home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Space & Astronomy
/
Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso
/
pc
/
text
/
spacedig
/
v16_4
/
v16no426.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1993-07-13
|
32KB
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 05:00:10
From: Space Digest maintainer <digests@isu.isunet.edu>
Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu
Subject: Space Digest V16 #426
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk
Space Digest Wed, 7 Apr 93 Volume 16 : Issue 426
Today's Topics:
Alaska Pipeline and Space Station!
Comet in Temporary Orbit Around Jupiter? (2 msgs)
Cosmos 2238
Dutch: symposium compacte objecten
HLV for Fred (was Re: Prefab Space Station?)
Market or gov failures
Metric vs English
nuclear waste (4 msgs)
pushing the envelope
Quaint US Archaisms
space food sticks (2 msgs)
STS-56 Press Kit
Summer Internships
The Area Rule
What if the USSR had reached the Moon first?
Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to
"space@isu.isunet.edu", 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 space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 12:40:37 GMT
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <aws@iti.org>
Subject: Alaska Pipeline and Space Station!
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <1993Apr5.160550.7592@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>Why can't the government just be a tennant?
>I think this would be a great way to build it, but unfortunately
>current spending rules don't permit it to be workable.
Actually, that is no longer true. In the last few years Congress has
ammended laws to provide whatever is needed. Note that both Spacehab
and Comet are funded this way.
The problems aren't legal nor technical. The problem is NASA's culture.
Allen
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves |
| aws@iti.org | nothing undone" |
+----------------------71 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX-----------------------+
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 1993 14:57 UT
From: Ron Baalke <baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Comet in Temporary Orbit Around Jupiter?
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
In article <1993Apr6.061329.25582@den.mmc.com>, seale@possum.den.mmc.com (Eric H Seale) writes...
>baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes:
>>According the IAU Circular #5744, Comet Shoemaker-Levy 1993e, may be
>>temporarily in orbit around Jupiter. The comet had apparently made a
>>close flyby of Jupiter sometime in 1992 resulting in the breakup of the
>>comet.
>
>Ooooh -- who would have thought that Galileo would get the chance to
>check out a comet TOO?!?
Comet Gehrels 3, which was discovered in 1977, was determined to have
been in a temporary Jovian orbit from 1970 to 1973. Comet Shoemaker-Levy 1993e
may remain in orbit around Jupiter long enough to allow Galileo to
make some closeup observations. The orbital trajectory for Comet
Shoemaker-Levy is still being determined.
___ _____ ___
/_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
| | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab |
___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Being cynical never helps
/___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | to correct the situation
|_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | and causes more aggravation
| instead.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 1993 15:32:18 GMT
From: Mats Lindgren <ml@chiron.astro.uu.se>
Subject: Comet in Temporary Orbit Around Jupiter?
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
Comet P/Helin-Roman-Crockett also spent some time as a temporary
satellite to Jupiter a few years ago if you believe the calculations
by Tancredi, G., Lindgren, M. and Rickman, H.(Astron. Astrophys.,
239, pp. 375-380, 1990).
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
| Mats Lindgren | Mats.Lindgren@astro.uu.se |
| Astronomical Observatory | 21619::laban::ml |
| Box 515 | |
| 751 20 Uppsala | Phone (+46) (0)18 51 35 22 |
| Sweden | Fax 52 75 83 |
-------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 15:40:47 GMT
From: apryan@vax1.tcd.ie
Subject: Cosmos 2238
Newsgroups: sci.space
I need as much information about Cosmos 2238 and its rocket fragment (1993-
018B) as possible. Both its purpose, launch date, location, in short,
EVERYTHING! Can you help?
-Tony Ryan, "Astronomy & Space", new International magazine, available from:
Astronomy Ireland, P.O.Box 2888, Dublin 1, Ireland.
6 issues (one year sub.): UK 10.00 pounds, US$20 surface (add US$8 airmail).
ACCESS/VISA/MASTERCARD accepted (give number, expiration date, name&address).
(WORLD'S LARGEST ASTRO. SOC. per capita - unless you know better? 0.033%)
Tel: 0891-88-1950 (UK/N.Ireland) 1550-111-442 (Eire). Cost up to 48p per min
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 14:29:50 GMT
From: Gert-Jan van Lochem <lochem@fys.ruu.nl>
Subject: Dutch: symposium compacte objecten
Newsgroups: sci.space
Sterrenkundig symposium 'Compacte Objecten'
op 26 april 1993
In het jaar 1643, zeven jaar na de oprichting van de
Universiteit van Utrecht, benoemde de universiteit haar
eerste sterrenkundige waarnemer. Hiermee ontstond de tweede
universiteitssterrenwacht ter wereld. Aert Jansz, de eerste
waarnemer, en zijn opvolgers voerden de Utrechtse sterrenkunde
in de daaropvolgende jaren, decennia en eeuwen naar de
voorhoede van het astronomisch onderzoek. Dit jaar is het 350
jaar geleden dat deze historische benoeming plaatsvond.
De huidige generatie Utrechtse sterrenkundigen en studenten
sterrenkunde, verenigd in het Sterrekundig Instituut Utrecht,
vieren de benoeming van hun 'oervader' middels een breed scala
aan feestelijke activiteiten. Zo is er voor scholieren een
planetenproject, programmeert de Studium Generale een aantal
voordrachten met een sterrenkundig thema en wordt op de Dies
Natalis aan een astronoom een eredoctoraat uitgereikt. Er
staat echter meer op stapel.
Studenten natuur- en sterrenkunde kunnen op 26 april aan een
sterrenkundesymposium deelnemen. De onderwerpen van het
symposium zijn opgebouwd rond een van de zwaartepunten van het
huidige Utrechtse onderzoek: het onderzoek aan de zogeheten
'compacte objecten', de eindstadia in de evolutie van sterren.
Bij de samenstelling van het programma is getracht de
deelnemer een zo aktueel en breed mogelijk beeld te geven van
de stand van zaken in het onderzoek aan deze eindstadia. In de
eerste, inleidende lezing zal dagvoorzitter prof. Lamers een
beknopt overzicht geven van de evolutie van zware sterren,
waarna de zeven overige sprekers in lezingen van telkens een
half uur nader op de specifieke evolutionaire eindprodukten
zullen ingaan. Na afloop van elke lezing is er gelegenheid tot
het stellen van vragen. Het dagprogramma staat afgedrukt op
een apart vel.
Het niveau van de lezingen is afgestemd op tweedejaars
studenten natuur- en sterrenkunde. OOK ANDERE BELANGSTELLENDEN
ZIJN VAN HARTE WELKOM!
Tijdens de lezing van prof. Kuijpers zullen, als alles goed
gaat, de veertien radioteleskopen van de Radiosterrenwacht
Westerbork worden ingezet om via een directe verbinding tussen
het heelal, Westerbork en Utrecht het zwakke radiosignaal van
een snel roterende kosmische vuurtoren, een zogeheten pulsar,
in de symposiumzaal door te geven en te audiovisualiseren.
Prof. Kuijpers zal de binnenkomende signalen (elkaar snel
opvolgende scherp gepiekte pulsen radiostraling) bespreken en
trachten te verklaren.
Het slagen van dit unieke experiment staat en valt met de
technische haalbaarheid ervan. De op te vangen signalen zijn
namelijk zo zwak, dat pas na een waarnemingsperiode van 10
miljoen jaar genoeg energie is opgevangen om een lamp van 30
Watt een seconde te laten branden! Tijdens het symposium zal
er niet zo lang gewacht hoeven te worden: de hedendaagse
technologie stelt ons in staat live het heelal te beluisteren.
Deelname aan het symposium kost f 4,- (exclusief lunch) en
f 16,- (inclusief lunch). Inschrijving geschiedt door het
verschuldigde bedrag over te maken op ABN-AMRO rekening
44.46.97.713 t.n.v. stichting 350 JUS. Het gironummer van de
ABN-AMRO bank Utrecht is 2900. Bij de inschrijving dient te
worden aangegeven of men lid is van de NNV. Na inschrijving
wordt de symposiummap toegestuurd. Bij inschrijving na
31 maart vervalt de mogelijkheid een lunch te reserveren.
Het symposium vindt plaats in Transitorium I,
Universiteit Utrecht.
Voor meer informatie over het symposium kan men terecht bij
Henrik Spoon, p/a S.R.O.N., Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht.
Tel.: 030-535722. E-mail: henriks@sron.ruu.nl.
******* DAGPROGRAMMA **************************************
9:30 ONTVANGST MET KOFFIE & THEE
10:00 Opening
Prof. dr. H.J.G.L.M. Lamers (Utrecht)
10:10 Dubbelster evolutie
Prof. dr. H.J.G.L.M. Lamers
10:25 Radiopulsars
Prof. dr. J.M.E. Kuijpers (Utrecht)
11:00 Pulsars in dubbelster systemen
Prof. dr. F. Verbunt (Utrecht)
11:50 Massa & straal van neutronensterren
Prof. dr. J. van Paradijs (Amsterdam)
12:25 Theorie van accretieschijven
Drs. R.F. van Oss (Utrecht)
13:00 LUNCH
14:00 Hoe zien accretieschijven er werkelijk uit?
Dr. R.G.M. Rutten (Amsterdam)
14:35 Snelle fluktuaties bij accretie op neutronensterren
en zwarte gaten
Dr. M. van der Klis (Amsterdam)
15:10 THEE & KOFFIE
15:30 Zwarte gaten: knippen en plakken met ruimte en tijd
Prof. dr. V. Icke (leiden)
16:05 afsluiting
16:25 BORREL
--
Gert-Jan van Lochem \\ "What is it?"
Fysische informatica \\ "Something blue"
Universiteit Utrecht \\ "Shapes, I need shapes!"
030-532803 \\ - HHGG -
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 93 12:44:56 GMT
From: "Allen W. Sherzer" <aws@iti.org>
Subject: HLV for Fred (was Re: Prefab Space Station?)
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <C5133A.Gzx@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh Hopkins) writes:
>>[Titan III is the cheapest US launcher on a $/lb basis]
>In that case it's rather ironic that they are doing so poorly on the commercial
>market. Is there a single Titan III on order?
They have a few problems. The biggest technical problem is the need to find
two satellites going to the same rough orbit for a luanch.
They also don't show much interest in commercial launches. There is more
money to be made churning out Titan IV's for the government. After all,
it isn't every day you find a sucker, er, customer who thinks paying
three times the commercial rate for launch services is a good idea!
Allen
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves |
| aws@iti.org | nothing undone" |
+----------------------71 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX-----------------------+
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 93 13:31:30 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
Subject: Market or gov failures
Newsgroups: sci.space
In <C4tCL8.7xI.1@cs.cmu.edu> 18084TM@msu.edu (Tom) writes:
>[Fred saying that gov coercive poser is necessary for any space program]
>I reply;
>>>BTW, Fred, you've really crossed the border, since you admit that the ideas
>>>you support can only be carried out with coercive power. Now that's really
>>>f***in' intolerant, so get off yer high horse about tolerance.
>Fred replies;
>>No, Tommy, I "admit" that there are such things as 'market failures'
>>which necessitate intervention by other than capitalist forces to
>>correct.
>I guess your understanding of this 'market failure' should be classified
>under Phil's 'economics on the level of 19th century medicine', since you
>apparently completely ignored that this 'market failure' can as easily,
>or even much more easily, be attributed to "government intervention
>failure". So, in addition to a strong moral argument against what you
>propose, there is also a strong utilitarian argument, namely that gov's
>destruction of wealth through confiscastory taxation and redistribution
>on a major scale has made significant private capital investments harder
>to make.
I note that you make no such case as you claim can be 'even more
easily made'. Yes, the argument can (and has) been made that current
government policy creates even larger market barriers than there were
in the first place, but there is no such term as 'government failure',
since the government can change policies whenever it pleases. The
market doesn't do that and is governed by (relatively) well-understood
forces. This libertopican bilge about 'moral arguments' about
taxation, etc., is, at bottom, so much simplistic economic thinking.
It can only be 'justified' by cliche derision of anyone who knows more
about economics than the libertopian -- which is what invariably
happens. Tripe a la Tommy, the new libertopian dish.
>>Get a clue, little boy, and go salve your wounded pride in my not
>>considering you infallible in some other fashion. I'm not interested
>>in your ego games.
>Puh-leese, Fred. This, besides being simply an attempt to be insulting,
>really belongs on private mail. If 'ego-games' are so unimportatnt to
>you, why the insults and this strange negative attatchment for me?
Wherever do you get this inflated idea of your own importance?
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 93 13:19:00 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
Subject: Metric vs English
Newsgroups: sci.space
In <1993Apr5.195215.16833@pixel.kodak.com> dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
>Keith Mancus (mancus@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov) wrote:
>> Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn) writes:
>> > SI neatly separates the concepts of "mass", "force" and "weight"
>> > which have gotten horribly tangled up in the US system.
>>
>> This is not a problem with English units. A pound is defined to
>> be a unit of force, period. There is a perfectly good unit called
>> the slug, which is the mass of an object weighing 32.2 lbs at sea level.
>> (g = 32.2 ft/sec^2, of course.)
>>
>American Military English units, perhaps. Us real English types were once
>taught that a pound is mass and a poundal is force (being that force that
>causes 1 pound to accelerate at 1 ft.s-2). We had a rare olde tyme doing
>our exams in those units and metric as well.
American, perhaps, but nothing military about it. I learned (mostly)
slugs when we talked English units in high school physics and while
the teacher was an ex-Navy fighter jock the book certainly wasn't
produced by the military.
[Poundals were just too flinking small and made the math come out
funny; sort of the same reason proponents of SI give for using that.]
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 12:56:08 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
Subject: nuclear waste
Newsgroups: sci.space
In <1993Apr2.150038.2521@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes:
>In article <1993Apr1.204657.29451@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>>This system would produce enough energy to drive the accelerator,
>>>perhaps with some left over. A very high power (100's of MW CW or
>>>quasi CW), very sharp proton beam would be required, but this appears
>>>achievable using a linear accelerator. The biggest question mark
>>>would be the lead target chemistry and the on-line processing of all
>>>the elements being incinerated.
>>
>>Paul, quite frankly I'll believe that this is really going to work on
>>the typical trash one needs to process when I see them put a couple
>>tons in one end and get (relatively) clean material out the other end,
>>plus be able to run it off its own residual power. Sounds almost like
>>perpetual motion, doesn't it?
>Fred, the honest thing to do would be to admit your criticism on
>scientific grounds was invalid, rather than pretend you were actually
>talking about engineering feasibility. Given you postings, I can't
>say I am surprised, though.
Well, pardon me for trying to continue the discussion rather than just
tugging my forelock in dismay at having not considered actually trying
to recover the energy from this process (which is at least trying to
go the 'right' way on the energy curve). Now, where *did* I put those
sackcloth and ashes?
[I was not and am not 'pretending' anything; I am *so* pleased you are
not surprised, though.]
>No, it is nothing like perpetual motion.
Note that I didn't say it was perpetual motion, or even that it
sounded like perpetual motion; the phrase was "sounds almost like
perpetual motion", which I, at least, consider a somewhat different
propposition than the one you elect to criticize. Perhaps I should
beg your pardon for being *too* precise in my use of language?
>The physics is well
>understood; the energy comes from fission of actinides in subcritical
>assemblies. Folks have talked about spallation reactors since the
>1950s. Pulsed spallation neutron sources are in use today as research
>tools. Accelerator design has been improving, particularly with
>superconducting accelerating cavities, which helps feasibility. Los
>Alamos has expertise in high current accelerators (LAMPF), so I
>believe they know what they are talking about.
I will believe that this process comes even close to approaching
technological and economic feasibility (given the mixed nature of the
trash that will have to be run through it as opposed to the costs of
separating things first and having a different 'run' for each
actinide) when I see them dump a few tons in one end and pull
(relatively) clean material out the other. Once the costs,
technological risks, etc., are taken into account I still class this
one with the idea of throwing waste into the sun. Sure, it's possible
and the physics are well understood, but is it really a reasonable
approach?
And I still wonder at what sort of 'burning' rate you could get with
something like this, as opposed to what kind of energy you would
really recover as opposed to what it would cost to build and power
with and without the energy recovery. Are we talking ounces, pounds,
or tons (grams, kilograms, or metric tons, for you SI fans) of
material and are we talking days, weeks, months, or years (days,
weeks, months or years, for you SI fans -- hmmm, still using a
non-decimated time scale, I see ;-))?
>The real reason why accelerator breeders or incinerators are not being
>built is that there isn't any reason to do so. Natural uranium is
>still too cheap, and geological disposal of actinides looks
>technically reasonable.
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 13:01:12 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
Subject: nuclear waste
Newsgroups: sci.space
In <1pp6reINNonl@phantom.gatech.edu> matthew@phantom.gatech.edu (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>In article <841@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp> will@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp (William Reiken) writes:
>> Well this pretty much says it. I have gotten alot of replys to this
>>and it looks like oil is only on Earth. So if those greedy little oil companys
>>who obviously don't give **** about it uses up all the oil then that leaves us
>>high a dry.
>Greedy little oil companies? Don't blame them; oil companies just supply the
>demand created by you, me, and just about everyone else on the planet. If we
>run out, its all our faults.
He also ignores a few other things. While organics would become
significantly more expensive were all the oil to disappear (and thus
some things would no longer be economically feasible), oil is hardly
an irreplaceable resource any more than most other consumables. As
supply decreases, prices rise and alternatives become more
competetive. He also needs to consider that there has been an
estimated 30 years of reserves pretty much as long as anyone has cared
about petroleum; whatever the current usage rate is, we always seem to
have about a 30 year reserve that we know about.
[I'm not sure that last figure is still true -- we tend not to look as
hard when prices are comparatively cheap -- but it was certainly true
during hte 'oil crisis' days of the 70's.]
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 93 14:59:30 GMT
From: William Reiken <will@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp>
Subject: nuclear waste
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <1pp6reINNonl@phantom.gatech.edu>, matthew@phantom.gatech.edu (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>
> Greedy little oil companies? Don't blame them; oil companies just supply the
> demand created by you, me, and just about everyone else on the planet. If we
> run out, its all our faults.
>
Ok, so how about the creation of oil producing bacteria? I figure
that if you can make them to eat it up then you can make them to shit it.
Any comments?
Will...
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 93 15:03:38 GMT
From: William Reiken <will@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp>
Subject: nuclear waste
Newsgroups: sci.space
Thanks for the Update.
Will...
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 15:38:16 GMT
From: fred j mccall 575-3539 <mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
Subject: pushing the envelope
Newsgroups: sci.space
In <1993Apr3.233154.7045@Princeton.EDU> lije@cognito.Princeton.EDU (Elijah Millgram) writes:
>A friend of mine and I were wondering where the expression "pushing
>the envelope" comes from. Anyone out there know?
Every aircraft has flight constraints for speed/AOA/power. When
graphed, these define the 'flight envelope' of that aircraft,
presumably so named because the graphed line encloses (envelopes) the
area on the graph that represents conditions where the aircraft
doesn't fall out of the sky. Hence, 'pushing the envelope' becomes
'operating at (or beyond) the edge of the flight (or operational)
envelope'.
Note that the envelope isn't precisely known until someone actually
flies the airplane in those regions -- up to that point, all there are
are the theoretical predictions. Hence, one of the things test pilots
do for a living is 'push the envelope' to find out how close the
correspondence between the paper airplane and the metal one is -- in
essence, 'pushing back' the edges of the theoretical envelope to where
the airplane actually starts to fail to fly. Note, too, that this is
done is a quite calculated and careful way; flight tests are generally
carefully coreographed and just what is going to be 'pushed' and how
far is precisely planned (despite occasional deviations from plans,
such as the 'early' first flight of the F-16 during its high-speed
taxi tests).
I'm sure Mary can tell you everything you ever wanted to know about
this process (and then some).
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1993 09:06:26 GMT
From: Dave Rickel <drickel@bounce.mentorg.com>
Subject: Quaint US Archaisms
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <C512wC.B0M.1@cs.cmu.edu>, nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes:
|> Oh, and the other advantage is that you don't have shit constants like
|> 32.??? hanging around.
No, instead you have stupid things like 3600 and 86400 and 31556925.9747 and
299792.458 and 9.80665 and ...
How many cc's in a ml anyway? The metric system has its problems, just not
as many of them.
david rickel
drickel@sjc.mentorg.com
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 93 13:45:26 GMT
From: kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: space food sticks
Newsgroups: sci.space
John Elson (jelson@rcnext.cso.uiuc.edu) wrote:
: Has anyone ever heard of a food product called "Space Food Sticks?"
I remember those awful things. They were dry and crumbly, and I
recall asking my third-grade teacher, Miss G'Francisco, how they
kept the crumbs from floating around in zero-G. She had no clue.
I have not seen anything like them in today's space program.
Some Apollo technology is best forgotten.
-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/GM2, Space Shuttle Program Office
kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (713) 483-4368
"HERE MEN FROM THE PLANET EARTH
FIRST SET FOOT UPON THE MOON
JULY 1969, A.D.
WE CAME IN PEACE FOR ALL MANKIND."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 15:37:06 GMT
From: Dillon Pyron <pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com>
Subject: space food sticks
Newsgroups: sci.space
In article <C50z77.EE6@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, jelson@rcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (John Elson) writes:
>Has anyone ever heard of a food product called "Space Food Sticks?" This
>was apparently created/marketed around the time of the lunar expeditions, along
>with "Tang" and other dehydrated foods. I have spoken with several people
>who have eaten these before, and they described them as a dehydrated candy.
>Any information would be greatly appreciated.
A freeze dried Tootsie Roll (tm). The actual taste sensation was like nothing
you will ever willingly experience. The amazing thing was that we ate a second
one, and a third and ....
I doubt that they actually flew on missions, as I'm certain they did "bad
things" to the gastrointestinal tract. Compared to Space Food Sticks, Tang was
a gastronomic contribution to mankind.
--
Dillon Pyron | The opinions expressed are those of the
TI/DSEG Lewisville VAX Support | sender unless otherwise stated.
(214)462-3556 (when I'm here) |
(214)492-4656 (when I'm home) |God gave us weather so we wouldn't complain
pyron@skndiv.dseg.ti.com |about other things.
PADI DM-54909 |
PS. I don't think Tang flew, either. Although it was developed under contract.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 14:58:40 GMT
From: apryan@vax1.tcd.ie
Subject: STS-56 Press Kit
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
Does anyone know ifthe STS-56 email press kit was ever released?
-Tony Ryan, "Astronomy & Space", new International magazine, available from:
Astronomy Ireland, P.O.Box 2888, Dublin 1, Ireland.
6 issues (one year sub.): UK 10.00 pounds, US$20 surface (add US$8 airmail).
ACCESS/VISA/MASTERCARD accepted (give number, expiration date, name&address).
(WORLD'S LARGEST ASTRO. SOC. per capita - unless you know better? 0.033%)
Tel: 0891-88-1950 (UK/N.Ireland) 1550-111-442 (Eire). Cost up to 48p per min
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 93 02:19:27 GMT
From: Mark Smilor <msmilor@skat.usc.edu>
Subject: Summer Internships
Newsgroups: sci.space
Hi Folks not exactly certain if this is the best place to ask, but I am
searching for a summer internship in engineering. I will be graduating in early
May with a B.S. in aerospace engineering and then pursuing my Masters this Fall
.Does anyone know of anything that is available, I am in the process of applyi
ng to some of the larger companies (ie. MacDac, Martin Marietta, Lockheed. If a
nyone knows of anything I would appreciate it if you could mail it to me.
Thanks in advance
Mark Smilor
msmilor@skat.usc.edu
or
smilor@aludra.usc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 13:36:41 EET
From: flb@flb.optiplan.fi (F.Baube[tm])
Subject: The Area Rule
I read it refered to as the "parabolic cross-section" rule;
the idea was that if you plot the area of the fuselage cross-
section as a function of the point fore-and-aft along the
fuselage, a plot that is a **paraboloid** minimizes somethin'
or 'nother (to be technical about it).
--
* Fred Baube (tm) * In times of intellectual ferment,
* baube@optiplan.fi * advantage to him with the intellect
* #include <disclaimer.h> * most fermented
* May '68, Paris: It's Retrospective Time !!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 12:27:34 GMT
From: Peter Alexander Merel <pete@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU>
Subject: What if the USSR had reached the Moon first?
Newsgroups: alt.history.what-if,sci.space
jgreen@trumpet.calpoly.edu (James Thomas Green) writes:
>If they had beaten us, I speculate that the US would have gone
>head and done some landings, but we also would have been more
>determined to set up a base (both in Earth Orbit and on the
>Moon). Whether or not we would be on Mars by now would depend
>upon whether the Soviets tried to go. Setting up a lunar base
>would have stretched the budgets of both nations and I think
>that the military value of a lunar base would outweigh the value
>of going to Mars (at least in the short run). Thus we would
>have concentrated on the moon.
Great speculation - I remember being proud on behalf of all the free
world (you think that way when you are seven years old) that we had
got there first. Now I'm almost sorry that it worked out that way.
I guess the soviets would have taken the victory seriously too, and
would almost certainly not have fallen victim to the complacency that
overtook the US program. Perhaps stretching to match US efforts would
have destabilized them sooner than it did in fact - and in the tradition
of Marvel Comics 'What If', this destabilization in the Brezhnev era might
have triggered the third world war. Hmm, maybe it was a giant leap after all.
--
Internet: pete@extro.su.oz.au | Accept Everything. |
UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!munnari!extro!pete | Reject Nothing. |
------------------------------
End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 426
------------------------------