun-synchonous (98 deg) polar
satellites.


-- 
Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.  

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 00:07:07 GMT
From: "John D. Boggs" <jboggs@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu>
Subject: NASA Coverup
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.conspiracy

From article <1992Nov3.134800.4317@athena.mit.edu>, by mcconley@athena.mit.edu (Marc W Mcconley):
> In article <1992Nov3.033855.48781@datamark.co.nz> david@datamark.co.nz (David Rowland) writes:
>>In article <4581@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes:
> 
> Sorry to participate in this awful flame war, but I just think it's funny.
> This assumes, of course, that the JFK conspiracy was politically motivated,
> when, clearly, it was masterminded by Elvis to get to Marilyn Monroe.
> 

And there's a van driving around San Francisco that somehow ties in Stephen
King.

-John D. Boggs     john-boggs@uiowa.edu

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 10:50:57 PST
From: snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us
Subject: NASA Coverup
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space,alt.conspiracy

    Well  ,  it  sounds  like the willingness to cling to some kind of la-la
   land belief that our  government  wouldn't  lie  to  us  about  the  moon
   landings  won't  just  melt  in  the  face of straightforward ,elementary
   mathematics ,and piles of circumstantial evidence. I guess I'll just have
   to use even bigger piles of circumstantial evidence and MORE  math.  Here
   goes:

    In one sixth gravity , a 180 pound man would weigh  a  mere  30  pounds.

                                6/180 = 30

    Writers  had  programmed the public to expect spectacular athletic feats
   when astronauts explored the moon. In the November 1967 issue of  Science
   Digest  an article entitled "How to walk on the Moon " predicted that men
   would be able to make 14 foot slow motion leaps,  perform  backflips  and
   other  gymnastics  like  professionals.   and  be  able to easily move up
   ladders and poles with their arms . An astronaut, , even in a  cumbersome
   suit  could jump six times higher on the moon than on earth.  Even though
   the alleged weight of the spacesuits and backpacks was 185 pounds  ,  the
   total combined weight of a 185 pound astronaut and his suit would only be
   62  pounds  on the moon . This is still only one third of the astronaut's
   weight.  Therefore , they should have been able to jump far  higher  than
   they  could  on  the earth without any difficulty. The average person can
   jump about 18 inches vertically without a  run.   On  all  of  the  video
   footage  shot  by  the  astronauts  while  in  the moonwalking mode , the
   highest leaps performed by the most vigorous individuals,  such  as  John
   Young,  never  amounted  to  more  than  about 18 inches, while they were
   THEORETICALLY CAPABLE OF SLOW BACKFLIPS!

    Another thing.  The practical design of a spacesuit would  dictate  that
   economy  of  weight  be  a  prime  consideration,  for  the  purposes  of
   maximizing  payloads.  The  value  of  185 pounds cannot be accounted for
   unless you attribute most of  this  weight  to  some  mysteriously  heavy
   equipment  in the the backpack. While a Scuba diver's dual tanks weigh in
   at about 80 pounds and are designed to aid the diver in  sinking  to  the
   bottom  ,  presumably  the  astronaut's  air  containment system would be
   significantly lighter. If we allow 40  pounds  for  air  containment,  20
   pounds  for  a  hefty  battery , and 40 or so pounds for lightweight heat
   pumps and the like ,that leaves 85 pounds for the suit itself .  This  is
   just  not  a  believable  figure  judging  from the general appearance of
   flexibilty of the material.

    If we merely assume that most of this alleged weight was taken up by the
   backpack and helmet assemblies , placing the center of gravity high above
   the astronaut's waist , the astronauts would have been a great deal  more
   "hunched over" to a near "V" position with helmet and backpack positioned
   equally distant from a center line drawn straight up from the toes , just
   to  be  able  to  maintain  their  balance.   Yet a "lean" effect is just
   slightly noticeable in a photograph of one of the astronauts  saluting  a
   flag  planted  on  the  moon.In  the photograph,the angle of lean is more
   consistent with a backpack weighing about 45 to 65  pounds  .   I  invite
   interested  science  oriented individuals to research this conclusion for
   themselves.

    During Apollo 17 ,  astronauts  Cernan  and  Scmitt  began  their  first
   assignment  by deploying and loading the Rover . Cernan apparently became
   quite excited and his Capsule Communicator , astronaut Parker warned  him
   that  his  metabolic rate was going up. That meant that he was using more
   oxygen. Cernan replied  that  he  never  felt  calmer  in  his  life  and
   indicated  to  Parker that he would take it easy . He mentioned to Parker
   that he thought that it was due to getting accustomed to handling himself
   in "zero g".

    Parker, an astronomer, then stated that he thought Cernan was working at
   1/6 gravity. Cernan's reply was "Yes. You know where we are....whatever."
   This remark suggests that Cernan wanted to avoid the discussion.  Perhaps
   Parker  was  not  aware  of  the  high  gravity  situation  and  asked an
   embarrassing question.

           Coming Next: Ten Embarrassing Questions about the Moon

------------------------------

Date: 4 Nov 92 04:07:13 GMT
From: "Michael V. Kent" <kentm@aix.rpi.edu>
Subject: NASA Coverup
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space,alt.conspiracy

In article <4586@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes:

>    Well  ,  it  sounds  like the willingness to cling to some kind of la-la
>   land belief that our  government  wouldn't  lie  to  us  about  the  moon
>   landings  won't  just  melt  in  the  face of straightforward ,elementary
>   mathematics

>                                6/180 = 30

Thank you.  This is the biggest laugh I've had all day.

>           Coming Next: Ten Embarrassing Questions about the Moon

I can hardly wait.

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tute Screwed Aero Class of '92                              Apple II Forever !!

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 00:20:01 GMT
From: "Simon E. Booth" <sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu>
Subject: Pumpkins to Orbit
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1992Nov3.204433.20579@s1.gov> jtk@s1.gov (Jordin Kare) writes:
>In article <17096@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn) writes:
>>
>>Last year, about 7,000 people gathered for the annual competition, the object
>>of which is to hurl your pumpkin farther than anyone else's, using a
>>contraption of whatever design - catapult, slingshot, centrifuge, crossbow -
>>you think will do the job....
>
>[Discussion of pumpkin chuckin' contest deleted]
>>
>>Which raises the question:  Are we safe here in metropolitan Washington?
>>
>>"Oh, I don't think they'll fly that far," says a Lewes Chamber of Commerce
>>spokesman, pausing a beat and adding, "Give us anouther couple of years."
>>
>>(end quote)
>>
>>     Here is your chance.  Just think of the papers which could be written.
>>
>>"The optomiziation of a linear propulsion device for vegetable matter"
>>"The subsonic and suspersonic aerodynamics of pumpkins"
>>"Investigation of maximal G forces sustainable by living tissue, using a
>>novel inexpensive surrogate for the human head"
>>
>
>A few years ago, when the SDIO Laser Propulsion Program was looking at
>pulsed laser ablation for propulsion, one of the potential "propellants"
>was water ice.  Since ice is a pain to work with, especially in a vacuum
>chamber, one contractor did a small number of tests on 95% water in
>solid form -- cucumber slices.  While the experiments themselves didn't
>lead anywhere, a party discussion with Jay Freeman did lead to
>a variety of applications:
>
>	Zucchini thrusters -- solve the annual zucchini surplus and
>		get cheap space launch at the same time.
>
>	Scaling up -- watermelon thrusters with zucchini strap-ons
>
>	MIRV's -- Multiple Independent Re-entry Vegetables
>
>		"Incoming Soviet Watermelons detected, Sir!  They're not
>		decoys -- we have seed echoes"
>
>	And finally:
>	SVI -- The Strategic Vegetable Initiative
>		"A zucchini at 10 km/s can ruin your whole day"
>
Over enemy teritory: they look up and see Slim Pickens riding a giant
watermelon,waving his hat going YE-HAA!!

(bad joke, I know)

Simon

------------------------------

Date: 3 Nov 92 11:17:51 CST
From: Dudley Knappe <dudley@fir35.cray.com>
Subject: requesting help with plant growth research
Newsgroups: bionet.plants,sci.bio,sci.bio.technology,sci.research,sci.space

	Sorry to interrupt your net.reading.  I have searched FAQs for hours 
now for references to plant growth experiments in different gravitational
environments and have found nothing.

	I am looking for papers, ftp sites, abstracts, or reference materials
on plant growth in different gravity conditions.  Pointers to papers,
references, etc. from NASA plant growth experiments in zero gravity or work
done on plant growth in gravitationally chaotic environments (constant
tumbling?) would be much appreciated.  Any other related references are
certainly welcome!

	Please e-mail me at dudley@fig.cray.com as I am not a regular reader
of these newsgroups.  I will summarize the information for anyone who may be
interested.

	Thanks for your help!  And now back to your regular news.....
--
Dudley Knappe, Software Development Division            Cray Research, Inc.
Phone: (612) 683-5529                                   655F Lone Oak Drive
E-mail: dudley@cray.com or uunet!cray!dudley            Eagan, MN 55121

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 22:05:57 GMT
From: Brad Whitehurst <rbw3q@rayleigh.mech.Virginia.EDU>
Subject: Russian Engines for DC-Y?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1992Nov3.201447.12647@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>In article <1992Nov3.200053.11520@seq.uncwil.edu> bgoffe@seq.uncwil.edu (Bill Goffe) writes:
>
>>An article in the Oct. 28 _Wall Street Journal_ describes how Pratt &
>>Whitney announced an agreement to market NPO Energomash's (said to
>>be Russia's leading rocked designer) engines in the U.S.
>
>That is good news. Does this mean RD-170's will be available?
>
	There's a good article in the latest Av. Week about this.
Yes, they will try to market the RD-170/171.  I don't have the mag
with me right now, but P&W will be the sole rep. for Energomash in
North America (I think).  The time scale for actual engine
availability was undefined (depending on the application, I'm sure).

>>Some time back I recall reading that no one engine seemed ideal for
>>use in the DC-Y. An chance there'd be something usable from NPO
>>Energomash?
>
>I don't think they make a cryogenic engine so it doesn't seem they
>would have an off the shelf solution.
>
	Av. Week had a second article on the NPO RD-701, a tri-fuel
engined which burns kerosene, LOX, and LH2, with continuously variable
fuel transition from kerosene to LH2.  Is this to customize the rocket
performance as a function of altitude, load, etc.?  The thrust figures
for all kerosene were significantly higher than with pure LH2.




-- 

Brad Whitehurst    |   Aerospace Research Lab
rbw3q@Virginia.EDU |   We like it hot...and fast.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 21:58:28 GMT
From: Josh 'K' Hopkins <jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Russian Engines for DC-Y?
Newsgroups: sci.space

aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>In article <1992Nov3.200053.11520@seq.uncwil.edu> bgoffe@seq.uncwil.edu (Bill Goffe) writes:

>>An article in the Oct. 28 _Wall Street Journal_ describes how Pratt &
>>Whitney announced an agreement to market NPO Energomash's (said to
>>be Russia's leading rocked designer) engines in the U.S.

>That is good news. Does this mean RD-170's will be available?

The subject is covered in _Space News_.  While they don't specifically say that
the RD-170 will be available, they do say that P&W will be marketing the Russian
hardware, and they mention the RD-170 as "the engine that everyone in the world
would like to get his hands on."  Apparently P&W sees this as very useful for 
their NLS work.

>>Some time back I recall reading that no one engine seemed ideal for
>>use in the DC-Y. An chance there'd be something usable from NPO
>>Energomash?

>I don't think they make a cryogenic engine so it doesn't seem they
>would have an off the shelf solution.

The article mentions the RD-701 which uses kerosene, LOX and hydrogen.  I assume
this is a cryogenic engine.  I believe that the Russians recently started 
operating a cryogenic engine somewhere, so it would be a good bet the Energomash
has one already built.
-- 
Josh Hopkins                                          jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu

"We can lick gravity, but the paperwork's a bit tougher."  Wernher von Braun

------------------------------

Date: 2 Nov 92 21:23:06 GMT
From: Bruce Watson <wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM>
Subject: STS-53 Press Kit (Forwarded)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1992Nov2.005136.26731@news.arc.nasa.gov| yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov (Peter Yee) writes:
|
|     SPECIAL NOTICE:  Department of Defense-1 (DoD-1), the primary 
|payload on mission STS-53, is classified...
|.. the primary payload and activities associated 
|with it will not be identified or discussed before, during or 
|after the flight in any public forum or medium, including 
|briefings, printed materials or interviews.
|
|STS-53 QUICK LOOK
|
|Launch Date and Site:     Dec. 2, 1992
|                          Kennedy Space Center, Fla. -- Pad 39A
|
|Launch Window:            6:59 a.m. EST
|
|Orbit/Inclination:        200 x 200 nm / 57 degrees (DOD-1)
|
|Vehicle/Payload                                          Pounds
|
|Department of Defense-1 and Support Equipment (DOD-1)    23,215
 
But look what they *have* told us.

-- 
Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.  

------------------------------

Date: 3 Nov 92 20:59:11 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <henry@zoo.toronto.edu>
Subject: Surveyor landings (was Re: QUESTIONS: Apollo, Earth, Moon)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <1992Nov2.114513.2667@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com (Michael Rivero) writes:

>... still later, portions of one of the landers (#2, I think) were
>returned to earth by the crew of Apollo 12.

Surveyor 3 was the one that Apollo 12 collected souvenirs from. :-)
Surveyor 2 wasn't suitable for this purpose, having crashed after a
failure in one of its vernier engines sent it tumbling out of control
during retrofire.

The other failure of the 7-mission program, incidentally, was Surveyor 4.
It abruptly went silent, quite mysteriously, shortly before landing.  If
this was a transmitter failure and not something more fundamental, it may
actually have landed safely.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

------------------------------

Date: 3 Nov 92 21:02:06 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <henry@zoo.toronto.edu>
Subject: Surveyor landings (was Re: QUESTIONS: Apollo, Earth, Moon)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <1992Nov2.175554.26242@kbsw1> chris@kbsw3.UUCP (Chris Kostanick 806 1044) writes:
>>further  reduce the descent velocity.  At 4.3 km above the surface, the
>>three thrusters were shut off, and the spacecraft simply dropped the
>>remainder of the way down, landing at a velocity of 11 km/hour. 
>
>If I understand you correctly, this means that I could drop over
>a mile on the moon and walk away from the landing...

'Fraid not.  Ron appears to have been the latest victim of the what's-
three-orders-of-magnitude-between-friends bug. :-)  The Surveyors dropped
4.3m, not 4.3km.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1992 21:44:44 GMT
From: ASTORQUIZA LUMSDEN JAIME RODRIGO <jastorqu@cipres.cec.uchile.cl>
Subject: the Happyface on Mars
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hi all.

Long time ago i haead about pictures of the FACE, please tell me where
i can get it.

Thanks in advance.

							Jaime R. Astorquiza

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 22:38:39 GMT
From: Tom Nugent <tjn32113@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
Subject: UN Space/Moon Treaty?
Newsgroups: sci.space

stu5s33@bnr.ca (Robert Nychka) writes:

>I am looking for information concerning the "Moon Treaty" or some sort
>of treaty drafted by the UN dealing with "...the Use of the Moon 
>and Other Celestial Bodies".

>Specifically I'm looking for limitations on private exploration and
>exploitation of space, and if there are - if they are enforcable, and by
>whom?

If I remember correctly, the Moon Treaty declares the Moon (and maybe all
other celestial bodies) the inheritance of all mankind or something like
that - very similar to what they've done in Antarctica.  Meaning, no
companies can own land, and it's only to be used for scientific investigation.

Now as to enforcement, well, if you can get there in the next 5 years, I think
you'd have a few years _at least_ before any government could even get
anything there.  Think if you tried to set up a factory in Antarctica.  YOu'd
get kicked off pretty quick, and taken before some international court, all
by an international military force.  This would be harder to do on the Moon,
but if you had any sort of requirements from Earth, they'd starve you out to 
get you to come back.  If they did get up there, though, they'd probably 
bring enough force (eventually) to kick you off.    

There is one point though:  I don't think the U.S. ever signed the Moon Treaty.
I'm not sure, however.  I also could have mis-stated what the Treaty actually
says.  This is what I remember, however.

-- 
Tom Nugent	voice:(217)328-0994	e-mail:tjn32113@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu 
"To be average scares the hell out of me." -- Anonymous

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:24:42 GMT
From: Dave Jones <dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com>
Subject: VIDEOTAPE OF OCT 9 FIREBALL
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

Mike Coren (mikec@spider.co.uk) wrote:
> In article <1992Oct27.210726.1@uwovax.uwo.ca> pbrown@uwovax.uwo.ca writes:
> (regarding the fireball seen over the eastern US on October 9):
> >The fireball produced a meteorite which hit the trunk of a high
> >school student's car in Peekskill, New York.
> 
> I realize this has nothing to do with sci.astro or sci.space, but would
> automobile insurance cover that?  Seriously.  Does anybody know if the
> high school student made a claim?
>
Most students are hard pressed to carry minimum required insurance, so I
doubt if this one had Acts of God covered..... 

--
||Halloween Candy: the office snack    |
||from Nov. 1st onwards............... |Puff the Magic Dragon
||-------------------------------------|Lived by the sea
||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com)|Who knows what's in the autumn mists
||Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY      |In the mind of Yadallee?

------------------------------

Date: 4 Nov 92 08:15:40 GMT
From: Ron Baalke <baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: VIDEOTAPE OF OCT 9 FIREBALL
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

Mike Coren (mikec@spider.co.uk) wrote:
> In article <1992Oct27.210726.1@uwovax.uwo.ca> pbrown@uwovax.uwo.ca writes:
>> (regarding the fireball seen over the eastern US on October 9):
>> The fireball produced a meteorite which hit the trunk of a high
>> school student's car in Peekskill, New York.
>> 
> I realize this has nothing to do with sci.astro or sci.space, but would
> automobile insurance cover that?  Seriously.  Does anybody know if the
> high school student made a claim?

I've heard that the car in question is up for sale to the highest bidder.
It will probably end up in a museum.   Also, the meteorite has been sold.
I've talked to the individual who bought it - he wouldn't tell me how much
he bought it for.  The meteorite weighs 27 pounds and one side of the 
meteorite has red paint on it from impact with the car.  The meteorite went 
all the way through the car at a very high speed.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Give people a second 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | chance, but not a third. 
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 21:23:02 GMT
From: j_butler@ponil.enet.dec.com
Subject: Why Vote?
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.motss,sci.space

(Re: 50976)

Gary...well said...Bravo!

John B.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 18:02:59 GMT
From: "Carlos G. Niederstrasser" <phoenix.Princeton.EDU!carlosn@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: X-15 plastic model
Newsgroups: sci.space,rec.aviation.military,rec.models.scale

Does anyone know of an X-15 plastic scale model?  Who makes it, and is it still  
available?  Any information appreciated!

Please respond via e-mail.

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |
|                                 |   and the reality of tomorrow   |
| carlosn@phoenix.princeton.edu   |---------------------------------|
| space@phoenix.princeton.edu     |    Ad Astra per Ardua Nostra    |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 21:30:48 GMT
From: "e.l.watkins" <watk@cbnews.cb.att.com>
Subject: X-15 plastic model
Newsgroups: sci.space,rec.aviation.military,rec.models.scale

In article <1992Nov3.180259.22021@Princeton.EDU> phoenix.Princeton.EDU!carlosn (Carlos G. Niederstrasser) writes:
>
>Does anyone know of an X-15 plastic scale model?  Who makes it, and is it still  
>available?  Any information appreciated!
Yes, Monogram has a very nice 1/72 scale X-15A-2 which can be shortend into
the original X-15, if you wish. Also their was a vacuformed X-15 but
was not very accurate. Revell used to make a 1/64 scale X-15.
Also avialble is Monograms X-15 with B-52 mother ship(1/72 big), and a B-52
X-15 combo in 1/200 from DML, just out.
>
>Please respond via e-mail.
>

------------------------------

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 376
------------------------------