Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V17/V17NO002.TXT

Text File | 1993-08-13 | 28KB | 777 lines

Space Digest                Mon,  9 Aug 93       Volume 17 : Issue 002

Today's Topics:
                  "Kit Rockets/Launchers" and how!?
                     computer softwares (2 msgs)
                  Do astronauts use sleeping pills?
              Low Tech Alternatives, Info Post it here!
                       Malin Space SS (2 msgs)
                 Mars Observer's First Photo (2 msgs)
      Mars Observer's First Photo (MEDIA WANTS DIGITAL IMAGES!)
                        Satellite of the Month
                    Sea/Ocean/Floating Launchers!
                     Simple Space Plane! (3 msgs)
                   Space Infrasture/Old Launchers.
                     Support the Shuttle (2 msgs)
                    WFPC-2 Installation into HST
                     Why I hate the space shuttle

        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: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 17:33:25 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: "Kit Rockets/Launchers" and how!?
Newsgroups: sci.space

I saw a news spot on CNN recently (today), about the BD-10 Kit Jet. Other than
the obvious use as a "toy", I wonder if you  can add hard point?

But the question is, I wonder if soem one can design, and build "Kit Space
Launchers"? and what regulatory and such harrassment would you have to go thru
to do teh original design work, and certification, and then the person who
bought it, and act as pilot, how much certification and trainign would a "Kit
Launcher"owner have to go thru??

I'm mostly think of the future on this...

If you can have a "private kit launcher/rocket" how hard would it be to buy a
kit, build it, and use it for small launches..

===
Ghost Wheel - [e-mail]

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

Date: 8 Aug 93 03:50:06 GMT
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
Subject: computer softwares
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.space

For those who need inputs and informations on computer software/
hardwares, i.e. Mathlab, Dsp..., below are two interesting
groups to check.

        math.comp.symbolic,
        comp.dsp


Although, these two groups seeme to be Group oriented.

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 06:45:02 GMT
From: Frank Pinto <[e-mail]>
Subject: computer softwares
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.space

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (S.H.) writes:


>For those who need inputs and informations on computer software/
>hardwares, i.e. Mathlab, Dsp..., below are two interesting
>groups to check.

>       math.comp.symbolic,
>       comp.dsp


>Although, these two groups seeme to be Group oriented.

Well

For those whom are interested in teaching "calculus",
there is a wonderful software called TEMATH (Tools for
Teaching Math.)
Well folks....
Try it. It was Written by two fine prof. from UMASS-Dartmouth
(Robert Kowalczyk and Adam Housknecht) and apart from 3-dimention
it (I garantee)will do the job.

Frarank Pinto





--
Frank Pinto (XICO)|Smallness of mind is the cause of stubbornness, and we do
Mathematics &     |      not  credit readily what is beyond our view.
Computer Science &|
Philosophy        |                  LA  ROCHEFOUCAULD

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

Date: 8 Aug 1993 12:02:10 -0400
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Do astronauts use sleeping pills?
Newsgroups: sci.space

NASA select has done some stuff on teh astronauts sleeping in the
STS.

they seemed to be sleeping just fine.  the flight crew have it
the hardest,  they have to sleep  while not bumping any switches
or their heads.

besides,  godon cooper proved that sleeping is quite easy in even
the worst of conditions.

pat
--
I don't care if it's true.  If it sounds good, I will
publish it.  Frank Bates Publisher  Frank Magazine.

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

Date: 8 Aug 1993 12:20:09 -0400
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Low Tech Alternatives, Info Post it here!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
|>milligram off it.  Ordinary engineering companies can build stuff much
|>cheaper than aerospace companies, *if* you don't care too much about the
|>total weight -- aerospace companies specialize in minimum weight at
|>maximum cost.
|
|Sure Henry, cast iron is our specialty. What I'm saying though, is that
|sending a Saturn up 1/3 full because the mission doesn't require a heavier
|payload, doesn't reduce the launch cost one penny. The $2,000 a pound
|cost only applies if the launcher is loaded to max gross. Unless you
|custom tailor the payload so that it masses exactly the max load for
|the launcher, and you generally can't do that unless your cargo is
|some bulk material you can load in arbitrary quanity, then your mission
|cost is not going to track the mythic $2,000 a pound figure the launcher
|is theoretically capable of achieving.
|

I am sure henry can do better justice,  but he's  probably trying to say
that  more mission can be achieved at far lower costs  when you have
really broad weight and performance measures.

besides,  no launcher flies truly full.
i suspect 85%  is a good working figure.  the X/lb is just for
scaling information.

besides,  what henry is trying to avoid  is the custom tailoring
of the payload to the launcher.  rather  just some
reasonable  approximation.

most of our launchers  throw between 20K-40K to LEO.  with the SV
you can throw  up to  250K to LEO.  if you remember,
the SV was also a fully configurable system.  if you wanted
130K,  you used a S1B,  or you could drop the SIVB  and
go for lwess weight.

pick the convenient increment  and go from there.

and that weight budget margin  gives a lot of room at cost reduction
in the payload.



|As an extreme example, suppose I have a vital one pound payload I need
|to launch. I'm not going to say, "Hey Saturn only costs $2,000 a pound"
|and go try to launch my one pound on the Saturn for $2,000. It's going
|to cost me $500 million to use the Saturn to launch one pound the same
|as if it were at max gross. That's my *mission* cost for that launcher.

of course,  rapid response is not the Saturn  nor the Shuttles forte.

As Mohney and i have discussed,  when a smoke shifter is needed
tomorrow  at SSF,  it won't go on either the STS or the saturn.

although i suspect a saturn had a better track record at launch time then the
shuttle ever did.


|Instead, I'm going to look at Scout for $10 million, or Pegasus for
|$15 million, or even Atlas for $35 million. All of them have a lower

if you have the time to wait for an atlas,  you have the time
to wait for a saturn mission  as a parsitic payload.

|mission cost even though the cheapest of them has the highest per
|pound cost. I might even put my pound in a GAS can and get it in
|orbit for only $10,000. That would be the lowest mission cost I
|could find, even though Shuttle has a high cost per pound. It *can*
|easily be fitted with several payloads that can share the cost
|where as multiple payloads on Saturn hasn't been done, and if it
|were it would have to be done as an integrated package that costs
|big bucks and major time.
|


I don't know gary. the  french demonstrated shotgun launches on
the Ariane 4  a while ago,  the Proton i believe is doing
shotgun launches  for iridium  and the Delta?  is a routine
double stack launcher.

if you wnat to get picky,  the  saturn V  was a double stack launcher.
the CSM  launched free  of the  SIVB-LEM stack.  now it could have picked
another trakectory,  but it chose not too.  instead it flew back
and mated with the second payload.

I suspect  multiple payloads to orbit  is far easier and cheaper then
you suspect.  MIRV warheads  are stacked payloads,  and they
were developed  back in the 60s?   and they have to handle
a pretty rough environment:-)

trh trick is keeping the cost down on stacked warheads.  cargo
drops are stacked payloads,  delivered at quite reasonable costs.
so are roll on roll off freighters.  aero-space has chosen
to be on the costly difficult road,  i am not certain it is neccessary.

pat
--
I don't care if it's true.  If it sounds good, I will
publish it.  Frank Bates Publisher  Frank Magazine.

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

Date: 8 Aug 1993 05:04:29 GMT
From: Jeff Bytof - SIO <[e-mail]>
Subject: Malin Space SS
Newsgroups: sci.space

[response to S.H., a fellow Triton]:

>just 400 km (248 mi) above the surface on Nov. 22.  The Mars
>Observer Camera was developed by and is operated under contract
                                         ^^^^^^^^
>to Jet Propulsion Laboratory by an industry/university team led
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>by Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, Calif.

>  Name of the University ?

Probably Arizona State University - as far as I know UC San Diego
has no personnel on the staff whatsoever.

>  How much do the students who were on `duty' getting paid ?

If students were hired, they were probably graduate students in the
middle of the MS or PhD work (in the planetary sciences), looking for
space mission operations experience.  I figure they are under a two-
year contract at approx. $3000/month.

>  What kind of `duty' do they do ?

Lots and lots of vi work.  I also understand that Thanksgiving dinner
will be catered.  They are paid for 8 hours/day, but are expected to
work 14.  They can eat at a large and very expensive table but have
to cover it with a plastic sheet first.  They take turns sitting
inside Dr. Malin's personal Mars simulator.  Exploding head tests?

>  Just for the curosity.

You are forgiven.  I was also curious, once.

-rabjab, AstroZionist Donkey Driver

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

Date: 8 Aug 93 05:56:27 GMT
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Malin Space SS
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.math

In article <2421gt$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff Bytof - SIO) writes:


>  What kind of `duty' do they do ?
>
>Lots and lots of vi work.  I also understand that Thanksgiving dinner
>will be catered.  They are paid for 8 hours/day, but are expected to
>work 14.  They can eat at a large and very expensive table but have
>to cover it with a plastic sheet first.  They take turns sitting
>inside Dr. Malin's personal Mars simulator.  Exploding head tests?
>




   vi: )

   Juan, July 26, 2:30pm......apple talk...
   later,.....






S.H. | Donkey and Donkey_Driver detector

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 16:22:14 GMT
From: John Manuel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:

> If all they want to do is degrade
> resolution, dynamic range, etc., that is easy to do digitally, without
> the cumbersome kludge of printing the image out and re-scanning it.

A friend of mine had one of those printed-and-then-re-scanned images
from a previous mission (I can't remember which) and did some image
processing on it to see if he could sharpen it up a bit... he found
fingerprints!

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 18:40:12 GMT
From: "Richard A. Schumacher" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

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

>I can't speak for the other NASA centers, but the Public Information Office
>at JPL purchased a color scanner last year specifically to scan in the
>public released photos and convert them to GIF images.  The Mars Observer

Why scan photos, instead of directly converting the data stream to
GIF or other format? Was it cheaper to buy a scanner and pay a flunky
rather than pay to have the code written?

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 17:01:42 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo (MEDIA WANTS DIGITAL IMAGES!)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave Michelson) writes:
> Actually, this brings up an interesting point.  What form does the media
> want imagery to be provided in?  With the increasing use of workstations
> in newspaper and magazine publishing, it might not be too long before they
> start asking for the imagery to be provided in digital form...

As member of "media" by virtue of publishing news-stand magazine,
WE would like images in digital form, by email. i.e. NOT colour
prints or transparancies by snail (which works more expensive for all
concerned)!

Ron Baalke mentioned images could be released by scientists earlier
than the 6 month period at their discretion.

Seems to me that these images were pure 'publicity' shots. There can't
be that much scientific merit, certainly not compared to ultimate resolution
M.O. is capable of.

Has anyone approached scientists involved to ask for digital version
of these images? You can tell them from me that that IS what this
media group wants. Thanks.

-Tony Ryan, ASTRONOMY & SPACE magazine published by:
 Astronomy Ireland, P.O.Box 2888, Dublin 1, Ireland.
 (ONE OF WORLD'S LARGEST ASTRO. SOC. per capita - email re any larger! 0.039%)
Tel:   0 8 9 1 - 8 8 - 1 9 - 5 0     for U.K. Hotline (new message Mondays)
                                 (dial 1550-111-442 in Republic of Ireland)

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

Date: 7 Aug 93 21:13:08 GMT
From: Bruce Watson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Satellite of the Month
Newsgroups: sci.space

Earth Satellite USA-33 (NORAD #19625, COSPAR 1988-099A) was launched
from Vandenberg Air Force Base on 1988 Nov 6 with a Titan 34D launch
vehicle. This satellite is in an orbit inclined to the earth's
equator by 97.9 degrees. It makes one revolution every 97.5 minutes
and and currently comes to within 267 km of the earth's surface and
is most distant at 1006 km. It is roughly cylindrical with a 3.0 m
diameter and length of 15.0 m--similar in size and shape to the
Hubble Space Telescope. It is thought to be a Keyhole 11 optical
surveillance satellite and is designated KH 11-8 in Ted Molczan's
list of 730+ two-line elements.

KH 11-8 is in what is called a "sun-synchronous" orbit. Such an orbit's
nodes (intersections of the orbit plane with the earth's equatorial
plane) precess, due to the earth's equatorial bulge, at the same rate
as the earth's revolution about the sun. This causes the satellite to
pass over a place on the earth's surface at approximately the same
local time at that place (a favorable situation for an earth
resources or surveillance mission). In this orbit it can be seen only
during the summer when the sun's rays shine over the pole. In the north
hemisphere we are now well into summer and KH 11-8 will be visible
for the next month or so. It can be seen around 10:20 pm +/- 50 min
(your daylight savings time zone) traveling from SSE to NNW on its
way to the other side of the earth where it is 10:20 am (or so) local
time.

Unlike KH11-8's older brother KH11-6, KH11-8 still has fuel for
maneuvering and changes its orbit frequently. The orbit change
is a repositioning of the orientation of the ellipse and a lowering
of perigee. Inclination changes little.

I have observed KH11-8 from Denver 12 times the last four summers
mainly at magnitude +2 with a variation of about 1 in visual magnitude
from pass to pass.

KH 11-8         15.0  3.0  0.0  4.6
1 19625U 88099  A 93210.14283180  .00013300  00000-0  13778-3 0    08
2 19625  97.9201 273.3573 0527429 314.1837  45.8162 14.77718520    07
--
Bruce Watson ([e-mail])

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 04:43:00 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Sea/Ocean/Floating Launchers!
Newsgroups: sci.space

What ever happened to the project/idea of using the sea or a lake based system
of launching rockets, and then use something like modified Polarises (or
Polaris 2?)..

Also what about the idea someone once had, c.1939 or so, of a floating launch
pad. Kind of like a oil derrick, but instead of oil exploration, you use it for
lauching satellites into orbit.. (the idea actually was for floating air ports
and the distances between america and europe..

One way to get around many of the problems of commericial wants, as well as
distance/safety and such..
You can anchor the launch site, on either coast, if the launcher goes bad, well
you will probably have plenty of sea/ocean to have it drop into. Also You can
charge peopel to get to the station, and security is easier, and less problems
with birds, and such. Of course the might haev to figure out a way to cool
down the exchaust (to keep the eco-nuts happy)..

===
Ghost Wheel - [e-mail]

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

Date: 8 Aug 1993 00:32:54 -0600
From: "Mr.HolierThanThou" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Simple Space Plane!
Newsgroups: sci.space

        Try working with this:


           The space plane's rocket engine starts and pushes
        the plane to Mach 1 and shuts down, at this point the
        plane's ramjet starts and gets the plane to Mach 6-8
        at about 31 km and shuts down as the rocket starts
        again. Use a thrust to mass ratio of 1:1 to start
        with. And the engine is the RD 171.


        RD 171

        fuel: kerosene and LOX
        mass: 8755 kg
        thrust: 7903.77 kN vac  7256.56 kN sl
        spimpulse: 308 sec sl  337 sec vac



        And for the real adventurous the heat sheild is about
        3.28 kg/m^2, as for tanks and internal structures I
        couldn't even guess.

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

Date: 8 Aug 93 08:13:33 GMT
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Simple Space Plane!
Newsgroups: sci.space

What was your question ?

How did you design that exercises ?

Must be somewhere you can get data?

Would you describle how did you get the data ?
And where did you get them?

Are you also one of the inter_net or somebody were using you ?

I know the internal stucture.
Perhaps, you may not wish to hear about.
It is the most stunning one.


S.H. |  " I only speak for myself ! "
     |  I heard such claim or discliam million times.
     |
     |  _" History of united_K"

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

Date: 8 Aug 93 12:14:26 GMT
From: Paul Dietz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Simple Space Plane!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <2426mm$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mr.HolierThanThou) writes:
>       Try working with this:

>          The space plane's rocket engine starts and pushes
>       the plane to Mach 1 and shuts down, at this point the
>       plane's ramjet starts and gets the plane to Mach 6-8
>       at about 31 km and shuts down as the rocket starts
>       again. Use a thrust to mass ratio of 1:1 to start
>       with. And the engine is the RD 171.

(figures deleted)

Hell, why bother with the ramjet?  With that performance, the RD 171
(?)  should be able to serve in an SSTO.  If engines must deliver a
total delta-V of 10000 m/s, and the Isp is 308 during the first 3000
m/s and 337 during the last 7000 m/s, then the mass ratio is 23, which
should be achievable with lightweight tanks (the volume required is
actually less for a given burnout mass than in a LOX/LH2 SSTO,
although more/larger engines are needed to deliver the higher liftoff
thrust.)

A dual-engine SSTO using both an RD 171 and LOX/hydrogen engines could
do even better.  Folks have looked at this and dual-fuel engines for
decades in SSTOs.

I really don't understand this obsession with jets and wings.

        Paul F. Dietz
        [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 04:06:31 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Infrasture/Old Launchers.
Newsgroups: sci.space

Here is how it works: Atleast how to get into space and such, namely
commericial space.. Is to sell off many of the old launchers (atlas/titan and
such), to get the cost of launchers down, and then as the old launchers wear
out, and such, you then start building newer model lauchers.

Namely build the infrastruture then worry about what you are using for the
launcher.. Basically worry about having cloths before you worry about which
raybans to wear.. for without a infrastructure, all you have is a bunch of
parts, and parts is parts, aint it??

===
Ghost Wheel - [e-mail]

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

Date: 8 Aug 93 03:20:17 GMT
From: Rob Schultz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Support the Shuttle
Newsgroups: sci.space

Pat ([e-mail]) wrote:

: It's the Ken program re-implemented with an even more
: aggressive tone.

You think they managed to get the "spreadsheet generator" subroutine to
work the time? :-)

--
Rob Schultz     |                       | There is no such thing as over-kill...
[e-mail] |                       |               ...only under-targeting.

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

Date: 8 Aug 1993 11:58:06 -0400
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Support the Shuttle
Newsgroups: sci.space

no.
--
I don't care if it's true.  If it sounds good, I will
publish it.  Frank Bates Publisher  Frank Magazine.

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

Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1993 18:05:02 +0000
From: Chris Marriott <[e-mail]>
Subject: WFPC-2 Installation into HST
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>
>What kind of mission are you doing ?
>
>Below is your message:
>
>=====================================================================
>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Ron Baalke) writes:
>From the "JPL Universe"
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>             ???
>
>July 16, 1993
>
>Putting WF/PC-2 in place may require the hands of a surgeon
>By Diane Ainsworth

[ lots of stuff deleted]

MUST you quote 150 lines of message in order to ask a 1-line question?

Chris
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Chris Marriott                           | [e-mail]    |
| Warrington, UK                           | [e-mail]  |
| Save the whales.  Collect the whole set. | CompuServe: 100113,1140     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Date: 8 Aug 93 04:32:18 GMT
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why I hate the space shuttle
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dan Newman) writes:


>>>There are airliners that don't have big wings.  (Hint:  Chinook.)

>>I thought those big things on top that go round and round were called
>>rotary wings.

>Bad choice of flight vehicle.  The RAAF found its Chinooks (C models) to
>be the most expensive aircraft it ever operated, had to keep about half
>its fleet in storage because it couldn't keep up the supply of spares
>and highly trained technicians, and in general had life cycle costs
>orders of magnitude greater than the initial purchase price indicated.


It was because highly trained technicians simply did not do any better
job than technicians who had min experience but can adapitively learn to
perform well. Quite often, many experts did their work to *demonstrate*
their techniques instead of solving problem.

>If this is meant to exemplify DC-X's future, MD should stop work now.

 What is MD ?

 There must be lots of gain back for them if they did not stop.




>Dan Newman                                        [e-mail]
>Sydney NSW 2006



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


To: [e-mail],
        [e-mail]
Xref: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu sci.space:68666
Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!network.ucsd.edu!sdcc12!imath1!sr600uab
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Mars Observer's First Photo
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 8 Aug 93 01:42:42 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Lines: 74
Nntp-Posting-Host: sdcc16.ucsd.edu
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes...
>>Also, note that the scientists have proprietary rights to
>>the science data for one year. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

     Do they ?

>They may release the images before that at their own discretion.
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     Really?   Are you a scientist ?


>This grace period varies by mission but it is normally one year.  I just
>found out for the Mars Observer mission the grace period is 6 months.


     Longer than  FLT ?

      ___    _____     ___
>    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
>    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
> ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | When given a choice betwee


=====================================

Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
Subject: Re: Mars Observer GIF Image
Summary:
Expires:
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender:
Followup-To:sci.math
Distribution: world
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Keywords: Mars Observer, JPL

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:
>
>                         ==========================
>                           MARS OBSERVER GIF IMAGE
>                               August 6, 1993
>                         ==========================

>just 400 km (248 mi) above the surface on Nov. 22.  The Mars
>Observer Camera was developed by and is operated under contract
                                         ^^^^^^^^
>to Jet Propulsion Laboratory by an industry/university team led
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>by Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, Calif.

  Name of the University ?

  How much do the students who were on `duty' getting paid ?

  What kind of `duty' do they do ?

  Just for the curosity.


>     ___    _____     ___
>    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
>    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |



S.H. | " Reading the stories of KGB is always exciting."
     | " A trip to explore the United_K - KGB, KKK... is worth millions."

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

End of Space Digest Volume 17 : Issue 002
------------------------------