Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V09_5/V9_538.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 15KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
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/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/QYh2wPi00UkVE22U4P>;
          Fri,  7 Jul 89 00:18:36 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri,  7 Jul 89 00:18:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #538

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 538

Today's Topics:
     A reminder: discussion of SCI.AERONAUTICS now in progress...
             Re: new space goals
               Re: SPACE Digest V9 #529
           Re: JOB VACANCY: for British Cosmanaut.
       *** CALL FOR VOTES *** Creation of newsgroup sci.skeptic
             HR2674: Dear Space Activist
              Re: Don't mess with NASA?
            HR2674: Dear Colleague
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 2 Jul 89 23:40:07 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!milano!molokai![e-mail]  (Robert Dorsett)
Subject: A reminder: discussion of SCI.AERONAUTICS now in progress...

A week or so ago, I posted a call to discuss a potential new newsgroup,
sci.aeronautics.  Thus far, the response has been mostly favorable.  The
following points have, however, been raised:

One person said that rec.aviation is satisfactory for all aviation-related
posts.  I covered this in the original call, but would like to add that
rec.aviation is almost exclusively oriented around recreational aviation.
The "serious" airliner-related discussions on other newsgroups rarely get
cross-posted to rec.aviation.

Note that I'm not suggesting that rec.aviation be phased out, or that
sci.aeronautics would change it in any way.  The idea behind sci.aeronautics
is merely to get "technology" people out of the closet...  Judging from
rec.aviation's character over the last year, I would doubt that anything
would change on that group.


Another person commented that since the original idea was to concentrate on
human-factors, that comp.cog-eng would do just fine.  The problem with this
is, essentially, that (a) comp.cog-eng's title does not suggest such dis-
cussions are welcome, and (b) until the person commented on it, I had no
idea comp.cog-eng existed.  That, combined with the relatively low post
rate (I see lots of inquiries, not many answers or discussions) would seem to
indicate that comp.cog-eng isn't really suitable for airliner human-factors
discussions...



Here's the original call, for those who missed it:

> After consulting with several frequent posters to comp.risks and rec.aviation,
> we concluded that it is desirable to have a separate newsgroup dedicated to
> airliner technology, particularly concentrating on: safety, human-interface
> issues (cockpit and otherwise, concentrating on the burgeoning role of
> automation), operations, and general aeronautics.  Many of these concepts have
> crossover applicability to military and general aviation aircraft.
>
> The reasoning behind the need for the new newsgroup is based on three
> longstanding observations:
>
> 1.  The tendency of airliner technology discussions on comp.risks to
> stray too far from the group's charter.
>
> 2.  The tendency of rec.aviation to be oriented around general aviation
> operational issues, rather than technology issues, and the consequent
> reluctance of many people to avoid participating in rec.aviation.
>
> 3.  The reluctance of some sites to import the rec.* stems, thus strangling
> free discussion of what appear to be popular research issues.
>
>The impetus behind sci.aeronautics was largely inspired by the success
>of sci.military.  If someone had told me a year ago that the net could support
>a consistently high-level technical (non-computer) newsgroup, I wouldn't
>have believed it.  Largely based on e-mail contacts, and the tendency of
>discussions on airliner issues on comp.risks to balloon until the moderator
>is forced to yank them, I'm willing to bet that there are enough people out
>there with interest in the issues that would be discussed in sci.aeronautics
>to support its creation.

One last comment: I'm leaning towards establishing a mailing list, based on
sci.aeronautics, for our brethren without USENET access.  This would be done
after the group is established, but should help people in the same situation
as Mike Trout, with unreliable connections.


Reminders:

* followups to news.groups only;

* voting starts Friday, July 7th, and will extend through August 7th.



Robert Dorsett
Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...cs.utexas.edu!rascal.ics.utexas.edu!rdd

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

Date: 3 Jul 89 18:11:12 GMT
From: concertina![e-mail]  (Steve Hix)
Subject: Re: new space goals

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jonathan Patrick Leech) writes:
>
>     I think people love space - as long as they don't have to pay for
> it.  Families who realize they can't ever afford a house are not
> likely to support massive increases in the space budget.

If they give up eating pizza, they can have just as much effect on
their ability to buy a house as if they quit spending on space.

If space operations ever become a *profitable* business endeavor,
separate from government interference, then we can have our space
and eat our pizza, too.

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

Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1989 17:18-EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: SPACE Digest V9 #529

> this one.  I just wanted to point out to the loyal readership why
> they're bothering.

True, but the information on the effects of long term exposure of
electronics and materials to LEO are going to be very useful to other
people as well: anyone planning on building and flying commercial
facilities. I suspect the External Tanks people will want to know the
results.  Assuming the data doesn't get classified.

It also should give a better statistical handle on the level of
impacts/year and impact particle size distribution of orbital debris.

SDI has consistantly funded interesting long term space development
research. Ask Jordin Kare about who funds laser launch concepts. It
ain't NASA. Probably because they have not yet been around long enough
to get the same hardening of the bureaucratic arteries that NASA has.
(But give them a few years...)

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

Date: 3 Jul 89 16:26:29 GMT
From: mcvax!ukc!etive![e-mail]  (Bob Gray)
Subject: Re: JOB VACANCY: for British Cosmanaut.

In article <[e-mail]> I wrote:
>JOB VACANCY: British cosmonaut required.

See original posting for details of how to get your
application form.

I should have mentioned in the previous posting that the
closing date is Friday 14th July.
    Bob.

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

Date: 3 Jul 89 17:52:03 GMT
From: jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!yunexus![e-mail]  (Norman R. Gall)
Subject: *** CALL FOR VOTES *** Creation of newsgroup sci.skeptic

This is the first call for votes on a new unmoderated group called
sci.skeptic. Instructions for voting are given below.

The charter for this group is:

                "A group dealing with issues in Parapsychology,
          UFOlogy, Creation Science, New Ageism, Astrology,
          Paranormal Health Claims, Cryptozoology, and other
          areas of inquiry which might tend to contradict or
          dismiss generally accepted principles of Science.
          Sociological and Educational issues arising from these
          areas are also important to Science and will be
          acceptable material. The aim is not to prove a priori
          that these kinds of claims are false, but to
          scrutinise them and try to tease out new threads of
          inquiry, reveal faulty logic or assumptions (as should
          be the case in _all_ areas of discourse), and
          generally investigate the impact these claims might or
          do have on _Scientific_ discourse. "

What we get out of the new group:

-- Allows for exchange of information about current events in these areas.

-- Provides an area for honest discussion of these issues in a non-credulous
atmosphere.

-- Increases the exposure to rigourous argument that some readers may find
hard to locate.



To vote, you send a message to one of two addresses.

* If you want the group to be created, send a message to

[e-mail]

* If you do not want the group to be created, send your message to

[e-mail]



The contents of the message are irrelevant; they will be classifed solely by
which address they are sent to.



Votes sent to my personal account, which includes replies to this
posting, will be ignored.


The actual vote tallying is being undertaken by David Collier-Brown
([e-mail] [Don't send things to him, either]

The voting ends on August 3, 1989.

Followups to this message should be posted in news.groups.

nrg



--
York University          |"_Wanting_ to think is one thing;
Department of Philosophy |      having a talent for thinking another"
Toronto, Ontario, Canada |                          - L. Wittgenstein (CV 44)
_____________________________________________________________________________

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

Date: 3 Jul 89 12:48:56 GMT
From: agate![e-mail]  (William Baxter)
Subject: HR2674: Dear Space Activist

Here is Ron Packard's letter to Space Activists.  Are you one?  This
bill needs more Cosponsors.  Have you seen your Representative about
HR2674?


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

Committee on Science, Space and Technology
US House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515

                    June 30, 1989

Dear Space Activist,

    I am pleased to have introduced HR2674, the Space Transportation
Services Purchase Act of 1989.  I introduced this bill because of the
concern of people like you in Southern California and all over the
country that we are not progressing fast enough in opening the space
frontier.  We need a robust commercial space industry so we can make
space a place where people can live, work and play,  We must ultimately
create a spacefaring civilization through private endeavor with
settlements beyond the Earth.  The first step in this is to foster the
development of a commercial space transportation industry.

    I need you to help to do this.  If you too wish to foster space
transportation to lower the cost of access to space, please let your
Congressman know this.  Please spread the new among all you know that
Congress is finally poised to take bold steps in creating a commercial
space transportation industry, the first step in truly opening the space
frontier.

                Ad Astra,

                Ron Packard,  Member of Congress

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

William Baxter

ARPA: web@{garnet,brahms,math}.Berkeley.EDU
UUCP: {sun,dual,decwrl,decvax,hplabs,...}!ucbvax!garnet!web

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

Date: 2 Jul 89 23:06:51 GMT
From: skipper![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Don't mess with NASA?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>>... If you want class when climbing into an aircraft, it has to have
>>>afterburners.
>>
>>Better watch it, Henry--you'd have to do it in a government-sponsored,
>>government-funded aircraft!  :-) :-)

>Ouch.  Touche. :-)

>Actually, you can find non-government birds with afterburners, but there
>aren't very many of them and often they aren't very accessible.

Yes, the only one I can think of is the F-20 and it's a single-seater.
Besides, I'm not absolutely certain that it's still in flying status.
What others are there?

That's what this country needs--general aviation with afterburners!
I'm ready!
--

M F Shafer                          [e-mail]
NASA Ames Research Center           arpa!elxsi.dfrf.nasa.gov!shafer
Dryden Flight Research Facility     ames!elxsi!shafer
Of course I don't speak for NASA    DON'T use the drynix address

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

Date: 3 Jul 89 12:42:33 GMT
From: agate![e-mail]  (William Baxter)
Subject: HR2674: Dear Colleague


Here is the "Dear Colleague" letter from Ron Packard concerning HR2674.

Original Cosponsors of the bill are:

Jim Kolbe (R-AZ), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), George Brown (D-CA),
Ralph Hall (D-TX), Tom Lewis (R-FL).

Additional Cosponsors include:
Don Ritter (R-PA), Larry Craig (R-ID), Donald Lukens (R-OH),
Ron Dellums (D-CA), Robert Walker (R-PA).

Have you spoken to your Congressmen about HR2674?

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



                    June 19, 1989

*******************************************************************
*                                  *
*   MAKE THE US SUPREME IN SPACE ONCE AGAIN.  COSPONSOR HR 2674   *
*                                  *
*******************************************************************


Dear Colleague:

    I have introduced legislation designed to maintain and strengthen
our preeminence in outer space.  The bill require the Federal Government
to purchase space transportation services from private companies.

    In the face or a growing foreign commercial space industry and an
overburdened US Government program, commercialization represents the most
effective and efficient means to remain dominant in space.  We need to
unleash our nation's private sector so that we can compete in the
international marketplace.  This represents the logical next step in our
commitment to progress in space.  The United States needs vigorous
private enterprise involvement in order to have and maintain a strong
space program.

    To maintain the US lead in space in the 21st century we must
allow for competition.  Free competition among private companies will
promote competitive pricing without sacrificing performance.  In
addition, this legislation will allow NASA to  focus on its original
objective of space exploration and research.  NASA can free up its
considerable resources to give us a better understanding of space, while
allowing commercial development of space in the private sector.

    If you would like to cosponsor HR2674, the Packard space
commercialization bill, or would like more infornation, contact me or
Alana Everts at x5-3906.


                Sincerely,

                Ron Packard, Member of Congress


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

William Baxter

ARPA: web@{garnet,brahms,math}.Berkeley.EDU
UUCP: {sun,dual,decwrl,decvax,hplabs,...}!ucbvax!garnet!web

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #538
*******************