Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_5/V16NO538.TXT

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

Date: Fri,  7 May 93 05:11:02
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #538
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Fri,  7 May 93       Volume 16 : Issue 538

Today's Topics:
                            BBS in Space?
           Boeing TSTO (Was: Words from Chairman of Boeing)
                          ESA orbit elements
                      Galileo Update - 05/06/93
                        HST Servicing Mission
             HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days
                               Level 5?
                                LLV???
                      NASA budget and STS costs
                     Shuttle Landings in Florida
    U.S. Government and Science and Technolgy Investment (2 msgs)
                     Vandalizing the sky (3 msgs)
                         Vandalizing the sky.
             Visas for astronauts after an abort (4 msgs)

    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: 6 May 93 16:41:39
From: Bob McGwier <[e-mail]>
Subject: BBS in Space?
Newsgroups: sci.space

>>[e-mail] (Bob McGwier) writes:


>>Mir already has a packet radio BBS on 145.55 Mhz (amateur radio service).
>>It regularly has bulletins posted by the Cosmonauts.  I used to practice

Dave says:

>Note also several 'microsats' are digital transponders or BBS's. FO-20

Oops, since I integrated the AMSAT microsats, built parts for them,
helped design them, wrote some of the software for them, etc. I should not
have left them out ;-).

BMc

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert W. McGwier                  | [e-mail]
Center for Communications Research | Interests: amateur radio, astronomy,golf
Princeton, N.J. 08520              | Asst Scoutmaster Troop 5700, Hightstown

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 20:11:11 GMT
From: Dave Stephenson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Boeing TSTO (Was: Words from Chairman of Boeing)
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:

>In article <stephens.736693823@ngis> [e-mail] (Dave Stephenson) writes:
>>>... "You can build an aircraft with less paperwork
>>>than it takes to build a house."
>>
>>The most important precident (or is it deja vu) being reestablished by
>>the DCX is the X program management style. i.e. Minimum paper work...

>Actually, Hudson wasn't talking about how much paperwork the project
>generates *internally*.  He was talking about how much government hassle
>you have to put up with to get permission to fly a private project.
>Experimental aircraft are easy.  Large rockets are not.

Agreed, but one problem with NASA is knowing where "external" stops
and "internal" begins. A lot of internal paper work is usually a sign
that there are too many formal structures between parts of a project that
are communicating up, over the top, and down the other side, when the
links should be lateral. Of course there has to be agreed and down
in black and white documentation for a project like a large rocket.
Active communication during a research program is another matter.
Hunter's theme with DCX has always been that it is not a form of
ammunition, but just another steam locomotive that flys. (Its
Back to the Future with DCX).
--
Dave Stephenson
Geological Survey of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thr, 6 May 1993 21:32 CST
From: [e-mail] (Martin Wuest)
Subject: ESA orbit elements

I would like to know what the European Space Agency uses to predict their
satellite orbits. Do they also use NORAD/NASA 2-line elements? If not where do
I find such information?

Thank you for your information
M. Wuest
*****************************************************************************
Dr. Martin Wuest
Space Science Dept.                 phone [phone]
Southwest Research Institute        fax   [phone]
P.O. Drawer 28510
San Antonio, TX 78228-0510          internet: [e-mail]
USA                                 SPAN    : SWRI::MARTIN
*****************************************************************************

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

Date: 6 May 1993 18:21 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Galileo Update - 05/06/93
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

Forwarded from Neal Ausman, Galileo Mission Director

                                  GALILEO
                       MISSION DIRECTOR STATUS REPORT
                                POST-LAUNCH
                           April 30 - May 6, 1993

SPACECRAFT

1.  On April 30, a cruise science Memory Readout (MRO) was performed for the
Magnetometer (MAG) instrument.  Analysis indicates the data was received
properly.

2.  On April 30, a command threshold test and a Radio Frequency Subsystem
Tracking Loop Capacitor (RFSTLC) test were performed over DSS-63 (Madrid
70 meter antenna).  Data analysis is in progress.  These tests are periodically
performed to provide detailed information relative to the telecom command
hardware integrity.

3.  On May 3, a NO-OP command was sent to reset the command loss timer to 264
hours, its planned value for this mission phase.

4.  On May 3, cruise science Memory Readouts (MROs) were performed for the
Magnetometer (MAG) and Dust Detector (DDS) instruments.  Preliminary analysis
indicates the data was received properly.

5.  On May 3, an Ultra-Stable Oscillator (USO) test was performed to verify
the health status of the USO and to collect gravitational red shift experiment
data; long term trend analysis is continuing.

6.  On May 4, a periodic RPM (Retro-Propulsion Module) 10-Newton thruster
flushing maintenance activity was performed; all 12 thrusters were flushed
during the activity.  Thruster performance throughout the activity was nominal.

7.  On May 4, the spacecraft under stored sequence control performed about a

six-degree unbalanced SITURN for the purpose of attitude maintenance.  The Z
thrusters were used during the activity.

8.  On May 4, a cruise science Memory Readout (MRO) was performed for the
Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrometer (EUV) instrument.  Analysis indicates the
data was received properly.

9.  The AC/DC bus imbalance measurements have not exhibited significant change
(greater than 25 DN) throughout this period.  The AC measurement reads 18 DN
(4.1 volts).  The DC measurement reads 144 DN (16.9 volts).  These measurements
are consistent with the model developed by the AC/DC special anomaly team.

10. The Spacecraft status as of May 6, 1993, is as follows:

       a)  System Power Margin -  73 watts
       b)  Spin Configuration - Dual-Spin
       c)  Spin Rate/Sensor - 3.15rpm/Star Scanner
       d)  Spacecraft Attitude is approximately 20 degrees
           off-sun (lagging) and 6 degrees off-earth (leading)
       e)  Downlink telemetry rate/antenna- 40bps(coded)/LGA-1
       f)  General Thermal Control - all temperatures within
           acceptable range
       g)  RPM Tank Pressures - all within acceptable range
       h)  Orbiter Science- Instruments powered on are the PWS,
           EUV, UVS, EPD, MAG, HIC, and DDS
       i)  Probe/RRH - powered off, temperatures within
           acceptable range
       j)  CMD Loss Timer Setting - 264 hours
           Time To Initiation - 184 hours


GDS (Ground Data Systems):

1.  Two Galileo GDS tests of MGDS V18.0 CMD took place May 1, 1993, with
DSS-61 (Madrid 34 meter antenna) and May 3, 1993, with CTA-21 (Compatibility
Test Area lab at JPL).  The test with DSS-15 (Goldstone 34 meter antenna) was
canceled due to configuration problems on the MOSO test string.  The second
test with CTA-21 was unsuccessful due to GCF (Ground Communications
Facility) or CTA-21 problems causing command files to have checksum errors
upon transmission to the CPA (Command Processor Assembly).  Resolution of the
CTA-21 test problem is expected during the Friday, May 7 retest with CTA-21.
The next GDS tests for V18.0 CMD will be May 7, 1993 with DSS-42 (Canberra
34 meter antenna) and CTA-21.


TRAJECTORY

     As of noon Thursday, May 6, 1993, the Galileo Spacecraft trajectory
status was as follows:

    Distance from Earth         206,494,200 km (1.38 AU)
    Distance from Sun           305,613,600 km (2.04 AU)
    Heliocentric Speed          87,100 kour
    Distance from Jupiter       511,783,400 km
    Round Trip Light Time       23 minutes, 4 seconds


SPECIAL TOPIC

1.  As of May 6, 1993, a total of 70260 real-time commands have been
transmitted to Galileo since Launch.  Of these, 65151 were initiated in the
sequence design process and 5109 initiated in the real-time command process.
In the past week, one real time command was transmitted and was initiated in
the sequence design process.  Major command activities included a command to
reset the command loss timer.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Once a year, go someplace
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you've never been before.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 18:50:03 GMT
From: "Steve Wissler,G10,xxx" <[e-mail]>
Subject: HST Servicing Mission
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro

From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Steve Willner):
>
> In article <1s2rpc$[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] (Dan Tilque) writes:
>> Has anyone looked at the cost of taking the second mirror, building
>> another Hubble around it (with modifications for things that weren't
>> right on Hubble I such as the solar panel supports) and launching
>> that?
>
> This is quite an interesting question.  I have it on good authority
> that the cost of Hubble servicing is roughly $250 million per year.
> It doesn't take many years at that rate to add up to the cost of a
> new telescope.  Or the cost of another major mission.
>
> For comparison, the cost of operating the telescope, including
> running the Institute, generating commands, and supporting the
> scientists, is $80 million per year.
>
    However, how much would it cost per year to service this new
    telescope, probably $250 million per year

                Steve Wissler
                [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 23:00:44 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: HST Servicing Mission Scheduled for 11 Days
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> In <1s60eg$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

..

> Except, of course, that you've now wasted a flight plus all that
> development money when you have a perfectly good way to do the reboost
> in hand already.
>
  WHAT reboost????  How did anyone get the idea that the servicing
mission involves a reboost????  Please, some facts here - otherwise
this thread is whistling into a vacuum.
..

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.


Wm. Hathaway
Baltimore MD

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 93 09:41:09 CDT
From: Bret Wingert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Level 5?
Newsgroups: sci.space

            <[e-mail]>

In <[e-mail]> Greg Stewart-Nicholls writes:
> How does this structure deal with those capable of producing working
>software on time, within budget, but don't have a 'process' ????
> -----------------------------------------------------------------

Typically, a case such as yours is a small group of folks with strong
domain expertise.  There is a "process" but it is just understood by
the group.  Loss of a team member can affect the performance of the
team.

Bret Wingert
[e-mail]

(713)-282-7534
FAX: [phone]

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

Date: 6 May 93 13:14:23
From: Steinn Sigurdsson <[e-mail]>
Subject: LLV???
Newsgroups: sci.space

Any one have any info on the recently
announced Lockheed Launch Vehicle?

Are they serious? How much and when?

(all I've seen is a short in the SJMN
stating they're going to make a 2-8000 pound
payload launcher, no other details).

|  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: Thu, 6 May 1993 18:35:51 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NASA budget and STS costs
Newsgroups: sci.space

Steinn Sigurdsson ([e-mail]) wrote:

: What fraction of the NASA workforce is civil servant
: as opposed to contractor

About 80% contractor and 20% civil service, but a handful are active
duty military and fall into neither category.

: [...] and what are the rules on
: reduction in work force for civil servants?

: eg, if say the shuttle program is terminated, how
: much is payroll reduced and how?

Civil servants are hard to kill, but we at NASA had a large Reduction
in Force (RIF) just after the Skylab days.  The rules change annually,
but if the job goes away, the civil servant is out on the street within
two weeks.  Some may be able to transfer to other NASA programs (that
happened during the Skylab RIF); others may be able to transfer to
other U.S. Government installations.  Some will be canned.  Hopefully,
we'll keep the good ones and can the incompetent, but that rarely
works out.

The Shuttle program will terminate eventually.  I've heard various
dates, but I'd guess around 2005 we'll stop flying the old girls.

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

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

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

Date: 6 May 1993 21:03:36 GMT
From: Claudio Oliveira Egalon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Shuttle Landings in Florida
Newsgroups: sci.space

When the Shuttle returned to flight, there was some
talk that landing the Shuttle in Florida was not as
safe as landing in California so, I am wondering if
NASA has already ironed out  these safety concerns
since the last few missions have landed in FL or is
NASA just compromising safety to save money???

[e-mail]

Claudio Oliveira Egalon

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 18:14:48 GMT
From: Brad Whitehurst <[e-mail]>
Subject: U.S. Government and Science and Technolgy Investment
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space,sci.research,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian,misc.education

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim Hart) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>>People who criticize "big Government" and its projects rarely seem to
>>>have a consistent view of the role of Government in science and
>>>technology. ...[idiocy about government going into R&D to help
>>> U.S. economic competitiveness]
>
>Your view, on the other hand, is perfectly consistent -- I want my
>pork, and I want it now.   You have the gall to use our tax money
>to sit here and lecture us on how stupid you think we are,
>and you can't even even tell the difference between your fetid
>bureaucracy's propaganda and history.  In actual history, the the
...[lots'o vitriol deleted]
>
>Jim Hart
>[e-mail]

    My goodness.  Heat and no light.  My momma always did say, "If
you can't say anything good...etc.".  C'mon folks, the vitriol belongs
over in the talk.* fora, not the sci.* fora.  Spare the rest of us!

--

Brad Whitehurst    |   Aerospace Research Lab
[e-mail] |   We like it hot...and fast.

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

Date: 6 May 1993 20:12:18 GMT
From: Steve Lamont <[e-mail]>
Subject: U.S. Government and Science and Technolgy Investment
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space,sci.research,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian,misc.education

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim Hart) writes:
>                                 ... In fact, countries that concentrated
>their R&D in the private sector (eg Japan) kicked our ass economically
>in the latter half of the Cold War as rigor mortis set in.  ...

Whereas the US concentrated on hare-brained schemes like Star Warts...

Followups to where they'll be appreciated...

                            spl
--
Steve Lamont, SciViGuy -- [phone] -- [e-mail]
San Diego Microscopy and Imaging Resource/UC San Diego/La Jolla, CA 92093-0608
"Until I meet you, then, in Upper Hell
Convulsed, foaming immortal blood: farewell" - J. Berryman, "A Professor's Song"

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 16:50:01 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Vandalizing the sky
Newsgroups: sci.space

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

>I wrote
>>>I would guess that the best legal and moral basis for protest would
>>>be violation of private property.  "I bought this house, out in
>>>the boondocks, specifically to enjoy my hobby, amateur astronomy.  Now
>>>this billboard has made that investment worthless, so I want the
>>>price of the property, in damages."  It wouldn't take too many
>>>succesful cases like that to make bill-sats prohibitively expensive.

>Fred responds:
>>Except for one small detail:  I thought it had already been
>>established that this would interfere minimally, if at all, with even
>>*professional* astronomers, much less with amateurs.  Damned difficult
>>to win a case where you can't demonstrate damages, and I don't think
>>complaining that your sky has been 'besmirched by vile mankind' is
>>going to get you real far.

>I don't recall the establishment of the lack of potential interference, but
>if there is none, I'd agree there would be no point in pursuing compensation
>for it.   I had no idea that you feel people are vile, Fred ;-)

Try reading the thread, Tommy, and maybe you'll understand where that
came from -- not being a reference to my opinion on the matter.

--
"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: Thu, 6 May 1993 16:55:19 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Vandalizing the Sky
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ("F.Baube[tm]") writes:

>From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
>>
>> Why does your ostensible right to see the sky "as nature
>> intended it" [..] override the 'right' of the advertiser
>> or the right of the folks putting it up to access part
>> of their funding that way so they can do things they
>> wouldn't otherwise be able to get funding to do?

>This pseudo-justification has been used repeatedly, and now it
>has insinuated itself into the discussion as an =assumption=:

Uh, *which* pseudo-justification?  The 'keep the sky pure' folks want
to prevent the folks launching this mission from getting the
advertising revenues.  Seems like they ought to have to make that up,
and *not* out of *MY* tax dollars, either.

>    Anything that makes money off of space is Good,
>    because it gets our civilization into space faster;
>    it doesn't matter *who* is making the money, and
>    it doesn't matter *what* they are doing to make it.

>Gee, how Eighties.  How retro.

How misattributed.

>That's roughly akin to saying let's let Anaconda strip-mine
>the Grand Canyon so that strip-mining can boldly go where no
>strip mining technology has gone before .. because after all,
>mining means profits, and profits mean technological advance-
>ment, and technogical advancement means prosperity, and pros-
>perity means happiness, and so to hell with the Grand Canyon ..

Well, it's only roughtly akin to saying that if you stretch *real*
hard.  As long as you won't let anyone do anything to make money at
it, there won't be anything much going on in space.  I bet you'd have
signed the Moon Treaty, too.

--
"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: Thu, 6 May 1993 20:39:42 GMT
From: Garrett Wollman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Vandalizing the Sky
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>Distribution: sci

There is no such distribution, and so your article was dropped by a
growing number of standards-conforming news transports throughout the
network.

>Uh, *which* pseudo-justification?  The 'keep the sky pure' folks want
>to prevent the folks launching this mission from getting the
>advertising revenues.  Seems like they ought to have to make that up,
>and *not* out of *MY* tax dollars, either.

To paraphrase:

The `keep the streets safe' folks want to prevent the folks who want
to build a 100-store shopping mall from putting their only entrance on
a residential street.  Seems like they ought to have to build a new
road for the shopping mall developers, and *not* out of *MY* tax
dollars, either.

Are you opposed to zoning, too, Fred?

-GAWollman

PS: I'm happy to live in billboard-free Vermont, and I want to keep
it that way.
--
Garrett A. Wollman   | Shashish is simple, it's discreet, it's brief. ...
[e-mail] | Shashish is the bonding of hearts in spite of distance.
uvm-gen!wollman      | It is a bond more powerful than absence.  We like people
UVM disagrees.       | who like Shashish.  - Claude McKenzie + Florent Vollant

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 23:15:35 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Vandalizing the sky.
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>>> (stuff) ...
>
>>> Object as you like.  Do as you like.  But if you think that a minority
>>> 'right' that doesn't exist should be allowed to stand in the way of
>>> research just because you don't like the idea that part of it is being
>>> funded by 'grubby commercialism', then I would suggest that you come
>
>>  (huh?  this wasn't _my_ reason for objection, but does it matter?)
>
> Ok.  Rephrase it as an aesthetic argument of your choice.  Why does
> your ostensible right to see the sky "as nature intended it" (as if

I never claimed ANY 'right'.  You're battering a strawman.  Chill already.

> mankind is not a part of the forces of 'nature') override the 'right'
> of the advertiser or the right of the folks putting it up to access
> part of their funding that way so they can do things they wouldn't
> otherwise be able to get funding to do?
>
..
>>I push to persuade, not to 'prohibit' and
>>it bothers me for someone to think I could force my views on anyone.
>>I'm just not that kind of person.  Views (sky sights) forced on me by
>>others is another matter.
>
> Perhaps, but where does this end?  I don't like the color of your
> house and I have to see it every day as I drive by.  Paint it.  I
> don't like the cut of your suit that you force me to see when you're
> in a crowd.  Take it off.  I don't like the model of your car that I
> have to look at on the freeway.  Junk it.
>

I said persuade - "Paint it" "Take it off" "Junk it" are demands.
Methinks you are arguing for pleasure.  Reminds me of a belligerent drunk
I know who delights in goading people for entertainment.  You'll make
more friends with a little love, sweet'ums.


..
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.


Wm. Hathaway
Baltmore MD

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 16:57:24 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Visas for astronauts after an abort
Newsgroups: sci.space

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Claudio Oliveira Egalon) writes:

>I have a question that has been ringing in my
>head for a while. What if after a launch, there is
>one of these nasty aborts and the Shuttle has
>to land in a foreign country (Spain or Morroco).
>Do the astronauts need a visa for staying there
>or NASA has some kind of special arrangement
>with the governments of these countries???

I would assume that all the places that are emergency abort strips
have some kind of arrangement similar to what the military does.  I
travelled all over the place and never needed a passport or visa.

--
"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: 6 May 1993 20:54:05 GMT
From: Claudio Oliveira Egalon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Visas for astronauts after an abort
Newsgroups: sci.space

> In '85 a Saudi Prince went up as a mission specialist.

The Prince was indeed a Spaceflight Participant but the
PR's  called him a Payload  Specialist just to be nice...

[e-mail]

Claudio Oliveira Egalon

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 20:07:17 GMT
From: Dillon Pyron <[e-mail]>
Subject: Visas for astronauts after an abort
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Claudio Oliveira Egalon) writes:
>I have a question that has been ringing in my
>head for a while. What if after a launch, there is
>one of these nasty aborts and the Shuttle has
>to land in a foreign country (Spain or Morroco).
>Do the astronauts need a visa for staying there
>or NASA has some kind of special arrangement
>with the governments of these countries???

This most likely covered by the Ditressed Seamen and Passengers Treaty, which
allows crew and passengers of ships that have sunk or been seriously damaged to
enter a country.  Usually, they are turned over to theri embassy, consulate or
ligation.  Of course, one must have diplomatic relations for this to be secure.

This allowed by wife to get off her plane in Denmark while flying from
Amsterdam to Dallas after some annoyance with one of the PWs caused the pilot
to declare an emergency.
--
Dillon Pyron                      | The opinions expressed are those of the
TI/DSEG Lewisville VAX Support    | sender unless otherwise stated.
[phone] (when I'm here)     |
[phone] (when I'm home)     |The TI GBU-28 redefines overpenetration.
[e-mail]          |
PADI DM-54909                     |

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

Date: Thu, 6 May 1993 20:15:43 GMT
From: Dillon Pyron <[e-mail]>
Subject: Visas for astronauts after an abort
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Adam R. Brody ) writes:
>[e-mail] (Claudio Oliveira Egalon) writes:
>
>>I have a question that has been ringing in my
>>head for a while. What if after a launch, there is
>>one of these nasty aborts and the Shuttle has
>>to land in a foreign country (Spain or Morroco).
>>Do the astronauts need a visa for staying there
>>or NASA has some kind of special arrangement
>>with the governments of these countries???
>
>>[e-mail]
>
>>Claudio Oliveira Egalon
>
>I've read that the crews' passports are kept in a pouch at launch, ready
>to be flown to an abort landing site.  I always thought that pretty strange
>since it would be pretty clear and documented in the media who these people
>are and from whence they came.  This issue invites further questions:
>When the President flys overseas, does he, and those with him carry
>passports.  What about military people?  It must have been a nightmare
>having 100,000 passports for US GIs in the Persian Gulf!

They all do.  Prez. Bill probably has a red passport.  In my life, I have
carried a Green one (Military non-duty and dependents), a Blue one (citizens)
and a Red one (diplomatic, oh lala!).  Active duty military on orders travel
under the cover of their orders and ID.  My father flew to Germany under
orders, but used his passport when we went to France, Netherlands, Austria and
others.

Did I say Denmark?  She landed in Iceland.  (See my previous post on this
topic).
--
Dillon Pyron                      | The opinions expressed are those of the
TI/DSEG Lewisville VAX Support    | sender unless otherwise stated.
[phone] (when I'm here)     |
[phone] (when I'm home)     |The TI GBU-28 redefines overpenetration.
[e-mail]          |
PADI DM-54909                     |

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 538
------------------------------