Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_3/V16NO307.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 32KB

Date: Sat, 13 Mar 93 05:10:28
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #307
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Sat, 13 Mar 93       Volume 16 : Issue 307

Today's Topics:
                                Charon
                         Clementine (2 msgs)
                   Galileo Update - 03/10/93 (Ida)
                      Goddard held responsible?
      Iceflingers and E.M. catcher (was Re: Lunar Ice Transport)
                         Lunar Ice Transport
                            NASA and gold
                 P-C review article (was Re: Charon)
                Solar Array vs. Power Tether SSF Drag
            Soviet Energia: Available for Commercial Use?
                            Strange lights
           Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anon (2 msgs)
Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anonymity is NOT the issue (2 msgs)
                      Winding trails from rocket

    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: 12 Mar 93 15:18:07 GMT
From: Titch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Charon
Newsgroups: sci.space

Yes, a blurry surface map was produced. It was reported in the UK's New
Scientist last year - I'll have a look tonight and post the relevant details
on Monday, if you like/

Cheers,

Rich.

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Rich Browning ([e-mail])   *  ASTRO SCOOP! ASTRONUT TO LAND ON SUN!
Department of Computer Science    * "I've got it all worked out," says Jim
University of Brighton            * Biggles, "I'm landing at night!".
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 16:16:41 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clementine
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("F.Baube x554") writes:
>> The major purpose of Clementine is to test SDI sensors in space.
>> As long as they need to fly a couple of UV-visible and IR cameras,
>> and a laser altimeter/LIDAR, they decided to do some lunar and
>> asteroid science with them.
>
>It's good to know that arrangements like this are possible,
>even if it sounds like the priorities are bass-ackwards.

Some of the people involved have their priorities straight. :-)  But they
need to sell it to their bosses on the grounds of usefulness to SDI.

>Are there any other such arrangements proposed, to use an
>SDI testbed and SDI money to do some planetary science ?

Last I heard, if Clementine 1 goes okay, there is serious talk of doing
a Clementine 2, although I don't recall seeing details.
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 17:54:11 GMT
From: "forrest.e.gehrke" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clementine
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("F.Baube x554") writes:
>>> The major purpose of Clementine is to test SDI sensors in space.
>>> As long as they need to fly a couple of UV-visible and IR cameras,
>>> and a laser altimeter/LIDAR, they decided to do some lunar and
>>> asteroid science with them.
>>
>>It's good to know that arrangements like this are possible,
>>even if it sounds like the priorities are bass-ackwards.
>
>Some of the people involved have their priorities straight. :-)  But they
>need to sell it to their bosses on the grounds of usefulness to SDI.
>
A small quibble about priorities: In the next very few years
it will be quite possible for some unfriendly people to have
control of ICBM's capable of arriving into the North America.
If one of those were lobbed at us today, all that could be done
is to watch it come in.  Consequently, I don't mind a few bucks
spent on SDI.  Incidentally, such an ICBM doesn't have to be
nuclear armed and its cost is a pittance compared to the
damage and loss of life it could cause.

That bomb in NYC a couple of weeks ago is just the tip of the
iceberg.

Forrest Gehrke [e-mail]

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

Date: 12 Mar 1993 17:18:29 GMT
From: Joel Plutchak <[e-mail]>
Subject: Galileo Update - 03/10/93 (Ida)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> writes:
>Will we see any pictures of "Ida" after the Galileio-flyby, or is the low-
>gain-antenna not powerful enough to send them back to earth ?

   The low-gain antenna is, of course, capable of sending data back to
the Earth from at least as far away as Jupiter will be during main
mission operations.  It's just a matter of transmission rate.
   The answer to the question I believe you're asking ("When will we
see the Ida images?") is that last I heard, there will be an attempt
to transmit at least one decent image soon (within a couple months?)
after the encounter at the end of August.  I suspect not many images
will be available that soon, though.
--
Joel Plutchak, Research Programmer/Analyst
"I'm mentally OVERDRAWN!"

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 18:41:52 GMT
From: "forrest.e.gehrke" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Goddard held responsible?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom) writes:
>
>
>Before you go getting upset about the uses his invention were put to,
>don't forget the great train of chemical discoveries necessary for
>the development of nerve gas or penecillin (sp?), or the invention of the
>automobile, responsible for untold numbers of marriges and conceptions,
>as well as 350,000 deaths annually in the U.S., or...
>

I believe you have added about 300,000 to fatalities due to
auto accidents annually in the US.  Or did you mean casualties?

Forrest Gehrke [e-mail]

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 10:20:34 -0600
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Iceflingers and E.M. catcher (was Re: Lunar Ice Transport)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <stephens.731945310@ngis>, [e-mail] (Dave Stephenson) writes:
> [e-mail] (John Papp) writes:
>>What happens to the ice when it
>>accelerates.  Does it melt, stay solid, explode?  For now, I'm assuming
>>it stays solid.  Controlability could also be a problem.

John, can't help you with a handbook reference, but my physics intuition
says the ice will survive in vacuum and acceleration won't affect it.
At worst you might need to wrap it in something to reduce sublimation.

[Dave's discussion of flinger devices deleted]

> Directional control should be handlable. Use a laser
> beam rider using 'brilliant pebbles technology' to guide the payload into
> the catcher. Incidently if the launcher is electromagnetic, leave the
> bucket on the payload of ice (which should be reinforced with rock wool BTW)
> and rotate in space to enter the catcher bucket first. The catcher could
> now be a similar electromagntic launcher in reverse acting as an eddy current
> brake. And so in one sudden bolt you get the launch energy back. Neat way
> of shipping energy from poles, where sunlight is permanent to lunar equator
> during the night!

Problem:  the "buckets" (devices which carry the ice slugs as they
pass through the launcher, possibly superconducting coils with
controls and small rockets for course correction) pile up at the
equator in this scheme.

Solution:  Build another gun at the equator, and a catcher at the
polar base, to return the empty buckets!

This set needs lower performance since the payloads are much lighter.
Also, if you play around with duty cycles, you may be able to use the
same gadget as flinger and catcher/decelerator.

The House Telecommunications Subcommittee  |
has scheduled a hearing on the issue for   | Bill Higgins
next Wednesday, featuring advocates of     | Fermilab
tougher regulation as well as Shari        | [e-mail]
Lewis, host of a children's show on public | [e-mail]
television, and her sock puppet Lamb Chop.  --*N.Y. Times*, 4 Mar 93, p. A9

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 18:36:41 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Lunar Ice Transport
Newsgroups: sci.space

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

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ross  Borden) writes:
>|>
>|>     In all the Lunar ice transportation proposals that I've seen,
>|> nobody has mentioned what would be, on Earth, the most obvious: overland
>|> hauling.

>The proposed lunar tractor/trailer, plus road engineering, would be
>incredibly expensive.  A polar rail gun avoids all the problems with
>surface transportation.  Accuracy would be great in vacuo, and you can
>charge up the capacitors with plentiful, cheap, solar power.  Even
>during lunar winter, you could beam power from a satellite, or operate
>the other pole.

Aren't we forgetting about things like mascons along the trajectory
and variations in the weights of the 'shells' being fired?  I would
have to question whether sufficient accuracy could be achieved without
an unbelievable precision in both the power delivered by the rail gun
(no variations between shots allowed) and the mass of the load
(precision measurement and machine of the load before it's fired?).
And even then you're going to need a number of ranging shots (*near
your base*) before you can start operations.  While this may all be
'mere engineering', I'm not convinced that it is doable engineering
with the degree of precision that would be required.

Seems like you need some kind of provision for terminal homing here to
meet the requirement for accuracy.

>Designing an equitorial catcher's mitt could be a challenge, though.

Really!

--
"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: 12 Mar 93 17:27:23 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NASA and gold
Newsgroups: sci.space

: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes...
: >Does anyone know why NASA uses gold in the satellites when it has the
: >third lowest resistivity next to silver and copper?  Any help appreciated.

Dennis, who is "[e-mail]" to me, wrote:
[...answer to the question deleted...]
: This is scary when this question is posed by someone at NASA hq.

: Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville

Dennis, why is this scary?  I think it's very healthy that HQ folks
are asking technical questions in an open forum, and I'm pleased as
punch that they're using our playground, Usenet.  I'd like to encourage
the use of this resource throughout NASA.  I think we'll all benefit.

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
      [e-mail]  [phone]

     "Better.  Faster.  Cheaper." -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 10:09:28 -0600
From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Subject: P-C review article (was Re: Charon)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave Tholen) writes:
> Dave Michelson writes:
>
>> Now that we've got the preliminaries out of the way, maybe Dave Tholen
>> or someone else who is active in the field can bring us up to date on what
>> has happened since 1990...

If, like me, your library doesn't get *Icarus* but does get *Annual
Reviews of Astronomy and Astrophysics*, check out volume 30, the 1992
issue.   There's an extensive review article by S.A. Stern, "The
Pluto-Charon System," pages 185-233.  On page 202 you can see the
surface map Dave Tholen was talking about.  (They haven't found any
canals or Faces yet.)  It's displayed as a collage of 24 still images
of Pluto and Charon at 15-degree intervals in a full rotation.

Hey, in fact this would be a nice animation to post, wouldn't it?

Is it too early to give names to these albedo features?
--
     O~~*           /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
   - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /       \                          (_) (_)                    / | \
 |       |     Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 \       /     Bitnet:     [e-mail]
   -   -       Internet:  [e-mail]
     ~         SPAN/Hepnet:      43011::HIGGINS

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 18:59:38 GMT
From: "Kieran A. Carroll" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Solar Array vs. Power Tether SSF Drag
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Frank Crary) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> Dr. Norman J. LaFave <[e-mail]> writes:
>>If you're going to use a tether, why not avoid the increased reboost from
>>the solar array and generate electricity with the tether itself.
>
>Using a tether to generate power actually increases the need for
>reboosts: The current creates an IxB force (essentially an
>electromagnetic drag) which slows the station. Essentially it
>just transforms the station's orbital kinetic energy into electricity.
>You can also reverse the process: Force current through the tether
>in the opposite direction and increase the station's orbital
>velocity. If you had a station with a teather, that would probably
>be the best way to reboost: No reaction mass is required and (I think)
>the process is fairly power efficient.
>

(I love a challenge :-)

O.K., here goes...  One way of looking at the IxB drag
is as the result of converting SSF's orbital energy into
electrical energy. If that conversion was done with 100% efficiency,
(which isn't likely, given resistive losses in the tether, and
effective resistance in the plasma contactor at one end and the
electron gun at the other end) then the power generated by the
tether system would result in a corresponding loss of SSF
orbital energy. This orbital energy power loss would be equal to
the product of SSF orbital speed (about 7000 m/s) and the
tether drag force. If the tether system generates 75 kW
of power, it would do so at the expense of generating a
drag force of 75,000/7000 = 10.7 (Newtons).

How does this compare to the drag caused by the SSF solar arrays?
One way to calculate this would be to calculate the average projected
cross-sectional area of the arrays, figure out what drag coefficient
to use, and multiply the two by the velocity squared (then divide
by two, by convention). I don't know what the first two numbers are, so
I'll try a different tack:

We've recently been told here that the reboost modules weigh
12,000 pounds. Assume that 10,000 pounds of that is hydrazine,
which we will assume will be burned with a specific impulse
of 350 lbf-sec/lbm. This means that one module's
worth of hydrazine would provide an impulse of 3.5E6 lbf-sec
to SSF, or about 1.56E7 N-sec. in metric units.

We're almost there...now, how long does it take to consume that
module full of hydrazine? I don't really know, but I imagine that
3 months (7.95E6 sec) is not too far off the mark. Thus, the
average force exerted by the hydrazine thrusters would be
1.56E7/7.95E6 = 2 (N) (approximately). Assuming that most of
the hydrazine will be spent compensating for the effects of atmospheric
drag, then the total average drag force on SSF would be about 2 Newtons.
The solar arrays probably contribute 80% to 90% of this drag, so
the solar arry drag would be something less then 2 Newtons.

Oh well, tethers create 5 times as much drag as this, for the
same amount of power generated. If you want to generate electricity
by burning hydrazine, it looks like you'd be better off doing
it in an APU, which wouldn't affect your orbital altitude...

--

     Kieran A. Carroll @ U of Toronto Aerospace Institute
     uunet!attcan!utzoo!kcarroll [e-mail]

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 17:51:33 GMT
From: "Simon E. Booth" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Soviet Energia: Available for Commercial Use?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dennis Newkirk) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>My question is how would payloads be mated to an Energia?  The Buran shuttle
>>is of course attached the same way the US shuttle is mated to its fuel tank,
>
>The attachment is much simpler since there are no LH or LOX connections and
>less forces are involoved since the Buran does not provide thrust to the
>stack during launch.
>
>You might be interested in a proposal shown for launching Freedom parts on
>an Energia in an Aerospace America issue last year.
>
>>This seems cumbersome, unless perhaps the module itself is designed to function
>>as some sort of unmanned orbiter rather than simply a launch shroud.
>
>It's pretty much a launch shroud with an upper stage for
>circularizing the orbit or boost to higher orbits.

That's what I had thought.  I've seen proposals for launch vehicles using
SRB's and ET's with a wingless, unmanned cargo vehicle attached instead
of the cargo vehicle.  I 've also seen proposals for shuttle-derived
launch vehicles in which shuttle main engines are clustered at the tail
of the ET, minimizing some of those stresses.
>
>>BTW- are we to assume that Energia evolved out of the N-1?
>
>Why should anyone assume that? There's less in common between the N-1
>and Energia than the Saturn V and the Space Shuttle. Much of the N-1
>development was done outside the Ministry of General Machine Building due
>to political and personal reasons. That Ministry is traditionally
>responsible for big rocket design and manufacture. After Glushko took over
>Korolev's old bureau in 1974 and formed Energia NPO, the work on the Energia
>was carried out mainly within the Ministry of General Machine Building (much
>of Buran development was done by the Ministry of Aviation. The result is
>that N-1 engine development was virtually abandoned among other design aspects.

Now this is very new to me, I had always thought that the Soviet space program
was simply an offshoot of the Strategic Rocket Forces.
>
>So more to the point, in 1974 Glushko started over with a clean sheet of
>paper. This was no accident, it was again done for political and personal
>reasons.

Sounds like what happened when the Saturn V was dropped totally in favor
of the shuttle.....
>
>The only piece of the N1/L3 plan to live on was the Block-D stage which is
>used on the Proton (But, only because Korolev won the L1 (Zond) mission away
>from the Chelomei bureau after Chelomei fell behind schedule. Chelomei had
>developed the Proton for his own L1 mission plan which did not utilize a
>Proton with a 4th stage. Korolev's bureau grafted the Block-D and Zond onto
>the already developed Proton to finially perform the unmanned circumlunar
>missions.). A few peices of N-1 boosters are also used as storage sheds, water
>tanks, etc. at the cosmodrome.

No N-1 on public display at Baikonour? :-)  Seriously, I'm curious at to why
it seemed to take so long for them to get Energia (and ultimately Buran)
off the ground- if the work on desiging Energia was started in the early
70's.  Unless it was plagued with problems far worse than were ever
encountered with the shuttle.
Even now Buran has yet to make a manned flight.  Its September 1988
unmanned flight was its only flight.

Simon


Even now, Buran has yet to make a manned flight.  Has it ever been flown

>


>Dennis Newkirk ([e-mail])
>Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector
>Schaumburg, IL

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

Date: 11 Mar 93 18:29:45 GMT
From: Bob Combs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Strange lights
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom) writes:
>Jim Jaworski sez;
>
>>Recently while walking to the grocery store, I saw a bright star like
>>object in the night sky.  When I was on the way TO the store this
>>star-sized light was in the western sky, about 14 deg. elev.  A few hours
>>later, about 6 hours, I saw the same thing, only this time it was in the
>>eastern side of the sky.  Do you know what this could be?  Is it Hubble?
>>It's easy to describe because its the brightest star/satellite out there.
>
>Sounds to me like you saw Venus and Jupiter.  Venus is in the Western
>sky early on, the Jupiter rises in the East a couple hours after Venus
>sets.  Also, they are about the same brightness right now, and always
>about the same color.
>
>Look again tonight.
>
>-Tommy Mac
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Tom McWilliams | 517-355-2178 (work) \\     Inhale to the Chief!
>[e-mail]  | 336-9591 (hm)\\  Zonker Harris in 1996!
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------


--

Bob Combs

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

Date: 12 Mar 1993 18:34:24 GMT
From: David Clunie <[e-mail]>
Subject: Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anon
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,sci.space,alt.privacy

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Dave Hayes) writes:

>[e-mail] (David Clunie) writes:

>>>     I am testing a shell script to carry out "Automated Retroactive
>>>Minimal Moderation" in response to Julf's (and your) suggestion that

>How very nice of you.

In trimming your response you edited this to make it look as if this proposal
was made by me !@#$

It should be attributed to [e-mail], [e-mail]
(Richard E. Depew).

I was in fact decrying Richard's suggestion ... please be more careful with
your editing ... I in no way want to have my comments construed as
endorsing Richard's proposal for unreasonable behaviour of cancelling other
people's posts. I strenuously oppose his suggestion.

---
David A. Clunie ([e-mail])

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 19:26:20 GMT
From: Dave Hayes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anon
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,sci.space,alt.privacy

[e-mail] (David Clunie) writes:
>In trimming your response you edited this to make it look as if this proposal
>was made by me !@#$

Extreme apologies.

>It should be attributed to [e-mail], [e-mail]
>(Richard E. Depew).

You are correct.

>I was in fact decrying Richard's suggestion ... please be more careful with
>your editing ... I in no way want to have my comments construed as
>endorsing Richard's proposal for unreasonable behaviour of cancelling other
>people's posts. I strenuously oppose his suggestion.

As do I.
--
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
[e-mail]       [e-mail]         ...usc!elroy!dxh

   History is not usually what has happened.
            History is what some people have thought to be significant.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 16:35:25 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anonymity is NOT the issue
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,sci.space,alt.privacy

[e-mail] writes:
   I think I will probably just turn off response to cancel messages totally if

That will cause quite a problem if you take a clari.* feed.

   It seems to me they are rarely used for other than controversial purposes

Outside clari.*, they're still used with some frequency.  I've
cancelled my own articles on a number of occasions.  Many people do.
Articles lose timeliness in a hurry, or errors made are retracted.

   No-one has appointed you as the moderator of all the non-alt groups
   retrospectively or otherwise, and no-one is likely to appoint anyone else
   in such a position either.

Let's take that one again, from the other end of the same equation:

"No-one has appointed Johan the arbiter to inflict his unusual
 news system on all the non-alt groups..."

   If you are so mad keen on democracy why don't you put it to a vote in
   each of the proposed groups

There have been these interesting complaints about some supposed right
to change the status quo.  If you want to change the status quo, then
it seems vacuously true that _you_ are the one who has to run the
votes.  And that's all the opponents of universal (and unannounced and
frequently unwelcome) anonymous access have ever really asked for.

   in fact there has been a distinct silence on both sides of late

Only because of the apparent futility of ever getting any of the crowd
demanding universal anonymous access even to admit to the existence of
a middle ground, much less move into it.  I've continued to read this
argument, but I haven't posted anything regarding it in probably 2
weeks by now.  I've had mail from several folk who share my viewpoint
but who have declined to post.  You've probably had mail with the
opposite bent but sharing similar sentiments.

   I don't think that you have a mandate to take this unilateral action

Good heavens, may I quote you on that?  May I quote you at Johan?

   I hope you are prepared to take responsibility for what is going to happen

He's already taken a heck of a lot more responsibility for what is
happening, because he had the decency to discuss it in public before
implementation.  And it's possible he could be talked out of it.

On the other hand, we have from Johan the twin but contradictory
viewpoints that "we need experimentation and experience" in the
provision of anonymous servers combined with the absolute prohibition
on ever possibly revealing someone, no matter how heinous the abuse.

A quest for "experience" which promises that it will not lead even to
the possibility of policy change is a lie.

   I would also be interested to hear a legal opinion on this matter.

Maybe you should have pursued the issue with a lawyer.  I did.  In the
process, I got some real information when it mattered to me.  You're
engaging in little more than mental masturbation, notably regarding...

   infringing on their First Ammendment rights,
   not to mention a potential breach of that Electronic Privacy Act

    "Usenet is not a right."
                    --Chip Salzenberg
    "Usenet is a right, a left, a jab, and a sharp uppercut
     to the jaw.  The postman hits!  You have new mail."
                    --Ed Vielmetti

The very idea of suggesting that the ECPA (C = Communications, btw)
would relate to the inherently public nature of a Usenet posting...
well, it's just obvious that you have occupied no brain cells on the
question.

In trying to apply ECPA restrictions to public Usenet postings, you
may have just achieved a new least common denominator for cluelessness.

   ...drop this one-man crusade to cleanse Usenet of the
   virulent anonymous strain.


"Johan should drop this one-man crusade to cleanse Usenet of the
 virulent anti-anonymous strain."

   It is only going to bring you grief in the end

How many hours a day did Johan say he's already spending on answering
mail related to his anon server?  Is that number still rising?

   I am sure you don't want to become Usenet's next "J Palmer"

No, Johan's got that position locked up already.  Considering that
what [e-mail] is planning to do is exactly what was
originally intended for Palmer in late 1990, the similarity between
the two is substantial and significant.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 13:07:18 -0500
From: "William C. Hulley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anonymity is NOT the issue
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,sci.space,alt.privacy,news.admin.policy

we can assume that three things will happen if rick enacts his
delightfully sensitive censorship scheme:

    - his site will be cut off from the rest of the net,

    - another anonymous site with a different naming scheme will be started
      within hours,

    - someone will try to post anonymously and when that post is
      "moderatedly moderated" he or she will contact the EFF and the ACLU
      and begin, probably through the courts, an action to protect our
      first amendment rights.

gee rick, i dunno, this ARMM thingy doesn't sound like such a good
idea, maybe you should think about it just a wee bit more before you
implement it.

-----

my humble apologies to the gods of bandwidth for further polluting the
wire with more of this but my email to mr. rick got bounced.  - bill

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

Date: 12 Mar 93 17:07:51 GMT
From: Art Berggreen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Winding trails from rocket
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.geo.meteorology

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (boyd johnson) writes:
>I'm new to these groups, so flame me easy if this is a FAQ.
>
>I'm sure many of you in Southern California saw the rocket contrail from
>Vandenberg Air Force Base last night (Tuesday) at sunset.  I have never
>seen one as it is created, but have seen it many times some time after
>it happens.
>
>It always seems to resemble something like what you'd get if you took
>the northern lights (aurora borealis) stretched them out, then let it
>snap into a tangled mess.  The trail is nearly vertical near the earth,
>but as it ascends it appears to go out of control.
>
>Is it the wind currents that twists the contrail or does the rocket
>follow a looping, circling route?  Also, it is always the same time of
>day.  Is this the only time the contrails are visible from a distance,
>or is it when the best atmospheric conditions exist for launch?
>I am about 250 miles from VAFB, so I assume it is visible from
>beyond the Mexican border to San Francisco or so.
>
>Do those of you near Cape Canaveral or other places see similar sights?

I grew up about 25 mi. from VAFB and have seen quite a few launches.
(Watching a staging during a night launch is especially impressive)

The missile usually follows a fairly straight course as it arcs out above the
pacific on its way.  The ballistic missile tests are usually aimed at the
Quagualeen (sp?) Atoll in the pacific.  Orbital launches are often headed
into polar orbits.  If a launch deviates from it's intended flight path by
very much, it is usually destroyed.  Missile are actually fairly fragile
devices and don't tolerate much shear stress.  If they start tumbling, they
usually break up.  Launches are often postponed because of weather conditions,
especially upper level turbulence.  In the early years, quite a few launches
went awry and were destroyed (or blem them selves up).  More recently the
success rate has been much better, but one of the early Titan-IV launches a
few years ago had a massive explosion on the launch pad.

The contrail gets its shape because of the upper altitude winds.  There is
often variations in the speed (and even relative direction) of the winds as
the altitude changes.  Soon after the missile has passed through, the contrail
gets stretched around.  In the high altitude, the contrail condenses into
ice crystals.  If the launch occurs just after sunset, the upper part of the
contrail can catch late afternoon sunlight and be quite spectacuarly colorful.

Art

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 307
------------------------------