Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_4/V16NO468.TXT

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

Date: Sun, 18 Apr 93 05:00:03
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #468
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Sun, 18 Apr 93       Volume 16 : Issue 468

Today's Topics:
              A flawed propulsion system: Space Shuttle
                        army in space (3 msgs)
                            DC-X update???
             Diaspar Virtual Reality Network Announcement
                    End of the Space Age? (2 msgs)
                           help for school
                             NASA "Wraps"
                    Orbital RepairStation (2 msgs)
                Orion drive in vacuum -- how? (3 msgs)
                      Quotation Was:(Re: <None|)
                       Russian Email Contacts.
                           Solar Sail Data
                             Space Debris
                   Space Shuttle information wanted
             What if the USSR had reached the Moon first?

    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: Sat, 17 Apr 93 18:54:59 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Terry Ford)
Subject: A flawed propulsion system: Space Shuttle

For an essay, I am writing about the space shuttle and a need for a better
propulsion system.  Through research, I have found that it is rather clumsy
(i.e. all the checks/tests before launch), the safety hazards ("sitting
on a hydrogen bomb"), etc..  If you have any beefs about the current
space shuttle program Re: propulsion, please send me your ideas.

Thanks a lot.

--
Terry Ford [[e-mail]]
Nepean, Ontario, Canada.

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

Date: 17 Apr 1993 17:31:36 GMT
From: kerry todd johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: army in space
Newsgroups: sci.space

Is anybody out there willing to discuss with me careers in the Army that deal
with space?  After I graduate, I will have a commitment to serve in the Army,
and I would like to spend it in a space-related field.  I saw a post a long
time ago about the Air Force Space Command which made a fleeting reference to
its Army counter-part.  Any more info on that would be appreciated.  I'm
looking for things like: do I branch Intelligence, or Signal, or other?  To
whom do I voice my interest in space?  What qualifications are necessary?
Etc, etc.  BTW, my major is computer science engineering.

Please reply to [e-mail]

Thanks for ANY info.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
= Whether they ever find life there or not, I think Jupiter should be         =
= considered an enemy planet.  --  Jack Handy                                 =
[e-mail][e-mail][e-mail]--

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 12:47:08 PDT
From: Charlie Prael <[e-mail]>
Subject: army in space
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (kerry todd johnson) writes:

> Is anybody out there willing to discuss with me careers in the Army that deal
> with space?  After I graduate, I will have a commitment to serve in the Army,
> and I would like to spend it in a space-related field.  I saw a post a long
> time ago about the Air Force Space Command which made a fleeting reference to
> its Army counter-part.  Any more info on that would be appreciated.  I'm
> looking for things like: do I branch Intelligence, or Signal, or other?  To
> whom do I voice my interest in space?  What qualifications are necessary?
> Etc, etc.  BTW, my major is computer science engineering.

Kerry-- I'm guessing a little at this, because it's been a few years
since I saw the info, but you will probably want to look at Air Defense
Artillery as a specialty, or possibly Signals.  The kind of thing you're
looking for is SDI-type assignments, but it'll be pretty prosaic stuff.
Things like hard-kill ATBM missiles, some of the COBRA rigs -- that kind
of thing.

Hope that gives you some ideas on where to look, though.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlie Prael  - [e-mail]
Shakala BBS (ClanZen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA [phone]

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

Date: 17 Apr 1993 17:45:21 -0400
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: army in space
Newsgroups: sci.space

There is the Army Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

They were the precursors to SDIO.  and still exist under
that umbrella.  Army Signal Corp's  and DCA  defense Comm Agency
oops  DISA, they just changed names  do space work.  that's
the point of all those defense comm sats.

But don't worry,  there are lots of jobs that need ditch digging,
somehow you'll end up there ;-)

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 14:51:41 GMT
From: John Lussmyer <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X update???
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:

> The first flight will be a low hover that will demonstrate a vertical
> landing.  There will be no payload.  DC-X will never carry any kind

Exactly when will the hover test be done, and will any of the TV
networks carry it.  I really want to see that...

--
John Lussmyer ([e-mail])
Mystery Spot BBS, Royal Oak, MI --------------------------------------------?--

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

Date: Sun, 18 Apr 93 02:05:35 GMT
From: Wyatt Miler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Diaspar Virtual Reality Network Announcement
Newsgroups: sci.space

Posted to the Internet by [e-mail]

000062David42      041493003715

             The Lunar Tele-operation Model One (LTM1)
             =========================================
                        By David H. Mitchell
                          March 23, 1993

INTRODUCTION:

In order to increase public interest in space-based and lunar operations, a
real miniature lunar-like environment is being constructed on which to test
tele-operated models. These models are remotely-controlled by individuals
located world-wide using their personal computers, for EduTainment
purposes.
Not only does this provide a test-bed for simple tele-operation and
tele-presence activities but it also provides for the sharing of
information
on methods of operating in space, including, but not limited to, layout of
a
lunar colony, tele-operating machines for work and play, disseminating
educational information, providing contests and awards for creativity and
achievement and provides a new way for students worldwide to participate in
Twenty-First century remote learning methods.

Because of the nature of the LTM1 project, people of all ages, interests
and
skills can contribute scenery and murals, models and structures,
interfacing
and electronics, software and graphics. In operation LTM1 is an evolving
playground and laboratory that can be used by children, students and
professionals worldwide. Using a personal computer at home or a terminal at
a participating institution a user is able to tele-operate real models at
the
LTM1 base for experimental or recreational purposes. Because a real
facility
exists, ample opportunity is provided for media coverage of the
construction
of the lunar model, its operation and new features to be added as suggested
by the users themselves.

This has broad inherent interest for a wide range of groups:
 - tele-operations and virtual reality research
 - radio control, model railroad and ham radio operation
 - astronomy and space planetariums and science centers
 - art and theater
 - bbs and online network users
 - software and game developers
 - manufacturers and retailers of model rockets, cars and trains
 - children
 - the child in all of us

LTM1 OVERALL DESIGN:

A room 14 feet by 8 feet contains the base lunar layout. The walls are used
for murals of distant moon mountains, star fields and a view of the earth.
The "floor" is the simulated lunar surface. A global call for contributions
is hereby made for material for the lunar surface, and for the design and
creation of scale models of lunar colony elements, scenery, and
machine-lets.

 The LTM1 initial design has 3 tele-operated machinelets:
 1. An SSTO scale model which will be able to lift off, hover and land;
 2. A bulldozerlet which will be able to move about in a quarry area; and
 3. A moon-train which will traverse most of the simulated lunar surface.

 Each machinelet has a small TV camera utilizing a CCD TV chip mounted on
 it. A personal computer digitizes the image (including reducing picture
 content and doing data-compression to allow for minimal images to be sent
 to the operator for control purposes) and also return control signals.

The first machinelet to be set up will be the moon-train since model trains
with TV cameras built in are almost off-the-shelf items and control
electronics for starting and stopping a train are minimal. The user will
receive an image once every 1 to 4 seconds depending on the speed of their
data link to LTM1.

Next, an SSTO scale model with a CCD TV chip will be suspended from a
servo-motor operated wire frame mounted on the ceiling allowing for the
SSTO
to be controlled by the operator to take off, hover over the entire lunar
landscape and land.

Finally, some tank models will be modified to be CCD TV chip equipped
bulldozerlets. The entire initial LTM1 will allow remote operators
worldwide
to receive minimal images while actually operating models for landing and
takeoff, traveling and doing work. The entire system is based on
commercially
available items and parts that can be easily obtained except for the
interface electronics which is well within the capability of many advanced
ham radio operator and computer hardware/software developers.

By taking a graphically oriented communications program (Dmodem) and adding
a tele-operations screen and controls, the necessary user interface can be
provided in under 80 man hours.

PLAN OF ACTION:

The Diaspar Virtual Reality Network has agreed to sponsor this project by
providing a host computer network and Internet access to that network.
Diaspar is providing the 14 foot by 8 foot facility for actual construction
of the lunar model. Diaspar has, in stock, the electronic tanks that can be
modified and one CCD TV chip. Diaspar also agrees to provide "rail stock"
for the lunar train model. Diaspar will make available the Dmodem graphical
communications package and modify it for control of the machines-lets.
An initial "ground breaking" with miniature shovels will be performed for
a live photo-session and news conference on April 30, 1993. The initial
models will be put in place. A time-lapse record will be started for
historical purposes. It is not expected that this event will be completely
serious or solemn. The lunar colony will be declared open for additional
building, operations and experiments. A photographer will be present and
the photographs taken will be converted to .gif images for distribution
world-wide to major online networks and bbs's. A press release will be
issued
calling for contributions of ideas, time, talent, materials and scale
models
for the simulated lunar colony.

A contest for new designs and techniques for working on the moon will then
be
announced. Universities will be invited to participate, the goal being to
find instructors who wish to have class participation in various aspects of
the lunar colony model. Field trips to LTM1 can be arranged and at that
time
the results of the class work will be added to the model. Contributors will
then be able to tele-operate any contributed machine-lets once they return
to
their campus.

A monthly LTM1 newsletter will be issued both electronically online and via
conventional means to the media. Any major new tele-operated equipment
addition will be marked with an invitation to the television news media.
Having a large, real model space colony will be a very attractive photo
opportunity for the television community. Especially since the "action"
will
be controlled by people all over the world. Science fiction writers will be
invited to issue "challenges" to engineering and human factors students at
universities to build and operate the tele-operated equipment to perform
lunar tasks. Using counter-weight and pulley systems, 1/6 gravity may be
simulated to some extent to try various traction challenges.

The long term goal is creating world-wide interest, education,
experimentation
and remote operation of a lunar colony. LTM1 has the potential of being a
long
term global EduTainment method for space activities and may be the generic
example of how to teach and explore in many other subject areas not limited
to space EduTainment. All of this facilitates the kind of spirit which can
lead to a generation of people who are ready for the leap to the stars!

CONCLUSION:

EduTainment is the blending of education and entertainment. Anyone who has
ever enjoyed seeing miniatures will probably see the potential impact of a
globally available layout for recreation, education and experimentation
purposes. By creating a tele-operated model lunar colony we not only create
world-wide publicity, but also a method of trying new ideas that require
real
(not virtual) skills and open a new method for putting people's minds in
space.


MOONLIGHTERS:

"Illuminating the path of knowledge about space and lunar development."
The following people are already engaged in various parts of this work:
David42, Rob47, Dash, Hyson, Jzer0, Vril, Wyatt, The Dark One, Tiggertoo,
The Mad Hatter, Sir Robin, Jogden.

Come join the discussion any Friday night from 10:30 to midnight PST in

Diaspar Virtual Reality Network. Ideas welcome!

Internet telnet to: 192.215.11.1 or diaspar.com

(voice)  714-376-1776
(2400bd) 714-376-1200
(9600bd) 714-376-1234

Email inquiries to LTM1 project leader [e-mail]
or directly to Jzer0 on Diaspar.

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

Date: 17 Apr 1993 18:47:37 GMT
From: Jeff Bytof - SIO <[e-mail]>
Subject: End of the Space Age?
Newsgroups: sci.space

We are not at the end of the Space Age, but only at the end of Its
beginning.

That space exploration is no longer a driver for technical innovation,
or a focus of American cultural attention is certainly debatable; however,
technical developments in other quarters will always be examined for
possible applications in the space area and we can look forward to
many innovations that might enhance the capabilities and lower the
cost of future space operations.

The Dream is Alive and Well.

-Jeff Bytof
member, technical staff
Institute for Remote Exploration

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

Date: 17 Apr 1993 17:53:15 -0400
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: End of the Space Age?
Newsgroups: sci.space

Oddly, enough,  The smithsonian calls the lindbergh years
the golden age of flight.  I would call it the granite years,
reflecting the primitive nature of it.  It was  romantic,
swashbuckling daredevils,  "those daring young men in their flying
machines".  But in reality, it sucked.  Death was a highly likely
occurence,  and  the environment blew.  Ever see the early navy
pressure suits,  they were modified  diving suits.  You were ready to
star in "plan 9 from outer space".   Radios  and Nav AIds were
a joke,  and engines ran on castor oil.  They  picked and called aviators
"men with iron stomachs",  and it wasn't due to vertigo.

Oddly enough, now we are in the golden age of flight.  I can hop the
shuttle to NY for $90 bucks,  now that's golden.

Mercury gemini, and apollo were romantic,  but let's be honest.
Peeing in bags,  having plastic bags glued to your butt everytime
you needed a bowel movement.  Living for days inside a VW Bug.
Romantic,  but not commercial.   The DC-X  points out a most likely
new golden age.  An age where  fat cigar smoking business men in
loud polyester space suits will fill the skys with strip malls
and used space ship lots.

hhhmmmmm,  maybe i'll  retract that golden age bit.   Maybe it was
better in the old days.  Of course, then we'll have  wally schirra
telling his great grand children, "In my day,  we walked on the moon.
Every day.  Miles.  no buses.  you kids got it soft".

pat

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

Date: 17 Apr 93 04:55:31 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: help for school
Newsgroups: sci.space

I am a newbie to the net, and I am trying to get some information for a paper
I am working on to get back into college.  If anyone can send me data on
Solar coronal holes and recurrant aurora  for the past thirty years it would be
a big help.  Or, if you have information on more esoteric things like Telluric
current, surge bafflers power companies use, or other effects sporatic aurora
have on the Earth's magnetic field, I'd be eternally gratefull.  Please send
anything interesting to me at
        Marty Crandall-Grela
        Van Vleck Observatory
        Wesleyan University
        Middletown,Ct 06487
 or e-mail it to me at [e-mail]
 Thank-you in advance,      Marty

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

Date: 17 Apr 1993 16:42 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NASA "Wraps"
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes...
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>>>BTW, universities do the same thing. They however, have a wrap of
>>>10% to 15% (again, this is over and above any overhead charge).
>
>>Wrong Allen. The max overhead charge is ALL of the charge. There is no
>>seperately budgeted overhead in any shape size form or fashion.
>
>A professor at the University of Virginia told me their wrap was about
>15%. The subcontracts I have let out and worked on for other universities
>are about the same. My employer (a non-profit research institute) does
>the same. This is generally reffered to as the fee.
>

I don't care who told you this it is not generally true. I see EVERY single
line item on a contract and I have to sign it. There is no such thing as
wrap at this university. I also asked around here. Ther is no wrap at
Marquette, University of Wisconsin Madison, Utah State, Weber State or
Embry Riddle U. I am not saying that it doees not happen but in every instance
that I have been able to track down it does not. Also the president of our
University who was Provost at University of West Virgina said that it did
not happen there either and that this figure must be included in the overhead
to be a legitimate charge.

>>How do
>>I know? I write proposals and have won contracts and I know to the dime
>>what the charges are. At UAH for example the overhead is 36.6%.
>
>Sounds like they are adding it to their overhead rate. Go ask your
>costing people how much fee they add to a project.
>

I did they never heard of it but suggest that, like our president did, that
any percentage number like this is included in the overhead.

>>If you have some numbers Allen then show them else quit barking.
>
>I did Dennis; read the article. To repeat: an internal estimate done by
>the Reston costing department says Freedom can be built for about $1.8B
>a year and operated for $1B per year *IF* all the money where spent on
>Freedom. Since we spend about half a billion $$ more per year it looks
>like roughly 25% of the money is wasted. Now if you think I'm making
>this up, you can confirm it in the anonymous editorial published a few
>weeks ago in Space News.
>

No Allen you did not. You merely repeated allegations made by an Employee
of the Overhead capital of NASA. Nothing that Reston does could not be dont
better or cheaper at the Other NASA centers  where the work is going on.
Kinda funny isn't it that someone who talks about a problem like this is
at a place where everything is overhead.

>This Dennis, is why NASA has so many problems: you can't accept that
>anything is wrong unless you can blame it on Congress. Oh, sure, you'll
>say NASA has problems but do you believe it? Remember the WP 02
>overrun? You insisted it was all congresses fault when NASA management
>knew about the overrun for almost a year yet refused to act. Do you
>still blame Congress for the overrun?
>

Why did the Space News artice point out that it was the congressionally
demanded change that caused the problems? Methinks that you are being
selective with the facts again.

>>By your own numbers Allen, at a cost of 500 million per flight the
>>service cost of flying shuttle to SSF is 2 billion for four flights, so how
>>did you get your one billion number?
>
>I have no idea what your trying to say here Dennis.
>
>  Allen
>--

If it takes four flights a year to resupply the station and you have a cost
of 500 million a flight then you pay 2 billion a year. You stated that your
"friend" at Reston said that with the current station they could resupply it
for a billion a year "if the wrap were gone". This merely points out a
blatent contridiction in your numbers that understandably you fail to see.

Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville.

Sorry gang but I have a deadline for a satellite so someone else is going
to have to do Allen's math for him for a while. I will have little chance to
do so.

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 14:37:31 GMT
From: Steve Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orbital RepairStation
Newsgroups: sci.space

The difficulties of a high Isp OTV include:
Long transfer times (radiation damage from VanAllen belts for both
 the spacecraft and OTV
Arcjets or Xenon thrusters require huge amounts of power so you have
to have either nuclear power source (messy, dangerous and source of
radiation damage) or BIG solar arrays (sensitive to radiation, or heavy)
that make attitude control and docking a big pain.

If you go solar, you have to replace the arrays every trip, with
current technology. Nuclear power sources are strongly restricted
by international treaty.

Refueling (even for very high Isp like xenon) is still required and]
turn out to be a pain.

You either have to develop autonomous rendezvous or long range teleoperation
to do docking or    ( and refueling) .

You still can't do much plane change because the deltaV required is so high!

The Air Force continues to look at doing things this way though. I suppose
they are biding their time till the technology becomes available and
the problems get solved.  Not impossible in principle, but hard to
do and marginally cheaper than one shot rockets, at least today.

Just a few random thoughts on high Isp OTV's. I designed one once...

                          Steve Collins

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 22:59:36 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orbital RepairStation
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve Collins) writes:
>The difficulties of a high Isp OTV include...
>If you go solar, you have to replace the arrays every trip, with
>current technology.

You're assuming that "go solar" = "photovoltaic".  Solar dynamic power
(turbo-alternators) doesn't have this problem.  It also has rather less
air drag due to its higher efficiency, which is a non-trivial win for big
solar plants at low altitude.

Now, you might have to replace the *rest* of the electronics fairly often,
unless you invest substantial amounts of mass in shielding.

>Nuclear power sources are strongly restricted
>by international treaty.

References?  Such treaties have been *proposed*, but as far as I know,
none of them has ever been negotiated or signed.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 17:21:24 GMT
From: Michael Robert Williams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orion drive in vacuum -- how?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> Leigh Palmer <[e-mail]> writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> James P. Goltz, [e-mail]
>writes:
>>  Background: The Orion spacedrive was a theoretical concept.
>
>It was more than a theoretical concept; it was seriously pursued by
>Freeman Dyson et al many years ago. I don't know how well-known this is,
>but a high explosive Orion prototype flew (in the atmosphere) in San
>Diego back in 1957 or 1958. I was working at General Atomic at the time,
>but I didn't learn about the experiment until almost thirty years later,
>when
>Ted Taylor visited us and revealed that it had been done. I feel sure
>that someone must have film of that experiment, and I'd really like to
>see it. Has anyone out there seen it?
>
>Leigh

Nope, I haven't seen the film, but Taylor's biography ("The Curve of
Binding Energy") contains a short section on Orion and this test flight.
Apparently it was quite impressi, and got von Braun very excited.

In Real Life:Mike Williams     | Perpetual Grad Student
e-mail      :[e-mail]|   - It's not just a job, it's an indenture
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you ever have a world of your own, plan ahead- don't eat it." ST:TNG

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 22:53:48 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orion drive in vacuum -- how?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> Leigh Palmer <[e-mail]> writes:
>... a high explosive Orion prototype flew (in the atmosphere) in San
>Diego back in 1957 or 1958...   I feel sure
>that someone must have film of that experiment, and I'd really like to
>see it. Has anyone out there seen it?

The National Air & Space Museum has both the prototype and the film.
When I was there, some years ago, they had the prototype on display and
the film continuously repeating.
--
All work is one man's work.             | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Kipling           |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 01:43:05 GMT
From: Leigh Palmer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orion drive in vacuum -- how?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> Henry Spencer,
[e-mail] writes:
>The National Air & Space Museum has both the prototype and the film.
>When I was there, some years ago, they had the prototype on display and
>the film continuously repeating.

Great! I'll visit the National Air and Space Museum at the end of the
month with my wife, who was also working at General Atomic at the time.
Once again netnews has enriched my life.

Leigh

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

Date: 16 Apr 93 18:07:31 GMT
From: Bruce Watson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Quotation Was:(Re: <None|)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]| [e-mail] writes:
|
|Can someone please remind me who said a well known quotation?
|
|He was sitting atop a rocket awaiting liftoff and afterwards, in answer to
|the question what he had been thinking about, said (approximately) "half a
|million components, each has to work perfectly, each supplied by the lowest
|bidder....."
|
Sounds similar to something Wally Schirra said.
--
Bruce Watson ([e-mail]) Bulletin 629-49 Item 6700 Extract 75,131

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 12:52:09 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Russian Email Contacts.
Newsgroups: sci.space

Does anyone have any Russian Contacts (Space or other) or contacts in the old
USSR/SU or Eastern Europe?

Post them here so we all can talk to them and ask questions..
I think the cost of email is high, so we would have to  keep the content to
specific topics and such..

Basically if we want to save Russia and such, then we need to make contacts,
contacts are a form of info, so lets get informing.

==
Michael Adams, [e-mail] -- I'm not high, just jacked

Alive in Nome, Alaska (once called Russian America).

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

Date: 17 Apr 93 12:29:18 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Solar Sail Data
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Frank J. Snyder) writes:
>
> I am looking for any information concerning projects involving Solar
>  Sails. I understand that the JPL did an extensive study on the subject
>  back in the late 70's but I am having trouble gathering such information.
>
> Are there any groups out there currently involved in such a project ?
>
>                     Frank Snyder
>                     Auburn University
>
>                     [e-mail]


I know someone had long talks about Solar Sails early this year and late last
year..Also about Solar Sailing. Not sure who captured it if possible..

I think it was one of the regulars who had most or all the data?

I think I started the latest round or the late last year round.. But the topic
has been around here, off and on for a year or two..

==
Michael Adams, [e-mail] -- I'm not high, just jacked

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

Date: 17 Apr 1993 18:34:17 GMT
From: CLAUDIO OLIVEIRA EGALON <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Debris
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.materials

There is a guy in NASA Johnson Space Center  that might answer
your question. I do not have his name right now but if you follow
up I can dig that out for you.

[e-mail]

Claudio Oliveira Egalon

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

Date: 17 Apr 1993 19:24:30 GMT
From: Joel C Belog <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Shuttle information wanted
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hello everyone,

    I was hoping someone could help me out.  I'm writing a program
    for my astronautics class for assent of the shuttle into a low
    orbit.  There are two things I'd like to know, First, how much
    time elapses between launch and the pitch over. Second, what is
    the cross-sectional area of the shuttle, srb's, and ext. tank.

    Thanks for any information, post or e-mail.

    Joel Belog
    [e-mail]


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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 14:43:39 EDT
From: Graydon <[e-mail]>
Subject: What if the USSR had reached the Moon first?
Newsgroups: sci.space

This is turning into 'what's a moonbase good for', and I ought
not to post when I've a hundred some odd posts to go, but I would
think that the real reason to have a moon base is economic.

Since someone with space industry will presumeably have a much
larger GNP than they would _without_ space industry, eventually,
they will simply be able to afford more stuff.

Graydon

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 468
------------------------------