Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT_ZIP/spacedig/v17/V17NO019.ZIP/V17NO019

Text File | 1993-08-13 | 35KB | 779 lines

Space Digest                Fri, 13 Aug 93       Volume 17 : Issue 019

Today's Topics:
             Auction of Soviet space goodies, $32 Catalog
Cold Fusion and its possible uses (if it is proven to exist) (2 msgs)
                      engine failures and safety
          Fate of Luna samples (was Re: Moon Rocks For Sale)
                How large is Halley's comet? *Please*
                        man-made meteor storm?
                     Mars Observer's First Photo
                     Moon Rocks For Sale (3 msgs)
                         Orbital information
                            Perseid watch
                      SE Michigan Perseid report
                                 Time
                Why the Shuttle will never be popular.

        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: 12 Aug 1993 19:08:32 GMT
From: Miles Abernathy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Auction of Soviet space goodies, $32 Catalog
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bruce
Watson) wrote:
> Will there be a full color catalogue of the items to be auctioned
> for us with little money?

I called Sothebys, 800-444-3709. Catalogs are $32.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
  _     Miles Abernathy, N5KOB        =
 | |__  [e-mail]  =
_|    | POB 7580, Austin TX 78713     =
\  * /  University of Texas @ Austin  =
  \/    tel. [phone]           =
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

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

Date: 12 Aug 1993 19:03:30 GMT
From: "Lawrence R. Mead" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cold Fusion and its possible uses (if it is proven to exist)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <23jm86$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lawrence R. Mead) writes:
>
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>>In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Snyder) writes:
>>>
>>>>This brings up a question that nags all experimenters, I think:
>>>>When is an unusual bit of data to be ignored, set aside with no further
>>>>thought, or explained way with one/some of the stock explanations
>>>>of possible complications?  And when is that bit of data the indication
>>>>of something new -- some new phenomenon, new observation, or the key
>>>>to some new understanding, if it is only pursued further?
>>>
>>>As well it should.  One of the classical historical incidents of this
>>>type was data that Milliken decided to throw out because it didn't fit
>>>with theory and wasn't prevalent enough to be statistically
>>>significant.  If he had kept that data and analyzed further, he would

>>>have discovered that there were particles with partial electronic
>>>charges; something that had to wait quite a while before being
>>>'rediscovered'.  Where would physics have been if we had known about
>
>>WHAT ????? WHAT PARTICLES ARE THOSE ???? PHYSICISTS HAVE FOUND NO
>>FREE PARTICLES WITH PARTIAL CHARGE SO HE WOULD NOT HAVE DISCOVERED
>>ANYTHING.
>
>GOD, I LOVE PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT THEIR CORRECTNESS IS IN DIRECT
>PROPORTION TO THEIR ABILITY TO TYPE IN ALL UPPER-CASE!!!!!  NOT TO
>MENTION HOW IMPRESSIVE THE USE OF REPETITIVE PUNCTUATION IS!!!!!!!

Capital letters are easy to spot - thats why they are used.

>
>[Buy a clue, Larry.  Got any *proof* that he didn't happen to detect
>one of the 'non-free' particles that carry partial charges?  Take the
>state of your gruntlement elsewhere -- I'm not interested.]

As has been pointed out elsewhere , extraordinary claims require
even more extraordinary evidence. I saw an extraoardinary claim
(though i believe now the author did not intend to make it), so
i asked for extraordinary evidence, as should you.
Lastly, you are reading far more into mere capital letters than i
ever meant by them. Chill out.

>

--

Lawrence R. Mead ([e-mail]) | ESCHEW OBFUSCATION !
Associate Professor of Physics





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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 20:13:10 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cold Fusion and its possible uses (if it is proven to exist)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space

In <24e462$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lawrence R. Mead) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>In <23jm86$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lawrence R. Mead) writes:

>>>WHAT ????? WHAT PARTICLES ARE THOSE ???? PHYSICISTS HAVE FOUND NO
>>>FREE PARTICLES WITH PARTIAL CHARGE SO HE WOULD NOT HAVE DISCOVERED
>>>ANYTHING.
>>
>>GOD, I LOVE PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT THEIR CORRECTNESS IS IN DIRECT
>>PROPORTION TO THEIR ABILITY TO TYPE IN ALL UPPER-CASE!!!!!  NOT TO
>>MENTION HOW IMPRESSIVE THE USE OF REPETITIVE PUNCTUATION IS!!!!!!!

>Capital letters are easy to spot - thats why they are used.

No, Larry, capital letters in a net setting are generally indicative
of 'shouting'.  Ditto the overblown use of multiple punctuation, which
is *never* correct.

>>
>>[Buy a clue, Larry.  Got any *proof* that he didn't happen to detect
>>one of the 'non-free' particles that carry partial charges?  Take the
>>state of your gruntlement elsewhere -- I'm not interested.]

>As has been pointed out elsewhere , extraordinary claims require
>even more extraordinary evidence. I saw an extraoardinary claim
>(though i believe now the author did not intend to make it), so
>i asked for extraordinary evidence, as should you.
>Lastly, you are reading far more into mere capital letters than i
>ever meant by them. Chill out.

Perhaps the problem is your writing skills?  Or perhaps your manners?
Or maybe Newbie Clewlessness?  Whichever, you should not be surprised
that when you 'shout' at someone they treat you like someone who is
shouting at 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, 13 Aug 93 01:24:00 BST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: engine failures and safety

> Date: 6 Aug 1993 08:16:08 GMT
> George William Herbert <[e-mail]>

writes:

> True.  However, all-engine failures are pretty rare in both planes
> and rockets.  Offhand, I remember that one 747 in the ash cloud,
> (very nearly) the DC-10 with the oil leaks in all 3 engines, the
> (727?) from columbia that ran out of fuel and crashed in NY, and the
> Canadair 767 which suffered from metric-conversion induced fuel
> starvation but lucked out and landed intact on a racetrack. 8-)

I am not going to attempt to document all the   airplane multiple
engine failures of the 20th century, but I am quite sure there have
been at least two caused by volcanic ash clouds (one in Alaska). I
have no recollection of it being a DC-10 in which the mechanic
erroneously assumed that the drain plugs came with "o" rings
installed (I would have guessed B-727, it is for sure that there were
three engines, so it could have been a L-1011, but DC-10 does not
compute.)

Some others, there was one, 727 this time for sure, enroute from
Florida to NYC in which the flight engineer noticed that the engines
were not doing well, and turned on heaters and that did them all in
(low NPSP as we say in the biz). There was a Delta flight, I don't
remember the type, which had just taken off from LAX when the
pilot, for some reason difficult to imagine, got the wrong switch, and
shut down all engines. There was one that really was a DC-10 in
which a shattered compressor disk chopped all three hydraulic
systems at a point where they were all in a knot, resulting in a corn
field landing (Iowa?)  and, there was a relatively recent incident in
Great Britain, a B-737, in which the crew noticed that one engine was
in trouble, but the pilot apparently got confused about "left looking
forward" or "left looking aft" (maybe "port" and "starboard" were not
such dumb ideas) and cut the wrong one. Then there were multiple
recent 747's in which the separation of one engine caused damage to
a second one.

I am not sure what the message in all this is, relative to rocket
safety, but something that is common to many of them is that in
airplanes, the engines all have a common mode failure at the   "top
level" in the form of the crew.

The volcanic ash is somewhat of a special case, I think.

And, the one DC-10 is the only airplane that I can think of in which
there was a direct and prompt cause and effect relationship between
the failure of one engine, and the loss of more than one safety critical
system. (Sometimes there is a "delayed and/or indirect" relationship,
i. e. fire, or loss of thrust causing ground contact.)

>  but any rocket is gonna come down hard if you run out
> of fuel, no matter what's underneath you or what hobbies you have.

I am just guessing from memory about airplane engine failures.
Rocket engines are something that I know more about, in my spare
moments, I am constructing the "Ultimate Data Base" which has
everything known about every rocket engine failure. Desk top size.

In discussing fuel depletion, one should remember that rockets
seldom have seldom had intermediate landing points available, and
no airplane is likely to make its intended destination if it
unexpectedly runs out of fuel, either. Unexpected propellant
depletion, is, perhaps unexpectedly, not all that rare as a failure
mode in rockets, and perhaps more expectedly, if you run out of
propellant when you didn't expect too, it is often hard to figure out
why.

I think that consideration of the effects of propellant depletion (we
rocket people do not like to say "fuel" which gets complicated) makes
a very interesting, and important, point, about engine reliability in
the two cases.

There is no question that rocket engines fail more often, and there is
also no question that they fail more often fail spectacularly than do
aircraft engines (per "equivalent flight"). There is a lot of question as
to why, and whether there "should" but this difference.

In the case of propellant depletion, early Rocketdyne engines (of the
type used on Thor, Atlas, Jupiter, etc.) had a "design feature" that in
that eventuality, they didn't "wimp out" and quit running, as you
might expect your automobile engine or an airplane engine to do,
but, rather, they shattered the turbine disk, which threw large
chunks, sometimes through propellant tanks, etc.

In many comparable situations, I have heard comments of "So what?'
If you miss the target, everything else is the same." I have also heard
comments along the lines that "It is easy to explain a spectacular
explosion to the 'higher up's' than an engine that 'wimps out'."

I don't know that either idea had anything to do with this particular
failure mode, but after the   first Thor ran out of propellant less than
a second before expected cutoff, and became a fireball rather than a
just having a slightly short range, a redesign was made that caused
the engine to "degrade gracefully." I don't think even one failure like
that of an airplane engine would have been necessary to have made
the   point.

The idea of engine failures that only cause the loss of thrust, and
ones that cause the loss of other engines, or other stuff, has been
called "correlation" in the   engine trade (I assume that is just an
euphemism, the idea being how many times engine two goes when
engine one does, and is therefore "correlated.") Other people have
tried to talk about "catastrophic" engine failures. That doesn't work
at all. For most rockets in the "historical data base" there was no
engine out capability, and therefore every failure was "catastrophic."
(And, there is, conceptually, some vehicle, somewhere, that could
withstand any loss of a single engine, no matter what it did.)

Correlation is very difficult to deal with, as it is a "rare" event, that
only happens after another "rare" event, the fact that the engine
stops running to begin with. And, hopefully, it never happens the
same way twice, since all known correlation modes get fixed.
Estimates for rocket engines run as high as 35 percent of all failures,
but 5 percent is more reasonable, in my opinion, and has been
discussed as a design goal for future engines. Aircraft engines have
rates much less than one percent.

> Still pretty good odds.  Assuming you have restart capability in
>  your motors, and that they're separated enough that a catastrophic
>  1-engine failure doesn't cascade, you can make a pretty safe
rocket.

I agree that one can make a pretty safe rocket, and, there are a
number of things that one can do to make them safer. engine
separation is one of them.

However, it is not at all clear that having a restart capability helps, it
seems that it could make things a lot worse. Another chance for the
engine to make like a bomb, after having already "dodged the bullet"
the first time.

Good idea or not, it is certainly novel, I have never heard it even
discussed, seriously, in the course of the Shuttle design, and many
subsequent studies. The only thing remotely similar is that on the
Centaur, there was an automatic sequence, even before the first of
the recent start failures, to try starting twice.

I am not sure if the effect is greater with rockets that with airplanes
or not, but certainly, the number of engines that one needs to
perform the intended mission decreases rapidly with time, and
restart wouldn't be very helpful, even if it could be accomplished.
Also, rocket engines tend to not be as easy to start, even the   first
time, as airbreathers, and a restart capability could result in greater
complexity.

One question I alluded to, and didn't answer is "Are rocket engines
inherently less reliable, or inherently more destructive in failure
than airbreathers?" That is very controversial, but my own opinion is
not inherently, except for the oxidizer pump, and oxidizer pump
failures are a very small proportion of total engine failures and
confined to "primitive, early rocket engine designs."

In various earlier messages on this topic, the relative merits of
engines and wings, or the contribution of wings to safety were
discussed. This is a complex subject, but, to make a vast
oversimplification, wings have nothing to do with safety, engines do.
Wings may have something to do with operations cost, but, only at
high flight rates, and may have something to do with various other
capabilities/desirements.



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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 19:32:51 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fate of Luna samples (was Re: Moon Rocks For Sale)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary,sci.geo.geology

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:
>And isn't it interesting that Korolev's family had a private lunar
>sample?

Actually, there are a fair number of these in the hands of VIPs and
ex-VIPs (although it's a little surprising that the Soviets would use
any of their tiny Luna samples for this -- guess they felt they owed
old Sergei...).  Nixon distributed a large number of small dust samples
to world leaders after Apollo 11, and I'd be willing to bet quite a
bit that the moonwalking astronauts were told they could keep one
pebble apiece if they kept quiet about it.
--
"Every time I inspect the mechanism     | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
closely, more pieces fall off."         |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 12 Aug 1993 20:09:48 GMT
From: Craig T Manske <[e-mail]>
Subject: How large is Halley's comet? *Please*
Newsgroups: sci.space

I recently had an argument with a friend of mine about the size of Halley's
comet.  I do not mean the size of the tail, but the size of the ice chunk
itself.  I argue that the chunk of frozen particles is about the size of a
hardball or softwall.  He argues it is about a mile in diameter.  Who is
correct here.  If I am correct, what keeps the comet itself from melting
to nothingness.

Thanx alot.

Albion
[e-mail]

P.S.  I do not read this newsgroup, so if you could reply via email, that
      would be great.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 22:19:08 GMT
From: & <[e-mail]>
Subject: man-made meteor storm?
Newsgroups: sci.space

: In article <[e-mail]: [e-mail] (John F. Lawrence) writes:
: :
: :More spectacular ones are much larger and sometimes survive
: :re-entry.  I also remember coming across the story of lady that
: :was hit by one in the 1920s while she was sleeping in her
: :apartment.  It crashed through the roof and a couple of floors of
: :the building before it hit her.  She suffered a broken hip.  Whoa.

I can't resist a followup. The meteorite in question is at the Alabama
Museum of Natural History (two buildings down from here). The victim
was Mrs. Annie Hodges, who was battered in late November of 1954 (photos were
in an issue of _Life_ the next month). It is a stony meteorite about
4 by 6 inches. Here landlady sued (and won, this is Alabama) for possession
of the rock, which she promptly sold back to Mrs. Hodges. There is to be
(I don't know whether it was published yet) a book by Harold Povenmire
on the incident. Apparently this happened at the height of UFO hysteria,
and hounding by kooks has been said to have contributed to a later nervous
breakdown. Mrs. Hodges' health failed and she died only a few years later.
One could get paranoid, knowing that a rock from space went to all the
trouble of coming through your roof, off the rafters, through the ceiling,
and bouncing off your console radio just to hit you in the hip...

Bill Keel                               Astronomy, University of Alabama

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

Date: 12 Aug 1993 22:47:09 -0400
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mars Observer's First Photo
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

 the project scientists  have  one advantage over everyone else.

they get to choose teh onbjects imaged.  I am sure somehow that if ones
PhD  was in crustal dynamics,  one would have very different
targets for observation then someone interested in surface chemistry.

I also doubt anyone not intimately associated with the program will be able
to make much progress with the raw data.  I am sorry,  these are
taxpayer funded projects,  US Citizens should get equal access
to the raw data  and the volume sets.

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

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

Date: 12 Aug 1993 19:11 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Moon Rocks For Sale
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes...
>My memory must be short...I was convinced that the Soviets never managed to
>send a spacecraft to the Moon and get it back. Could someone tell me when that
>happened?
>

The Soviets had three successful unmanned lunar sampler missions that brought
back lunar material from the Moon: Luna 16 (1970), Luna 20 (1972) and
Luna 24 (1976).  With Luna 15, they attempted to return the first lunar samples
ever just days before Apollo 11, but the Soviet spacecraft crashed on the Moon.
The Soviets have also land and operated two rovers on the Moon, which something
the US has never accomplished.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     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: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 22:42:29 GMT
From: Barney the Dinosaur <[e-mail]>
Subject: Moon Rocks For Sale
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

Ron Baalke ([e-mail]) wrote:
: The Soviets have also land and operated two rovers on the Moon, which something
: the US has never accomplished.

Ah, yes, landing LIVE HUMANS certainly pales in comparison to landing a rover..
How silly to think that it was some kind of great accomplishment.

--
     e-mail to        :  [e-mail]
     boring flames to :  /dev/null *or* dev/eat/shit

**This .sig is a test. It is only a test. If it had been an actual .sig, it
would have contained a number of humorous quotes and/or graphics..**

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

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 01:54:48 GMT
From: "Phil G. Fraering" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Moon Rocks For Sale
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

[e-mail] (Barney the Dinosaur) writes:

>Ron Baalke ([e-mail]) wrote:

>>The Soviets have also land and operated two rovers on the Moon, which
>>something the US has never accomplished.

>Ah, yes, landing LIVE HUMANS certainly pales in comparison to landing
>a rover..  How silly to think that it was some kind of great
>accomplishment.

But I wonder what our excuse was/is for not following up; there would
be a lot of useful stuff that could be done today with an unmanned rover,
some of which would be precursors towards a manned return.

(Besides, we could have used our manned rover designs as a starting
point...)

>--
>     e-mail to        :  [e-mail]
>     boring flames to :  /dev/null *or* dev/eat/shit

Believe me, when I flame, it's anything but boring. Ugly, yes, but
I try not to be boring.

>**This .sig is a test. It is only a test. If it had been an actual .sig, it
>would have contained a number of humorous quotes and/or graphics..**
--
+-----------------------+"Just think of the mail server as
|"Standard disclaimer"  | a friendly robot librarian."
|[e-mail] |(or words to that effect, from someone
+-----------------------+who probably hasn't used one).

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

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 93 19:10:00 -0500
From: Charles Radley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orbital information
Newsgroups: sci.space

 It seems impossible to send you email, so I am making this
 public, please provide your individual email address.

 -=> Quoting Elliott Conan Evans to All <=-

 ECE> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
 ECE> Newsgroup: sci.space
 ECE> Organization: Junior, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

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

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

This is known as a "sun synchronous" orbit.  Since the orbit of the
Earth around the Sun takes 365 days, the day/night terminator
migrates with respect to intertial space.

This means that the near-polar orbiting satellite would have to perform
a plane change of slightly over one degree per day in order to stay
in the day/night terminator region.   This plane change would take
up quite a lot of fuel, but otherwise, is perfectly feasible.

The inclination of the orbit would be at 66.5 degrees to the Earth's
equator, and orthogonal to the Solar ecliptic plane.

 ECE> Is the scenario even believeable?

 Yes, basically, provided you can design a spacecraft with enough
 fuel and propulsion capability to change the orbit.  You might
 have to run some numbers.

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

The type of orbit you need would not be any more susceptible to
orbital debris collisions than any other orbit.

P. S. , there is another newsgroup for discussing science fiction
story ideas ( Rec.Arts.SF.science )  where this discussion would
be more appropriate.


... Internet address:- [e-mail]  Ad Astra per Guile !
--- Blue Wave/QWK v2.10

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

Date: 12 Aug 1993 15:54:35 -0400
From: Earl W Phillips <[e-mail]>
Subject: Perseid watch
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

                  1993 PERSEID METEOR TRICKLE REPORT


     In  anticipation  of the expected high meteor rates of  the  1993
Pereid Meteor Shower (due to the recent return of comet P/Swift-Tuttle
to the inner solar system), I coordinated a Meteor Watch with my local
amateur astronomy club, the Westerville Astronomy Interest Group,  and
the students of my IS-410 (astronomy) class. The night of the expected
peak  (8/11) I reserved the local State Park's beach area (Alum  Creek
State Park). I chose that particular site because of it's low horizon,
relatively  dark skies, and lack of interference from curious  recrea-
tioners. The reasoning behind the Watch was to collect useful data  to
report to the International Meteor Organization, as well as expose the
astronomy  students   and club members to a bit of "real  science"  in
this field.

     As it turned out, our skies were much less than ideal. We had (at
times  heavy)  haze, and at one point the entire  sky  was  completely
clouded  out.  Our average limiting visual magnitude was  +3,  and  an
average of 35% of the sky was blocked from clouds and haze. Obviously,
our  counts were low, and the derived ZHR's reflect the bad  observing
conditions  in their high error bars. Still, we saw quite a few  spec-
tacular  meteors. Bright, long-trailed yellowish meteors  crossed  our
sky,  and  a  few flashes were observed. What  appeared  as  lightning
behind the hazier areas were actually Perseids flashing and  exploding
at the end of their short duration flights through Earth's atmosphere.
I  personally caught one Perseid in the act of blowing itself to  bits
at the end of it's trail.

     As a result of the poor observing conditions, the peak was  anti-
climactic. In fact, the "peak" night was no better than a night  about
a week before, when I and my mate went out for about 1.5 hours to do a
Perseid  count. Still, we got useful data. After running  the  numbers
through  a  computer program I wrote to derive ZHR's, it'll  all  boil
down to useful information for the databanks. I hope everyone else had
better  observing conditions than we did! Our data is included  below,
for those interested in such things.

OBSERVER'S      MID-POINT OF       DERIVED   ERROR          OBSERVER'S
  NAME          TIME & DATE          ZHR      BAR          AFFILIATION
                OF OBSERVATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Riffle,Helen    23:15    8/8/93      123      55              WAIG
Phillips,Earl   23:40    8/8/93      133      44              WAIG
Evans,Jeff      22:32:30 8/11/93     684      183             IS-410
Darling,Lynn         ditto           ditto    ditto           ditto
Taylor,Sharon   22:17:30 8/11/93     255      128             IS-410
Gaetano,Amy     23:22:30 8/11/93     775      144             IS-410
Busche,Bill     22:26:30 8/11/93     518      156             WAIG
Branoff,Ruth         ditto           ditto    ditto           ditto
Williams,John   22:45    8/11/93     910      263             WAIG
Phillips,Earl   00:03    8/12/93     356      92              WAIG
Metheny,Michele 00:37:30 8/12/93     808      125             IS-410
Barnhart,Dr.Phil22:15    8/11/93     272      136             IS-410
Barnhart,Esther      ditto           ditto    ditto           ditto

     The  average  ZHR of these observations is 483, with  an  average
error  bar (+/-) of 133; for the time period spanning from  8/8/93  to
8/12/93 local time.







     Key to above: WAIG = Westerville Astronomy Interest Group. IS-410
=  Integrative  Studies 410 (astronomy) class  at  Otterbein  College,
Westerville,  Oh.  Ditto = was observing partner (note taker)  of  the
person listed directly above.

     For  more  information  regarding the above data,  or  if  you're
interested  in obtaining a copy of the computer program, you may  con-
tact the author at: Earl W. Phillips, Jr, 7893 Thornfield Lane, Colum-
bus, Oh 43235; or via internet as [e-mail].
The  computer program was written for IBM and compatibles with a  math
co-processor  and at least EGA graphics. If necessary, a copy  of  the
source code will be supplied along with the compiled program.




*****************************************************************
*                                    | ====@====      ///////// *
* [e-mail]|     ``________//         *
*                                    |       `------'           *
*                 -JR-               | Space;........the final  *
*                                    | frontier...............  *
*****************************************************************

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

Date: 12 Aug 1993 20:06:02 GMT
From: Ojvind Bernander <[e-mail]>
Subject: SE Michigan Perseid report
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary,sci.geo.geology

In article <24cq31$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dale Atems) writes:
>I saw roughly 25 meteors between 21:30 and 23:45 EDT Aug 11 (0130 to
>0345 UT Aug 12), when thick fog interrupted viewing. Conditions were
>generally hazy but not too badly so. Most meteors left a glowing trail;
>one was very bright (magnitude about -5 or so). Activity was sporadic,
>with three or four in a minute (sometimes two consecutively) followed
>by lulls of up to 30 min. Radiant point appeared to be Cassiopeia, but
>many meteors extended well south and/or west of the zenith. Overall a
>good Perseid show, considering that it was before midnight.
>
>Returned to viewing briefly from 1:30 to 2:00 EDT Aug 12. Saw two
>meteors in that time; neither left a visible trail.

Here in Southern California, I camped out and stayed awake from 11pm to 1am.
I saw about 1-2/minute average, with up to 5 or 10 in a single minute.

-- Ojvind Bernander

--
     ##                                                            ##
   # ..      _~                  __                                .. #
   @  >     / ) ,    ,    _/)    /_)  _  _  _  _  _  _/)_  _       <  @
    | ^    (_/ /_|/_/_/)_(/_  __/_) _(/_/(_/)_(I_/)_(/_(/_/(_      v |

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 10:13:32 GMT
From: "Piet op den Brouw." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Time
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike Fraietta) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Mike Fraietta)
>Subject: Re: Time
>Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1993 14:35:19 GMT
>In article <2487ao$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Jeffcoat) writes:
>|> 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.
>|>
>|>
>
>Here is the way I understand it to be:
>
>1) TAI = UTC + Delta_AT
>2) UTC last adjusted I believe on 30 June by 1 leap second
>3) GPST is defined to be the same as UTC (USNO) at midnight on the night
>   of 5 Jan 1980 and the morning of 6 Jan 1980.  GPST = TAI - 19s.
>
>Hope that helps.
>
>--
>Mike Fraietta
>[e-mail]
>McDonnell Douglas Aerospace - Houston Division
>[phone]
You are right but it is now I believe -27s.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Piet op den Brouw                     Phone :    [phone]
SHAPE Technical Centre                Fax   :    [phone]
p.o. Box 174
2501 CD  The Hague                    Email : [e-mail]
Netherlands
----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1993 22:37:58 GMT
From: Barney the Dinosaur <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why the Shuttle will never be popular.
Newsgroups: sci.space

Pat ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob Schultz) writes:
: |Ok, how about this.  The space shuttle started as a small pickup and midway
: |through had folks try to turn it into a Lamborgini.
: |Rob Schultz     |                       | There is no such thing as over-kill...


: AClose.

:       Actually, the STS is a winnebago, designed and built by
: Lamborgini.

: pat

The STS is a Yugo, designed and built by small children in a schoolyard.

--
     e-mail to        :  [e-mail]
     boring flames to :  /dev/null *or* dev/eat/shit

**This .sig is a test. It is only a test. If it had been an actual .sig, it
would have contained a number of humorous quotes and/or graphics..**

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

End of Space Digest Volume 17 : Issue 019
------------------------------