Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v16_1/v16no141.txt

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 32KB

Date: Thu, 11 Feb 93 09:56:30
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #141
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Thu, 11 Feb 93       Volume 16 : Issue 141

Today's Topics:
      Astronaut Educational Req. (was An 'agitator' replies...)
                      Cooling re-entry vehicles.
            engine cycles (was Re: National Launch System)
                         IRAS - 10 Years Ago
                        leading-edge anonymity
               Meteor Riding/Netting (lets go fishing)
                              Mir Mirror
                  Moscow Science Support Foundation
                         Polar Orbit, Alaska+
                          Precursors to SSF
                Precursors to SSF/ST: TNG Data Ports.
Reasons for SS(was Re: Precursors to Fred (was Re: Sabatier Reactors.))
                             Solar Mirror
                              Solar sail
                 So what's happened to Henry Spencer?
             Space Station Freedom Media Handbook - 16/18
                Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger
                         Units and Star Trek
                           Wanted- Mars Gif

    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, 5 Feb 1993 02:58:56 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Astronaut Educational Req. (was An 'agitator' replies...)
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Edward V. Wright) continues wrangling with Doug Mohney.

Along the way Ed writes:
> I guess I missed all the money-making processes that have come out
> of NASA.  I also missed all those NASA mission specialists writing
> papers.  They spend their time in space prepping satellites or
> performing other people's experiments -- jobs that would be done
> by technicians with a bachelor's or associate's degree on Earth.
> NASA hires PhDs for these jobs because a) they get so many applicants,
> they have to cut down the numbers somehow, and b) it fits the superhero
> image of the astronaut NASA has constructed.
[Doug's comments deleted for brevity.]
> "Trained monkey" is principle investigator's slang for astronaut!

While I'm inclined to agree that making a PhD an effective requirement
(they really only *require* a Bachelors degree, they just don't select
many non-PhD's) for astronaut candidacy is silly, I'll allow that at
least in the case of Storey Musgrave - a truly talented generalist with
five (count em, 5) graduate degrees including an MD, the educational
requirements have paid off.  I am VERY pleased that he is the Payload
Commander for the upcoming HST refurbishment mission.

I'll hasten to add that its not just Storey's well educated background
that comes into play here.  He's also a veteran of lots of (what 3, 4??)
Shuttle flights and has spent thousands of hours in the pool (neutral
bouyancy tank) learning his craft.

Still, NASA is hardly the only institution guilty of using PhD's for
things that could be done by good High School graduates.  Artificially
inflated educational requirements have been used as a means of enhancing
institutional prestige for a long time.  The flip side of this problem
is that the 5 years (at least) that a PhD spends in the Astronaut
office are lost as far as their research careers go.  And lest ye think

that they come back to academia with additional prestige, most of what
they gain is the animosity of their colleagues who resent their fame.

-Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute

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

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1993 16:04:08 GMT
From: Nick Haines <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cooling re-entry vehicles.
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Edward V. Wright) writes:

   Unfortunately, pure ice is kind of brittle.  If chunks start
   coming off during reentry, you're history.  During World War II,
   the US Navy considered a scheme to build battleships out of ice.
   They proposed lacing the ice with sawdust to increase its strength.

The British navy also (I believe the original idea was that of a
British engineer). Works really well, too. The main advantage from a
navy's point of view is not strength (although ice+sawdust _is_ a
surprisingly strong and not particularly brittle material) but another
property of ice. You can blow many truck-sized holes in an ice
aircraft-carrier, and it won't sink. (n.b. the project was for
carriers and other large (or extremely large) vessels; don't think it
was ever mooted for battleships).

I wouldn't suggest it as a skin heatshield, though. Maybe as an layer
just inside your titanium skin; I would expect it to melt/sublime in
layers that can then be circulated or dumped. Still, seems a waste to
carry all that water into orbit and then just throw it away.

Nick Haines [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1993 09:55:11 GMT
From: Dave Michelson <[e-mail]>
Subject: engine cycles (was Re: National Launch System)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
>(A thread that started in sci.space.shuttle, cross-posted to sci.space
>because of more general interest.)
>
>The key difference between the various cycles is:  what powers the pumps?
>It's always a gas turbine of some kind, since they need lots of power with
>little weight, but there is considerable variation in where the gas comes
>from and where it goes afterwards...

> [much talk about gas generator cycle and staged combustion cycle engines]

Just for interest, some texts refer to these as "open-cycle" and "closed-cycle"
engines, respectively...  (which kind of makes sense!)

==

And, on a related subject, in case anyone is interested in the difference
between hydrazine, monomethylhydrazine, and unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine...

    H     H         CH3    H         CH3    H
    |     |          |     |          |     |
    N-----N          N-----N          N-----N
    |     |          |     |          |     |
    H     H          H     H         CH3    H

...now you know!  Now what does N2O4 look like? :-)

---
Dave Michelson                             University of British Columbia
[e-mail]                                  Antenna Laboratory

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

Date: 5 Feb 93 14:40:13 GMT
From: Jonathan McDowell <[e-mail]>
Subject: IRAS - 10 Years Ago
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

> Gerry Santoro - CAC/PSU <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>W/r the anniversery of  IRAS ......
>
>>Does anyone else remember the comet IRAS-Aracki-Alcock?  (sp?)


I remember it! We'd been trying to see
it for several days, but East Anglia remained cloudy.
It miraculously cleared one evening, on a date
very close to its perigee, and I was completely
flabbergasted to see this ghostly second moon in
the sky. Huge! Naked-eye! (albeit just). Although
the surface brightess was pretty low, it remains
the most impressive comet I've seen.


 - Jonathan McDowell

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

Date: 5 Feb 1993 14:34:45 GMT
From: David Toland <[e-mail]>
Subject: leading-edge anonymity
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy

[e-mail] (Tesuji) writes:
>X-Anon-To:sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy
>
>I believe that fast adapters are accepting
>anonymous postings as the next step in personal
>freedom in communication.

For those out there who are ranting against anonymous postings in
general, please realize that there are *legitimate* reasons for
anonymous postings.  For instance, there are newsgroups that deal
with sensitive personal issues, for which anonymity is a requirement
in order not to divulge confidences or at least to allow someone to
open up who could not otherwise do so.

It also may be necessary in some instances for someone to post
an unpopular opinion anonymously in order to be safe (including
that person's family!) from harassment, which can at times assume
dangerous proportion.

I do *not* think that the person who posted the alleged Challenger
transcript falls into these categories, however.  What was posted
was more than opinion, it was an assertion of facts without any
means of verification.  It was furthermore in very poor taste,
and bordered on libelous.  Even if true (which I *sincerely*
doubt), it certainly would be an invasion of privacy.  Especially
in light of the poster's choice to submit this anonymously, I don't
think he really believes it is credible either - he expected to
be censured (sic) if his identity were known.  In short, it was
sensationalist trash, that half of the checkout line rags would
even probably have rejected as below *their* standards.

But anonymity in posting is really a much broader issue, which I think
has gotten a bum rap here.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
All opinions are MINE MINE MINE, and not necessarily anyone else's.
[e-mail]   |  "Laddie, you'll be needin' something to wash
                           |  that doon with."

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

Date: 5 Feb 1993 04:36:49 GMT
From: "Earl A. Hubbell" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Meteor Riding/Netting (lets go fishing)
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Josh Hopkins) writes:

>[e-mail] writes:


>Take a look at your favorite video of high performance fighters going fast.
>Pick one that shows them going as fast as possible at low altitude so you get
>the full effect.  Now imagine they're battleships going that fast.  Now imagine
>you're in a jet heading straight at them at full speed.  Now speed up everybody
>by about 100 times.  Now picture yourself throwing a net in front of one of the
>hypersonic battleships.  That's what you're talking about.

>I hesitiate to say it's impossible to lasso a moving asteroid but it sure makes
>chemical propulstion look safe and comfortable.  Given the number of easier
>methods of propulsion I think we can safely assume asteroids won't be used for
>delta V in such a direct manner.

Reaction mass.  Anything that avoids the exponentials inherent in the
'rocket equation' has a big theoretical advantage.

Engineering...well, there's at least one paper out there...but you
are right in your analogy - it doesn't seem possible to get 10km/sec
encounters to work, but 1km/sec delta-v changes seem feasible.

>Josh Hopkins                                          [e-mail]
--
"Have you never wanted to look beyond the clouds and *[e-mail]
the stars?  Or to know what causes the trees to bud, *Earl Hubbell
or what changes a darkness into light?  But if you   *Opinions solely mine.
talk like that, people call you crazy." --Frankenstein

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

Date: 5 Feb 93 11:00:58 GMT
From: Ken Kobayashi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mir Mirror
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (David M. Faubert) writes:

>Hi,

>On the radio this morning I heard that the Russian mirror experiment could
>be seen in the west from Vancouver, where I am. I went outside and, sure
>enough, there was this extremelely bright light in the west. By extremely,
>I mean around magnitude -5 I suppose. It was flickering slightly and it
>was slightly yellow, which is what one would expect from a light outside
>the atmosphere that low on the horizon.

>Did anyone else see it? I would like to have some confirmation that the
>thing I saw was the mirror and not something else like another UFO.


   I saw it too I think.  I went out on the roof this morning after
figuring out the time with TrakSat.  I didn't see anything at first, then
saw a brief flash (lasting about one second?) brighter than Vega but
darker than Venus.  About a minute later, around the highest point in the
sky, it reappeared, but it was a steady light slightly brighter than Vega.
No flickering.  How bright is Mir usually in the sky?  (I'd never seen it
before)  Was it just Mir I saw or was the first flash the mirror?

Ken Kobayashi
kkobayas&husc8.harvard.edu

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

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1993 16:35:47 +0200
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Moscow Science Support Foundation

Dear ISUers:

I would like to continue to inform you about new possibilities
for contacts with russian scientists and industry.

Now  I am in a working group for preparing a new  organization
called "Moscow Science Support Foundation". The initiative  of
this Foundation is growing from Moscow Government. It will  be
very powerful organization  in  Russia  for  establishing  new
level of international cooperation  in  science  and  industry
community.

It is possible to become a Founder of this Foundation not only
for russian organizations and persons but also foreign ones.

With pleasure, I have to honour of inviting  any  organization
which is in ISU-net to join this prestigious Foundation and to
become a Founder. I need to have previous interest for further
information as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Dr. Sergey Savastuk, (ISU`89 was in Strasbourg !!! )

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

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1993 02:31:07 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Polar Orbit, Alaska+
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>>
>>>>Why does the US launch polar orbit missions from Vandenburg? other than for
>>>>military missions? I wonder is they know about Poker Flats here in Alaska
>>>>which has many of the same benfits as Vandenburg (open spaces) but nicely is
>>>>near the pole.. Actually more like near or at the Arctic Circle..
>>>
>>> They launch from Vandenburg because the facilities exist, the weather
>>> is nice and warm, and they have lots of open water to the south for
>>> range safety purposes.  Alaska is a bad choice for regular operations.
>>> It's too cold for too big a part of the year.
>>>
>>> --
>>> "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.
>
>>Cold yes, but what is a major colst for rocket launches, is keeping the feul
>>cold..
>
> Note that this is only true for liquids, and some of them need it more
> than others -- not sure I'd like the idea of gelled kerosine for my
> fuel.  Cold is, in general, probably not real good for things like
> segmented solids.
>
>>Also the Fairbanks area can get upi to 90-100 F during the summer..
>>True it can get to -60 during sometimes in the winter..
>
> Sounds great if you're only flying cryogenic fuels.  ;-)
>
> --
> "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.

Here is a semi-info post about Poker Flats. (I believe they use nike or atlas
rockets to send suborbital and soon orbital packets into space.)

#154 ACAD3A::FYSEIS      Mon 25 Jan 1993  09:41:57  (  14/  722)

From:     C Rowe, UAGI Seismology

Poker Flats is a region north of Fairbanks, just beyond Chatanika.  The
Geophysical Institute runs a rocket launch facility there, principally
to support upper atmosphere, ionosphere, magnetospheric and aurora
research (barium shots and the like).  They send up fairly sizeable
rockets, some three-stage jobs.  I'm not particularly well versed in
terms of the specifics, but you might try talking to Dan Osborne.  His
office # is 474-7107.  Another person to try might be Roger Smith, at
474-7416.  Roger is a professor of geophysics and is into aurora
research; Dan is more involved with the operational end of things and
might be more useful if those are the sorts of things you are wishing
to know.

Charlotte Rowe

(Her address is [e-mail])


Michael Adams
Alias: Morgoth/Ghost Wheel
[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1993 05:44:03 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Precursors to SSF
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes:
>... why not save the weight of paper and use a 9600b/fax
>modem that reads straight to file? Cut out the dead tree portion
>altogether.

Because, despite what you hear from people like Go Corp., it's still a
whole lot more convenient to carry a piece of paper around inside Spacelab
(for example) than to lug a portable computer around.
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 5 Feb 93 11:49:50 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Precursors to SSF/ST: TNG Data Ports.
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes:
>>... why not save the weight of paper and use a 9600b/fax
>>modem that reads straight to file? Cut out the dead tree portion
>>altogether.
>
> Because, despite what you hear from people like Go Corp., it's still a
> whole lot more convenient to carry a piece of paper around inside Spacelab
> (for example) than to lug a portable computer around.
> --
> C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
> effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

Why muist it be a portable computer? Why not a data port as in Star Trek the
Next Generation.. I know it is nice to have a hard copy, but.. Why not make the
technology and computer better and have a real AI or combined system...
Kind of liek ST:TNG...


Michael Adams
Alias: Morgoth/Ghost Wheel
[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1993 05:37:58 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Reasons for SS(was Re: Precursors to Fred (was Re: Sabatier Reactors.))
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>>Microgravity materials science, currently the #2
>>justification for the station, has been waning in popularity since the
>>ballyhoo days of the early Eighties.
>
>That is hardly surprising.  You have two groups of researchers:  Group
>A, who try to make better materials in space, and Group B, who try to
>prove that they can do better on Earth...

Actually, you've also got Group C, who are sure it could be done better
in space, but have given up and gone back to doing it on Earth.  These
are the folks who hoped NASA could deliver a hands-on manned microgravity
lab (aka Space Station Freedom) in a reasonable length of time, with easy
access and reasonable resources available... but have decided that it's
not going to happen that way in their lifetimes.

One big reason why microgravity materials work has been waning in
popularity is that the prospect of being able to do experiments on sane
budgets with sane lead times has waned, as has the prospect of getting
professional scientists (who cannot be NASA astronauts -- there aren't
enough hours in the day to be both) into space with some regularity.

Note that, for all the press NASA gives to crystal-growing experiments,
it wasn't until last year that a professional crystallographer (Larry
DeLucas) managed to get aboard a shuttle mission.  (And he was busier
than a one-armed paperhanger, too:  "...so many conditions that people
expected would be right turned out to be off target...".)
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 5 Feb 93 07:06:55
From: Terence Chua <[e-mail]>
Subject: Solar Mirror
Newsgroups: sci.space

What's the purpose behind this solar mirror that the Russians are
putting up? Call it hysteria, but I have this vision of it being used
to melt ice-caps...

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terence Chua, Dept of Laws, Queen Mary College, University of London
Snail Mail: 22 Courcy Road, London N8 0QH
Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am not a free man, I am a lawyer!"

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

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 93 07:56:15 EST
From: John Roberts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Solar sail

-From: ida@atomic (David Goldschmidt)
-Subject: Re: Solar Sail/Parachute/Brake
-Date: 30 Jan 93 02:23:57 GMT
-Organization: Princeton University, Dept. of Computer Science

-  If you made a very light sail, (far beyond anything we can make today), and
-make it reflective one side only, it will accelerate even in interstellar
-space (the reflected light gives twice the pressure of the absorbed light).

-       Dave Patterson, guest on this account

That would be nice, but I don't believe it works that way - if it did, then
you could make a "perpetual motion machine" driven by the microwave
background radiation. There are two important principles that have to be
considered:
 1) The thrust of a beam of light is equal to power / c only if it's a
    directed beam. If the light is coming in equally in all directions,
    then performing an integration in spherical coordinates, the net
    force perpendicular to the surface is only half as great per unit
    power involved as with a directed beam. This also applies to reflection,
    if the reflection is from a diffuse source, or if the reflector is
    diffuse in such a way that it reflects equally in all directions
    (over the 2 * pi steradians of sky visible from a given point on the
    surface), so if the light in interstellar space is more or less
    uniformly distributed (at least as an approximation, though point
    symmetry would also apply) such that an opaque flat surface is exposed
    to incident electromagnetic radiation of P watts per square meter,
    then the net light pressure on the reflective side (in Newtons per
    square meter) is P / 2c from the incident light plus P / 2c from
    the reflection, for a total of P / c (where c is the speed of light,
    ~ 3E8 m/s).
 2) The thrust of a directed beam of light is P/c : note that wavelength
    does not enter into the equation. Thus, thermal infrared energy also
    produces light pressure. For a flat surface radiating energy at rate
    P watts per square meter, the net force perpendicular to the surface
    is P / 2c, where again the factor of 2 is needed because the radiation
    is diffuse rather than directed. The nonreflective side of your solar
    sail absorbs energy from the background light of interstellar space,
    and re-radiates an equal amount. You might think that the reflective
    side if the sail would also radiate some of the energy absorbed by the
    nonreflective side, but in fact good reflectors make poor radiators -
    a perfect reflector would not radiate any energy at all, so all of the
    energy would have to be radiated from the nonreflective side. The
    net force against the nonreflective side is thus P / 2c from the
    incident light pressure, and P / 2c from the radiated energy, so the
    total is P / c, which is equal to the pressure on the reflective
    side, so there is no net force on the solar sail as a whole that
    can be used for acceleration.

Note that if more incident radiation strikes one side of the sail than the
other, this analysis doesn't mean there won't be net acceleration. But the
same would be the case with a conventional solar sail.

John Roberts
[e-mail]

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

Date: 5 Feb 1993 00:24:30 -0500
From: Pat <[e-mail]>
Subject: So what's happened to Henry Spencer?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry Spencer) writes:
|The space-related parts of the "away" part may be of interest...  First,
|I attended "Making Orbit 93", which was a seriously neat con with some
|very interesting people.  Where else can you hear Max Hunter explain
|why his Thor team fought to end static tests, Gary Hudson discuss the
|history of his single-stage-to-orbit concepts, and Mitchell Burnside
|Clapp tell you why kerosene and hydrogen peroxide is a better fuel
|combination for an SSTO than LOX/LH2?  Or see videos of (for example)
|the Soviet N1 lunar booster exploding on its first flight?  If the

Henry.  WOuld you be able to post your notes from the convention????


pat

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

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1993 15:42:24 GMT
From: Bruce Dunn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space Station Freedom Media Handbook - 16/18
Newsgroups: sci.space

From NASA SPACELINK:

"6_10_2_7.TXT" (4147 bytes) was created on 10-06-92

Work Package Contractors

Work Package 1

Boeing Defense & Space GroupHuntsville, AL
Prime Contractor

Teledyne Brown EngineeringHuntsville, AL
Lab Outfitting Equipment, Payload Integration, Ground-Support Equipment and
Laboratory Support Equipment

TRW, Inc.Huntsville, AL
Systems Simulation and Training Software

Allied-Signal AiResearchTorrance, CA
Thermal Control, Environmental Control and Life Support, Valves, Fire
Detection

Lockheed Missiles and Space Co.Sunnyvale, CA
Life Sciences and Animal Research Facilities Outfitting

Hamilton StandardWindsor Locks, CT
Water Recovery (hygiene and potable), Temperature and Humidity Control;
Avionics Cooling, Commode/Urinal Subassembly

ArdeNorwood, NJ
ECLSS Tank Sets

Loral FairchildSyossett, NY
Video Systems

Astro International Corp.League City, TX
ECLSS Processing Control Water Quality Monitoring

Grumman Aerospace Corp.Houston, TX
Design and Outfit Habitation Module

ILC Space SystemsHouston, TX
Galley, Laundry, Refrigerator, Trash, Storage

Life SystemsCleveland, OH
CO2 Reduction, O2 Generator, Urine Processor

Camus, Inc.Houston, TX
Mockups, Trainers, Simulators, Flight Hardware

Harris CorpMelbourne, FL
Internal Audio/Video System

Perkin-ElmerPomona, CA
Atmosphere Composition Monitor

Ball Aerospace Co.Boulder, CO
Fluid Subcarrier Tank Sets

ILC TechnologySunnyvale, CA
General Lighting


Work Package 2

McDonnell DouglasHuntington Beach, CA
Prime Contractor

McDonnell DouglasHouston, TX
Software Development, Operations Planning, Flight Crew Integration,
Airlock Testing

Lockheed Missiles & Space Co.Sunnyvale, CA
Thermal Control System, Support to EVA Rotary Mechanisms

Lockheed Eng. & SciencesHouston, TX
EVA Technical Support

Hamilton StandardWindsor Locks, CT and Houston, TX
Shuttle Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) Program Interfacing

LTV        Grand Prarie, TX
Heat Rejection System

General ElectricCamden, NJ
Communication & Tracking System

MotorolaScottsdale, AZ
Various Communications Equipment

Spar AerospaceCanada
Station Antennae

Honeywell, Inc.Clearwater, FL
Control System

Honeywell, Inc.Glendale, AZ
Multiplexer/Demultiplexer (MDM)

Allied SignalTeteboro, NJ
Control Moment Gyros

IBMHouston, TX
Data Management System

IBMOswego, NY
Data Management System, Flight Hardware

AstroCarpinteria, CA
Mobile Transporter

EagleHouston, TX
Technical Services


Work Package 4

Rockwell InternationalCanoga Park, CA
Prime Contractor: System Integrator, PMAD Rocketdyne Division
Software, Beta Gimbal, IEA

Allied-Signal AerospaceTempe, AZ
Closed Brayton Cycle Engine

Allied-Signal AerospaceTorrance, CA
Solar Receiver

Ford AerospacePalo Alto, CA
Batteries, DC Source PMAD, EEE Parts

Lockheed Missiles & SpaceSunnyvale, CA
Solar Arrays

Hamilton StandardWindsor Locks, CT
Thermal Control
System, Pump Flow Control System

Harris CorporationMelbourne, FL
Solar Concentrator

LTVDallas, TX
SD Radiator

Spectrolab, Inc.Sylmar, CA
Solar Cells

Applied Solar Energy, Corp.City of Industry, CA
Solar Cells, Bypass Diode

Honeywell Space & AviationDurham, NC
Motor Drive Assembly

AEC-Able EngineeringGoleta, CA
Mast Canisters

Sheldahl, Inc.Northfield, MN
Kapton Coating, FCC Cable

Whittaker-YarndeyPawcatuck, CT
Battery Cells

Gates CorporationGainsville, FL
Battery Cells


Management Support and Information Systems Contractors


Technical and Management Information Systems
Boeing Computer Services        Reston, VA

Space Station Engineering and Integration Contractor
Grumman Space Station Program Support Division  Reston, VA

Software Support Environment
Lockheed Missiles and Space Co. Sunnyvale, CA

Level I Support Contractors
BDM, International      McLean, VA

Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc.    Bethesda, MD

The Egan Group  Washington, D.C.

Technical and Administrative Services Corporation       Washington, D.C.
(TADCORPS)



The material above is one of many files from SPACELINK
A Space-Related Informational Database
Provided by the NASA Educational Affairs Division
Operated by the Marshall Space Flight Center
On a Data General ECLIPSE MV7800 Minicomputer

SPACELINK may be contacted in three ways:

1) Using a modem, by phone at 205-895-0028

2) Using Telnet, at spacelink.msfc.nasa.gov

3) Using FTP capability. Username is anonymous and Password is guest.
Address is 192.149.89.61.


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

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

Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 21:16:54 GMT
From: Bob Combs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle



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

Date: 5 Feb 93 14:00:09 GMT
From: John VanAntwerp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Units and Star Trek
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Bill Gripp) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John VanAntwerp) writes:
>>In the original series, "warp speeds" were defined as:
>>
>>    c * [warp ** 3]

>I heard it was c ** warp.  This never made sense to me because it
>depends on the units you use to define c (i.e. if c is 1 light year/year
>then c ** warp is always 1).  Why warp ** 3? (besides the fact that they
>had to pick something).

This is the formula from Gene Rodenberry's book on the series... I will re-
read that section and post a summary of his reasoning (he does give an
explanation, if I remember right).

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

Date: 5 Feb 93 06:11:27 GMT
From: Kirk Marcroft <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wanted- Mars Gif
Newsgroups: sci.space

I'm looking for a computer generated gif of what Mars would like if it were covered by 2/3 of water like Earth. It was in an issue of Popular Science
back in 1992.






any info would be helpful...
thanks



Wookie

--MetaUseNet v2.22 [CNet Amiga]

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 141
------------------------------