[net.space] Info on shuttle mission results and other NASA news

wmartin@ALMSA-2.ALMSA (Will Martin -- AMXAL-RI) (11/14/85)

Would it be possible to feed the SPACE Digest with any NASA press releases or
reports, if they are available at some stage in their preparation in an
electronic form, related to current activities? We have seen the regular
media neglect the spece missions more and more (this is inevitable as
they become more common, and actually, I suppose, desirable, as we make
space-based activities a normal and ordinary part of human actions). I
would think that NASA would still be preparing info or reports about the
results of shuttle missions and other space activities, and such could
be "narrowcasted" to those of us interested in the subject via this
electronic medium. If they exist in an on-line form on a machine
connected into the Internet in some way, could it be made a standard
practice to release these via electronic mail to this list at the same
time as they are released on paper through more traditional channels?

Any NASA types out there -- please pass this on to your PR people.
(Send it in as a suggestion and make a few bucks! That's fine with me!)

Regards, Will Martin
US Army Materiel Command

eugene@ames.UUCP (Eugene Miya) (11/15/85)

> Would it be possible to feed the SPACE Digest with any NASA press releases or
> reports, if they are available at some stage in their preparation in an
> electronic form, related to current activities?
> 
> Any NASA types out there -- please pass this on to your PR people.
> (Send it in as a suggestion and make a few bucks! That's fine with me!)
> 
> Regards, Will Martin
> US Army Materiel Command

I have high respect for your suggestions Will.  This has been proposed
to me, and I will try to answer your questions about the problems we
have.

1) Foremost.  The money which goes into the space agency goes (obviously)
to project oriented research.  PR is an after fact.  I have been working
with the Ames people recently to get some TRs published.  Our
publication people are all heavily overworked and using obsolete tools.
At Ames, we just hard an NBI system installed, but insite training was poor,
networking between them does not exist, and the money is not there.
Functions such as this come third to projects preceded by research and so
forth. I think most large bureacracies are like this.  Also, none of the
PR branches have laser printers.  Use of the word LASER in the government
implies numerous safety rules which these departments don't deal with
[another story].  This illustrates some of our problems.

2) There is quite a bulk of NASA data out there: Voyager status notes,
Tech Briefs, Pioneer reports, NASA Activities, etc.  Who decides what,
how much, and so forth?   There is a lot of "junk."  I receieved
a couple of complaints when I posted NASA Activities. Following
the USENET is a major time kill (yeah, tell me something new...).

3) Networks and computers are foreign to large portions of NASA.
I am on here by the graces of my management and the graces of
a different Division who runs this machine (our Central Computer
Facility does not have Unix machines [we actually have an SGI IRIS]).
I have been called in my Division chief's office on more than one
USENET posting when it came from the net somewhere else back to my
management.  Information including simple correspondence typically
must go thru a clearance cycle [e.g., your voice represents the Agency
whether you disclaim things or not.].  Dispersal of information to
"foreign" ....  worries a lot of people.  I cannot accept invitations
to speak or present papers based on electronic mail (must have
hardcopy with letterhead and 'signature.')

I recently visited one research Center (larger than Ames but back East)
which had never seen a Mac before.  This Center has 2 (two) IBM PCs
with all other work done on IBM and other mainframes.  Univac would
love to sell Ames one of their machines, but they were luck to get two
people show up for their presentation.

4) There are, as posted by others, small BBSs at various NASA Centers
like Johnson and Goddard.  The numbers are available.

5) Roger Noe has written suggesting involvement on internal discussion
groups.  Al Globius (ames!al) started a local news group on discussing
space station design topics, but few local researchers got involved.
This brings up problems of propritary information from contractors
and vendors, and the possibly of "premature announcement" of ideas
which are not policy.

It would be nice to spend more time, but back to work.

From the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
--eugene miya
  NASA Ames Research Center
  {hplabs,ihnp4,dual,hao,decwrl,allegra}!ames!aurora!eugene
  emiya@ames-vmsb

jrd@mit-amt.MIT.EDU (Jim Davis) (11/17/85)

In a previous message Will Martin asked that STS info be posted
here.  There is already a group dedicated to the Shuttle, it is called
net.columbia.  STS info should go there.  Duplication of subject
area should be avoided.

-- 
ARPA:jrd@media-lab.mit.edu
Phone: (617)-253-0360

dls@mtgzz.UUCP (d.l.skran) (11/19/85)

After reading this posting, I cannot help but feel that the 
situation at NASA is little short of tragic. Many indvidual employees
where I work apparently have more computing power on their desks
than whole divisions of NASA. The notion of a publications
department not having a laser printer when you can buy one
for under $10,000 dollars is incredible. It sounds like
we are almost an entire generation of equipment ahead of you.

Dale Skran
Trying hard not to reveal too many specifics
Not speaking for AT&T.

wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (11/19/85)

In article <39@mit-amt.MIT.EDU> jrd@mit-amt.MIT.EDU (Jim Davis) writes:
>In a previous message Will Martin asked that STS info be posted
>here.  There is already a group dedicated to the Shuttle, it is called
>net.columbia.  STS info should go there.  Duplication of subject
>area should be avoided.

Heavy sigh... We see here again a lack of realization of what is going
on in the Internet environment and with newsgroup/mailing-list gateways.

I'm lucky -- I can see net.space and net.columbia at a host where I have
limited USENET access; I get the ARPA SPACE Digest at my regular "home"
host, mailed to me on the MILNET. Few other people can see this stuff
from both viewpoints, however, and it can come and go away for me, too.

When I posted that (to which Eugene Miya has written an excellent
response explaining why it is unlikely that it will happen), I referred
explicitly and specifically to the SPACE Digest on the ARPA side. (For
me, it is much more reliable and long-term available than USENET access.)

The SPACE Digest has a gateway between it and USENET's net.space
newsgroup. This recently was put back into operation after being down
for a while. There is NOT a gateway between it and net.columbia (the
USENET's space-shuttle newsgroup). So, to the ARPA side, which is where
I addressed that query, net.columbia might as well not exist, and stuff
posted to it is never seen. For maximum exposure, and for distribution
to the ENTIRE community, information like I was requesting (reviews of
the results of missions, reports on satellites and projects, anything
and everything we could get out of NASA) MUST be posted to net.space or
sent to the SPACE Digest. It will do no good for the ARPA side to put it
on net.columbia.

It would be nice to get a one-way gateway feeding net.columbia into the
SPACE Digest, but this probably would result in the postings eventually
migrating over to net.space, since the software would feed them back
through the two-way SPACE Digest <> net.space gateway as new items. In
practical terms it means that an ARPA Digest or mailing list can have a
single gateway to a USENET newsgroup, and we will have to live within
this constraint.

To those of you on USENET, pay attention to the header fields when
responding to or evaluating a posting you see in net.space (or any other
gatewayed newsgroup). If it comes from an ARPA site, and especially if
it refers to a "Digest" as the medium, DON'T evaluate it like it was
a posting from a USENET site and refer the poster to "more appropriate"
newsgroups, which do not exist in that poster's environment.

Will Martin

UUCP/USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin   or   ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA