Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v16_1/v16no178.txt

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 33KB

Date: Sat, 13 Feb 93 18:43:01
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V16 #178
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Sat, 13 Feb 93       Volume 16 : Issue 178

Today's Topics:
            Discovery Missions Selected for Further Study
         extreme responses to Challenger transcript (2 msgs)
             Getting people into Space Program! (4 msgs)
In defense of sick humour (was Re: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger)
     Other shuttles (was Re: Getting people into Space Program!)
                      parachutes on Challenger?
                     Peekskill Meteorite (2 msgs)
                             Space Icons
                          wind on the moon?
                Women in EVA (was Re: Question Help !)

    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 Feb 1993 16:48 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Discovery Missions Selected for Further Study
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary

Donald L. Savage
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                  February 11, 1993
(Phone:  [phone])

RELEASE:  93-027

NASA SELECTS 11 DISCOVERY MISSION CONCEPTS FOR STUDY

     NASA today announced the selection of 11 new science mission
concepts in the Discovery Program which have been identified for
further study during this fiscal year.

     The mission candidates were selected from 73 concepts
discussed at the Discovery Mission Workshop held at the San Juan
Capistrano Research Institute in San Juan Capistrano, Calif.,
last Nov. 16-20.  The potential projects were those considered to
have the highest scientific value as well as a reasonable chance
of meeting strict budgetary guidelines.

     Discovery missions are designed to proceed from development
to flight in less than 3 years, combining well-defined
objectives, proven instruments and flight systems, costs limited
to no more than $150 million and acceptance of a greater level of
risk.

     "These missions represent a bold new way of doing business
at NASA," said NASA Administrator Dan Goldin.  "By accepting a
greater level of risk, we can deliver high-return missions that
are cost-effective, quicker from concept to launch, and
responsive to the present budget climate.  They promise to
revolutionize the way we carry out planetary science in the next
century."

     "The Discovery Program is probably the most exciting new
initiative in planetary exploration," said Dr. Wesley T.
Huntress, Jr., Director of NASA's Solar System Exploration
Division.

     "We now will be able to more effectively take advantage of
emerging technology and quickly - and relatively cheaply -
undertake more new missions of discovery than at anytime since
the beginning of the space age.  Also, because of the shorter
time frames and lower costs, these missions will allow greater
participation from the academic and aerospace communities,"
Huntress said.

    The 11 mission concepts to be studied are:

          % Mercury Polar Flyby has an objective to study the
polar caps and complete the photographic reconnaissance of the planet.
Principal Investigator:  Paul D. Spudis, Lunar and Planetary
Institute, Houston.
          % Hermes Global Orbiter to Mercury involves remote
sensing of the planet's surface, atmosphere and magnetosphere.
Principal Investigator:  Robert Nelson, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
          % Venus Multiprobe Mission involves placement of 14
small entry probes over one hemisphere of Venus to measure winds,
temperature and pressure.  Principal Investigator:  Richard
Goody, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
          % Venus Composition Probe enters Venus' atmosphere in
daylight to measure atmospheric structure and composition on a
parachute descent.  Principal Investigator:  Larry W. Esposito,
University of Colorado, Boulder.
          % Cometary Coma Chemical Composition aims to rendezvous
with a cometary nucleus at or near perihelion and conduct 100
days of scientific operations.  Principal Investigator:  Glenn C.
Carle, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, Calif.
          % Mars Upper Atmosphere Dynamics, Energetics and
Evolution Mission will  study Mars' upper atmosphere and
ionosphere.  Principal Investigator:  Timothy Killeen, University
of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
          % Comet Nucleus Tour involves study of three comets
during a 5-year mission, focusing on structure and composition of
the nucleus.  Principal Investigator:  Joseph Veverka, Cornell
University, Ithica, N.Y.
          % Small Missions to Asteroids and Comets involves four
separate spacecraft launches to study distinctly different types
of comets and asteroids.  Principal Investigator:  Michael
Belton, National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tuscon, Ariz.
          % Near Earth Asteroid Returned Sample will acquire
samples from six sites on a near-Earth asteroid and return them
to Earth for study.  Principal Investigator:  Eugene Shoemaker,
U.S. Geological Survey, Flagstaff, Ariz.
          % Earth Orbital Ultraviolet Jovian Observer will study
the Jovian system from Earth orbit with a spectroscopic imaging
telescope.  Principal Investigator:  Paul Feldman, Johns Hopkins
University, Baltimore.
          % Solar Wind Sample Return mission aims at collecting
and returning solar wind material to Earth for analysis.
Principal Investigator:  Don Burnett, Calif. Institute of
Technology, Pasadena.

     In addition, three concepts also were targeted for further
consideration this fiscal year.  They are:

          % Mainbelt Asteroid Rendezvous Explorer would
rendezvous and orbit the mainbelt asteroids Iris or Vesta.
Principal Investigator:  Joseph Veverka, Cornell University,
Ithica, N.Y.
          % Comet Nucleus Penetrator would rendezvous with a
comet and deploy a penetrator into its nucleus.  Principal
Investigator:  William V. Boynton, University of Arizona, Tuscon.

          % Mars Polar Pathfinder involves a lander which will
carry out subsurface exploration of the northern Martian polar
cap by radar and a probe to measure ice quantities and
temperature.  Principal Investigator:  David A. Paige, University
of Calif. at Los Angeles.

     "It was a difficult task narrowing the list down," said Dr.
Richard Vorder Bruegge, a member of the Discovery Advanced Study
Review Group which made the selections.

     A formal competition to make final selections of the
missions to be conducted will be announced possibly next year.

     "The formal selection process will be open to all interested
parties.  Anyone will be able to submit a proposal for a
Discovery mission in the formal competition," said Vorder
Bruegge.  "These proposals will have to be more extensive than
the studies and include science rationale, spacecraft design,
observations, data systems -- a start-to-finish proposal for a
new mission."

     The 11 mission concepts selected follow the first two
Discovery missions selected for Phase A studies last year.  They
are the Mars Environmental Survey (MESUR) Pathfinder, planned for
launch in 1996, and the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR),
planned for a 1998 launch.

     Phase A studies of the MESUR Pathfinder mission was awarded
to NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. (JPL).  The
Applied Physics Laboratory of Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, Md. (APL), has been awarded Phase A studies of the
NEAR mission.

     MESUR Pathfinder is envisioned as a technical demonstration
and validation flight for the MESUR program, scheduled to begin
in 1999.  The MESUR program calls for building a network of about
16 small automated surface stations widely scattered around Mars
to study the planet's internal structure, meteorology and local
surface properties.

     NEAR would spend up to a year station-keeping with a near-
Earth asteroid.  The NEAR spacecraft, probably carrying only
three instruments, would assess the asteroid's mass, size,
density and spin rate, map its surface topography and
composition, determine its internal properties and study its
interaction with the interplanetary environment.

     "The study of planets provides other planetary examples
against which to compare our own Earth, in order to understand
better how  planet Earth works and how it behaves," said
Huntress.  "The study of the solar system, and the planetary
bodies within it, also will help us to understand how our solar
system formed, how other solar systems might form around other
stars, and therefore lead us to answer whether or not there are
other Earths and other life in the universe.

     "To understand the uniqueness of the Earth, we need to
understand the other rocky planets in the solar system --
Mercury, Venus and Mars.  To find clues to the origin and
evolution of the solar system we need to examine and return
samples from the oldest and most primitive objects in the solar
system -- comets and asteroids," Huntress said.

     The Discovery Program is managed by the Solar System
Exploration Division of the Office of Space Science and
Applications, NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C.

- end -

EDITOR'S NOTE:  The Discovery Program Workshop Summary report,
containing a list of the 73 mission concepts presented at the
Discovery Mission Workshop at La Jolla, Calif., is available by
calling the NASA Headquarters Newsroom at 202/358-1600.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Never yell "Movie!" in a
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | crowded fire station.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |

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

Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1993 16:59:26 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: extreme responses to Challenger transcript
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy,comp.org.eff.talk

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jason Cooper) writes:

>> Let me see if I've got this.  As an anonymous poster, you think he is
>> entitled to post any sort of stupid drivel that he cares to, but that
>> people ought not to be permitted to post flames toasting him for being
>> an idiot?  Sorry, if he doesn't like the flames (or knowing what
>> peoples' opinions of him are -- no 'flame' required; he's an idiot),
>> then he has the options of not acting like an idiot or of hitting 'N'
>> himself.  Seems more than equitable to me.
>>
>> --
>> "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 m

>I never said you SHOULDN'T flame him; I said that there's no reason TO
>flame him.  If you don't like his ideas, hit 'N'.  If you do, read.  Just
>because you don't like a guy's ideas is no reason to call him an IDIOT.
>By doing so you're proving that that's exactly what YOU are.

Nonsense.  This non sequitor is rather like saying that recognizing
that a wall is green and calling it green proves that you are green.

--
"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, 12 Feb 1993 17:09:56 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: extreme responses to Challenger transcript
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.privacy,comp.org.eff.talk

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jason Cooper) writes:

>> > Let me see if I've got this.  As an anonymous poster, you think he is
>> > entitled to post any sort of stupid drivel that he cares to, but that
>> > people ought not to be permitted to post flames toasting him for being
>> > an idiot?  Sorry, if he doesn't like the flames (or knowing what
>> > peoples' opinions of him are -- no 'flame' required; he's an idiot),
>> > then he has the options of not acting like an idiot or of hitting 'N'
>> > himself.  Seems more than equitable to me.
>> >
>> > --
>> > "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

>I must add, as a second message, that if he was posting that because he
>gets high on watching others freak, you're doing a DAMN good job of
>satisfying him!

Well, sorry to disappoint you and him, but I'm not 'freaking'; merely
commenting on what he is.

--
"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, 12 Feb 1993 16:48:18 GMT
From: Mary Shafer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Getting people into Space Program!
Newsgroups: sci.space

On Fri, 12 Feb 1993 13:50:39 GMT, [e-mail] (Allen W. Sherzer) said:

AWS> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hugh Emberson) writes:

>Why is just about everything the US millitary does/uses called Have or
>Pave?

AWS> I think it is part of the naming system. Every 'Pave' program I have
AWS> ever worked on or had access to had something to do with radar. I don't
AWS> know what 'Have' means (if anything). Perhaps Mary can give a better
AWS> answer.

Different commands use different prefixes.  Since each command has an
area of expertise, it's not surprising to see such groupings.  The
second word is usually chosen to be distinct but to have no
relationship with the actual project.  This is an obvious security
measure.

As I recall. there was a Pave something that was an FAE and another
that was a quick-repair system for runways (Pave Pave?), so it's
not just radar.

I think that Pave belongs to Materiel Command, formerly known as
Systems Command.  This is hardly surprising, since they're the people
who are tasked with the specification, acquisition, and testing
process for new systems.

Back in the early 70's, Have referred to personnel programs, as in
Have Gold which was a program for sending qualified NCOs to college
and then commissioning them.

The USAF Test Pilot School uses a meaningful second word for their
class projects--Have Blinders for a limited visibility study, Have
Drag for a study of F-16 drag in power approach with stores, Have
ATLAS for the study they did using my ATLAS equipment (Adaptable
Target Lighting Array System), and so forth.

Maybe Have is used for unclassified programs?
--
Mary Shafer  DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
[e-mail]                    Of course I don't speak for NASA
 "A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all."  Unknown US fighter pilot

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

Date: 12 Feb 93 17:24:33 GMT
From: "Dr. Norman J. LaFave" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Getting people into Space Program!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> Bill Higgins-- Beam
Jockey, [e-mail] writes:
> This is massively unfair to both the leadership of NASA and the troops
> in the trenches-- including all the people on the Net who are working
> on SSF and things that support it.
>
> You may hold the opinion that they are deluded, wasteful, or foolish.
> But they are NOT apathetic.  The real people working on this thing
> *really want to see it fly*.  Managers who have gone before Congress
> again and again for ten years to fight for Fred are not doing it to
> make contractors fatter.  They're doing it because they believe
> America needs a space station.
>
> You want to change things.  I think insulting people is a mighty poor
> way to do it.
>
> If you want them to come around to your way of thinking, you need to
> earn their respect.

Thanks Bill. I couldn't have said it better myself.

As you know Allen, I am a big proponent of your beloved SSTO concept
and I am lobbying hard for its continued funding. However, I take GREAT
exception to your contention that hardly anybody cares if Freedom flies.
I gave up an opportunity to obtain a job at twice the salary because I
(and many others) care deeply about the success of NASA's space
exploration
efforts. It has driven us to exasperation to see the government
micro-management
in the name of "cost-cutting" delay our efforts, drive up our long-term
cost, and lessen the station's capability. Despite this, we continue
to work long hours (many unpaid) to see Freedom become a success.

If you really want to see your SSTO fly, you need the support of
those of us in the NASA community. I guarantee if 100,000 of us lose our
jobs because of a stupid boondoggle like cutting Freedom, you can forget
that support and kiss your own baby good-bye.

Learn the art of compromise and diplomacy Allen. Without it, you
become a burden on the very effort you support.

Norman

Dr. Norman J. LaFave
Senior Engineer
Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company




When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
                               Hunter Thompson

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

Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1993 16:43:42 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Getting people into Space Program!
Newsgroups: sci.space

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

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hugh Emberson) writes:

>>Why is just about everything the US millitary does/uses called Have or
>>Pave?

>I think it is part of the naming system. Every 'Pave' program I have
>ever worked on or had access to had something to do with radar. I don't
>know what 'Have' means (if anything). Perhaps Mary can give a better answer.

I'm not sure what it is, either, but it's not just radar.
Electro-optic and laser targeting seem to be included in the
namespace.  Examples abound around here.  Paveway (laser or
electro-optic guided munitions package), Pave Penny (laser illuminator
for some aircraft), etc.  One heard Pave <insert name of choice> for a
*lot* of the 'smart weapon' coverage from the Gulf War.

--
"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, 12 Feb 1993 17:23:46 GMT
From: Jeff Bytof <[e-mail]>
Subject: Getting people into Space Program!
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Nick Haines) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (Nick Haines)

>I'm not saying the US should `invest' in random shoddy tractor parts
>or something; I'm saying money should be spent on those things the
>Russians do _better_ and _cheaper_ than the US, and that the rewards
>will be _both_ a better space program _and_ a better international
>situation.

Won't that make the Russians more dependent on us than ever?
I would think they would realize it's more in their interest to
make better tractor parts and consumer items, rather that depend
on contracts from the US government that would only stimulate a
limited sector of the Russian economy.

-rabjab

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

Date: 12 Feb 93 17:05:52 GMT
From: Mary Shafer <[e-mail]>
Subject: In defense of sick humour (was Re: Today in 1986-Remember the Challenger)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle

On 12 Feb 93 14:22:35 GMT, [e-mail] (Henry Troup) said:

HT> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
HT> |>probably the worst setbacks ever for the space program and all these people
HT> |>could do was crack sick jokes.

HT> Sick humour is a defense mechanism.  It means "if I were serious about
HT> this, I couldn't bear it".  Not everyone reacts the same way.

HT> Although I remember the Apollo 1 Grisson Chaffee White fire, I don't
HT> remember any jokes about it.  Probably because the accident itself was
HT> not televised live.

The jokes were around--trust me.  Now that the shock and grief have
worn off, they're incredibly tasteless, as are the Challenger jokes.
But at the time, they were, as you point out, a coping mechanism.

Actually, one usually hears the best sick jokes from the people most
closely involved--I've heard a lot from fighter pilots, test pilots,
astronauts.  And doctors and nurses and firemen and policemen have a
lot of these jokes; they probably couldn't continue in their jobs
without them.  M*A*S*H was a pretty accurate show, even if they did
tone it down a lot.

You will notice, however, that the "de mortuis nil nisi bonum" taboo
still holds; the jokes are impersonal.  We don't tell Judy Reznick or
Dick Scobee jokes, we tell dead astronaut jokes.  There are rules of
taste still operating.


--
Mary Shafer  DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
[e-mail]                    Of course I don't speak for NASA
 "A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all."  Unknown US fighter pilot

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

Date: 12 Feb 93 18:59:34 GMT
From: George Hastings <[e-mail]>
Subject: Other shuttles (was Re: Getting people into Space Program!)
Newsgroups: sci.space

Matthew DeLuca ([e-mail] ) writes:
> Well, the Russians are still planning to launch their shuttle again (I forget
> the date, unfortunately) so I'd say it's not dead.  As I understand it, the
> original batch of problems they had were technical, and since then the breakup
> of the USSR has caught up with them.

    Maybe you've had contact with DIFFERENT Russian space
program sources than I have. When I was at Zhvuzhdny Gorodok
for a week of cosmonaut training last June/July, I specifically
asked a number of RSA scientists and engineers there when Buran
might be scheduled for another launch, and the consenus was,
"probably never!"
>
> The point I am getting at, I would say, is that with the sole exception of the
> Russians, nobody is considering using disposable capsules for their manned
> access to space, and the Russians themselves are or were trying to get away
> from it.  Seems like everyone's trying to forward, except for certain elements
> here in the U.S.

   I don't think so. The Soyuz-TM has undergone a long series
of upgrades, and we flew rendezvous and dockin SIMs in it.
Although it is REALLY small for three people, It's success rate
is excellent, and the KURS rendezvous and docking radar usd
between the MIR and Soyuz-TM is good enough that I have heard
that NASA is considering a formal evaluation of it for use on
FRed (That's FRED AFTER Clinton's 40% additional cut in
funding! 8-)

 ____________________________________________________________
| George Hastings        [e-mail] |
| Space Science Teacher        72407,[e-mail]      |
| Mathematics & Science Center     [e-mail]     |
| 2304 Hartman Street        OFFICE: 804-343-6525         |
| Richmond, VA 23223        FAX:    [phone]         |
 ------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1993 17:36:20 GMT
From: Henry Spencer <[e-mail]>
Subject: parachutes on Challenger?
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (R. Lee Hawkins) writes:
>>The right solution for future vehicles is the one used today for airliners:
>>build them redundant and fail-safe so you don't *need* escape systems.  Any
>>escape system is far inferior to being able to save the whole vehicle.
>
>I'm not sure the above is a very valid engineering or statistical comparison.
>Airliners fly thousands of flights each day while the Shuttle flys less
>than 12 per *year*.  To build things that don't fail, you have to
>understand all the failure modes, both expected and unexpected (remember
>the Comet?  The DC-10 engines?), and this unfortunately seems to require
>a few crashes now and then and some of deaths...

Precisely.  Practical spaceships will have to have turnaround times short
enough that they can fly at least a few hundred test flights before they
enter operational service -- there is no other way to test them adequately,
regardless of what NASA says -- and their programs will have to be set up
to tolerate occasional crashes, because crashes *will* happen no matter
what you do.  We've already had one, plus a few near-misses, in the early
test phase of the Shuttle.  (Don't kid yourself; fifty flights is still
the early test phase, regardless of what it's called.)

>... Also, the shuttle is just a *wee* bit more complicated
>than a DC-10 or 747...

No it's not.  A few parts of it undergo higher stresses, but the overall
complexity is quite similar.
--
C++ is the best example of second-system| Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
effect since OS/360.                    |  [e-mail]  utzoo!henry

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

Date: 12 Feb 1993 16:28 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Peekskill Meteorite
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Cook) writes...
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:
>
>>The meteorite that went through the trunk of the car in Peekskill, New York,
>>last October is on display at the Best Western Executive Inn in Tuscon,
>>Arizona...

>This has probably been asked and answered a hundred times, but I'd like
>to know who owns this baby.  If I wake up tomorrow and find a 25-pound
>metorite in my trunk, am I allowed to keep it and sell it to the highest
>bidder?

It depends on where it lands.  If it lands on private property in the U.S.,
then it is yours.  I'm not sure what the rule is on public land.  In
Australia, the government lays claim to all meteorites found there, and
other countries do so also.

The Peekskill meteorite landed on private property and hit the car of
18 year old Michelle Knapp.  The meteorite and the car was purchased
by a group of three individuals for an undisclosed amount, but I believe
it to be in the $80,000 range.  This was rather high for the meteorite was
a rather common stone meteorite, but the publicity of the event drove the
price up.  The meteorite/car were then placed at the Tuscon Gem
Show on consignment.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Never yell "Movie!" in a
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | crowded fire station.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |

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

Date: 12 Feb 1993 16:33 UT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Peekskill Meteorite
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Greg Hennessy) writes...
>What is the normal price for meteorites?
>

There is a tremendous range, and it depends on the meteorite, and they
can go from .10/gram to 1000/gram.  Iron meteorites tend to go for $1-$2/gram,
stone meteorites from $2-$20/gram, and stony-irons from $5-$25/gram.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Never yell "Movie!" in a
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | crowded fire station.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     |

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

Date: 13 Feb 1993 10:49:43 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Icons

     I have several astronomy and Space related files in Windows,that
were without icons.I'd like to get some icons to use for them and wonder
if anyone can tell me where I can obtain some, either by FTP or a
program offered by some company?

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

Date: 12 Feb 93 17:28:44 GMT
From: "David S. Oderberg" <[e-mail]>
Subject: wind on the moon?
Newsgroups: sci.space

Is there anyone out there - perhaps from JPL? - who might solve the
following problem. I am aware that there is supposed to be no wind
on the moon, since there is no atmosphere. There is certainly
no wind capable of blowing a flag. On the well-known "one small
step for man" film, the flag stands bolt upright, held up, it
is said, by wire supports.

So far so good. But I _also_ recently saw film, said by the presenter
(a non-NASA physicist) to be NASA film of an Apollo mission, 11 if I
recall (not sure), in which the US flag FLUTTERS as if in a strong
breeze. It well and truly WAVES and FLAPS as surely as it would have
had it been in a strong breeze on Earth. I cannot recall for certain
whether it was a colour film, but I _think_ so. It was of higher
quality than the "one small step" grainy b&w film.

What is the explanation? Several have been suggested to me on email,
all of them, to my mind, ludicrous: gas from the space suits, exhaust
from the module, a practical joke by an astronaut (there were _no_ hands
on the flagpole, though there were astonauts moving around, if I recall),
optical illusion, trick photography.

My eyes did not deceive me. It fluttered, long and hard.

Suggestions welcome.
David

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

Date: 12 Feb 93 19:11:07 GMT
From: George Hastings <[e-mail]>
Subject: Women in EVA (was Re: Question Help !)
Newsgroups: sci.space

 ([e-mail]) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] (fred j mccall 575-3539) asks:
>
> > Has there been a female space-walker?
>
> Seems I recall seeing Kathy Sullivan suited up on some mission or other.
> Can't recall the specific mission.

   Actually, the FIRST female space-walker was Svetlana
Savitskaya, whoe worked in an Orland EVA space suit outside the
MIR Space Station several months before Kathy Sulliva became
the first American female spacewalker.

 ____________________________________________________________
| George Hastings        [e-mail] |
| Space Science Teacher        72407,[e-mail]      |
| Mathematics & Science Center     [e-mail]     |
| 2304 Hartman Street        OFFICE: 804-343-6525         |
| Richmond, VA 23223        FAX:    [phone]         |
 ------------------------------------------------------------

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


From: Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
Subject: It followed me home, can I keep it? (was Re: Peekskill Meteorite)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Feb 93 15:40:35 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
Lines: 21
Nntp-Posting-Host: fnalf.fnal.gov
Sender: [e-mail]
Source-Info:  Sender is really [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Cook) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:
>>The going price for both the remaining 12 pound meteorite and the car is
>>$125,000.
>
> This has probably been asked and answered a hundred times, but I'd like
> to know who owns this baby.  If I wake up tomorrow and find a 25-pound
> metorite in my trunk, am I allowed to keep it and sell it to the highest
> bidder?

Yes.  Unless God asks for it back.

"Do you know the asteroids, Mr.Kemp?...    Bill Higgins
Hundreds of thousands of them.  All
wandering around the Sun in strange        Fermilab
orbits.  Some never named, never
charted.  The orphans of the Solar         [e-mail]
System, Mr. Kemp."
                                           [e-mail]
"And you want to become a father."
  --*Moon Zero Two*                        SPAN/Hepnet: 43011::HIGGINS

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

End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 178
------------------------------