Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_3/V16NO319.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 31KB

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 05:36:40
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #319
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Tue, 16 Mar 93       Volume 16 : Issue 319

Today's Topics:
                        Alignment of planets?
                         a Plan for NASA,etc.
                             Beyond 1000!
                 cancel wars accountability (2 msgs)
                       Charon: Planet or moon?
                   Cosmonaut Georgi Grechko in USA
                                 DC-X
                     Gaspra Animation (QuickTime)
                        Martian Winter (When?)
                  Response to various attacks on SSF
                     Retraining at NASA (2 msgs)
              REVIEW article on crystal growth in space
         Road & Track road tests 1996 JPL Rocky IV Microrover
        Sisters of Mars Observer (was Re: Refueling in orbit)
    Threat of mass cancellings was Re: Anonymity is NOT the issue
                            Venus and Mars
               Venus and Mars, was Re: TIME HAS INERTIA
                      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: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 00:16:52 GMT
From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Alignment of planets?
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Edmund Hack) writes:

>The planets are all in alignment right now! They are all lined up in the
>SAME PLANE.  I feel the energy flowing this instant.... or is that the
>heating system blowing on me?

If they are in the same plane, it would be a first. Maybe if you back
up pretty far, like to Alpha Centauri, it looks that way, but they're
not.

>--
>Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
>[e-mail] - I speak only for myself, unless blah, blah..
>"Everybody wants prosthetic foreheads on their real heads"
>"I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV."

I'm not a geek, but I post to Usenet anyway.

Or maybe I am...
--
Phil Fraering         |"...drag them, kicking and screaming,
[e-mail]|into the Century of the Fruitbat." - Terry Pratchett,
                       _Reaper Man_

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

Date: 15 Mar 93 20:50:37 GMT
From: "Bill Jameson SPS Pres." <[e-mail]>
Subject: a Plan for NASA,etc.
Newsgroups: sci.space

 Someone i saw on this group recently was talking about NASA not having a
plan, a long-term goal, or purpose that was well defined. Perhaps we have not
been exposed to this plan (there were also complaints about NASA's poor PR),
but whether it exists or not, I offer my own plan for our nation's (or,
preferably, nations' ) space program.
 As the population of our measly little planet grows, we will need increasing
amounts of the land area for food production and living space, things which
would be economically impractical off-planet. (I mean LARGE SCALE living, not
to say that permanent manned bases are a bad idea) Thus, it would be useful
and considerate of our environment (Which includes us!!!) for the more nasty
aspects of our technological life style to be carried out where they won't
pollute the surface of the planet- hence, off-planet.
  The things which I suggest as most likely practical are off-planet mining
of asteroids, moons, or other planets, and material processing up there too.
Perhaps have a lunar ironworks.
  Also off practical possiblility is the use of off-planet solar power and
beam-down to earth using Masers and rectenae. (Yes, i read _Fallen Angels_)
This seems to me perhaps the _best_ selling point, especially to the eco-freaks
of whom we have quite a few in this community. They are ( to my mind) unreason-
ably afraid of nuclear power, and Should be concerned about coal power and coal
mining. (this being a mining region), so the off-planet collection of solar
energy should be an appealing thing to most people.
  I came up with these ideas because i find myself frequently defending the
space program from technophobes. I hope someone at NASA will comment and perhaps
help me to improve my arguments. I also hope that NASA will take a serious look
at this, and consider a PR campaign of Its PLAN (whatever they feel it to be)
----
 bill jameson.

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

Date: 15 Mar 93 21:27:46 GMT
From: Josh Hopkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Beyond 1000!
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:

>In article <1o15ak$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Francis Vaughan) writes:
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:
>> I find Beyond 2000 good mind
>> numbing stuff when I want to veg in front of the tube, but
>> painfully difficult to watch othertimes as they blithly report
>> what has been common knowledge for some years as scientific
>> breakthrough.
>[...]
>> The style of the show seeks to sensationalise and often
>> trivialise much work, and has a habit of also mixing in utter
>> dross and occasionally features fringe science with no caveat
>> warning the naive veiwer.

>As a kid my interest in science and technology was *greatly*
>stimulated by the American magazines *Popular Science* and *Popular
>Mechanics*, which practiced a school of cornball gosh-wow journalism
>similar to that of *B2K*.  I don't think it did much damage to my
>scientific education, and I am inclined to be tolerant of such
>popularization.

I would have to agree with Bill.  Unless one is involved in the relevant
field or has access to good coverage it can be very hard to keep up with
science and non-consumer technology.  The regular media isn't worth squat for
such things.  I've had to wince at things in B2K or "Popular So-and-so" before,
but I'm sure there are people who don't have a better source of info.  The pop
science people aren't the only ones who engage in gosh-wow stuff or who don't
know how to use the future conditional.  Lots of stuff comes out of NASA with
the same sort of attitude. One solution to this is to encourage the rest of the
media to pick up the slack.  The Christian Science Monitor has reasonably good
space coverage for a mainstream newspaper for example.

Somewhere I have a Popular Mechanics whith a cover predicting hypersonic
passenger travel will be available in ten years.  Of course, it was written in
1959.
--
Josh Hopkins                                          [e-mail]
          "Tout ce qu'un homme est capable d'imaginer, d'autres hommes
                     seront capable de la realiser"
             -Jules Verne

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 20:57:58 GMT
From: Rex Jolliff <[e-mail]>
Subject: cancel wars accountability
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug Sewell) writes:

>[...]
>Or perhaps we need someone to implement an anonymous-cancel-by-mail server ?

implementing an 'anonumous-cancel-by-mail server' should be considered an
act of electronic mail fraud.  If somebody does implement it, then I'm
sure somebody will decide that your (or jay maynard's, etc.) posts are
not acceptable and will cancel each and every one posted.

>Doug Sewell, Tech Support, Computer Center, Youngstown State University
>[e-mail]       [e-mail]    <internet>!cc.ysu.edu!doug


--
Rex Jolliff  N7PCF  ([e-mail], ...!jimi!otto!rex)
Teleguide/Hospitality Network  |Disclaimer:  The opinions and comments in
Your In-Room Casino Cash Source| this article are my own and in no way
          $$$$$$$$$$           | reflect the opinions of my employers.

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 22:06:17 GMT
From: Jay Maynard <[e-mail]>
Subject: cancel wars accountability
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,sci.space,sci.astro,news.admin.policy

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob Sartin) writes:
>Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to [e-mail].
>*IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to [e-mail] for details.
>I encourage you to write if you feel the service is being abused.

As if the situation were symmetrical.

The coward asked folks to flood Dick Depew's superiors with mail and phone
calls. Not only is [e-mail] NOT the coward's superior, he's not
even at the same institution (most likely).

Anyone who incites flooding of someone's boss deserves the same thing to
happen to him. The coward, by hiding behind Julf's server, has evaded the
consequences of his actions.
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
[e-mail]      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
        You won't see this on TV: (video of Mount Carmel compound)
        "This is David Koresh, of Waco, Texas. He cannot be seen."

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

Date: 15 Mar 1993 22:38 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Charon: Planet or moon?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes...
>Grabbing a handy table, I see that Pluto's radius is 1151 +/- 6 km,
>Charon's radius is 593 +/- 13 km, and the distance between them is
>19,640 +/- 320 km.  The mean density of the system is 2.029 +/- .032
>grams/cm^3; nobody knows whether Pluto and Charon have different mean
>densities.  Let's assume they are identical.

Here are the numbers I've got from the Pluto Fast Flyby folks:

           Pluto           Charon
Radius     1150-1215 km    600-640km
Density    ~2.1 g/cm^3     ~1.3 g/cm^3

     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Don't ever take a fence
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | down until you know the
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | reason it was put up.

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

Date: 11 Mar 93 01:10:37 GMT
From: George Hastings <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cosmonaut Georgi Grechko in USA
Newsgroups: sci.space

Dr. Georgi Grechko, Cosmonaut
Lecture Tour of the United States

Novins Planetarium in Toms River, NJ      March 1
Albany Community on             March 4
Albany NY Schools on            March 5
Syracuse, NY on                March 6
Rochester, NY on            March 7
Rochester, NY WXXI-TV            March 8
Hamilton/Toronto, Canada        March 9
Royal Ontario Museum            March 10
by AMTRAK to Flint, MI            March 11
Longway Plaetarium, Flint, MI        March 12
by AMTRAK to East Lansing, MI        March 13
Abrams Planetarium, East Lansing    March 14, 15
Champaign, IL                March 16
Speak/ Radio-Theater in Champaign    March 17
Depart for Colorado Springs        March 18
Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs    March 19
Travel to Salt Lake City        March 20
Hansen Planetarium, Salt Lake City    March 21
Travel to San Francisco, CA        March 22
Morrison Planetarium, San Francisco    March 23,24
Tour San Francisco            March 25
Chabot Observatory, Oakland, CA        March 26
Travel to Lafayette, LA            March 28
Lafayette Natural History Museum    March 29
Travel to Richmond, VA            March 30
Thomas Jefferson High School        March 31
Science Museum of Virginia        March 31
Travel to Charleston, NC        April 1
Sunrise Planetarium, Charleston        April 2
Travel to Philadelphia, PA        April 3
Fels Planetarium, Philadelphia        April 4, 5
Travel to Chicago, IL            April 6

   Other speaking engagements may be added.
 If Dr. Gretchko is scheduled for your area, call
 the local planetarium for mor information.

 ____________________________________________________________
| George Hastings        [e-mail] |
| Space Science Teacher        [e-mail]      |  If it's not
| Mathematics & Science Center     STAREACH BBS: 804-343-6533   |   FUN, it's
| 2304 Hartman Street        OFFICE:       804-343-6525   |  probably not
| Richmond, VA 23223        FAX:          [phone]   |    SCIENCE!
 ------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 21:51:11 GMT
From: "Matthew R. Feulner" <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
|> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Michelson) writes:
|> >>They were MOST interested in hearing about YOUR support.
|> >>I agreed to carry hard copies of posts from here to their facility as a
|> >>morale booster...
|> >
|> >It goes without saying that the DC-X team certainly have *my* support.
|>
|> I think it's fair to say that almost everyone in this community is hoping
|> and praying that DC-X will work (and that DC-Y will get funded and work).
|> Even most of the skeptics -- who think it's a poor approach or beyond
|> the near-term state of the art -- would be delighted to be proved wrong.
|> --
|> C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
|> effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry


I haven't been keeping up to date, so could someone give me a reference
where I can read about DC-X?

Matt

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 22:51:26 GMT
From: Eric H Seale <[e-mail]>
Subject: Gaspra Animation (QuickTime)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

[e-mail] (Mike Smithwick) writes:

>Is this file compressed or corrupted somehow? The Zmodem hurled when
>trying to download this so I finally went to Kermit. But the
>quicktime readers I have don't recognize it at all.

Ditto.  I tried downloading in binary (with / without MacBinary enabled)
and ascii modes -- none of my programs can do a thing with the results either.
Could this be re-posted in BinHex'ed format?

Eric Seale
#include <disclaimer.std>

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

Date: 15 Mar 93 22:54:46 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Martian Winter (When?)
Newsgroups: sci.space

   I have a question that should be pretty straight forward.  I need to know at
what part of its orbit around the Sun is it winter in the northern
hemisphere of Mars?  By what part I mean, at what longitude relative to
Earth's vernal equinox is the vernal equinox of Mars in the ecliptic plane
or something equivelent to that.  I would very much appreciate it if someone
could either give me the answer to direct me to where I can find the answer.

Please reply via e-mail if possible because I can't always get back to check
sci.space every day.

Joseph A. Huwaldt

[e-mail]


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

Date: 15 Mar 93 21:37:29 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Response to various attacks on SSF
Newsgroups: sci.space

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

>In article <[e-mail]>
>[e-mail] (David B. Mckissock) writes:

>Would you please define the following terms used in your discussion of SSF
>management? I can't find them in my dictionary.

These are pretty much 'standard' terms -- jargon, if you prefer.  ;-)

>"flowed down", or "flowdown"

Things start with high-level requirements.  These must be allocated to
who is going to produce the product that fulfills them, may generate
secondary requirements, etc.  The purpose of 'flowdown' is to make
sure that all the requirements actually get allocated to somebody to
fulfill, so that there's always someone who is responsible for making
sure that a specific piece of hardware/software will be 'held
responsible' for meeting each of the system requirements.  'Flowdown'
is how you make sure that no system requirements get dropped on the
floor.  Then you have to do traceability from the design back to the
requirements, to prove that you actually designed the system that was
asked for.  Kinda fuzzy, but it gives you the idea.

>"baselined"

This is the term used for when things are put under change control.
All documents, requirements, designs, drawings, software, etc. is put
under Configuration Management control.  Once something is baselined,
you cannot simply go in and arbitrarily change it.  Any changes must
be reviewed by a Configuration Control Board, approved, QC'd, etc.
This is also how you 'step back' to a prior version (when talking
about software).  CM is responsible for knowing which baselined
version of what is used to be each revision level of a system.

Hope this helps clear all that up a bit.

[I have nothing to do with NASA, but this isn't that unusual a way to
work.]

--
"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: 15 Mar 93 21:39:05 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Retraining at NASA
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian Donnell) writes:
>What do you call Bush's SEI?  While I disliked Bush in almost all
>other respects, his and Quayle's support of the Space Program was nothing
>short of enthusiastic...

When Griffin wanted a lousy $30M to get some *unmanned* lunar work started,
and Congress balked, as best I can tell Bush did not lift a finger in
support.  He talked a good fight, but did not seem to be willing to commit
serious time, effort, and political capital to making SEI happen.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 15 Mar 93 12:30:36 GMT
From: Nick Szabo <[e-mail]>
Subject: Retraining at NASA
Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.flame

[e-mail] (Brian Donnell) writes:

>Major sigh...I think most of us within NASA who read these
>threads look at them with a sense of resignation. People
>like Nick Szabo and Tom McWilliams are so misinformed,
>it's depressing to even attempt to correct them.


Of course.  Criticism of you means we're "misinformed."
And you have to spend our tax money to sit there and
upbraid us for it, meanwhile your projects slip farther
behind schedule, get more functionality deleted from
them and cost even more.  But if we point out these embarassing
facts, we're "misinformed".

Now, while taking the time to "inform" us you would think
Mr. Donnell's post would contain at least one piece of NASAfact,
eg cost estimates derived by illegal accounting methods,
how many "high-tech aerospace jobs" (really bureacratic
paper pushers who could just as easily work for the HUD
or VA) are created by NASA in Houston, ad nauseum. But no, not one
tidbit for this poor misinformed soul!  How dissapointing.

>NASA's PR in general has been pathetic

Spending my tax money on PR to spread your idiotic lies ("the
shuttle will lower launch costs") and sadly delusional
visions ("the space station is the next logical step") instead
of actually making projects that work and do something useful
at an affordable cost is pathetic.

Get off this stupid forum and get back to work, you lazy,
good-for-nothing exemplar of why socialism sucks.  If you
don't like this post forward it to your boss, he would be proud
of you.  Meanwhile, you might want to take a second look at that
ex-NASA employee resume; perhaps you are the one who needs to
be informed.


--
Nick Szabo                     [e-mail]

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

Date: 15 Mar 93 17:47:13 GMT
From: CLAUDIO OLIVEIRA EGALON <[e-mail]>
Subject: REVIEW article on crystal growth in space
Newsgroups: sci.space

I am having a hard time to find a REVIEW article on crystal growth in
microgravity. I have contacted a guy here at NASA that works on that and he told
me that there are none. There anyone in the NET knkows of any review article on
that???

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

Date: 15 Mar 93 23:55:53 GMT
From: Mike Van Pelt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Road & Track road tests 1996 JPL Rocky IV Microrover
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein) writes:
>the review I'd like to see is for the Saturn V's tractor trailer...
>weight of umpity umpity tons, top speed 0.something miles per hour,
>acceleration of near zero and with a pretty looooonnnng stopping distance.

They did that one... I forget the year, but I've got a copy at home.
It's hilarious.

--
"The American Republic will endure, until        Mike Van Pelt
politicians realize they can bribe the people    [e-mail]
with their own money."  Alexis de Tocqueville

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 22:16:06 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sisters of Mars Observer (was Re: Refueling in orbit)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>|>I thought MO was supposed to be one in a whole series of spacecraft?
>|
>|The key word is "was".  The Observer series is dead...
>
>How many were planned in the Mars Observer series?

It was supposed to be an open-ended series, doing modest-cost planetary
missions at regular intervals in the same way that the Explorer series
does modest-cost space-science and astronomy missions.  The intent was
that it copy another important feature of the Explorer series:  steady
annual funding for an ongoing program, rather than a political battle
to get separate approval for each mission.  That part, unfortunately,
didn't happen, and that may have been the death knell for the Observer
series right there.

There were half a dozen missions listed as early Observer candidates.
Lunar Observer was pencilled in as the one after MO -- flying much the
same instruments in lunar polar orbit.

The Observers were also supposed to be based on a standard commercial
satellite bus, with only the instruments and a few other details changing
with the mission.  There's no particularly good reason why a commercial
comsat or something of that ilk couldn't function perfectly well around
Mars or Venus, with minor adjustments to things like the size of the
solar arrays.  Unfortunately, while MO *is* based on a commercial bus
(the one RCA builds for low-orbit weather satellites), there have been
many, many, many, many, many changes and the cost has skyrocketed.

> ANd why did they use
>the TOS stage for the titan? launch.  why not use the centaur.
>a much more proven launch vehicle.

Centaur is much bigger and a good deal more expensive.  It's costly
overkill for something the size of MO.  And MO wasn't originally
supposed to be TOS's first flight.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 18:20:19 GMT
From: Ed McGuire <[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

[Please note that news.admin is a bogus group.  Use news.admin.misc or
news.admin.policy.  Also note followups directed to n.a.policy only.]

In <[e-mail]> "William C. Hulley" <[e-mail]> writes:

>    - 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.

The First Amendment protects USA citizens from its government.  This
appears to be the action of a private citizen, so the First Amendment
doesn't apply.  If you can show you are substantially damaged by the
action, sue him.  Ignore his cancels if you like, they are only
advisory.

Regards, Ed
--
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX [phone]
Intellection, Inc.           <[e-mail]>

Raise Usenet quality.  Read news.announce.newgroups and vote.

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

Date: 15 Mar 1993 23:32:20 GMT
From: Jon Leech <[e-mail]>
Subject: Venus and Mars
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ata Etemadi) writes:
|> Talk about a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Plain old moss loves the constituents
|> of the Venus atmosphere, and is highly resistent to attack from UV, acid etc..
|> If its spores were released at high altitude on Venus, they would happily float
|> around converting the CO2 to Oxygen.

    Presuming this is true, I'd think we would find large quantities of moss
spores floating around in Earth's atmosphere. Are they there? If not, why
not?
    Jon
    __@/

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 22:34:38 GMT
From: Ata Etemadi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Venus and Mars, was Re: TIME HAS INERTIA
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Eric H. Taylor) writes:
-| In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alexander Abian) writes:
-| >[...]
-| >VENUS should be given an near Earth like orbit to become a Born Again Earth
-|

Talk about a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Plain old moss loves the constituents
of the Venus atmosphere, and is highly resistent to attack from UV, acid etc..
If its spores were released at high altitude on Venus, they would happily float
around converting the CO2 to Oxygen. It would take roughly 100 years for the
spores to reach the surface of Venus, by which time the atmosphere would also
have been converted. I think terraforming is really a branch of bioengineering.
Other approaches just don't make economic, or practical sense.

    regards
        Ata <(|)>.
--
| Mail          Dr Ata Etemadi, Blackett Laboratory,                          |
|               Space and Atmospheric Physics Group,                          |
|               Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine,        |
|               Prince Consort Road, London SW7 2BZ, ENGLAND                  |
| Internet/Arpanet/Earn/Bitnet [e-mail] or [e-mail]  |
| Span                              SPVA::atae       or     MSSLC:atae        |
| UUCP/Usenet                       [e-mail]        |

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 21:13:38 GMT
From: "Grant W. Petty" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Winding trails from rocket
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space,sci.geo.meteorology

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Anthony E
Bible) writes:

>
>    I can respond to the question about time of day.  Launches
> from Vandenberg go into (nearly) polar orbits.  The time of day
> determines what the angle will be between the orbital plane and the
> sun.  For example, launch at sunset or sunrise and you get a twilight
> orbit which has a 90 degree sun angle.  Launch into a noon orbit (high
> noon or midnight) and you have a zero degree sun angle.  One of the
> reasons this is important is the sun angle determines the heat loads
> and distribution on the vehicle.  A twilight orbit puts one side
> always to the sun and the other always to outer space.  In that case
> you'd like to paint the vehicle so it absorbs little solar on one side
> and radiates little heat on the other.  Of course, after three months
> all twilight orbits become noon orbits and vice versa, but for short

Actually, it's very rare that the plane of a near-polar satellite
orbit is fixed relative to the universe the way the last comment
implies.  Rather, they precess on account of the oblateness of the
earth.  The exact rate of precession depends on several orbital
parameters, such as inclination angle, orbital altitude, etc.

Most polar-orbiting weather satellites (e.g., NOAA) are placed in
orbits that precess at the rate of 1 revolution per year -- this is
called a sun-synchronous orbit.  The result is that the satellite
always views a given geographic location at about the same local time
(or sun time) each day, even after years in orbit.

--
Grant W. Petty                                [e-mail]
Assistant Prof. of Atmospheric Science        [phone]
Dept. of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences     FAX:[phone]
Purdue University, West Lafayette IN  47907-1397

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

From: Doug Mohney <[e-mail]>

Newsgroups: sci.space,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: plans, and absence thereof
Date: 15 Mar 1993 20:20:39 GMT
Organization: Computer Aided Design Lab, U. of Maryland College Park
Lines: 26
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: king.eng.umd.edu
Sender: [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Nick Szabo) writes:

>(Sorry for the harsh language, but the gall of Dennis Wingo to sit
>here and use my tax money to harangue me that the problem with the space
>program is that everybody in the U.S. doesn't agree with and fork over
>money for his archaic Plan which has already squandered $100's of
>billions, just torks the hell out of me.  Again my apologies to yourself
>and third parties).

Nick.  You're a fanatic.  Please.  What's the difference between you and
Korish?  You don't live in Waco, Texas.

I wasn't aware that your one penny of every dollar of tax money was bigger than
the one penny of every tax dollar Mr. Wingo pays.

Or your taxes paid thereby gives you exclusive rights to HARANGUE any
goverment employee whom you see fit to do so.

If that's the best you can come up with for a vent, the lithium is over that
way...




    Software engineering? That's like military intelligence, isn't it?
  -- >                  [e-mail]                        < --

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 319
------------------------------