Data from Columbia 2/1/03 massacre survived... Sounds like anothergovmint covup to me!

In article ,
James Of Tucson wrote:
On May 9, 6:36 pm, "Jorge R. Frank" wrote:

DOS was never the OS for the space shuttle.

When MS-DOS was on the table, the choice was made to use 68000 chips
and the OS-9 operating system instead.
But the avionics systems were never based on consumer hardware or
software at all.

The avionics are distributed among hundreds (about 300) separate
specialized control units. These were designed from the ground up
specifically for the Shuttle. These control units are interfaced to
"General Purpose Computers".

At one time, the GPCs were based on a Motorola 68000, but a special
one that was designed for the space program.
That one ran OS-9. It was actually the second generation GPC, in


As someone else posted in more detail, the main computers were
off-the-shelf IBM hardware. See

http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/ex...e_shuttle.html


--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail

On May 10, 1:30*am, "Alan Erskine" wrote:
"eyeball" wrote in message

...

discovered the truth:

http://www.ilovebonnie.net/tinfoil-hat.jpg

LOL! *I never thought I'd see a picture of someone actually wearing a
tinfoil had!

Now there's an obamarama supporter if I've ever seen one! Is he the
new director for Nasa in January?????
-------
DemonCraps.... Making the lives of poor people even more miserable!
DemonCraps.... Save a planet, Starve a Nation

On Sat, 10 May 2008 11:32:03 -0500, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:

James Of Tucson wrote:

At one time, the GPCs were based on a Motorola 68000, but a special
one that was designed for the space program.
That one ran OS-9. It was actually the second generation GPC, in
84.

No. The GPCs have always been from the IBM AP-101 family. They started
out as AP-101B and were upgraded to AP-101S starting in 1991. The S has
more memory and has the IOP integrated into the CPU, while the B had
separate CPUs and IOPs.

IIRC, 68000s did turn up in the updated Main Engine Controllers circa
1990. I had an Amiga at the time and was impressed that some part of
the Shuttle was also now using the 68000.

Brian

Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 11:32:03 -0500, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:

James Of Tucson wrote:
At one time, the GPCs were based on a Motorola 68000, but a special
one that was designed for the space program.
That one ran OS-9. It was actually the second generation GPC, in
84.
No. The GPCs have always been from the IBM AP-101 family. They started
out as AP-101B and were upgraded to AP-101S starting in 1991. The S has
more memory and has the IOP integrated into the CPU, while the B had
separate CPUs and IOPs.

IIRC, 68000s did turn up in the updated Main Engine Controllers circa
1990. I had an Amiga at the time and was impressed that some part of
the Shuttle was also now using the 68000.

Hmm, right you are. Jenkins says the Block II MECs were certified in
1991 (p. 416) but does not mention that it used a 68000. That bit of
info is in /Computers in Spaceflight: The NASA Experience/, however.

Jorge R. Frank wrote:
Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 11:32:03 -0500, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:

James Of Tucson wrote:
At one time, the GPCs were based on a Motorola 68000, but a special
one that was designed for the space program.
That one ran OS-9. It was actually the second generation GPC, in
84.
No. The GPCs have always been from the IBM AP-101 family. They
started out as AP-101B and were upgraded to AP-101S starting in 1991.
The S has more memory and has the IOP integrated into the CPU, while
the B had separate CPUs and IOPs.

IIRC, 68000s did turn up in the updated Main Engine Controllers circa
1990. I had an Amiga at the time and was impressed that some part of
the Shuttle was also now using the 68000.

Hmm, right you are. Jenkins says the Block II MECs were certified in
1991 (p. 416) but does not mention that it used a 68000. That bit of
info is in /Computers in Spaceflight: The NASA Experience/, however.

It is also probably worth pointing out that there are other "computers"
on the shuttle that are more powerful than the GPCs. The MEDS IDPs are
Intel 386-based, and the MEDS MDUs have RISC processors, for example.

On Sat, 10 May 2008 15:16:35 -0500, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:

IIRC, 68000s did turn up in the updated Main Engine Controllers circa
1990. I had an Amiga at the time and was impressed that some part of
the Shuttle was also now using the 68000.

Hmm, right you are. Jenkins says the Block II MECs were certified in
1991 (p. 416) but does not mention that it used a 68000. That bit of
info is in /Computers in Spaceflight: The NASA Experience/, however.

....And with that, Brian wins an "I Corrected Jorge" baseball cap, the
first of its kind. Congrats!

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

On Sat, 10 May 2008 15:47:29 -0500, OM
wrote:

On Sat, 10 May 2008 15:16:35 -0500, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:

IIRC, 68000s did turn up in the updated Main Engine Controllers circa
1990. I had an Amiga at the time and was impressed that some part of
the Shuttle was also now using the 68000.

Hmm, right you are. Jenkins says the Block II MECs were certified in
1991 (p. 416) but does not mention that it used a 68000. That bit of
info is in /Computers in Spaceflight: The NASA Experience/, however.

...And with that, Brian wins an "I Corrected Jorge" baseball cap, the
first of its kind. Congrats!

Jorge: 127, Brian: 1

:-)


Brian

On May 9, 1:12 pm, wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080509/...recovered_data

On the Net:

NASA write-up of the experiment whose data was recovered:

http://tinyurl.com/44nqgv

the news article tried to downplay the use of the DOS operating system
as the OS for the space shuttle, saying that facilitated writing to
one hard drive. Windows can also write to one drive - just don't
partition it.

what leads me to think it was a governmint coverup is the stating that
a NASA contractor kept the hard drive for 6 months before handing it
over to Kroll Ontrack to 'recover' the data. why did the contractor
hold on to it for so long? yeah, we got us one of dem dar govmint
covups again. but what else would you expect from NASA, and, also,
the evil EWOC (Emperor WithOut Clothes) GWBush!

triba la raza!

I looks to me as though data that goes missing and relatively young
folks of NASA that should be in nothing but the very best of health
are suddenly dieing off, is their status quo of cloak and dagger
business as per usual.
.. - Brad Guth

On May 10, 1:37*pm, ayatollah obama
wrote:
On May 10, 1:30*am, "Alan Erskine" wrote:

"eyeball" wrote in message

...

discovered the truth:

http://www.ilovebonnie.net/tinfoil-hat.jpg

LOL! *I never thought I'd see a picture of someone actually wearing a
tinfoil had!

Now there's an obamarama supporter if I've ever seen one! Is he the
new director for Nasa in January?????
-------
DemonCraps.... Making the lives of poor people even more miserable!
DemonCraps.... Save a planet, Starve a Nation

Democraps? Who got us into the nation building in the Middle East? Who
started a dumb war based upon false intel?

You Repugs had your chance and blew it.

On May 9, 9:36*pm, "Jorge R. Frank" wrote:
wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080509/...recovered_data

On the Net:

NASA write-up of the experiment whose data was recovered:

http://tinyurl.com/44nqgv

the news article tried to downplay the use of the DOS operating system
as the OS for the space shuttle,

DOS was never the OS for the space shuttle. The space shuttle carried
experiments from many different agencies and some of them used DOS. That
does not mean that DOS was the OS for the space shuttle.

the article stated that DOS was used stupid. did you even take time
to read the article, you lazy ****?