danghungithp/text_dataset · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 2.94k
in those sectors.
Jobs provided building the thing, balance of trade improvement, etc..
We mentioned that skypix would benifit from lower launch costs.
We left the paper on what technologies needed to be invested in in order
to make this even easier to do. And he asked questions on this point.
We ended by telling her that we wanted her to be aware that efforts are
proceeding in this area, and that we want to make sure that the
results from these efforts are not lost (much like condor, or majellan),
and most importantly, we asked that she help fund further efforts along
the lines of lowering the cost to LEO.
In the middle we also gave a little speal about the Lunar Resource Data
Purchase act, and the guy filed it separately, he was VERY interested in it.
He asked some questions about it, and seemed like he wanted to jump on it,
and contact some of the people involved with it, so something may actually
happen immediatly there.
The last two things we did were to make sure that they knew that we
knew a lot of people in the space arena here in town, and that they
could feel free to call us any time with questions, and if we didn't know
the answers, that we would see to it that they questions got to people who
really did know the answers.
Then finally, we asked for an appointment with the senator herself. He
said that we would get on the list, and he also said that knowing her, this
would be something that she would be very interested in, although they
do have a time problem getting her scheduled, since she is only in the
state 1 week out of 6 these days.
All in all we felt like we did a pretty good job.
John.
On Tue, 6 Apr 1993 02:19:59 GMT, [email protected] (Phil G. Fraering) said:
Phil> [email protected] (Mary Shafer) writes:
>On 4 Apr 1993 20:31:10 -0400, [email protected] (Pat) said:
>Pat> In article <[email protected]> Pat>
>[email protected] writes: >Question is can someone give me 10
>examples of direct NASA/Space related >research that helped humanity
>in general? It will be interesting to see..
>Pat> TANG :-) Mylar I think. I think they also pushed Hi Tech Pat>
>Composites for airframes. Look at Fly by Wire.
>Swept wings--if you fly in airliners you've reaped the benefits.
Phil> Didn't one of the early jet fighters have these? I also think
Phil> the germans did some work on these in WWII.
The NACA came up with them before World War II. NASA is directly
descended from the NACA, with space added in.
You'll notice that I didn't mention sweep wings even though the
X-5, tested at what's now Dryden, had them. We did steal that one
dirctly from the Germans. The difference is that swept wings don't
change their angle of sweep, sweep wings do. Perhaps the similarity
of names has caused some confusion? 747s have swept wings, F-111s
have sweep wings.
>Winglets. Area ruling. Digital fly by wire. Ride smoothing.
Phil> A lot of this was also done by the military...
After NASA aerodynamicists proposed them and NASA test teams
demonstrated them. Richard Whitcomb and R.T. Jones, at Langley
Research Center, were giants in the field.
Dryden was involved in the flight testing of winglets and area
ruling (in the 70s and 50s, respectively). It's true that we
used military aircraft as the testbeds (KC-135 and YF-102) but
that had more to do with availability and need than with military
involvement. The YF-102 was completely ours and the KC-135 was
bailed to us. The Air Force, of course, was interested in our
results and supportive of our efforts.
Dryden flew the first digital fly by wire aircraft in the 70s. No
mechnaical or analog backup, to show you how confident we were.
General Dynamics decided to make the F-16 flyby-wire when they saw how
successful we were. (Mind you, the Avro Arrow and the X-15 were both
fly-by-wire aircraft much earlier, but analog.)
Phil> Egad! I'm disagreeing with Mary Shafer!
The NASA habit of acquiring second-hand military aircraft and using
them for testbeds can make things kind of confusing. On the other
hand, all those second-hand Navy planes give our test pilots a chance
to fold the wings--something most pilots at Edwards Air Force Base
can't do.
Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
[email protected] Of course I don't speak for NASA
"A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all." Unknown US fighter pilot
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Ron Baalke) writes:
\|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.
a
What about positional uncertainties in S-L 1993e? I assume we know where
and what Galileo is doing within a few meters. But without the
HGA, don't we have to have some pretty good ideas, of where to look
before imaging? If the HGA was working, they could slew around
in near real time (Less speed of light delay). But when they were
imaging toutatis???? didn't someone have to get lucky on a guess to
find the first images?
Also, I imagine S-L 1993e will be mostly a visual image. so how will
that affect the other imaging missions. with the LGA, there is a real
tight allocation of bandwidth. It may be premature to hope for answers,
but I thought i'd throw it on the floor.
pat
Archive-name: space/new_probes
Last-modified: $Date: 93/04/01 14:39:17 $
Information on upcoming or currently active missions not mentioned below
would be welcome. Sources: NASA fact sheets, Cassini Mission Design
team, ISAS/NASDA launch schedules, press kits.
ASUKA (ASTRO-D) - ISAS (Japan) X-ray astronomy satellite, launched into
Earth orbit on 2/20/93. Equipped with large-area wide-wavelength (1-20
Angstrom) X-ray telescope, X-ray CCD cameras, and imaging gas

in those sectors.

Jobs provided building the thing, balance of trade improvement, etc..

We mentioned that skypix would benifit from lower launch costs.

We left the paper on what technologies needed to be invested in in order

to make this even easier to do. And he asked questions on this point.

We ended by telling her that we wanted her to be aware that efforts are

proceeding in this area, and that we want to make sure that the

results from these efforts are not lost (much like condor, or majellan),

and most importantly, we asked that she help fund further efforts along

the lines of lowering the cost to LEO.

In the middle we also gave a little speal about the Lunar Resource Data

Purchase act, and the guy filed it separately, he was VERY interested in it.

He asked some questions about it, and seemed like he wanted to jump on it,

and contact some of the people involved with it, so something may actually

happen immediatly there.

The last two things we did were to make sure that they knew that we

knew a lot of people in the space arena here in town, and that they

could feel free to call us any time with questions, and if we didn't know

the answers, that we would see to it that they questions got to people who

really did know the answers.

Then finally, we asked for an appointment with the senator herself. He

said that we would get on the list, and he also said that knowing her, this

would be something that she would be very interested in, although they

do have a time problem getting her scheduled, since she is only in the

state 1 week out of 6 these days.

All in all we felt like we did a pretty good job.

John.

On Tue, 6 Apr 1993 02:19:59 GMT, [email protected] (Phil G. Fraering) said:

Phil> [email protected] (Mary Shafer) writes:

>On 4 Apr 1993 20:31:10 -0400, [email protected] (Pat) said:

>Pat> In article <[email protected]> Pat>

>[email protected] writes: >Question is can someone give me 10

>examples of direct NASA/Space related >research that helped humanity

>in general? It will be interesting to see..

>Pat> TANG :-) Mylar I think. I think they also pushed Hi Tech Pat>

>Composites for airframes. Look at Fly by Wire.

>Swept wings--if you fly in airliners you've reaped the benefits.

Phil> Didn't one of the early jet fighters have these? I also think

Phil> the germans did some work on these in WWII.

The NACA came up with them before World War II. NASA is directly

descended from the NACA, with space added in.

You'll notice that I didn't mention sweep wings even though the

X-5, tested at what's now Dryden, had them. We did steal that one

dirctly from the Germans. The difference is that swept wings don't

change their angle of sweep, sweep wings do. Perhaps the similarity

of names has caused some confusion? 747s have swept wings, F-111s

have sweep wings.

>Winglets. Area ruling. Digital fly by wire. Ride smoothing.

Phil> A lot of this was also done by the military...

After NASA aerodynamicists proposed them and NASA test teams

demonstrated them. Richard Whitcomb and R.T. Jones, at Langley

Research Center, were giants in the field.

Dryden was involved in the flight testing of winglets and area

ruling (in the 70s and 50s, respectively). It's true that we

used military aircraft as the testbeds (KC-135 and YF-102) but

that had more to do with availability and need than with military

involvement. The YF-102 was completely ours and the KC-135 was

bailed to us. The Air Force, of course, was interested in our

results and supportive of our efforts.

Dryden flew the first digital fly by wire aircraft in the 70s. No

mechnaical or analog backup, to show you how confident we were.

General Dynamics decided to make the F-16 flyby-wire when they saw how

successful we were. (Mind you, the Avro Arrow and the X-15 were both

fly-by-wire aircraft much earlier, but analog.)

Phil> Egad! I'm disagreeing with Mary Shafer!

The NASA habit of acquiring second-hand military aircraft and using

them for testbeds can make things kind of confusing. On the other

hand, all those second-hand Navy planes give our test pilots a chance

to fold the wings--something most pilots at Edwards Air Force Base

can't do.

Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA

[email protected] Of course I don't speak for NASA

"A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all." Unknown US fighter pilot

In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Ron Baalke) writes:

|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.

a

What about positional uncertainties in S-L 1993e? I assume we know where

and what Galileo is doing within a few meters. But without the

HGA, don't we have to have some pretty good ideas, of where to look

before imaging? If the HGA was working, they could slew around

in near real time (Less speed of light delay). But when they were

imaging toutatis???? didn't someone have to get lucky on a guess to

find the first images?

Also, I imagine S-L 1993e will be mostly a visual image. so how will

that affect the other imaging missions. with the LGA, there is a real

tight allocation of bandwidth. It may be premature to hope for answers,

but I thought i'd throw it on the floor.

pat

Archive-name: space/new_probes

Last-modified: $Date: 93/04/01 14:39:17 $

Information on upcoming or currently active missions not mentioned below

would be welcome. Sources: NASA fact sheets, Cassini Mission Design

team, ISAS/NASDA launch schedules, press kits.

ASUKA (ASTRO-D) - ISAS (Japan) X-ray astronomy satellite, launched into

Earth orbit on 2/20/93. Equipped with large-area wide-wavelength (1-20

Angstrom) X-ray telescope, X-ray CCD cameras, and imaging gas