Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_2/V16NO207.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 29KB

Date: Sun, 21 Feb 93 05:23:44
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #207
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Sun, 21 Feb 93       Volume 16 : Issue 207

Today's Topics:
            Advanced Communication Technologies Sat (ACTS)
                           Aurora (rumors)
                   Book Computers/AI in Shuttle-SSF
                   Canadian SSF effort ?? (6 msgs)
                    Henry Spencer stamps (2 msgs)
                    I need some info about Ada...
                           Major Matt Mason
                       Nobody cares about Fred?
    Reliable Source says Freedom Dead, Freedom II to be developed
                          Sabatier Reactors
                          Sabatier Reactors.
   Space IR telescope schemes (was Re: HST repair mission) (2 msgs)
          Spy Sats (Was: Are Landsat Satellites receivable?)
                Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger

    Welcome to the Space Digest!!  Please send your messages to
    "[e-mail]", 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 [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 19 Feb 1993 11:57:50 -0800
From: Fogbound Child <[e-mail]>
Subject: Advanced Communication Technologies Sat (ACTS)
Newsgroups: sci.space

Greetings!

I'm a student at USC, currently taking a course in Political Processes in
Engineering.

For a term paper, I'm going to be writing about NASA's ACTS project (Advanced
Communication Technologies Satellite). It seems to be politically interesting:
for a number of years, NASA left it out of the budget, the President tried to
cut it from the budget, but Congress gave it funding.

Currently, I understand there may be difficulty finding private sector
customers for it.

In any case, I'd be interested to communicate with people who know more
about it or have been involved.

All correspondence will be kept in strict confidence (if requested).

Thanks!
--
_________Pratice Safe .Signature! Prevent Dangerous Signature Virii!_______
Guildenstern: Our names shouted in a certain dawn ... a message ... a
              summons ... There must have been a moment, at the beginning,
              where we could have said -- no. But somehow we missed it.

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 20:11:03 GMT
From: Lab Master <[e-mail]>
Subject: Aurora (rumors)
Newsgroups: sci.space

Was watching TV the other day (Beyond 2000????), and they had a clip on a
rumored replacement for the SR-71 called the Aurora.  The main gist of the
report was that the word "aurora" had accidentally surfaced in a MD (or
was it Lockheed) financial report.  The two incidents noted were an air
traffic controller ("a friend of mine who is") who had tracked two of
these supposed aircraft at 10,250 mph  (Yes, that is what they said.).
The other was a tremor felt in Los Angeles that scientists said was not an
earthquake.

Anyone have any opinions, thoughts, facts, etc. on this?

My own opinions echo the report I'm referring to:  that the DoD rarely phases
out anything unless they have something to replace it with.  I also
believe that the clip I saw was not very well done...

USENET and email welcome.

-Mike Andersson <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1993 18:05:27 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Computers/AI in Shuttle-SSF
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>..."sending" the data to the shuttle using lasers.  Not very feasable as
>they require line of sight.  Not that the crewmwmber is probably ever
>outside the line of sight of the crew compartment, but the crewmember
>must point the laser in the right direction for it to function...

Actually, this is not a significant issue, in principle.  The UHF bands
that the existing suit communications systems use are also line-of-sight
for all practical purposes.  The same answer applies:  multiple antennas.
In the case of laser communications you probably wouldn't want to radiate
isotropically, but there's no *fundamental* problem in doing tracking
and "antenna" switching automatically.

Of course, we are talking about a fairly complex and novel system here,
so Mark is correct in spirit:  this is not something you can get off
the shelf.

I wonder if the non-directional LED-based IR systems used in some office
networks and the like would have enough range to be practical for the job.
That wouldn't be so difficult.
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 18:56:06 GMT
From: Lord Vader <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian SSF effort ??
Newsgroups: sci.space

To all of you who keep on about SSF being cancelled, reports of
its demise have been greatly exagerated...


WASHINGTON POST - NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin ended
weeks of rumors yesterday with an announcement that President
Clinton has directed him to "redesign" the planned space
station to make it more efficient and useful.  "We're going
to streamline the space station and meet the president's
challenge," Goldin told NASA employees around the country
over closed-circuit television after meeting with officials
at the White House.  Goldin said the nature of the changes
has not been decided.  The $2.3 billion provided for the
project in the president's new fiscal 1994 budget is enough,
Goldin said, for a "smooth transition of the program to a
streamlined, cost-effective design, assuring stability in the
program during the transition and minimizing any potential
job loss."  Aerospace Daily also reports that NASA research
on advanced subsonic and supersonic transport aircraft would
get a big increase under Clinton's budget plan, with $550
million more programmed in fiscal years 1994-97, and another
$267 million scheduled for FY '98.  Short haul aircraft
research also would get a $50 million push over the next four
years under Clinton's plan, according to documents released
yesterday and Wednesday.

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

Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1993 18:13:31 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian SSF effort ??
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rohit Sharma) writes:
>Does anyone know what's going to happen regarding the C S A effort towards
>SSF now that it's been cancelled (eh!) ????           ^^^^^
>                                                    Canadian Space Agency

I think it's pretty safe to assume that the CSA themselves haven't figured
this out yet.

Clinton's probably just made some enemies at ESA, JSA, and CSA.  They've
been angry enough when previous changes to Fred were made without any
attempt to consult them, and now this...

Unless this is handled very skillfully indeed, NASA is going to have real
trouble lining up international "partners" for future projects.
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Fri, 19 Feb 93 18:58:35 GMT
From: Rohit Sharma <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian SSF effort ??
Newsgroups: sci.space

Henry Spencer ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rohit Sharma) writes:
: >Does anyone know what's going to happen regarding the C S A effort towards
: >SSF now that it's been cancelled (eh!) ????           ^^^^^
: >                                                    Canadian Space Agency

: I think it's pretty safe to assume that the CSA themselves haven't figured
: this out yet.

: Clinton's probably just made some enemies at ESA, JSA, and CSA.  They've
: been angry enough when previous changes to Fred were made without any
: attempt to consult them, and now this...

: Unless this is handled very skillfully indeed, NASA is going to have real
: trouble lining up international "partners" for future projects.

 Given a high degree of collaboration between ESA and CSA and
possibly between these two and JSA, would a non-US-Govt space station be
feasible ?  This might be incredibly naive but except for the politics of
this whole thing, what are the other loopholes in this line of thinking ?
 I assume non-Govt US efforts(DCX-SSTO ??) could/would be part of this Fred.

-rohit

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 10:56:17 GMT
From: Matthew DeLuca <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian SSF effort ??
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rohit Sharma) writes:

> Given a high degree of collaboration between ESA and CSA and
>possibly between these two and JSA, would a non-US-Govt space station be
>feasible ?  This might be incredibly naive but except for the politics of
>this whole thing, what are the other loopholes in this line of thinking ?
> I assume non-Govt US efforts(DCX-SSTO ??) could/would be part of this Fred.

Considering the unreliability of U.S. funding for large projects, it would
be a good idea, except that neither the ESA, CSA, or NASDA have any experience
to speak of in orbital operations.  They've launched individual satellites
but that is it...no orbital rendezvous and docking, no in-space assembly,
no spacewalk experience...nothing.  They'd probably want to work with the
Russians.  Not that I'd trust Russian funding and stability, but I don't see
ESA/CSA/NASDA able to go it on their own anytime in the next twenty years.
--
Matthew DeLuca
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:      ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!matthew
Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1993 19:26:30 GMT
From: Jeff Bytof <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian SSF effort ??
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lord Vader) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Lord Vader)

>has not been decided.  The $2.3 billion provided for the
>project in the president's new fiscal 1994 budget is enough,
>Goldin said, for a "smooth transition of the program to a
>streamlined, cost-effective design, assuring stability in the
>program during the transition and minimizing any potential
>job loss."  Aerospace Daily also reports that NASA research

I thought the *current* design was a "streamlined, cost-effective
design"!  It seems like when all is said and done, a redesigned station will
cost just as much as the original.  Well, I suppose we could resurrect
MOL and go back to using Gemini capsules...

-Jeff "Falling Down" Bytof

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

Date: 19 Feb 1993 20:20:26 GMT
From: Doug Mohney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian SSF effort ??
Newsgroups: sci.space

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

>Clinton's probably just made some enemies at ESA, JSA, and CSA.  They've
>been angry enough when previous changes to Fred were made without any
>attempt to consult them, and now this...
>
>Unless this is handled very skillfully indeed, NASA is going to have real
>trouble lining up international "partners" for future projects.

Yet another "hidden cost" not mentioned by the chainsaw reformists.
                    I have talked to Ehud, and lived.
  -- >                  [e-mail]                        < --

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 18:21:01 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Henry Spencer stamps
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James Thomas Green) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom) writes:
>>
>>To be honest, I have no idea what Henry actually looks like, so if he was
>>on those stamps, I wouldn't know anyway :-)
>>
>He probably looks like Elvis.

But does he look like the Young Elvis or the Old Elvis?  ;-)

--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 10:32:16 GMT
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Henry Spencer stamps
Newsgroups: sci.space

UUNET maintains a database of faces from video scans
taken during a few years of USENIX workshops.
I'd bet Henry is in there along with many of our other
friends.  Contact UUNET for further Info,
i don't have any...

pat

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 12:31:18 GMT
From: Bill <[e-mail]>
Subject: I need some info about Ada...
Newsgroups: sci.space

I am looking for opinions about the usefulness of Ada in the space program.  Do
programmers like to program in Ada?  Why/not?  Does Ada's future in the space
industry look promising or bleak?  If you have an opinion/fact that you think
I could use, please E-mail me since I don't really want to sift through the net
looking for responses.  After all, my report is due soon....

Later and thanx in advance...

    Bill

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 22:35:47 GMT
From: John E Childers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Major Matt Mason
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Dave Michelson) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Craig Keithley) writes:
>>
>>Geez...  That brings back memories of Major Matt Mason (sic?).  About the
>>same size as and functionality as GI-JOE.  Lets see, it was late sixties,
>>early seventies.  They're probably collectors items now.  Lots of neat moon
>>rovers, etc.  Sigh.  I'd probably pay for one if it was in good enough
>>condition...
>
>You got it right:  Major Matt Mason - Mattel's Man in Space
>
>Actually, the Major Matt Mason collection was one of the more intelligent
>space oriented toys to come out in that time period.  Anyone else have
>pleasant memories of either giving or receiving MMM toys or still have
>some kicking around (!) ?
>
>---
>Dave Michelson                             University of British Columbia
>[e-mail]                                  Antenna Laboratory



I guess I've forgotten the unintelligent space toys.  Don't expect to find
many Major Matt Mason figures in good condition.  I was a little ruff on my
toys (wasn't eveykid:-) so the wires in the arms broke very quickly.  After
that the rubber joints didn't last to long.  But, all is not lost.  Try
looking for an "old style GI Joe", the 12 inch tall ones.  I don't know
how collectable they are.  I still have mine, including a spacesuit
and rocket pack!



John Childers                            | Voting for Clinton may have been
University of North Carolina at Charlotte| a mistake, but voting for Bush or
Electrical Engineering Department        | Perot would have been just as
Charlotte NC 28223                       | big a mistake. :-(
Internet? Try [e-mail]   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer?  Does anyone on usenet ever offically speak for their computer?

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 17:54:51 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nobody cares about Fred?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes...
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>
>>>Where do you get your information Allen that the original truss could not be
>>>built in orbit?
>>
>>In 1989 after Congress mandated the redesign it became common knowledge. If
>>you want a more recent source, a SSF engineer recently posted in sci.space
>>that the truss wouldn't work. You recall he said he still can remember
>>the day their chief enginner was told it wouldn't work.
>>

>I have never seen any post from an SSF engineer on the truss in the year
>that I have been reading sci.space. As for the "common knowledge" I want
>to see a source. send it to me on personal mail if you have to. In my opinion,
>if the problem that you say is there was there, then there would have been
>people screaming from the rooftops about it. Something stinks in that little
>"confidential reporting"

Then you haven't been reading very carefully.  I saw the post I
presume that Allen is referring to, not within the last year, but
within the last two weeks.  I think Allen went slightly overboard on
his interpretation of it, but not nearly as overboard as you must have
been when it was posted in order to not have seen it.

>>In addition, I and others where leaked some internal NASA documents
>>showing that not only the truss but other parts as well coldn't be
>>built.

>well why don't you send the documents to the Washington post to bolster
>your position. I am sure that since you are so well in the know about this
>that you can work to kill SSF and push your own ideas by this move. To do
>otherwise is criminal and is at odds with what you profess to be advocating.

This is called Burning Your Sources, and it is generally considered to
be a Bad Thing.

>>
>>>You seem to spend a lot of time pushing the "fact" with not
>>>engineering basis for it.
>>
>>As I said in the past, some of this comes from engineers who want to
>>see an effective space station built but are distressed at NASA's
>>attitude. Since these people are placing their jobs in jepordy by
>>talking to me, I won't reveal names.

>Allen on a daily basis I see more NASA engineers from more projects than
>you do. I can guarantee you that. I work around engineers from package 1
>and I spend several hours a week at Boeing right now, including spending
>time with SSF engineers. I think that if what you say is true, I would have
>heard something about it. The problems that I hear about more than any
>are related to integration BUT they are being solved.
>>
>>Are you saying I am lying about this?
>>

>I am saying that you are being one heck of a lot less than truthful about
>what you are saying. If what you are saying is true then don't you think
>that others would take this "inside information" that you have and release
>it to the press? Why is it that it is official NASA that comes out with all
>of the problems? Why is it that NASA started scheduling more EVA after a mission
>that you so derided?

Why do you think YOU don't hear it, Dennis?  Perhaps it's because your
attitude leads people to think that if they criticize the thing in
front of you that you would report them, and they've gotten used to
eating regularly?  It's usually been my experience in these little
flamewars that when someone starts accusing someone else of lying, it
is because that is what the *accuser* would do in the same situation.

--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 09:31:26 GMT
From: "Michael K. Heney" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Reliable Source says Freedom Dead, Freedom II to be developed
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <1lvpte$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (George William Herbert) writes:
|>A source that I consider reliable inside NASA HQ has stated
|>that Freedom is indeed dead.  However, NASA Administrator
|>Goldin will personally lead a (well funded) look at new
|>concepts for building a station that will better address percieved
|>needs, so a new station is hoped to rapidly follow Freedoms demise.

Oh, God, I was afraid of this.  New Freedom.  I suppose it'll be launched
from a mini-pad???

----
Mike Heney                |   Senior Systems Analyst and     |  Reach for the
[e-mail]   |  Space Activist / Entrepreneur   |  Stars, eh?
Kensington, MD (near DC)  |     * Will Work for Money *      |

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

Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1993 18:28:12 GMT
From: WELLS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sabatier Reactors
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> WELLS,
[e-mail] writes:
>useful technology has resulted. One that comes to mind is the OSCRS,
>Orbital Spacecraft Consumables Resupply System. In this experiment,

Correction that was named ORS, Orbital Refueling System.... not OSCRS.

Dennis W.

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 18:08:01 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sabatier Reactors.
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>|
>|> Could shuttle have carried a empty centaur to orbit,
>|>and met up with an orbiting fuel dump?
>|
>|Not impossible, and such things were proposed.  In fact, you could
>|*probably* fuel an empty Centaur from residual propellants in the shuttle's
>|own external tank, and dispense with the fuel dump.  However, there are
>|some modest unknowns associated with transferring cryogenic fuels in
>|free fall, and a fair bit of development work would have been needed
>|overall.  NASA is no longer ambitious enough to tackle things like that,
>>however valuable they would be in the long run.
>>

>Note For the Record.  Henry says My Idea, which other people had also
>proposed, is not a terribly difficult thing to do.  But that NASA, and
>all the other net shuttle supporters ( two people leap to mind)
>do not propose this fairly simple engineering task.

>If people are going to defend the shuttle as this marvelous
>workshop,  then i suggest we see it do some real workshop
>type activities.  Refueling satellites is a very reasonable
>mission,  and it seems beyond the shuttles capacity.

>I would view this example as a reasoonable argument that the
>shuttle is a lousy workshop.

Perhaps you should consider viewing it as a reasonable argument that
there aren't any satellites to speak of that are equipped for 'in
space' refueling, instead?  It has nothing to do with the Shuttle's
suitability or non-suitability as a workshop.

--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

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

Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1993 17:50:31 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space IR telescope schemes (was Re: HST repair mission)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>Passive cooling to 60K or thereabouts should not be hard, especially
>since I think the L-2 point is in permanent shadow...

Wups, correction -- a friend pointed out that the L2 point is beyond
the end of Earth's umbra, although only about 20% of the solar surface
is showing by my calculation, which should help.
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 10:54:55
From: Steinn Sigurdsson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space IR telescope schemes (was Re: HST repair mission)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

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

   In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
   >Passive cooling to 60K or thereabouts should not be hard, especially
   >since I think the L-2 point is in permanent shadow...

   Wups, correction -- a friend pointed out that the L2 point is beyond
   the end of Earth's umbra, although only about 20% of the solar surface
   is showing by my calculation, which should help.

At the AAS the latest SIRTF scheme proposed (as related by Goldin) was
to put it in trailing orbit behind the Earth. Supposedly reduces
launch cost and tracking costs. A specific reason for the choice of
orbit was that the He dewar would run dry anyway before it trailed
too far behind the Earth to be tracked...

Actually quite clever (IMHO) to consider a non-Earth orbit orbit.

Of course first it needs funding...

|  Steinn Sigurdsson    |I saw two shooting stars last night        |
|  Lick Observatory    |I wished on them but they were only satellites    |
| [e-mail] |Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?        |
| "standard disclaimer"    |I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care - B.B. 1983    |

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

Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1993 17:56:16 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Spy Sats (Was: Are Landsat Satellites receivable?)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Martin Connors) writes:
>> The diffraction limit will make it impossible to do better than a few
>> centimeters with visible-light optics that fit in current launcher
>> payload shrouds.
>
>... Surely the diffration limit is by no means the
>worst of the problems in imaging through the atmosphere...

There are persistent rumors that adaptive optics for removing atmospheric
turbulence have been state of the art for US spysats for some time.  It
might be true.  Certainly resolution down to the 1-2m range doesn't
require anything like that (and this will show you smaller objects,
e.g. well-spaced people, if they contrast well with the background).
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 19 Feb 93 20:36:17 GMT
From: Charley Rathkopf <[e-mail]>
Subject: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle

** On 10 Feb 93 15:01:13 GMT, [e-mail] (Mr. C.D. Smith) said:
  >> Nntp-Posting-Host: rib.csc.liv.ac.uk

  >> Does anyone know the Jean Micheal Jarre song that R.Mcnell (forgive me if I've got his name incorrect) was going to play sax to, live from orbit ?

  >>   Listening to it now and directly after the accident (I don't remember the track name) I always get a sad errie feel.  This song 'suits' the 'mood' of the accident, if you see what I'm getting at, almost as if it had been written

  >> Chris.

    The album is Rendez-vous my Jean Michel Jarre, 1986.
The track you are refering to is the last (11) titled Last
Rendez-vous "Ron's Piece."

The liner notes read:

        "This qiece was specially composed for Ron to play on
    his saxophone in the shuttle and was to become the first
    musical piece played and recorded in space.  Ron was so
    excited about this piece that he regearsed it continuously
    until the last moment.  May the memory of my friend the
    astronaut and the artist Ron McNair live on through this
    piecs"
                -- Jean-Michel Jarre


    I have not yet been able to listen to this album and
keep my eyes dry.

--
--
Charley Rathkopf                        If it wasn't for disappointments,
[e-mail]               I wouldn't have any appointments.
                                        -They Might Be Giants

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

Newsgroups: sci.space

From: Rohit Sharma <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian SSF effort ??
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Summary: fred is dead, CSA
Keywords: SSF, CSA, Canada
Sender: Operator <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: nrcphy1.phy.nrc.ca
Organization: National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 93 18:01:30 GMT
Lines: 11
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]


Does anyone know what's going to happen regarding the C S A effort towards
SSF now that it's been cancelled (eh!) ????           ^^^^^
                                                    Canadian Space Agency

-rohit
--
--
{  Rohit Sharma        [e-mail]   or  [e-mail]  }
 T R Labs - Photonics Division  and  Solid State Optoelectronics Consortium
 Edmonton, Alberta                   NRC, Ottawa, Ontario

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 207
------------------------------