Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V16_9/V16NO947.TXT

Text File | 1993-08-03 | 29KB | 708 lines

Space Digest                Fri, 30 Jul 93       Volume 16 : Issue 947

Today's Topics:
                              11 planets
             Apologies to Phil... (was Perseid publicity)
                  Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 at Jupiter
                   Consoldiation of NASA stations!
                                 DC-X
            DC-X Prophets and associated problems (3 msgs)
               Found your own dark-sky nation? (2 msgs)
                          Happy B-day NASA!
                              Kelly Act
              Low Tech Alternatives, Info Post it here!
                    M31 - One black hole? (2 msgs)
                            Outerspace....
                          Perseid publicity
            Test Stands at MSFC (Was Re: Room in the VAB?)
                Why I hate the space shuttle (2 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: 29 Jul 1993 17:05:38 GMT
From: Jeff Foust <[e-mail]>
Subject: 11 planets
Newsgroups: sci.space

In a recent article [e-mail] (Steven Reardon) writes:
>In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>Well, actually, there *is* currently a planet beyond Pluto, isn't
>>there?  I think it's called 'Neptune'.
>
>Yep, until 1999.  Which, if I'm remembering right, is also about the time
>Pluto's atmosphere will collapse.  Part of the reason behind sending two
>cheap, short-development-time probes at Pluto before then is so we can have
>a look at the atmosphere.

Actually, Pluto's atmosphere shouldn't collapse until the early 21st century.

A good thing, too, since the two PFF spacecraft won't arrive at Pluto until
2006-2008 or so (depending on the date of launch and flight time).

--
Jeff Foust                "'Quality' with a capital 'K'"
Grad Student, Planetary Science, MIT     -- David Letterman's promise
[e-mail]                to viewers
[using my Caltech account until I get one on Athena]

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

Date: 30 Jul 1993 00:23:16 GMT
From: "George F. Krumins" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Apologies to Phil... (was Perseid publicity)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

[e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:

>[e-mail] (George F. Krumins) writes:

>>[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

>>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:

>>>It makes a difference, but not that much since crime in our cities
>>>is also common in daylight. It's mostly of psychological value.
>>>But that doesn't make the demand for it any less real.

>It looks like I wrote that, but I didn't. For the record, it was
>Gary.

>Not that I agree/disagree/whatever...

Sorry about that.  I realised my mistake too late.
George Krumins
--
Pufferfish Observatory         |^^^^^\^^^^|     The Universe had its origin
[e-mail]       ^^^/\ \^^^      in two hockeysticks colliding
                                  / /\ \
       "Home of the Hockeystick  /_/  \_\  Memorial Telescope"

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

Date: 29 Jul 93 09:58:03 GMT
From: "David H. Levy" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 at Jupiter
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

Thanks for posting the summary from the MacLean's article.  I haven't
seen
it yet, so I don't know what camera I was holding-- I would guess that
it was a telescope though.  I definitely need to get a copy!

David

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

Date: 29 Jul 1993 20:53:20 GMT
From: Doug Mohney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Consoldiation of NASA stations!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>CLOSE soem of those space related bases that have no real reason to exist (I
>>know there is soem) and consolidate the rest

>While this makes sense, it's politically improbable.

Hmm, don't count on that.

>... Congress couldn't bring itself to close bases in their home
>districts, but they were under intense pressure to cut the defense budget.
>So they created the base closure commission and limited themselves to
>approving or disapproving the entire list. That gave them the political
>out with the folks back home, but they sure don't like it. They're unlikely
>to do it again over the piddling sums involved in NASA. The heat was too
>great.

ACTUALLY, there have been proposals to enter into another mutual suicide pact,
er commission-like arrangements to cut pork projects.  It's sad that Congress
wants to cop out on their responsibility, but due to the way the system(tm) is
setup, I can't really say I blame them.

I think either the Baltimore Sun or NY Times had an editorial noting who on the
Congress cooked up the idea for non-military expenditures.  Maybe they'll go
after farm subsidies.  By golly, lord knows we need more mohair. I understand
Pat and Allen need their wool shirts under their tunics :)

>The Cape is the worst spot for launches, except for any other spot in
>the continental US.

Hmm, we could always re-steal, er build some facility in Panama (since this is
idle speculation :-)

By golly, old-fashioned Banana Republic Diplomacy! Ahh *pull out Cuban cigar*


     January 1993 - John Scully embraces Bill Clinton.
     July 1993    - Apple Computer lays off 2500 workers, posts $188
            million dollar loss.

  -- >                  [e-mail]                        < --

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 23:50:29 GMT
From: Innocent Bystander <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) Pontificated:
>
>+----------------------90 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX-----------------------+
                        ^^ Is this correct or a typo?



/~~~(-: James T. Green :-)~~~~(-: [e-mail] :-)~~~\
|  I didn't do it! Nobody saw me do it! You can't prove anything!  |
|                                        <Bart Simpson>            |

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

Date: 29 Jul 1993 22:44:53 GMT
From: Josh Hopkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X Prophets and associated problems
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Pat) writes:

>Most payloads don't need to be returned.

Most large ones don't.  Many small ones do shuttle middeck or Spacehab
experiments.  Many of these also need some human intervention on orbit (though
I'm not going to argue that they all require enough to justify shuttle).

>Look at ALexis,  pound for pound the same price as a GAS Can,

The launch costs of Alexis (which is what we're talking about) couldn't
possibly be similar to the price on a GAS can.  The _costs_ may be similar but
the prices are far lower on GAS cans.

>Look at Skylab.  it did far more bio-science work then shuttle will
>in it's entire program life.

Pat, I really hope you have some numbers to back this up because I really doubt
that it is true.  I'm always happy to be proven wrong, but I like to see
evidence.

--
Josh Hopkins                                          [e-mail]
     "Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results,
                 but that's not why we do it."
            -R. Feynman

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

Date: 29 Jul 1993 22:57:33 GMT
From: Josh Hopkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X Prophets and associated problems
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

>>the Senators from Lockheed and Rockwell won't see it as a credible
>>threat either. Just tell them about 200 flights a year. They'll laugh
>>all the way to the conference committee.

>They aren't laughing Gary. Lockheed has a very active SSTO effort going
>on. Both submitted proposals to SDIO saying it was possible. They think
>it can be done, why don't you?              ^^
 ^^
Ah, the ever flexible word "it."  What Gary commented on is the proposed 200
flights per year from a first generation VTOL SSTO.  What Lockheed and
Rockwell (and Boeing and Grumman and General Dynamics and Chrysler and GE
and ...) have suggested in possible is a first generation vehicle with positive
payload and reasonable price.  For that matter, I haven't seen McDonnell
Douglas advertising the price and flight rates you've been espousing Allen.
Can you point to some references?

--
Josh Hopkins                                          [e-mail]
     "Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results,
                 but that's not why we do it."
            -R. Feynman

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1993 00:43:33 GMT
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC-X Prophets and associated problems
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <239kkt$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Josh Hopkins) writes:

>>on. Both submitted proposals to SDIO saying it was possible. They think
>>it can be done, why don't you?              ^^

>Ah, the ever flexible word "it."  What Gary commented on is the proposed 200
>flights per year from a first generation VTOL SSTO.

So was I. One of the requirements placed on SSRT by BMDO at the very
beginning was max 7 day turnaround for launch. Therefore with a fleet of
four vehicles, we get a 200 flight per year rate.

All of the companies who participated in the Phase I SSRT effort said it
could be done.

>payload and reasonable price.  For that matter, I haven't seen McDonnell
>Douglas advertising the price and flight rates you've been espousing Allen.
>Can you point to some references?

The Phase I requirments for the SSRT program.

  Allen
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Lady Astor:   "Sir, if you were my husband I would poison your coffee!"   |
| W. Churchill: "Madam, if you were my wife, I would drink it."             |
+----------------------8 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 23:09:23 GMT
From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Found your own dark-sky nation?
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,sci.geo.geology

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>Uhhh. The original post was meant to be tongue in cheek, now you're
>getting serious. I don't think that most astronomers would really
>want a sea level observatory if they had a choice. The seeing would
>be poor too much of the time.

Well, I've been to sea level a couple times in my life, and the
seeing was fine. Although to tell you the truth I couldn't really
enjoy it that much, what with the altitude making me dizzy and
all that...

(Yes, yes, I know, Louisiana isn't really below sea level.
Just in parts.)
--
+-----------------------+"And so it went. Tens of thousands of messages,
|"Standard disclaimer"  |hundreds of points of view. It was not called
|[e-mail] |the Net of a Million Lies for nothing."
+-----------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 23:12:34 GMT
From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Found your own dark-sky nation?
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.geo.geology,sci.space

[e-mail] (Keith Mancus) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:
>> [e-mail] (Joe Dellinger) writes:

>>>    Of course, it probably wouldn't work anyway. A while back somebody
>>>actually tried to found "a libertarian paradise" on some previously unclaimed
>>>sea-level atolls between Fiji and Tonga, the "Republic of Minerva". Tonga
>>>simply waited a few days while the "Minervans" built up a seawall for them,
>>>then invaded, kicked everyone out, and officially annexed the atolls to Tonga.

>> I read something of more detail about this... apparently the (whatever)
>> of Minerva was outside of Tonga territorial waters... and more than a couple
>> days passed before the gov of Tonga let a couple people out of the jails
>> and said they could stay out if they went and kicked the guys off the
>> island.
>
>  If anyone can point me at a detailed reference, preferably once that's
>still readily available, I'd appreciate it.  I've heard only bits and
>pieces of the Minervan story.

I'll see what I can dig up, but I'm still trying to recover from
three weekends in a row of Great Accidental Deletings....

>--
> Keith Mancus    <[e-mail]>
> N5WVR           <[e-mail]>
> "Black powder and alcohol, when your states and cities fall,
>  when your back's against the wall...." -Leslie Fish

That and remember to make frequent backups.
--
+-----------------------+"And so it went. Tens of thousands of messages,
|"Standard disclaimer"  |hundreds of points of view. It was not called
|[e-mail] |the Net of a Million Lies for nothing."
+-----------------------+

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

Date: 29 Jul 1993 16:20 PDT
From: "Horowitz, Irwin Kenneth" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Happy B-day NASA!
Newsgroups: sci.space

According to a blurb today on CNN, today is the 35th anniversary of the signing
of the National Aeronautics and Space Act by President Eisenhower, which led
to the creation of NASA.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irwin Horowitz                        |
Astronomy Department                  |"Whoever heard of a female astronomer?"
California Institute of Technology    |--Charlene Sinclair, "Dinosaurs"
[e-mail]                |
[e-mail]                 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 21:39:57 GMT
From: Innocent Bystander <[e-mail]>
Subject: Kelly Act
Newsgroups: sci.space

I've seen the "Kelly Act" refered to in this newsgroup a lot.
Could someone post the actual text or point me to an ftp site?



/~~~(-: James T. Green :-)~~~~(-: [e-mail] :-)~~~\
| "I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving    |
| the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the     |
| Moon and returning him safely to the Earth."            |
|                  <John F. Kennedy; May 25, 1961>         |

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1993 00:18:07 GMT
From: Paul Dietz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Low Tech Alternatives, Info Post it here!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim Bowery) writes:

> I think there is some confusion between carbon-carbon and graphite-epoxy
> here.  The densification process that goes into the highest performance
> carbon-carbon is exceedingly expensive and results in the thousands of
> dollars per pound figures.  Graphite-epoxy is simply a higher grade of
> "fiber glass" that isn't all that expensive -- tens of dollars per pound.


Actually, the confusion is between different grades of carbon fiber.
Standard PAN-derived carbon fiber costs as little as $10/lb; one
Japanese supplier has promised to drop the price of carbon fiber to
700 yen/lb by 1995.  Ultrahigh modulus carbon fiber, such as the
pitch-based Amoco P-100, can cost upwards of $1000/lb.

Another mistake on my part: E-glass fiber is not several dollars per
pound.  It can cost as little as $.50/lb.  It is already used in
cost-conscious applications like wrapping gas pipeline pipes, even
when low weight is not itself a primary concern.  I would classify it
as a cheap material, especially on cost per (volume x strength).

    Paul F. Dietz
    [e-mail]

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

Date: 29 Jul 93 21:10:57 GMT
From: Rob Douglas <[e-mail]>
Subject: M31 - One black hole?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <238psj$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mike Fiorella) writes:
|>
|>
|>   A recent image from HST seems to indicate that the Andromeda galaxy
|> contains the remnants of a cannibalized galaxy, but an argument has
|> been made that this is unlikely since the theorized black hole at the
|> center of M31 would have torn the other galaxy's core apart.
|>  So what's the problem with this canibalized galaxy having it's own
|> black hole holding the core together, with the two black holes in
|> orbit of each other, or eventually converging?
|>
|>
|>

That is one of the hypothese.  Re-read the press release, if you can find it.
I found it on sci.astro.hubble.  Here is an excerpt:


From: [e-mail] (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Hubble Find a Double Nucleus in the Andromeda Galaxy


Paula Cleggett-Haleim
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                      July 20, 1993
(Phone:  [phone]

Jim Elliott
Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
(Phone:  [phone])

Ray Villard
Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore
(Phone:  [phone])


RELEASE:  93-133

HUBBLE FINDS A DOUBLE NUCLEUS IN THE ANDROMEDA GALAXY

[most of the release deleted]

    One way for the remnant to survive for a much longer time
is if it has its own massive black hole.  Gravity from a black
hole in the remnant would hold it together against destruction
from the other black hole at the M31 center.

[the rest deleted]

--
===========================================================================
| Rob Douglas                     | SPACE     | 3700 San Martin Drive     |
| AI Software Engineer            | TELESCOPE | Baltimore, MD  21218, USA |
| Advance Planning Systems Branch | SCIENCE   | Phone: [phone]     |
| Internet: [e-mail]    | INSTITUTE | Fax:   [phone]     |
===========================================================================

Disclaimer-type-thingie>>>>>  These opinions are mine!  Unless of course
    they fall under the standard intellectual property guidelines.
    But with my intellect, I doubt it.  Besides, if it was useful
    intellectual property, do you think I would type it in here?
--
===========================================================================
| Rob Douglas                     | SPACE     | 3700 San Martin Drive     |
| AI Software Engineer            | TELESCOPE | Baltimore, MD  21218, USA |
| Advance Planning Systems Branch | SCIENCE   | Phone: [phone]     |

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

Date: 29 Jul 1993 22:29:11 GMT
From: Mike Fiorella <[e-mail]>
Subject: M31 - One black hole?
Newsgroups: sci.space

  ...that's what I get for reading summaries.
 The S&T weekly bulletin didn't have nearly as much info
 as the release from JPL via Ron Baalke which was posted
 to sci.astro.hubble. Unfortunately for me, my site does
 not save very many sci.astro.hubble articles and I missed
 it. Fortunatley for me though, Rob Douglas forwarded a
 copy to me (Thanks again Rob) if you also missed it, you
 can read it in a follow up that I posted to my original
 question in sci.astro



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

Date: 30 Jul 93 02:21:44 GMT
From: "W.D. Seymour " <[e-mail]>
Subject: Outerspace....
Newsgroups: sci.space

 I always wonder when I look up into the deep vast universe from our
planet earth. I would really enjoy to hear from anyone who share any
information a space travler should need to know if they were to travel
into outer space from our planet. Keeping in mind that I have nothing.
>From scratch I must build my spaceship and think of everything to get to
another universe far far away. Hope to hear from anyone who can prove
it's truly possible?

William ^_^






planet earth. I would really enjoy to hear so

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 22:56:13 GMT
From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Perseid publicity
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

[e-mail] (George F. Krumins) writes:

>[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:

>>It makes a difference, but not that much since crime in our cities
>>is also common in daylight. It's mostly of psychological value.
>>But that doesn't make the demand for it any less real.

It looks like I wrote that, but I didn't. For the record, it was
Gary.

Not that I agree/disagree/whatever...
--
+-----------------------+"And so it went. Tens of thousands of messages,
|"Standard disclaimer"  |hundreds of points of view. It was not called
|[e-mail] |the Net of a Million Lies for nothing."
+-----------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 23:05:05 GMT
From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Test Stands at MSFC (Was Re: Room in the VAB?)
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:

>Of course, the difference is a little academic, since HCl is just about as
>much of a problem to breathe as Cl itself...  Give HCl the slightest trace
>of water and it turns into hydrochloric acid.

>My understanding of this one is that Pat's right:  the biggest reason not
>to test full-scale ASRMs at Marshall was environmental impacts from the
>exhaust plume.  They're taking enough static about this at Stennis, which
>is out in the middle of nearly-uninhabited nowhere.
>--

Unless they're testing it elsewhere than the main Stennis site,
it isn't really any more isolated than the south end of the
Arsenal. Especially outside the exclusion zone...


>Altruism is a fine motive, but if you   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
>want results, greed works much better.  |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry
--
+-----------------------+"And so it went. Tens of thousands of messages,
|"Standard disclaimer"  |hundreds of points of view. It was not called
|[e-mail] |the Net of a Million Lies for nothing."
+-----------------------+

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

Date: 29 Jul 1993 16:20 CDT
From: "Windows NT: from the people who brought you EDLIN." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why I hate the space shuttle
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Littlefield) writes...
>
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (stephen voss) writes:
>|> Newsgroups: sci.space
>|> Path: aio!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!usenet.ufl.edu!cybernet!news
>|> From: [e-mail] (stephen voss)
>This is far too good to pass up.
>
>|> 1)It costs way too much for what it does
>
>I wouldn't presume to debate this issure among all of the closet NASA
>administrators out there... ;-)

There do seem to be quite a few of us.  Armchair quarterbacks come
out of the woodwork like termites when a team loses. ;-)

>
>|> 2)The failure of the space shuttle to perform as promised has thwarted
>|> every manned space exploration objective for the next 30 years
>
>Which "manned space exploration objective"s are you referring to?  There are
>only three initiatives that I am aware of, SSF, Moon, and Mars.  Another Moon
>landing would be politically difficult as the average man-on-the-street would
>say "why go to the moon, we've already been there." (if you don't believe me,
>just find one and ask).  A Mars mission would resemble Apollo in that it would

Only if they are ancient enough to have been around during Apollo. :-)
With the way NASA likes to do things, yes, this is true of a Mars mission.

>
>|> 5) It makes manned space exploration look like an unnecessary,dangerous
>|> costly venture when it doesnt have to be either dangerous or costly
>
>Manned spaceflight is both dangerous and expensive.  Even with the cheapest
>and safest systems (a truely contradiction in terms) that can even be imagined
>today, you are still putting people into a hostile environment in complex
>vehicles which are pushing the materials that they are built from to their
>limits.  Like high performance military aircraft, there will always be
>accidents.

So was flying when it first started.  There was political will to change
this.  As long as the situation is accepted, it will be there.  Of course
there are scads of people saying this in this very group.  People die
doing everything.  I am not sure if even the shuttle is more dangerous
than driving.  (statisticaly)

>B)  A statement like this makes me doubt that the poster is even OLD enough
>to be posting to USENET. (flame intented)

Yeah, he probably can't remember moon landings either.

>
>
>Take some advice.  Go to school, get a degree, and then rethink what you wrote
>here.
>

This sounds like something NASA/evil-conspiracy-aero contractors would say.
( :-) :-) Double smiley for the humor-impaired.)
There are enough people who do have a degree who are on both sides.  I do
not have a degree, I have taken basic aero courses and I am a senior
(computer science - I want a job when I graduate).  I have worked for an
aerospace contractor on a space application.  Is a degree a requirement
for having an opinion on how one's taxes should be spent?  I am not saying
I know anything about how a space program should be run.  As such, I hope
I can be in touch with what people who don't know what is possible and what
isn't want to see happen.  There has to be a happy medium between what
the people who pay for the space program want and what people who know
how to run a space program (supposedly) give them.  If there isn't, lets
shut the thing down and channel the money into a program were we can get
what we want with our money.

Craig

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1993 23:09:02 GMT
From: Keith Mancus <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why I hate the space shuttle
Newsgroups: sci.space

>>> 2)The failure of the space shuttle to perform as promised has thwarted
>>> every manned space exploration objective for the next 30 years...

Mark Littlefield ([e-mail]) wrote:
>>Which "manned space exploration objective"s are you referring to?  There are
>>only three initiatives that I am aware of, SSF, Moon, and Mars.  Another Moon
>>landing would be politically difficult as the average man-on-the-street would
>>say "why go to the moon, we've already been there." (if you don't believe me,
>>just find one and ask).  A Mars mission would resemble Apollo in that it would
>>largely be a one-shot deal, with little infrastructure in place for routine
>>trips.
>>Finally, SSF is often used as a justification for even HAVING a shuttle.
>> So, where are these thwarted objectives?

[e-mail] (Michael C. Jensen) writes:
>Didn't you know? NASA's failed it's objectives because Joe Q. Public can't
>go to his local airport and hop on a flight to the moon for the weekend.
>The big bad government doesn't want to let all the tourists into space
>for bargin basement prices.. how rude of it..

  I think this is a misreading of the initial comment.  I suspect the original
poster was saying something more like "NASA has failed its objectives
because it is unclear that any progress has been made toward the day
when Joe Q. Public can go to his local spaceport and..."  You DO agree that
this is the end goal, right?
  Personally, I think that more attempts to make the results (primarily
the hi-res color pictures, of course) of Viking/Voyager available to everyone
at low cost would do a great deal to stir up interest.  Do you really think
that watching a few astronauts recover a satellite excites the public as
much as looking as superdetailed pictures of Saturn's rings?  I don't.

--
 Keith Mancus    <[e-mail]>
 N5WVR
 "Black powder and alcohol, when your states and cities fall,
  when your back's against the wall...." -Leslie Fish

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 947