Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V17/V17NO010.TXT

Text File | 1993-08-13 | 31KB | 750 lines

Space Digest                Wed, 11 Aug 93       Volume 17 : Issue 010

Today's Topics:
                   Auction of Soviet space goodies
                                 DC-X
           Magellan Aerobraking at Venus a Success (4 msgs)
                   man-made meteor storm? (3 msgs)
                   Mars Observer GIF Image (2 msgs)
              NASA's planned project management changes
                         Orbital Information
             Perseids...Orbiting ojects worst nightmare?
                      Starlite, Super Material?
                                 Time
                   Titan IV failure. Info? (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: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 22:43:23 GMT
From: Ben Burch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Auction of Soviet space goodies
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey,
[e-mail] writes:
> I would *really* like to have Sergei Korolyov's slide rule.  Do you
> suppose 100 bucks would take it?  (-:  I don't have much money...
> Anybody care to bid on other items?

Bill, if the Smithsonian doesn't outbid $100 for that, I'd be quite amazed.  I
imagine, with all this lead time, most of this will be bought by museums and
corporations who wish to donate the items to museums.

At least, that is how it *should* be.

-Ben Burch, Staff Engineer    | Motorola Wireless Data Group:
[e-mail]  | Good PDAs go EVERYWHERE.

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

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 21:20:46 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: DC-X
Newsgroups: sci.space

Scott Chisholm ([e-mail]) wrote:

: > Consider that any child that does not have
: > access to a computer before she reaches the age of 15 is peranently
: > and most likely extremely dissadvantaged in the working world today

:    Rediculous statement. It takes 15 min. to learn how to use a computer
: for most uses like word processing and stuff.

"Stuff" like a spelling checker, so you'd know you had misspelled
"ridiculous" or "dissadvantaged?"  Some people may NEVER learn how to
use computers beyond the McDonald's cash register level.

Computer illiteracy is a problem in any organization which uses
high-tech.  We have managers here who have had the computers removed
from their offices and have their secretaries print out their e-mail
for them.  Some of this is caused by the crummy user interfaces
computers have these days (not that they weren't worse in the past),
but some of it is technophobia.  Even in the space program, where
computers really are a way of life, few people really understand the
boxes on their desks.

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/DE44, Mission Operations, Space Station Systems
      [e-mail]  [phone]

     "Some people ask why NASA spends money in space.  We don't.
      We spend it all on Earth -- and in the United States.  The one
      percent of the federal budget -- and one-quarter of one percent
      of the GNP -- we invest in NASA is a vital investment in our
      nation's competitiveness"

       -- Daniel S. Goldin, NASA Administrator

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

Date: 10 Aug 1993 21:41 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Magellan Aerobraking at Venus a Success
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

Paula Cleggett-Haleim
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.
August 10, 1993
(Phone:  [phone])

Jim Doyle
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
(Phone:  [phone])

RELEASE:  93-144

MAGELLAN AEROBRAKING AT VENUS A SUCCESS

     Magellan Project officials at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
Pasadena, Calif., today announced the successful first-of-a-kind experiment
to "aerobrake" a spacecraft by dipping it into the atmosphere of a planet.

     The Magellan spacecraft's orbit was changed from highly elliptical to
nearly circular by dragging it through the top of the thick Venusian
atmosphere repeatedly over a period of 70 days, ending on Aug. 3, 1993.

     Magellan was the first orbiting planetary spacecraft to use atmospheric
drag, or aerobraking, to change its orbit.  Launched in May 1989, Magellan was
placed in an orbit with a closest approach, or periapsis, of 186 miles (300
kilometers), on Aug. 10, 1990.  Its furthest distance from the planet, or
apoapsis, was 5,270 miles (8,500 kilometers).

     Starting on May 25, 1993, with carefully controlled rocket firings,
project engineers were able to lower the periapsis to about 87 miles (140
kilometers) which is just skimming the thin upper atmosphere.

     The purpose was to reduce the orbital high point, apoapsis, using the
atmospheric drag to slow the spacecraft rather than the limited fuel
available for the small rocket thrusters, which was not enough for the desired
change.


     Magellan's orbit was successfully modified from a 3-hour, 15-minute
elliptical orbit to a nearly circular 94-minute orbit, about the same as
orbital periods of Space Shuttle flights around Earth.

     Additionally, the project was able to gather significant new information
about the planet's atmosphere.

     In its new orbit, Magellan is positioned to profile the planet's gravity
at the mid and higher latitudes and the poles to give scientists a better
picture of Venus' interior.

     "A historic first for planetary spacecraft has been achieved by
demonstrating the innovative aerobraking technique to change orbits," said
Project Manager Doug Griffith.  "The Magellan flight team has done this on a
shoestring budget in the best spirit of cheaper-better-faster."

     Project Scientist Steve Saunders said that with the circular orbit, "We
will begin collecting valuable gravity data around the poles for the first
time."

     By mapping key areas at the higher latitudes, he said, scientists will be
able to compare gravity anomalies of surface features to understand how those
features are caused by interior processes.

     "We will see global patterns that will help us understand the origin of
major surface features such as mountains and plateaus," he said.

     Aerobraking in the atmosphere of Venus also provided a better
understanding of planetary atmospheric response to the 11-year sun spot cycle,
said Dr. Gerald Keating, Senior Research Scientist from NASA's Langley
Research Center, Hampton, Va.

     "We are learning from Venus about greenhouse heating near the surface and
exceptionally strong cooling of the upper atmosphere, processes which may
affect Earth in the future," Keating said.

     During the aerobraking, he said, it was found that aerodynamic heating
of the spacecraft was much less than expected.  The Venus atmosphere also was
less disturbed than expected.

     "These findings indicate that future spacecraft may be able to safely fly
lower in carbon dioxide atmospheres than previously believed, making
aerobraking a more effective technique and thus, improving the designs of
future Mars and Venus missions," Keating said.

     Magellan finished its radar mapping of the surface of Venus on Sept.
14, 1992, returning images of 98 percent of the planet.  It subsequently
mapped the gravity of Venus with high resolution in the equatorial band for a
full cycle, which is 1 Venus day or 243 Earth days.

    The aerobraking experiment began on May 25.  High resolution gravity
mapping of the mid and high latitude regions and the poles will begin Aug. 16
from the near-circular orbit.

- end -
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | When given a choice between
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | two exciting things, choose
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | the one you haven't tried.

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

Date: 10 Aug 1993 23:15:55 GMT
From: Claudio Egalon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Magellan Aerobraking at Venus a Success
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

Sorry if I missed any discussions about that but,
let me understand what is going on: Magellan's
orbit around Venus right now is  a circular one,
for sure! Now, what is the altitude of its orbit?
87 miles, 186 miles or something else?

I understand that,,

1. initially  Magellan's orbit was 186 x 5270 miles.

2. Then, in order to lower the apoapsis through
aerobraking, the periapsis was decreased to 87 miles
using rocket firings and the apoapsis left at 5270.

3. Then we had the aerobraking maneuver to lower
the apoapsis from 5270 miles to whatever value.

So, what was the final apoapsis, 87, 186 miles or
something else?

If it was  87 miles I see a problem here because
at this altitude Magellan's orbit  will still keep
on decaying  because of the drag with Venus atmosphere.
If that is the case is there any concern at JPL
because of this decaying orbit?

On the other hand, if the present altitude is now
186 miles, somehow the periapis had to be increased
from 87 to 186 miles. Of course if that is the case,
instead, another rocket firing was required to
finally circularize Magellan's orbit.

Could anyone please clarify that to me?

Thanks

Claudio Oliveira Egalon
[e-mail]

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

Date: 11 Aug 1993 00:33 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Magellan Aerobraking at Venus a Success
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Claudio Egalon) writes...
>Sorry if I missed any discussions about that but,
>let me understand what is going on: Magellan's
>orbit around Venus right now is  a circular one,
>for sure! Now, what is the altitude of its orbit?
>87 miles, 186 miles or something else?

Magellan's orbit is now 540 x 197 km.

>
>If it was  87 miles I see a problem here because
>at this altitude Magellan's orbit  will still keep
>on decaying  because of the drag with Venus atmosphere.
>If that is the case is there any concern at JPL
>because of this decaying orbit?
>
>On the other hand, if the present altitude is now
>186 miles, somehow the periapis had to be increased
>from 87 to 186 miles. Of course if that is the case,
>instead, another rocket firing was required to
>finally circularize Magellan's orbit.

Towards the end of the aerobraking,
the periapsis was raised by five small manuevers called Exit Orbit Trim
Maneuvers.  This placed the spacecraft high enough above Venus so that
it was no longer travelling though Venus' atmosphere.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | When given a choice between
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | two exciting things, choose
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | the one you haven't tried.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 00:07:42 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Magellan Aerobraking at Venus a Success
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Claudio Egalon) writes:
>... Magellan's
>orbit around Venus right now is  a circular one,

Actually, no, but it's a lot closer to circular than it was before.

>... somehow the periapis had to be increased
>from 87 to 186 miles. Of course if that is the case,
>instead, another rocket firing was required to
>finally circularize Magellan's orbit.

Exactly.  Once you've got the apoapsis down to something that suits you,
you have to do a rocket burn (in this case, actually, it was several
small burns) to raise the periapsis out of the atmosphere.  This costs
something, but the overall fuel cost is still much less than doing the
whole thing by rocket burn.
--
"Every time I inspect the mechanism     | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
closely, more pieces fall off."         |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 20:48:31 GMT
From: Larry Chapman <[e-mail]>
Subject: man-made meteor storm?
Newsgroups: sci.space

I always thought a big can of glass marbles dumped from the shuttle would
be cool.


-- LSC (aka Larry Chapman)
   [phone]
   [e-mail]

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

Date: 10 Aug 1993 21:33:57 GMT
From: George William Herbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: man-made meteor storm?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <247cgq$[e-mail]>,
Eric Shafto <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I was trying to figure out what it would take to make a man-made
>meteor swarm, but I'm afraid I'm not clever enough by half.  Could an
>ordinary shotgun or rifle, fired from the shuttle, fire its
>projectiles to where they would experience enough atmospheric drag to
>re-enter?  If so, would they be as impressive as real meteors, or are
>they not travelling fast enough to give off that much light?
>
>I thought it might be kind of neat to fill a shell with shot made from
>different metals, and make a multi-colored meteor shower.
>
>From my inadequate calculations, though, it seemed that the delta-v
>from a shotgun wouldn't be nearly enough.  Am I right?

You don't need to totally deorbit the projectile; you don't _want_ to totally
deorbit it by the initial impulse, it won't be moving fast enough
for a really spectacular burn-up if you do.

All you need is to bring the perigee down to say 75 km, maybe a bit
more is ok; figure out the hohman transfer delta-V1 for a 160 km -> 75km
orbital change, that's the delta-V needed.  Which will probably be
a whole lot less than 300 m/s (which shotguns can achive), since
Soyuz flies with 300 m/s of total rendezvous and re-entry burn delta-V.

I won't address the question of wether you'll be able to see the
re-entering pellets.  I suspect not, from a first-order feeling.
Things that size re-enter all the time (meteors) and I think you
can only see multi-kg initial mass ones from the ground.

-george william herbert
Retro Aerospace

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

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 22:28:21 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: man-made meteor storm?
Newsgroups: sci.space

Eric Shafto ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I was trying to figure out what it would take to make a man-made
: meteor swarm, but I'm afraid I'm not clever enough by half.  Could an
: ordinary shotgun or rifle, fired from the shuttle, fire its
: projectiles to where they would experience enough atmospheric drag to
: re-enter?  If so, would they be as impressive as real meteors, or are
: they not travelling fast enough to give off that much light?

: I thought it might be kind of neat to fill a shell with shot made from
: different metals, and make a multi-colored meteor shower.

: From my inadequate calculations, though, it seemed that the delta-v
: from a shotgun wouldn't be nearly enough.  Am I right?

I hope this doesn't start up the "guns in space" thread again!

An ordinary rifle or shotgun would have enough muzzle velocity
("delta-vee" in NASA-ese) to cause a small projectile to de-orbit from
the low Earth orbits used by the manned space program today.  The
Shuttle only needs about 500 feet per second in delta-vee to deorbit,
so your hypothetical shotgun blast should be able to, also.  Your
astronaut would need to brace himself and aim carefully, or your
payload would need to point its "pyrotechnic deployment mechanism"
carefully, but there's no technical reason one couldn't manage this.

However, because the projectile is very, very small, and space is very,
very large, you probably would not be able to see the projectile enter
the atmosphere, no matter what it's made of.  (I dare you to prove me
wrong.)  But this would be a good experiment to conduct.  Nobody knows
exactly what thermal and chemical processes occur during the passage of
bodies through the atmosphere, and some careful science could enrich
our knowledge of this area, to the benefit of heat shield designers and
planetary geologists who study meteorites.  For example, if we knew
what affect passage through the atmosphere has on a few well-known
samples of rock which we can collect after entry, we could better
understand how that passage changes meteorites which we have already
collected.

If your school is looking for a simple space project, you might
think about this one.

-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/DE44, Mission Operations, Space Station Systems
      [e-mail]  [phone]

     "Good ideas are not adopted automatically.  They must be driven into
       practice with courageous impatience." -- Admiral Hyman G. Rickover

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

Date: 10 Aug 93 20:48:03 GMT
From: Kenneth Anderson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer GIF Image
Newsgroups: sci.space

In sci.space you write:

>Is there a gif89a viewer available in the software directory at the
>jplinfo ftp site? Could you send details about where and how to find one?

If you own a Mac, the latest version of GifConverter will accept the gif89a
format.  GifConverter can be found at mac.archive.umich.edu or
sumex-aim.stanford.edu for anonymous ftp.

If you work on a Sun workstation, the tool xv will read the gif no problem.
I use the Mars photo as my background...

I have no experience with other platforms and thus can not recommend
the appropriate viewers for them...

As this is my first post to sci.space let me take the time to say that
this is my favorite newsgroup, I find the mission updates fascinating and
I love going up to my friends and saying "Hey, guess what happened
on Venus today?"  :)

Kudos to Ron Baalke for all his hard work... it does not go unappreciated...


Ken Anderson
U.C. Irvine
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Anderson                           |  "I'd much rather live in perfection,
U.C. Irvine                            |   than deal with reality." -- Kenbod
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think we should tax all foreigners   |  Practice random kindness and
living abroad.           -- John       |  senseless acts of beauty.
                            Cleese     |  -- Anne Herbert
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 20:51:05 GMT
From: Chris Cannon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer GIF Image
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes...
>>Where (ftp site) can I get a GIF viewer for the GIF89a format?
>>
>
>There are GIF viewers for various computer platforms available at
>jplinfo.jpl.nasa.gov (137.78.104.2).  Look in the software directory.
>     ___    _____     ___
>    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
>    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
> ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | When given a choice between
>/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | two exciting things, choose
>|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | the one you haven't tried.


        Along these lines, I was wondering what kind of format the original
        VICAR files are.  What resolution/bits per pixel/color they use.
        If they are greater than 8 bits/pixel, then its a shame they
        are GIF's

--
===================
[e-mail]

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

Date: 10 Aug 93 16:36:59
From: Steinn Sigurdsson <[e-mail]>
Subject: NASA's planned project management changes
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

   In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes:

   >   Why does government procuremnt NEED to be different from accepted industry
   >   practice?

   >Different purpose,

   Government launches a communications satellite, private companies
   launch communication satellites.

Different purpose. Cos want to broadcast the olympics on three
channels, live. Govs want the nation to remain in being.

   >different scale.

   Both use the same launcher. The only difference is the government pays
   tens of millions more for the exact same service.

Come on, the government procurement takes place on a scale
ten times larger than the largest company - NASA is subject
to all government laws plus whatever specifications Congress
made just for them (aren't they lucky). GM doesn't have to list
its suppliers+contract value by Congressional district, NASA is
required to.
        Another comparison is the difference between procurement
practises and accounting required by charities. Different purpose,
different rules.

   Same purpose, same scale.

I give up. So let NASA form a Kereitsu (hey, TRW was a good start)
and procure externally mostly from Goldin's golf buddies, no?
It seems to be the most efficient system of those around.

|  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: 10 Aug 1993 21:26:33 GMT
From: George William Herbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orbital Information
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>,
Elliott Conan Evans  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I wish to put a fictional character in earth orbit so that the view
>out of the portholes is more-or-less a constant sunrise. The idea is
>to have my character experience a year long sunrise.
>
>A discussion with my housemate yields the idea for a very fast
>(~45 minutes) polar orbit that precesses slowly to take earth's
>orbit around the sun into account. Of course, some of his sunrises
>will actually be sunsets, but the character is a poet, who probably
>won't even notice. =^>

Err, there are no 45 minute orbits.  90 is about as low as it gets,
you'd be underground if you were orbiting every 45 minutes 8-)

That having been said, a 90 minute sun-synchronous orbit over the
terminator is not only possible but common; some spy sattelites are
put there for maximum exposure to the shadows when they're longest.

The orbital period really has nothing to do with it, it's primarily a
function of inclination and exact position.

So, Yes, if you want them to see the sun rise/set for a year (or two)
it works just fine 8-)

-george william herbert
Retro Aerospace

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

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 22:34:09 GMT
From: Rod Beckwith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Perseids...Orbiting ojects worst nightmare?
Newsgroups: sci.space

Hello all,

Since meteor storms are so rare, the odds must increase 10fold for an
orbiting satellite, HST, or MIR to be hit by one or many of these buggers.
What do you all think the chances of this occuring are? Can serious damage
occur? What is the relative speed & size of these meteors?

Rod

--
Rod Beckwith     |$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$| The
Datacom I/S      |"The great obstacle of progress is not ignorance,| Nite
[e-mail]|but the illusion of knowledge."                  | Net
                 |$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$|
Knight

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

Date: 10 Aug 1993 18:10:22 -0400
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Starlite, Super Material?
Newsgroups: sci.space

So wha'ts the dean drive?


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

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

Date: 10 Aug 1993 13:20:24 GMT
From: Mark Jeffcoat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Time
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.space

Three questions:

1.  What is the current difference between International Atomic Time (TAI)
    and Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)?

2.  When was UTC last adjusted?

3.  What time basis is used by the Global Positioning System (GPS)?

E-Mail response to [e-mail], or just post it.  E-Mail
would be easier on me.

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

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 22:26:18 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Titan IV failure. Info?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <24867u$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>>The original Columbia was a naval vessel too, and I believe Captain Cook's
>>ships (one of the Discoveries, and the original Endeavour) were as well.
>>Civilian oceanographic vessels are a relatively recent development...
>
>OH wow.  this may be a henry correction.  Judges, please......
>I believe the use of the rondels by the columbian expeditions  would
>count,  and columbus did do some reasonable science work on the trip.

You'll notice I said "oceanographic"; this was not an accident... :-)
Civilian exploration was not that uncommon, especially in the days of
the East India companies and the like.  A fair bit of the early
exploration of the Canadian Prairies was done by the Hudson's Bay
Company, for example.  (For that matter, Henry Hudson's expedition(s)
were commercial rather than government.)  But these folks generally
were interested in oceans only as transit routes and/or obstacles.

>Also, amundsen  i believe was entirely a civilian,  and he conducted a major percent
>age of the serious science work done in polar research.

Well, that may be a bit of an overstatement.  Yes, he was a civilian, but
he was an explorer, not a scientist.  The only significant scientific
contribution he made, that I can recall, was re-determining the position
of the North Magnetic Pole (which was scientific headline news because
it was the first absolute proof that the magnetic poles move).  Even
then, that was primarily done for the sake of getting backing for an
expedition that was primarily aimed at (a) making the first real
traversal of the North West Passage and (b) sorting out techniques
and equipment for an attempt on the North Pole.  (He shifted his
attention to the South Pole only when Peary and Cook claimed to have
reached his intended goal.)  He made no attempt at any scientific
work at all on the South Pole expedition.
--
"Every time I inspect the mechanism     | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
closely, more pieces fall off."         |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 00:39:46 GMT
From: Jonathan Stone <[e-mail]>
Subject: Titan IV failure. Info?
Newsgroups: sci.space

>The original Columbia was a naval vessel too, and I believe Captain Cook's
>ships (one of the Discoveries, and the original Endeavour) were as well.

Endeavour was indeed a vessel of the British Navy; but all Aotearoans are
taught that it was in fact a converted Newcastle collier, not a
warship at all...

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


From: Elliott Conan Evans <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Orbital Information
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 16:10:44 -0400
Organization: Junior, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Lines: 27
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: po4.andrew.cmu.edu
Sender: [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

I had an interesting idea for a literary project the other day,
but find now that if I really want to pull it off I need some
technical help.

I wish to put a fictional character in earth orbit so that the view
out of the portholes is more-or-less a constant sunrise. The idea is
to have my character experience a year long sunrise.

A discussion with my housemate yields the idea for a very fast
(~45 minutes) polar orbit that precesses slowly to take earth's
orbit around the sun into account. Of course, some of his sunrises
will actually be sunsets, but the character is a poet, who probably
won't even notice. =^>

If somebody out there is bored enough to work on this for me, I'd be
very grateful, and if the project is ever complete you'll get credits
of course (yipee, I know).

Is the scenario even believeable?

What if we ignore the fact that he'd be smashing into scads of space
junk and possibly other sattelites?

------
Elliott C. "Eeyore" Evans
"And when the heart of man is broken,
 Give the power to believe" --Dream Academy

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

Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

From: Rob Healey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mars Observer's First Photo
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: SSESCO
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 20:03:03 GMT
Lines: 8
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eric H Seale) writes:
>Has any thought been given to doing a direct (digital) VICAR=>GIF
>conversion and skipping the Print-Scan process?
>
        How about loading the VICAR image in xv and saving it out as GIF?
        Not sure how extensive the VICAR format support is in xv tho.

                -Rob

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

End of Space Digest Volume 17 : Issue 010
------------------------------