NOTAM!

"MikeMl" wrote in message ...
Airbus wrote:
02/062 (A0038/08) - AIRSPACE CARF NR. 90 ON EVELYN STATIONARY RESERVATION
WITHIN AN AREA BNDD BY 3145N 17012W 2824N 16642W 2352N 16317W 1909N
16129W 1241N 16129W 1239N 16532W 1842N 17057W 2031N 17230W 2703N 17206W
SFC-UNL. 21 FEB 02:30 2008 UNTIL 21 FEB 05:00 2008. CREATED: 18 FEB 12:51
2008

Spy Satellite?

Google "USA 193" Lots of interesting stuff.
TP

I have a bad feeling about the military's intent to publically take a
shot at it... dumb, dumb, dumb, and dumber - and likely to fail...
So, here we go again, the laughing stock of the world...
Also, totally unnecessary as the heat of reentry will set off the
'toxic' hypergolic fuel leaving nothing but scrap metal to impact...
So, the desire to destroy HAS to be based in other reasons...
At least the chinese were smart enough to take their shots in secret
and only announce AFTER they hit it...
But not our gov't and pentagon, nope, no waay, shoot their mouths off
ahead of time so we can look really stupid...

denny

On Feb 20, 11:35*pm, Denny wrote:
I have a bad feeling about the military's intent to publically take a
shot at it... dumb, dumb, dumb, and dumber - and likely to fail...
So, here we go again, the laughing stock of the world...
Also, totally unnecessary as the heat of reentry will set off the
'toxic' hypergolic fuel leaving nothing but scrap metal to impact...
So, the desire to destroy HAS to be based in other reasons...
At least the chinese were smart enough to take their shots in secret
and only announce AFTER they hit it...
But not our gov't and pentagon, nope, no waay, shoot their mouths off
ahead of time so we can look really stupid...

you want governments to do things in secret? Now thats not very
American.
why would missing the target make you look stupid?. hitting a small
object moving at 17000 mph would be one hell of an achievement if you
ask me. If it doesnt work the first time , have another go. You guys
put men on the moon for christ sake, no one laughs at America for its
technological ability. If you are really worried about the US being
a laughing stock, heres a tip from a foreigner, get yourself another
president ( democrat or republican - see, I am not being political )
terry

Terry,
Thanks for the comments
Yes, I want the US Gov't to have kept it's mouth shut until they
accomplished the deed... As you point out it will be a heck of an
accomplishment - which means it is hard, not easy... I feel they have
been spooked by the Chinese, so they feel they have to 'catch up'...
Same reponse to Sputnik in 57.. And if so, the odds are the early
going will be the same results..

This shot is more difficult than the chinese shot because it is a low
altitude, much higher closing velocity with far less time for the
missile to correct its path, a 'relatively' unstable orbital path
much like riding a motorcyle on a rough, dirt road, and thus similar
to shooting ducks passing in front of you on a windy, rainy, day...
Not easy...

Now having said that, I recognize that governments work in mysterious
ways and nothing is as it seems..

It could be that they have already done a covert shot on something and
have a certainty that this one will work... If so it is likely they
are taunting the Chinese by doing this shot so publically, proving
that our technology is still an order of magnitude ahead of theirs...

It could be that this shot is to divert all the earth radars and
satellite sensors into concentrating on this shot, so they will not
notice something else we are doing at the same time...

It could be they are up to something that is beyond my poor
imagination...

Or it could be, they have their heads up their butts like they seem to
do a high percentage of the time - which is what I fear...

Now, as to the next president: Yeah, yeah, yeah, rub it in...

snip of long, eloquent analysis of all the candidates after I
remembered that this is a group post, not private email

sniff, sniif, and it was SO eloquent

denny

"Denny" wrote in message
...
Terry,
Thanks for the comments
Yes, I want the US Gov't to have kept it's mouth shut until they
accomplished the deed... As you point out it will be a heck of an
accomplishment - which means it is hard, not easy... I feel they have
been spooked by the Chinese, so they feel they have to 'catch up'...
Same reponse to Sputnik in 57.. And if so, the odds are the early
going will be the same results..


PBS just had a NOVA documentary on Sputnik and the US side of the story. We
had a Redstone rocket ready to go BEFORE Sputnik but egos got in the way and
the Russians beat us to it. It was a really good program though.

If you are really worried about the US being
a laughing stock, heres a tip from a foreigner, get yourself another
president ( democrat or republican - see, I am not being political )

Funny thing is, many Americans were saying the same thing with Mr. Clinton.

Sad thing is, we can't vote for "None of the Above". The candidates in the
upcoming race merit no more than a yawn, a cringe, or a laugh. (I'll leave
it to you to assign the candidates! :-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:46:03 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in L2Xuj.41991$9j6.8650@attbi_s22:

The candidates in the
upcoming race merit no more than a yawn, a cringe, or a laugh. (I'll leave
it to you to assign the candidates! :-)


Mmm... Would that be a yawn at the thought of McCain's hawkish stand
and Bush endorsement (more of the same), a cringe at Huckabee's
Christian supremist agenda in persecution the Crusades, and a laugh at
Clinton's desperate reliance on feminine emotional displays to soften
here image in the public eye?



Oblig. Aviation Content:
Hydrazine doesn't seem like it would present too large of a problem if
it burned in the upper atmosphere. Does anyone know just how much
hydrazine is involved? Is the hazard more from a tank full of the
stuff making it to the surface intact?

It's interesting to learn that F16s crash with hydrazine aboard all
the time:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrazine
Hydrazine is the chemical compound with the empirical chemical
formula N2H4. Its formula can also be written as (NH2)2. It is
widely used in chemical synthesis and is a component in some
rocket fuels. With an ammonia-like odor, hydrazine has a liquid
range and density similar to those of water.


Safety
Hydrazine is highly toxic and dangerously unstable, especially in
the anhydrous form. Symptoms of acute exposure to high levels of
hydrazine in humans may include irritation of the eyes, nose, and
throat, dizziness, headache, nausea, pulmonary edema, seizures,
coma, and it can also damage the liver, kidneys, and central
nervous system. The liquid is corrosive and may produce dermatitis
from skin contact in humans and animals. Effects to the lungs,
liver, spleen, and thyroid have been reported in animals
chronically exposed to hydrazine via inhalation. Increased
incidences of lung, nasal cavity, and liver tumors have been
observed in rodents exposed to hydrazine.[16]


Other industrial uses
Hydrazine is used in many processes including: production of
spandex fibers, as a polymerization catalyst; a blowing agent; in
fuel cells, solder fluxes; and photographic developers, as a chain
extender in urethane polymerizations, and heat stabilizers. In
addition, a semiconductor deposition technique using hydrazine has
recently been demonstrated, with possible application to the
manufacture of thin-film transistors used in liquid crystal
displays. Hydrazine in a 70% hydrazine, 30% water solution is used
-- to power the EPU (emergency power unit) on the F-16 fighter plane.
The explosive Astrolite is made by combining hydrazine with
ammonium nitrate.


Rocket fuel
Hydrazine was first used as a rocket fuel during World War II for
the Messerschmitt Me 163B (the first rocket-powered fighter
plane), under the name B-Stoff (hydrazine hydrate). If mixed with
methanol (M-Stoff) and water it is called C-Stoff.

Hydrazine is also used as a low-power monopropellant for the
maneuvering thrusters of spacecraft, and the Space Shuttle's
Auxiliary Power Units. In addition, monopropellant
hydrazine-fueled rocket engines are often used in terminal descent
of spacecraft. A collection of such engines was used in both
Viking program landers as well as the Phoenix lander launched in
August 2007.

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:25:20 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

Hydrazine doesn't seem like it would present too large of a problem if
it burned in the upper atmosphere. Does anyone know just how much
hydrazine is involved?

Half a ton. Probably frozen solid, but without telemetry, there's no way to
tell.

Is the hazard more from a tank full of the stuff making it to the
surface intact?

I'd suspect the problem is if it makes it intact. The Wikipedia article refers
to its use in the Me-163 Komet of WWII. The plane occasionally *dissolved*
pilots during accidents....

Ron Wanttaja

Mmm... Would that be a yawn at the thought of McCain's hawkish stand
and Bush endorsement (more of the same), a cringe at Huckabee's
Christian supremist agenda in persecution the Crusades, and a laugh at
Clinton's desperate reliance on feminine emotional displays to soften
here image in the public eye?

I wasn't even considering Huckabee.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:35:34 -0800 (PST), Denny wrote:

I have a bad feeling about the military's intent to publically take a
shot at it... dumb, dumb, dumb, and dumber - and likely to fail...
So, here we go again, the laughing stock of the world...
Also, totally unnecessary as the heat of reentry will set off the
'toxic' hypergolic fuel leaving nothing but scrap metal to impact...

Some of the hydrazine tanks from Space Shuttle Columbia survived to impact.

http://astroprofspage.com/archives/1516

As for failing in the eyes of the world, the US has already demonstrated its
ability to "shoot down" satellites. The USAF destroyed a satellite in the 1980s
using a missile launched from an F-15.

Ron Wanttaja