Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/V16_9/V16NO994.ZIP/V16NO994

Text File | 1993-08-13 | 31KB | 793 lines

Space Digest                Sat,  7 Aug 93       Volume 16 : Issue 994

Today's Topics:
                         11 planets (2 msgs)
                    2nd CFV: sci.astro.planetarium
               Ghost Wheels & HenrySpancer_Zoo (2 msgs)
                 Mars Observer's First Photo (5 msgs)
                   Mars Observer Update - 08/02/93
                   Nitrogen Ice Discovered on Pluto
                Re-using Old ICBMs as Space Launchers
      Refit/Rebuild old Rockets! Low Tech? Standardize! (2 msgs)
                         Support the Shuttle
                 The Inquisition (The Usenet edition)
                       Titan IV failure. Info?

    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: Fri, 6 Aug 93 09:06:17 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 11 planets

Is it even possible that the asteriod belt between mars and jupiter could have
been an eleventh planet?  Given the extent of the belt, would it not take a
**colossal** force to destroy such a planet?  Would such an destructive force
have repercussions upon the other planets?

just curious.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 13:17:29 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: 11 planets
Newsgroups: sci.space

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

>Has anyone considered the notion that perhaps
>the asteroid belt that lies between Mars and Jupiter
>might actually be the remains of the so called eleventh
>planet of which "holy" scriptures refer?

But then, which one is the TENTH planet?

Seriously, the idea that the asteroid belt was a 'destroyed planet'
has been considered and generally rejected due to scientific evidence.
It is thought much more likely that it is a planet that never formed
at all due to the gravitational influence of Jupiter next door (or
such was the case many moons ago when I was interested enough to read
up on this sort of thing).

[There's not enough mass in the Belt to make a reasonable planet, the
composition seems wrong, and the orbits do not support the idea that
at one time it was all one object, among other objections.]

--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

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

Date: 6 Aug 1993 09:43:38 -0400
From: Ron Asbestos Dippold <[e-mail]>
Subject: 2nd CFV: sci.astro.planetarium
Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,sci.astro,sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,sci.physics

              CALL FOR VOTES (2nd of 3)

Creation of the unmoderated group sci.astro.planetarium

Newsgroups line:
sci.astro.planetarium            Discussion of planetariums.

Votes must be recieved by: Thursday, Aug 26, 1993 11:59:59 GMT

This vote is being conducted by a neutral third party.  For voting
questions only, contact [e-mail].  For questions about
the proposed group, contact Davin Flateau <[e-mail]>.

This CFV will also be posted to the "Planetarian Electronic
Newsletter" mailing list by Davin Flateau.



STANDARD VOTING INFO

You should send MAIL (posts to a group are invalid) to
      [e-mail]
(just replying by MAIL to this message should work).  Your mail
message should contain one and only one of the following statements:

      I vote YES on sci.astro.planetarium
or
      I vote NO on sci.astro.planetarium

You may add a comment, but anything other than a definite statement
involving the group name and "yes", "no", "for", or "against" on a
single line may be rejected by the automatic vote counting program.
If you later change your mind you may also use send in an "abstain"
vote in the same manner, using "abstain" in place of "yes" or "no".
Additional CFVs will include mass acks.

Standard Guidelines for voting apply - one vote per person (not per
account).  100 more YES votes than NO votes and 2/3 of all votes being
YES are the requirements for group creation.


Charter
-------

   sci.astro.planetarium will be a newsgroup that provides a common forum
for patrons of planetaria, planetarium professionals, planetarium
audio-visual developers, and anyone interested in astronomy education to
come and exchange their ideas, news, and calendar events.  Major topics
of discussion that this newsgroup will cover include:

 *  Planetarium presentation techniques and show production discussions by
    planetarium professionals.

 *  Technical discussions relating to the production of planetarium
    presentations (Digistar programming, A/V equipment maintenance, automation
    system discussions, etc.).

 *  News and announcements of upcoming planetaria events from
    planetaria all over the world (workshop announcements, star-parties,
    special showings, etc.).

 *  General public discussion about the institution of planetaria,
    including items of historical interest, and new planetaria being opened.

 *  Upcoming astronomical, space events and alerts concerning planetarium
    professionals, and the general public.

 *  Astronomical education topics and general discussion by both
    planetarium professionals, developers and the general public.

 *  Educate others in topics of astronomy and space exploration.


Rationale
---------

   For the last 70 years, planetaria have been the world's source for
astronomical education, and public astronomy information.  Many
educational institutions such as high schools and universities have
planetaria on campus for just this purpose.  With most universities
connected to the internet, and many more science centers and museums
connecting every day, sci.astro.planetarium will provide a central
place for discussion of astronomy education and the special issues
concerning planetaria themselves.

   More and more planetarium enthusiasts and professionals are making
use of the great capabilities of the internet - the recently formed
"Planetarian Electronic Newsletter" has gained explosive support, and
now reaches many people. sci.astro.planetarium will be an essential
step in connecting these people and institutions, and help astronomy
education greatly.

Summary
-------

   sci.astro.planetarium will be an important step in linking everyone
interested in planetaria together.  Professionals can exchange
technical information, production ideas, news, events, techniques, and
get feedback from people interested in astronomy.  Everyone interested
in astronomy can also get up-to-date information about local public
shows, astronomical events, organized astronomical gatherings, and
more.  The huge success of the Planetarian Electronic Newsletter has
shown these topics to be of great interest to many people (in fact,
the Newsletter has so many subscribers and is so large in content, it
is moving to regional distribution).  To accomplish all of these goals
with thousands of planetaria professionals all over the globe, the
creation of sci.astro.planetarium is essential.


Bounce List - as of 08/4/93 you should have recieved a mail ACK on
your vote.  These are the mail acks for counted votes which have
bounced for one reason or another.

 [e-mail]
 [e-mail]
 [e-mail]
 [e-mail]
 [e-mail]
--
Just when we got good at this, we run out of planets.
  -- Anonymous Voyager scientist

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

Date: 6 Aug 93 09:50:05 GMT
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ghost Wheels & HenrySpancer_Zoo
Newsgroups: sci.space

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


>>Socrates was killed too.

>>I still read about him.

>I like Socrates. Please keep in mind, though, that Socrates
>was not so much killed as given the choice of committing suicide
>or leaving the city he loved and admitting to "crimes" he was not
>guilty of


Thanks.

But why Socrates refused to escape when his friend mano wanted to help him?



S.H.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 13:11:49 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ghost Wheels & HenrySpancer_Zoo
Newsgroups: sci.space

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

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bruce Hoult) writes:

>>
>>Welcome to the kill file.

>Really ?

>What else are you going to Kill ?

>Socrates was killed too.

>I still read about him.

Speaking of reading, go read the 'Netiquette for Newbies' postings.
I'm sure your site has them somewhere and you seem to have a desperate
need of them.



--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 12:57:03 GMT
From: "Richard L. Rush" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Carl
J Lydick) wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
> =In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard D Pierce) writes:
> =>>     The B & W photograph is available by calling NASA's
> =>>Broadcast and Imaging Branch ...
> =>
> =>And, of course, it's available by FTP, right?

> =It won't be available for FTP until somebody gets a copy and scans it in.

> The abvove demonstrates a profound ignorance of NASA.  For some missions, at
> least, the photos are available via FTP long before they're available as
> hard-copy.


FTP site address? Anyone?

-Rich Rush

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 13:48:00 GMT
From: Tim Harincar <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Rod Beckwith) writes...
>
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard D
>Pierce) writes:
>>>     The B & W photograph is available by calling NASA's
>>>Broadcast and Imaging Branch ...
>>
>>And, of course, it's available by FTP, right?
>===========================================================================
>======
>(Henry Spencer)wrote:
>
>>>That's either sarcasm or naivete; no way to tell which. :-)
>
>>>It won't be available for FTP until somebody gets a copy and scans it
>in.
>>>NASA's PR people are still in the dark ages when it comes to electronic
>>>availability of such things.
>===========================================================================
>=====
>
>Henry,
>
>The images are coming in & converted to a viewable format, unless Polariod
>technology has come a long way 8->......zero's & ones could be made readily
>available for FTP format. Distributing things in a soft manner is so much
>quicker, nah that would make to much sense, besides, the Postal service
>must love their archaic ways.
>
>
>I tend to agree that NASA is a BIT slow on getting things out. Efficiency
>is so unbureaucratic!

Just what is the format of images when they're sent down? Is it a custom
graphics/compression routine designed for spacecraft, or a dirivative of
a more common format? I don't have my notes here, but isn't Clementine
using a flavor of JPEG and transmitting uncoded? I would think those
images could get dumped almost directly into an ftp site...

--
tim harincar
[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 14:14:52 GMT
From: [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:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard D Pierce) writes:
>>>     The B & W photograph is available by calling NASA's
>>>Broadcast and Imaging Branch ...
>>
>>And, of course, it's available by FTP, right?
>
> That's either sarcasm or naivete; no way to tell which. :-)
>
> It won't be available for FTP until somebody gets a copy and scans it in.
> NASA's PR people are still in the dark ages when it comes to electronic
> availability of such things.
> --
> Altruism is a fine motive, but if you   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
> want results, greed works much better.  |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry
==============================================================================
Not always true.  As I recall, Ron Baalke has on occation provided
images for ftp shortly after an announcement.  I assume that he scans
itimself, which, therefore depends on his free time.  But I've
gotten a few images while waiting for the mail to arrive.


J. Scott Miller, Program Coordinator
Rauch Memorial Planetarium
University of Louisville
[e-mail]

P.S.  I do not mean to imply the Ron is one of NASA's PR people, but
that he has provided this group with quite a bit of info for someone
that is as busy as he seems to be.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 14:22:50 GMT
From: "Anthony A. Datri" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

>The abvove demonstrates a profound ignorance of NASA.  For some missions, at
>least, the photos are available via FTP long before they're available as
>hard-copy.

The claim made at Gaspra was that various funding agencies deserved the first
crack at images.
--

======================================================================8--<

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

Date: 6 Aug 93 15:46:07 GMT
From: "S.H." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.math,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard L. Rush) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Carl
>J Lydick) wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>> =In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard D Pierce) writes:
>> =>>     The B & W photograph is available by calling NASA's
>> =>>Broadcast and Imaging Branch ...
>> =>
>> =>And, of course, it's available by FTP, right?
>
>> =It won't be available for FTP until somebody gets a copy and scans it in.
>
>> The abvove demonstrates a profound ignorance of NASA.  For some missions, at
>> least, the photos are available via FTP long before they're available as
>> hard-copy.
>
>
>FTP site address? Anyone?
>
>-Rich Rush


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


    I see. This whole thing was set up.

    There was NO such photo!
    There was only electronic bits!
        Excuses were used to sneak,
           informations!!!

    Setting up things, Making up things,
            fake_ing up things,
    All for the same mean: --
         To have excuses to access to a FTP site,
            or to the top research Labs.

    QMW:[Queen Mary Westfield College/London],
    U.K.+++,

        Another trick, a Big one .



S.H.

=====================================================
Watch out, watch out, watch out....
I  have the Photos -  B/W !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
=====================================================

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

Date: 6 Aug 1993 14:25:46 GMT
From: Bruce McLaughlin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer Update - 08/02/93
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (julie moses) writes:
>
>>SM> Question: why does Mars Observer have such an unattractive/unconventional
>>SM> name? With some exceptions (Lunar Orbiter - yawn) our probes seem to
>>SM> get nice names like Galileo and Viking. What's the story?
>>
>Mars Observer Mission -- MOM.  You can't get much more attractive or
>conventional than calling it after everyone's mother! B-)

And remember that MO is the first (and unfortunately possibly last) of the
proposed Planetary Observer Program.  We know that space has reached full
acceptance when it becomes a MOM and POP endeavor.

--bruce

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

Date: 6 Aug 1993 16:02 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nitrogen Ice Discovered on Pluto
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

Paula Cleggett-Haleim
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                    August 6, 1993
(Phone:  [phone])

Diane Farrar
Ames Research Center, Mountain View, Calif.
(Phone:  [phone])

RELEASE:  93-142

NITROGEN ICE DISCOVERED ON PLUTO

        The distant planet Pluto is covered with surface ices
that are 98 percent nitrogen, University of Hawaii, NASA and
other scientists say.  With such abundant nitrogen surface ice,
Pluto's thin atmosphere must be primarily gaseous nitrogen, they
conclude.

        This is the first clear detection of nitrogen on Pluto
and the first clear indication that the atmosphere is mostly
nitrogen gas rather than methane, as previously believed.  Carbon
monoxide also was detected for the first time.

        "Rather than methane as previously thought, it appears
that frozen nitrogen dominates the surface," said Dr. Ted Roush.
Roush, employed by San Francisco State University, works at
NASA's Ames Research Center, Mountain View, Calif.

        Methane was detected on Pluto's surface in 1976.
Extremely small amounts of methane are easy to detect because it
strongly absorbs specific wavelenths of sunlight.

        "The small amounts (1.5 percent) of methane ice are
'dissolved,' or mixed at a molecular level, in the frozen
nitrogen," Roush said.

        The abundant nitrogen recently found on Pluto is a poor
absorber of sunlight and produces very weak features in the light
reflected from the planet, so it previously had not been
identified.

        The observations were made in Hawaii with a new
instrument on the United Kingdom Infrared Telescope in May 1992.
The results are published in the current issue of Science
magazine, along with similar observations of Neptune's moon,
Triton.

        Pluto resembles Triton in size and in surface and
atmospheric composition.  Both have nitrogen, methane and carbon
monoxide ices on their surface.

        Because their surfaces are made of similar materials,
scientists think Pluto and Triton may have formed in a similar
location in the solar nebula, Roush said.

        Pluto, almost 3 billion miles from Earth, is the only
planet not yet explored by a spacecraft.  Pluto is unusual in
several respects.  Although classified as a planet, it is smaller
than Earth's moon.  Pluto's only moon, Charon, is at least half
as big as the planet itself.  It also is the only planet in the
solar system with an orbit highly inclined out of the plane of
the solar system.

        The authors, with Roush, include first author Dr. Tobias
Owen, University of Hawaii; Dr. Dale Cruikshank of Ames; and Drs.
J. L. Elliot and L. A. Young, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.

        Additional authors are C. de Bergh, Observatoire de
Paris-Meudon, France; B. Schmitt, St. Martin d'Heres, France; T.
R. Geballe, Joint Astronomy Center, Hilo, Hawaii; R. H. Brown,
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena; and M. J. Bartholomew, Ames.

- 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: 6 Aug 1993 08:14:43 -0500
From: "Hoffman, Eric J." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re-using Old ICBMs as Space Launchers
Newsgroups: sci.space

    In July 1991 the following proposition was debated before the AIAA
Space Transportation Technical Committee:  "U.S. should convert surplus
ICBMs into lightsat launchers."  I took the pro side, an Orbital Sciences
VP took the con.  The Technical Committee consists mostly of top level
management and technical people from all the U.S. (and some foreign) rocket
builders.  You would expect such a group to favor destroying all surplus
missiles, so they can sell fresh new hardware to Uncle Sam.  Instead, the
Committee voted, following the debate, in favor of conversion, 19 to 12.

    I made all the usual arguments:

    -- that there is a huge, unsatisfied demand for low-cost launches for
       scientific payloads

    -- that the U.S. is losing lightsat launches to foreign secondary
       launch providers

    -- that increased launch capability would help the _entire_ lightsat
       industry grow, including current small ELV providers like OSC

    -- increased flight opportunities would help retain space scientists
       and engineers who are now being lost to other fields.


    I pointed out how conversion could easily be made compliant with the
INF and START Treaties (the AIAA Space Systems Technical Committee, in
1988, prepared a Position Paper outlining a "cheat-proof" protocol.)  The
technical possibilities of some of the ICBM conversion options were
presented (the 450 Minuteman-2s due to be retired by 1997 look especially
attractive).

    But I think the clinching argument was this:  The U.S. in 1986 was
heavily dependent on a single launch provider-- the Shuttle.  The
Challenger accident led to a 3-year hiatus in launch activity.  We should
not allow a similar situation to develop for lightsat launchers.

    The fact is that with the last Scout launch, the only U.S. lightsat
launcher actually flying is Pegasus.  I have tremendous admiration for
OSC's accomplishments with this innovative vehicle, and in fact served on
the design review board for it.  But it is _way_ behind its originally
projected flight rate, and its reliability record (defined in this business
as putting the payload in the _intended_ orbit, not just in orbit) has been
spotty, as you would expect for a totally new vehicle.

    The principal spokesman for conversion is UCLA Prof. Paul Coleman, who
is also president of Universities Space Research Associates.  He will
participate in a panel discussion on 17 Sept at the SpaceTalk '93
Conference in Logan, Utah, "How to Get to Space: the Role and Use of
Surplus Strategic Assets."

    NASA Administrator Dan Goldin has also issued a challenge to USRA,
which Coleman has accepted, to do three orbital missions for $24M.  USRA
has arranged with the Air Force to use converted ICBMs as the ELVs.

  .........................................................................
  :   Eric J. Hoffman      Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab   :
  :                                     Laurel, Maryland                  :
  :                                                                       :
  :   [e-mail]                           [phone]   :
  :.......................................................................:

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

Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1993 17:17:10 GMT
From: "Robert B. Love " <raptor![e-mail]>
Subject: Refit/Rebuild old Rockets! Low Tech? Standardize!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry
Spencer) writes:
> And, surprise surprise, is using them as launchers.  MM has a contract
> to refit some of the old Titans as launchers -- Clementine is going up
> on one, for example -- and will probably get contracts to do the rest.

Another reason that commercial launches turned down the TII refurb was
that there is only a launch pad on the West coast.  Most commercial
companies desire an East coast launch

> commercial launch industry.  You really don't want to get a bunch of
> cheap launches in the near-term if it means bankrupting your long-term
> launch suppliers with subsidized competition, and it's tricky to work
> out a way of using those launchers for non-government payloads that
> doesn't take business away from the commercial launch suppliers.

Too true, this also killed MMAG's attempts at becoming a commercial
launcher with Titan III's.  They have about $8 Billion in launch contracts
with the USAF for TIV's so when the USAF sees a satellite launched for
commercial rates they wonder should we be getting lower launch costs?
MMAG didn't want to do anything to risk its cash cow.  Military and
commercial launches don't have identical requirments but they are similiar
enough.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Love                   [e-mail]  (NeXT Mail OK)
                           BIX: rlove

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

Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1993 17:25:13 GMT
From: "Robert B. Love " <raptor![e-mail]>
Subject: Refit/Rebuild old Rockets! Low Tech? Standardize!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <John_Fleming-040893163438@192.111.236.225>
[e-mail] (John Fleming) writes:
> By the way, did you ever try to price one of those wheat-field Titans?
> A company I worked for did once.  The price was absurd.  There was
> absolutely no cost savings.  In fact, they were more expensive than a
> new LV.
Like I said in one of my earlier posts, there is no launch pad suitable
for your launch requirements.  You not only had to buy the rocket but
support the cost of a pad.  I worked offering a Titan II to GE at JSC for
"LifeSat" and it was darn cheap < $20 Million.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Love                   [e-mail]  (NeXT Mail OK)
                           BIX: rlove

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

Date: 6 Aug 93 09:25:48 EDT
From: JEFF MILLNER <[e-mail]>
Subject: Support the Shuttle
Newsgroups: sci.space

Please quit bashing the Shuttle.  And for Pete's sake, stop singing
the praises of Russian equipment.  If I hear one more comment
about how we should scrap our stuff and buy from them.....Anyway,
do a little comparison before you do.

We have only had one true failure (and even that is too many).  The
Russians have had several missions that tried to dock with whatever
space station they had up at the time, and for one reason or another,
failed to do so.  Total mission failures (yes, the Russians have had
failures).  What about the ones we never heard about?  Communism
was very good at hiding things, but NASA is very open about what is
happening, which make it a great target for armchair astronauts to bash.

The Russians, for all of their expertise at putting up large things in space,
are EXTREMELY limited when it comes to bringing anything back.  They
have small recovery capsules, and their astronauts come back with a
small bag of samples.  Big deal.  The Shuttle, on the other hand, routinely brings
up large items such as spacelabs and returns.  In fact, I the STS-71
mission that will dock with MIR is going to bring back a large Russian
gyroscope that FAILED in orbit.  They haven't been able to bring it back
to diagnose it, so they called on us.  By the way, they do beat us in on-orbit
stay time.  Other than that, they aren't really doing that much up there.
I will take quality over quantity anytime.  Just wait until our Space Station
gets up there, politics notwithstanding.

These opinions are my own, but feel free to share them.

[e-mail]
    sorry no cute quote, I am a college graduate...

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

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1993 23:05:07 +1200 (NZST)
From: Bruce Hoult <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Inquisition (The Usenet edition)
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering) writes:
> [e-mail] (Ward Paul) writes:
>
> >In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (S.H.) writes:
> >>
> >>What is your backgroud?
> >>Who do you speak for ?
> >>
> >>What do you do besides writing posters ?
>
> >Gee, no one told me the inquisition had started again.
>
> Same here. I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

NOONE expects the Spanish Inquisition!!  Our three principal methods are...












(I'm sorry.  I couldn't resist wasting hundreds if not thousands of dollars...)

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

Date: 6 Aug 1993 11:48:55 +0100
From: Mike C Holderness <[e-mail]>
Subject: Titan IV failure. Info?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>
>A rocket running wild under power -- like an SRB cut loose from its core
>stage -- can threaten civilians.  Vandenberg isn't remote enough to avoid
>that possibility.  That's why such rockets *have* destruct systems.

Isn't is also military policy to blow up anything sensitive, in case
the Other Side decide to do a re-make of _Moonraker_?

(Who gets to play the Russian who plays Howard Hunt?)

(Younger readers -- Moonraker was the Bond film fictionalising the attempt to
 salvage a sunken Soviet submarine. Older readers -- correct me if my
 memory's failed me.)

Not that I know what the payload was, but like most others I make certain
assumptions about unannounced payloads.

Mike
--
Anyone wants me to have opinions on their behalf, they pay by the word.

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 994
------------------------------