Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V16_1/V16NO149.ZIP/V16NO149

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

Date: Fri, 12 Feb 93 10:30:47
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #149
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Fri, 12 Feb 93       Volume 16 : Issue 149

Today's Topics:
             Active Space Research/Home Sewage Recycling+
               Censoring Anonymous (was Re: hilarious)
                              Censorship
                              DC reentry
                     Fred is dead again. (3 msgs)
                              hilarious
                           In Memorium, RAH
                   leading-edge anonymity (3 msgs)
              Looking for orbital elements of the moon *
          Molecular Weight (Was Re: kerosene/peroxide SSTO)
                 RESULT: sci.geo.eosdis passes 114:14
                          Satellite Imagery
           Space Station Freedom Media Handbook - Comments
                         where isi old digest

    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 Feb 1993 14:24:56 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Active Space Research/Home Sewage Recycling+
Newsgroups: sci.space

The big thing as I see it,  is that  Advanced technologies may be able
to handle sewage reprocessing  in a much more compact and efficeint
manner then septic fields.

The trick with septic fields is that they use Large sand beds to allow the
bacteria to consume everything.

The idea I have been mulling around is small sewage treatment facilities
that may integrate with producing biomass.

One thing to remember, is this country faces a crisis in water
resources.  Water consumption is at an rising trend, while sewage
treatment is not keeping up with population.  If we could develope
small treatment facilities to supplement the central facilities
we may end up producing  cleaner water..

Also  developemnt of efficient small wate management systems may allow
developement of land currently unusable due to failure to perc
and non-availability of sewer.

pat

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 23:41:44 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Censoring Anonymous (was Re: hilarious)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (RASKU, JASON T.) writes:

> Is there anything that can be done to prevent anon postings in groups that
> there is no reason to post anonomously?  I CAN see some people who don't
> have access to a group posting anonomously but I'm sure that consideration
> can be made for them.  Is there ANY way that a UNIVERSAL kill file can be
> created in order to keep people from posting GARBAGE anonomusly?  There is
> NO reason to not post publicly if you are posting something you feel is of
> worth unless you CAN'T post any other way.  What does the rest of the net
> think of this?

Well, in my VAX newsreader I just type:

   kill/from

If I'm reading something and I decide I never want to read anything from that
poster again.  [Speculation about WHO is featured this way please limit to
e-mail.] Since the "from" line of these anonymous posts is always the same
this should work.

I'd imagine the unix newsreaders have kill filters with similar properties.

But the general answer to your question is, I think, that in unmoderated
newsgroups we don't want "prior restraint", alias censorship.  Each of us
acts as censor by virtue of our kill filters, but that's a personal
decision for each user and not one to be imposed from outside.

-Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute

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

Date: 6 Feb 93 23:14:22 GMT
From: Jack Coyote <[e-mail]>
Subject: Censorship
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy,alt.censorship

In sci.astro sci.space & alt.privacy, [e-mail] (RASKU, JASON T.) writes:

>Is there anything that can be done to prevent anon postings in groups that
>there is no reason to post anonomously?  I CAN see some people who don't
>have access to a group posting anonomously but I'm sure that consideration
>can be made for them.  Is there ANY way that a UNIVERSAL kill file can be
>created in order to keep people from posting GARBAGE anonomusly?  There is
>NO reason to not post publicly if you are posting something you feel is of
>worth unless you CAN'T post any other way.  What does the rest of the net
>think of this?

   Who decides? Why should anyone have the right to censor postings because
THEY consider it GARBAGE. (I consider posts like yours GARBAGE, but I do not
dispute your right to post.) HOW DARE YOU ?

   Who decides if someone CAN'T post any other way?  What if the content of
their post threatens their job? What if it threatens their LIFE? ( If you
think this is melodramatic, ask people on alt.pagan or alt.homosexual about
threats against their health !)  HOW DARE YOU ?!?

   Irresponsible crap postings are everywhere. (case in point) I doubt that
BY VOLUME their are more crap postings from anonymous authors than by others.
USEnet is a cooperative anarchy.  If you want regulations to tell you ( and
me ) what you can & cannot say, go elsewhere.

*  If you are unwilling to allow others to post whatever they want without
   restriction, STICK TO MODERATED GROUPS!

*  If you wish to ignore anonymous postings, USE A KILL FILE.

*  If you want to flame a posting, E-MAIL THE FLAME!

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

  For the net-novices: This thread has been being argued back & forth over
more newsgroups than I care to name. In every case, the only result has been
an increase in bandwidth and a lack of consensus and consideration.  In any
event, THIS ISSUE DOES NOT BELONG IN sci.* ANYMORE. (And no, I'm NOT saying
you can't still post about it, just that those of us who want to read sci.*
postings are tired of it)

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

         This rant courtesy of the `New York Echo' Foundation.
--
   "If we outlaw stupidity, only the outlaws will be stupid."  - M. Kellen
--
"Pound for pound, lame puns are your best entertainment value." -- Gogo Dodo

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

Date: 6 Feb 1993 14:48:40 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC reentry
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
|In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
|>... the nose first trajectory conserves
|>fuel, which seems to be the current tight spot in DC-Y.  if they
|>still have a 10,000 lb margin after construction, then maybe
|>they will skip the flip over.
|
|Unlikely... if only because the flip is, to some extent, McDonnell-Douglas
|technology that they can claim proprietary rights to.  (There have been
|allegations that this is the real reason why the DC design is set up
|for nose-first reentry -- because base-first with an aerospike offers
|McDD nothing to call its own.)



But in the DC-10, is there anything that is McDac Proprietary?
Most wing shapes are Govt property, cuz nasa studied them.
Engines are owned by GE, Rolls, P&W....  ANd control surfaces aren't
exactly patentable.  What McDac and Boeing have are the skills
required to build the birds.  Anybody can build a piece, in fact
LTV builds fueslage sections for both companies.

THe real trick is putting them together.

pat

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 19:53:14 GMT
From: "John S. Neff" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fred is dead again.
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Henry Spencer)
>Subject: Re: Fred is dead again.
>Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 04:17:29 GMT
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>>... Director of OMB Panetta is proposing (and Clinton seems
>>to be accepting) a $12 billion NASA budget. The money is to come from
>>ending Freedom and ASRM.
>
>Latest news:  Clinton has denied any plan to terminate Fred, although
>he has not ruled out cutting it back.
>--
>C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
>effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

According to a New York Times article Saturday the proposals to cut SSF and
the super collider were trial balloons. The Clinton proposals recieved a
hostile reaction from the supporters of these projects in congress. The NYT
called both of these projects scientific pork barrel. If the
congressional opponents of these projects make an attempt to
eliminate them, the Clinton administration probably would not fight to keep
them.

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

Date: 6 Feb 1993 14:51:03 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fred is dead again.
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space

Rumour has it that SSC went on the block too.

However, don't hold your breath.  IN DC, nothing dies.  The contractors
are spending 30 million on PR this week alone.   Look for major ads.

So waht re-write of the NASA act is likely????

pat

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

Date: 7 Feb 1993 00:29:20 GMT
From: Jeff Foust <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fred is dead again.
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space

In a recent article [e-mail] (Pat) writes:
>However, don't hold your breath.  IN DC, nothing dies.  The contractors
>are spending 30 million on PR this week alone.   Look for major ads.

    I don't doubt that.  Friday afternoon I called up the communications
office at McDonnell Douglas in Huntington Beach for reasons entirely
unrelated to SSF.  The person I talked to said he would get back to me on
Monday morning because "we're in panic mode about the space station right now."
Thinking he was referring to the reports of cost overruns on SSF work as
reported in Space News, I didn't completely understand him until I caught the
evening news...

--
Jeff Foust                        Senior, Geophysics/Planetary Science, Caltech
[e-mail]                       [e-mail]
       Final score of the Interstellar Space        Deep Space 9
      Station Championship Softball Game:        Babylon    5

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 22:11:00 GMT
From: "RASKU, JASON T." <[e-mail]>
Subject: hilarious
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tesuji) writes...
>X-Anon-To:sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy
>
>The response the Challenger transcript has gotten
>has been hilarious.
>
>If you guys can't joke about bone cancer,
>childhood leukemia, and facing certain
>horrifying death, then you guys don't have
>the perspective to call yourself adults.
>
>Get a life.  Get *seven*.  Ha ha.

Is there anything that can be done to prevent anon postings in groups that
there is no reason to post anonomously?  I CAN see some people who don't
have access to a group posting anonomously but I'm sure that consideration
can be made for them.  Is there ANY way that a UNIVERSAL kill file can be
created in order to keep people from posting GARBAGE anonomusly?  There is
NO reason to not post publicly if you are posting something you feel is of
worth unless you CAN'T post any other way.  What does the rest of the net
think of this?

                            Jason Rasku

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 21:06:28 GMT
From: Bruce Dunn <[e-mail]>
Subject: In Memorium, RAH
Newsgroups: sci.space

> Henry Spencer writes:
>
> In article <[e-mail]> ssi![e-mail] ("Louis F.
> Adornato") writes:
>
> >What I'm wondering about is the possibility of naming some sort of
> >geological feature after him.  Something on Venus would be appropriate,
> >as all the other features there are named for women...
>
> Not quite, actually; Maxwell Montes is named after James Clerk Maxwell.
> However, the current rule is that he is to be the only exception.  Besides,
> Venus is a cloud-covered hellhole; better RAH should get something with a
> view of open space.


        For RAH (Robert A. Heinlein) I would suggest a major feature on
Ganymede.  The dream of colonizing a new world which is ***not*** a planet is
explored in his "Farmer in the Sky", which takes place on this satellite of
Jupiter.

--
Bruce Dunn    Vancouver, Canada   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 20:18:01 GMT
From: Steve Gardner <[e-mail]>
Subject: leading-edge anonymity
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>No.  Instead, it gets you all the credibility that an anonymous
>posting deserves -- i.e., none.
    I don't agree.  Although I have never posted anonymously myself
    I think others might legitimately use it.  There are many cases
    where something has to be revealed but the revealer cannot
    accept the consequences of pissing off the powerful.  Anonymity
    is the great equalizer--kind of like Mr. Colt's invention.
    This is why the powerful and their spear carriers and sympathizers
    resent anonymous posts.  I expect that anything that threatens the
    status quo and tends to equalize power will be opposed by some folks.
    Needless to say, even today the powerful are out to ban Mr. Colt's
    invention in this country, All I got to say is get used to it,
    it won't go away.

    On a side note, when can we get off the crying about the the infamous
    Challenger post.  I missed it but I can't imagine why people are
    so emotional about it. What does it change? We already know that
    those people are dead.  The circumstances of the last moments of
    their lives are far less important than the reason for their death.
    We know they died because of incompetence and political favor
    currying at NASA.  Some people speak in hushed tones about the space
    program and of astronauts as if they were some sort of ubermensch
    and more deserving of respect and awe than the rest of us.  Get a
    life trekkies. Grow up and get off the space kick.  Its over.
    The great manned space dream-adventure is over. You can wake up now
    and find a new topic to    go ballistic over.


                            smg

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 20:25:35 GMT
From: Steve Gardner <[e-mail]>
Subject: leading-edge anonymity
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dances with Drums) writes:
>The idea that you have to have 'courage' to post non-anonymously is
>some sorta macho game: "if you were a 'real man' you would sign your
>name (so we can later harrass and beat the *#$% out of you)."  As a
>general rule, anytime someone tells me I'm not being a "real man", or
>uses loaded words like "courage" and "immaturity" I find they are trying
>to manipulate my behaviour along some lines they find acceptable.  I
>dislike such manipulation.  I am careful to try to NOT change my behaviour,
>(including not increasing the disliked behaviour), since I desire
>to ignore such manipulating actions.
    You have hit the nail right on the head here.  Thanks for posting
    this very perceptive response.


>It seems this whole little discussion got started when some anon
>poster posted an alleged transcript of the challenger crew conversations.
>If you take the attitude that 'nothing is sacred', you can just read
>that person's posting and say "Huh.  Maybe it happened that way, maybe
>it didn't."  and go on with life.  To get really upset about it seems
>to be showing a lack of perspective.  If you don't like it, ignore
>it -- maybe it will go away.
    This is really on target.  Thank you.  I wish the folks who live
    vicariously through the space program would get a life and get
    that trekkie-monkey off their back.  It makes them unable to
    think rationally about what was a rather silly thing to get mad
    about.


                            smg

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

Date: 6 Feb 93 22:59:32 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: leading-edge anonymity
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy

I was reading this poster's post...

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Gardner) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dances with Drums) writes:
>>The idea that you have to have 'courage' to post non-anonymously is
>>some sorta macho game: "if you were a 'real man' you would sign your
>>name (so we can later harrass and beat the *#$% out of you)."  As a
>>general rule, anytime someone tells me I'm not being a "real man", or
>>uses loaded words like "courage" and "immaturity" I find they are trying
>>to manipulate my behaviour along some lines they find acceptable.  I
>>dislike such manipulation.  I am careful to try to NOT change my behaviour,
>>(including not increasing the disliked behaviour), since I desire
>>to ignore such manipulating actions.
>     You have hit the nail right on the head here.  Thanks for posting
>     this very perceptive response.
>
>
>>It seems this whole little discussion got started when some anon
>>poster posted an alleged transcript of the challenger crew conversations.
>>If you take the attitude that 'nothing is sacred', you can just read
>>that person's posting and say "Huh.  Maybe it happened that way, maybe
>>it didn't."  and go on with life.  To get really upset about it seems
>>to be showing a lack of perspective.  If you don't like it, ignore
>>it -- maybe it will go away.
>     This is really on target.  Thank you.  I wish the folks who live
>     vicariously through the space program would get a life and get
>     that trekkie-monkey off their back.  It makes them unable to
>     think rationally about what was a rather silly thing to get mad
>     about.



That "trekkie monkey?"
What an ass...

I would like to tell this poster that I thought the "Challenger transcript"
infighting was a bit ridiculous, myself and that I am a Trekkie.  At the risk
of turning this newsgroup into "sci.fi.trek-wars," I will insist that the
poster broaden his horizons a bit and understand that there are "trekkies" who
do not make unwarranted, categorical statements about other people.

What an ass...


The Ultimate "Trekkie,"
Aaron Christopher
Ball State Univ.

                             smg

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

Date: 7 Feb 93 00:31:31 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking for orbital elements of the moon *
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ryan Korniloff) writes:
>I am looking for, if they exist, orbital elements (2-line) for the moon.
>If they exist or you know where I can get them please let me know by email.

What do you want them for?  Do bear in mind that a simple set of orbital
elements isn't going to be useful for anything precise.  Jan Meeus, in
"Astronomical Algorithms", spends pages describing how to calculate the
position of the Moon to only moderate accuracy.  The Moon is far enough
out from Earth that the Sun interferes significantly, while still close
enough that irregularities in Earth's gravitational field matter too.
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: Sat,  6 Feb 1993 15:36:00 -0500
From: Lawrence Curcio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Molecular Weight (Was Re: kerosene/peroxide SSTO)
Newsgroups: sci.space

Uh... this molecular weight of exhaust gasses hurting exhaust velocity
is kind of a matter of perspective. At a given chamber temperature and
specific heat ratio, more molecular weight hurts exhaust velocity. What
actually matters most, as a limitation to exhaust velocity, is heat
energy per unit mass. (After that, there are departures from ideality to
consider.) Chamber temperture is an indication of heat energy *per
molecule* (ideally, it is proportional). Dividing molecule-specific heat
content by molecular weight converts it to energy output per unit mass.
Looking at molecular weight by itself tells you nothing, and
concentrating on it in isolation just allows people to confuse
themselves. (And I for one need no one's permission to do this:)

As for molecular weight having anything to do with thrust, that's a new
one on me. At a given effective exhaust velocity, thrust is limited by
the mass flow rate of the exhaust gas, which at equillibrium is limited
by the mass flow rate of the liquid propellant or the mass burning rate
of the solid propellant.

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

Date: 6 Feb 1993 18:45:29 -0500
From: Cindy Posinski <[e-mail]>
Subject: RESULT: sci.geo.eosdis passes 114:14
Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,sci.space,sci.astro,sci.geo.fluids,sci.geo.geology,sci.geo.meteorology

    The vote for the creation of the sci.geo.eosdis has ended
(January 27, 1993).  The results of the Call For Votes (CFV) are listed below.

The group passes, 114 yes votes to 14 no votes.

Regarding the group submission names, I've set up
[e-mail] as the e-mail address where normal news
postings can be sent and [e-mail] where people
can send e-mail to me directly.

114 YES Votes Received
----------------------
[e-mail] (Ethan Miller)
[e-mail] (Peter Yee)
[e-mail] (Tom Williams)
[e-mail] (Ranjan S Muttiah)
[e-mail] (Po Shan Cheah)
[e-mail] (Scott Denning)
[e-mail] (Masao Matsumoto Moriyama)
[e-mail] (Joe Cain)
[e-mail] (Mark Warren)
[e-mail] (Raymond Thomas Pierrehumbert)
[e-mail] (Robs)
[e-mail] (Ian Okabe)
[e-mail] (Glenn Meeth)
[e-mail] (Frode Weierud)
[e-mail] (Grant Denkinson)
[e-mail] (Charles N Duncan)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (Bob Harwood)
[e-mail] (Tim Day)
[e-mail] (Paul A. Newman)
[e-mail] (Robert N. Green)
[e-mail] (Rainer B{rs)
stdvax::peipyy (PETER YASUDA)
[e-mail] (Joel Plutchak)
[e-mail] (Mark W. Bultman)
[e-mail] (Jere Justus)
[e-mail] (Dave Peters)
[e-mail] (Forrest Smith)
[e-mail] (Mike Krajnak)
[e-mail] (Debbie Blake)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (David M.
[e-mail] (Ronald Hess)
[e-mail] (Doug Westphal)
[e-mail] (Lori Haynes)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (Phil Austin)
[e-mail] (Loren Shure)
[e-mail] (Bill McKie)
[e-mail] (Kenneth P. Bowman)
[e-mail] (Ernie Cisneros)
[e-mail] (K. Scott Hunziker)
[e-mail] (Mike Fraietta)
[e-mail] (Will Marchant)
[e-mail] (Donald Eliason)
[e-mail] (Georg Mayr)
[e-mail] (Suresh)
[e-mail] (Dr. Mike Daily)
[e-mail] (Annette Walker)
[e-mail] (Henry Selkirk)
[e-mail] (Larry Shotland)
[e-mail] (Steven J. Gill)
[e-mail] (Keith Horton)
[e-mail] (Clement Chase)
[e-mail] (Grant W. Petty)
[e-mail] (John B. McKeon)
[e-mail] (Peter D. Ashcroft)
[e-mail] (Michael Sawyer)
[e-mail] (Steve Frampton)
[e-mail] (Pat Hayes)
[e-mail] (Mark Chladil)
[e-mail] (Christopher Mark Lasdauskas)
[e-mail] (Gregory G. Woodbury)
[e-mail] (Toyomi Sakamoto)
[e-mail] (Georges Buffet)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (Steve Hipskind)
[e-mail] (Dack)
[e-mail] (Alex Neilson)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (Bob Harrington)
[e-mail] (Bob Billson)
[e-mail] (Juan Valero_Gomez)
[e-mail] (David E. Martin)
[e-mail] (Ray Moyneur)
[e-mail] (Todd Butler)
[e-mail] (Gary Veum)
[e-mail] (George Fisher)
[e-mail] (David E. Goggin)
[e-mail] (Kim Suk Kyoung)
[e-mail] (Tsengdar Lee)
[e-mail] (Jennifer Miletta)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (James R Schiess)
[e-mail] (Sherri Calvo)
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (Michael Quinn)
[e-mail] (Adil ERDEM)
[e-mail] (Guy Beaver)
[e-mail] (PENG)
[e-mail] (Yrjo Rauste)
[e-mail] (Gary Dorman)
[e-mail] (Jerry L. Miller)
[e-mail] (Randy Dodge)
[e-mail] (Michael Burianyk)
[e-mail] (Ed Lewis)
[e-mail] (G.R.Major)
dlhpfm.uucp![e-mail] (daniel lance herrick)
[e-mail] (Mike D. Dettinger)
[e-mail] (Bill Higgins)
[e-mail] (Hal Mueller)
[e-mail] (Bill Livingston)
[e-mail] (TERRI SHAFFER)
[e-mail] (Marie Bussman)
[e-mail] (Lise Maring)
[e-mail] (Lynda Williams)
[e-mail] (Terri Wolfrom)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (D. Alex Neilson)
[e-mail] (Steven J. Gill)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (Judy Montgomery)
[e-mail] (Sharon Fowler)

14 NO Votes Received
--------------------
[e-mail] (Richard H. Miller)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (Reginald Beardsley)
[e-mail] (Jean Kirwin)
[e-mail] (Paul J. Schinder)
chance!pseudo![e-mail] (Murray Nesbitt)
[e-mail] (Dave Joyce)
[e-mail] (Noah White)
[e-mail]
[e-mail] (Stephen Trier)
[e-mail] (Rich Kulawiec)
[e-mail] (Eric J. Olson)
[e-mail] (Leonard J. Peirce)
[e-mail] (J R Evans)

YES VOTES - 114

NO VOTES  -  14

Eighty-Nine percent (89%) of the votes received are in favor of creating
the sci.geo.eosdis newsgroup.  This percentage meets the 2/3 margin
requirement.

I would like to thank everyone who participated in the voting
process.

Thanks,
Cindy Posinski

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 19:11:07 GMT
From: Richard Ottolini <[e-mail]>
Subject: Satellite Imagery
Newsgroups: sci.image.processing,sci.aeronautics,sci.astro,sci.geo.geology,sci.geo.meteorology,sci.misc,sci.space,alt.sci.image-facility

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard Bence) writes:
>
>I am seeking information for a colleague concerning space borne
>platforms for synthetic aperture radar imagery that is in the
>public domain.  As an example, SEASAT which I believe was orbited
>in the mid 80's and managed by NOAA.  If anyone out there on the
>Internet either knows of or is involved with present or past
>systems of this type, would they please email Richard Bence at
>[e-mail] to begin a dialog.
>
>Also anyone with any information on side-looking synthetic
>aperture radar implementations on air borne platforms would also
>be welcome to communicate.

There is very little such data before four new satellites went up
in 1992.  Good timing.  There is a major conference on the subject
not far from you starting Monday- ERIM Remote Sensing Conference
at the Doubletree Hotel in Pasadena Feb 8-11.
As for public domain, good luck.  None of the SAR sats is American
due to the sorry state of our space exploration program.

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1993 21:32:48 GMT
From: Bruce Dunn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Station Freedom Media Handbook - Comments
Newsgroups: sci.space

        I have posted the "Space Station Freedom Media Handbook" from NASA
SPACELINK over the last several days, as a series of files (as received from
SPACELINK).  I tried to space the postings out so that they would be received
in order, and so that they would not comprise a large fraction of the
messages on any one day.

        I have had a couple of comments by E-mail that information in the
files is out of date.  I invite anyone with specific information which can
act as a correction to the files, to publically post the information.  The
files themselves were obtained just a couple of days ago from SPACELINK,
which is NASA's attempt to provide up-to-date information for the public.
Most files bear a date in October 1992, but it is not clear whether a file
date in October actually represents a revision of the information at that
time.  Whether or not the information in the posted files is correct, it does
represent the current information for anyone contacting SPACELINK, which has
the mandate of making NASA information publically available.

      I invite E-mail (not postings) as to whether anyone has found this
exercise useful, and whether the use of network bandwidth is justified for
transmission of such material for those who don't have FTP or telnet
capability to get the information themselves.




--
Bruce Dunn    Vancouver, Canada   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 93 22:31:06 EST
From: Peter Curtis <[e-mail]>
Subject: where isi old digest

  Could you tell me there are any back archives and where they are located.
I am interested in finding some missing issues.

Thank you I really enjory the digest

Robert Hall
[e-mail]

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 149
------------------------------