Selected SRB Pc (MSFC) from Lift-Off [51-L]

COPYRIGHT 2003 - John Thomas Maxson (All rights reserved.)
============================================

Except for the initial set of data points below, all sets are the
first set provided by FOIA for the 1-second interval listed.
Thus this list necessarily uses a vastly reduced sample rate.

Where ~ deltas are given, at least 2 out of 3 sensors on the
right SRB exceeded in value the same ones on the left SRB.

The ignition interval is murkier and must be treated separately.

============================================
028:16:38:01.533 905.082 900.854 897.734 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 12) 897.240 909.343 903.504 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:02.013 903.097 900.854 895.765
(minmax ~ 13) 897.240 909.343 899.526

028:16:38:03.093 897.144 892.993 889.860 [data in PSIA]
(minmax ~ 15) 893.259 905.385 895.547

028:16:38:04.013 895.160 891.028 887.892
(minmax ~ 13) 891.268 901.428 895.547

028:16:38:05.013 895.160 891.028 887.892 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 16) 895.250 903.407 899.526 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:06.053 899.129 892.993 893.797
(minmax ~ 14) 899.231 907.364 903.504

028:16:38:07.053 903.097 896.923 895.765
(minmax ~ 14) 903.212 909.343 905.493

028:16:38:08.173 901.113 896.923 893.797
(minmax ~ 16) 899.231 909.343 903.504

028:16:38:09.053 897.144 892.993 891.829
(minmax ~ 16) 899.231 907.364 903.504

028:16:38:10.173 895.160 892.993 889.860 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 16) 895.250 905.385 899.526 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:11.053 893.175 891.028 887.892
(minmax ~ 18) 895.250 905.385 897.537

028:16:38:12.013 893.175 889.062 885.923
(minmax ~ 14) 893.259 899.450 895.547

028:16:38:13.173 893.175 889.062 885.923
(minmax ~ 14) 891.268 899.450 893.558

028:16:38:14.013 889.207 887.097 881.986
(minmax ~ 15) 887.287 897.471 891.569

028:16:38:15.013 885.238 883.167 880.018 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 14) 883.306 893.514 885.602 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:16.053 883.253 881.201 878.050
(minmax ~ 12) 881.315 889.557 883.613

028:16:38:17.133 879.285 877.271 874.113
(minmax ~ 14) 879.324 887.578 881.624

028:16:38:18.253 879.285 875.305 872.144
(minmax ~ 13) 877.333 885.600 879.635

028:16:38:19.173 877.300 873.340 872.144
(minmax ~ 12) 875.343 883.621 877.646

028:16:38:20.173 875.316 871.375 870.176 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 12) 873.352 881.643 875.656 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:21.173 871.347 869.410 866.239
(minmax ~ 13) 871.362 879.664 871.678

028:16:38:22.053 867.378 865.479 862.302
(minmax ~ 13) 861.408 875.707 863.722

028:16:38:23.013 853.487 855.653 846.555
(begin matching) 841.501 857.900 843.831

028:16:38:24.013 835.628 837.965 830.807
(begin matching) 827.567 840.093 827.918

028:16:38:25.013 817.768 820.278 813.092 [LH - A, B, C]
(begin matching) 811.642 824.264 812.005 [RH - A, B, C]
============================================

I will E-mail (by attachment) the MOD's Pc plot (which covers
this interval for JSC) to professionals and others who have been
respectful to me in the past (e.g., Dave Michelson and Stephen
Stocker), or to anyone who has never been disrespectful of me,
upon request presented to the sci.space.shuttle bulletin board.

To the extent I have them, I am willing to take the trouble to post
comparative values from three other Challenger missions, and from
three early non-Challenger missions (military, high-orbit). Before
I do that, I would like to see more open-minded interest here.

As posted earlier, according to JSC the maximum difference in Pc
seen previously for SRBs with an unmatched pair was "4-9 psi."
The three military missions reflect those unique chamber pressures.
I'm quite sure that you will find them extremely interesting.

Two of the other Challenger missions serve as controls, but you
are certain to find the third one, Mission 41-C, most intriguing.

=============================================
COPYRIGHT 2002 - John Thomas Maxson (All rights reserved.)
=============================================

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

"John Maxson" wrote in message
...

COPYRIGHT 2003 - John Thomas Maxson (All rights reserved.)
============================================

You obtained almost all of the data below from where? Do you ever
acknowledge anyone else helped you?

I made the FOIA requests to MSFC below, IIRC. I interviewed key people at
MSFC on that data. I have compiled all of the STS 51-L SRB thrust data in
Excel spreadsheet format, reorganized it to make it more intelligible, and
identified almost all of the fraud, lies, and deceipt thrust upon the U.S.
citizenry via that data. That data is the baseline origin for my arguments
on prior posts on the subject of Mr. Lee along with the thrust mismatch
"DAR". To now belatedly inject this information as your own, Dad, with
copyright, with no other attribution, is arrogant and egotisitical IMO.
Enjoy your copyright time for now ;-)

I am trying to help you, but you keep kicking me in the head publicly and
privately which makes it diificult to say the least. I will still help if
you wnat me too. Your post is no way to get help.

Except for the initial set of data points below, all sets are the
first set provided by FOIA for the 1-second interval listed.
Thus this list necessarily uses a vastly reduced sample rate.

Where ~ deltas are given, at least 2 out of 3 sensors on the
right SRB exceeded in value the same ones on the left SRB.

The ignition interval is murkier and must be treated separately.

Define "murkier".

The STS 51-L data for the ignition transient is where in the Roger's report?

Let me be blunter. Where in the hell is the T=0 to T+1 second SRM ignition
transient data from the STS 51-L flight?

Of all of the times in the STS 51-L flight for data to turn up AWOL, you
would think one of the intellectuals here, some of whom have based their
entire private reputations on an SRB leak which allegedly began with black
smoke during the interval from zero to one seconds would know.

Any takers? Go look through the five volumes of the beloved Roger's report
and post up a storm on the above time interval or accept that just maybe you
were snookered by NASA. Not that my Dad goes into any of this data in
detail in his book. He did not do so. He does so now, because??? I
brought up Mr. Lee and called that man a liar. My Dad never even
acknowledged the unmatched SRM pair in his book. He suggested I withheld
that information here in a prior post.

The T=0 to T+1 second data for STS 51-L and other missions I requested from
NASA under the FOIA was manipulated in dramatic fashion. That action
obfuscated any real evaluation of the ignition transient timeframe I tried
to make. NASA admitted the data had been removed after I called them on it
in a phone call involving a MSFC engineer, a Public Affairs representative,
and one of their lawyers.

For mission 51-L, the data I have from MSFC has been altered to hide certain
data points. Some seconds during the flight have as many as 25 data points
(second number 0) and other seconds have as few as five data points (second
number 65). There are many seconds with a number of data points inbetween
these values.) Interesting given that the sample frequency is 12.5 samples
per second (every second.)

Note that below:

A=B47P1300C=Left SRB=1sample/second
B=B47P1301C=Left SRB=2/samples/second
C=B47P1302C=Left SRB=12.5samples/second

or

A=B47P2300C=Right SRB=1sample/second
B=B47P2301C=Right SRB=2/samples/second
C=B47P2302C=Right SRB=12.5samples/second

============================================
028:16:38:01.533 905.082 900.854 897.734 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 12) 897.240 909.343 903.504 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:02.013 903.097 900.854 895.765
(minmax ~ 13) 897.240 909.343 899.526

028:16:38:03.093 897.144 892.993 889.860 [data in PSIA]
(minmax ~ 15) 893.259 905.385 895.547

028:16:38:04.013 895.160 891.028 887.892
(minmax ~ 13) 891.268 901.428 895.547

028:16:38:05.013 895.160 891.028 887.892 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 16) 895.250 903.407 899.526 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:06.053 899.129 892.993 893.797
(minmax ~ 14) 899.231 907.364 903.504

028:16:38:07.053 903.097 896.923 895.765
(minmax ~ 14) 903.212 909.343 905.493

028:16:38:08.173 901.113 896.923 893.797
(minmax ~ 16) 899.231 909.343 903.504

028:16:38:09.053 897.144 892.993 891.829
(minmax ~ 16) 899.231 907.364 903.504

028:16:38:10.173 895.160 892.993 889.860 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 16) 895.250 905.385 899.526 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:11.053 893.175 891.028 887.892
(minmax ~ 18) 895.250 905.385 897.537

028:16:38:12.013 893.175 889.062 885.923
(minmax ~ 14) 893.259 899.450 895.547

028:16:38:13.173 893.175 889.062 885.923
(minmax ~ 14) 891.268 899.450 893.558

028:16:38:14.013 889.207 887.097 881.986
(minmax ~ 15) 887.287 897.471 891.569

028:16:38:15.013 885.238 883.167 880.018 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 14) 883.306 893.514 885.602 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:16.053 883.253 881.201 878.050
(minmax ~ 12) 881.315 889.557 883.613

028:16:38:17.133 879.285 877.271 874.113
(minmax ~ 14) 879.324 887.578 881.624

028:16:38:18.253 879.285 875.305 872.144
(minmax ~ 13) 877.333 885.600 879.635

028:16:38:19.173 877.300 873.340 872.144
(minmax ~ 12) 875.343 883.621 877.646

028:16:38:20.173 875.316 871.375 870.176 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 12) 873.352 881.643 875.656 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:21.173 871.347 869.410 866.239
(minmax ~ 13) 871.362 879.664 871.678

028:16:38:22.053 867.378 865.479 862.302
(minmax ~ 13) 861.408 875.707 863.722

028:16:38:23.013 853.487 855.653 846.555
(begin matching) 841.501 857.900 843.831

028:16:38:24.013 835.628 837.965 830.807
(begin matching) 827.567 840.093 827.918

028:16:38:25.013 817.768 820.278 813.092 [LH - A, B, C]
(begin matching) 811.642 824.264 812.005 [RH - A, B, C]

And they end matching where????

More importantly. Why don't you go into the details of the friggin
calibration of these pressure transducers if you can. That is where I was
going.

============================================

I will E-mail (by attachment) the MOD's Pc plot (which covers
this interval for JSC) to professionals and others who have been
respectful to me in the past (e.g., Dave Michelson and Stephen
Stocker), or to anyone who has never been disrespectful of me,
upon request presented to the sci.space.shuttle bulletin board.

Don't bother. They will see all of it on the net when I am ready. I have a
FOIA pending. I have a request for permission to publish a document on the
internet pending with NASA. I can only go so fast.

To the extent I have them, I am willing to take the trouble to post
comparative values from three other Challenger missions, and from
three early non-Challenger missions (military, high-orbit). Before
I do that, I would like to see more open-minded interest here.

Insufficient and not scientifically mathematical enough to be taken
seriously. You must post all High Performance Motor (HPM) SRM missions so
that we can discuss the true standard deviations etc., otherwise you will be
no more credible than NASA on this issue.


As posted earlier, according to JSC the maximum difference in Pc
seen previously for SRBs with an unmatched pair was "4-9 psi."
The three military missions reflect those unique chamber pressures.
I'm quite sure that you will find them extremely interesting.

No kidding.

Two of the other Challenger missions serve as controls, but you
are certain to find the third one, Mission 41-C, most intriguing.

There are no controls in this instance whatsoever. They are all real
flights with real data under varying launch temperatures and propellant
manufacturing processes. Hell five of the mission used unmatched pairs.
The only control if you will is NASA's normalization of the data to 60
degrees F and 625 PSI, IIRC.

=============================================
COPYRIGHT 2002 - John Thomas Maxson (All rights reserved.)
=============================================

Interesting copyright properties.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

"Let me be blunter. Where in the hell is the T=0 to T+1 second SRM ignition
transient data from the STS 51-L flight?"
------------------------

It either doesn't exist or is taken from *other* flights. Period.

"Interesting copyright properties."

He went backwards a year in one post, probably kicking himself in the butt too. LOL.

How can you copyright a post to a public newsgroup?

Daniel,

You are in a win-win situation as I see it.

A. NASA allows you to post the data you asked permission to post.

B. They explain why you can't, (open can of worms.)

P.S. Why the major delay for *this* request from them?

Sucks to burn bridges doesn't it JTM?

PM

-----------------------



"Charleston" wrote in message news:jU49b.54557$cj1.15969@fed1read06...
"John Maxson" wrote in message
...

COPYRIGHT 2003 - John Thomas Maxson (All rights reserved.)
============================================

You obtained almost all of the data below from where? Do you ever
acknowledge anyone else helped you?

I made the FOIA requests to MSFC below, IIRC. I interviewed key people at
MSFC on that data. I have compiled all of the STS 51-L SRB thrust data in
Excel spreadsheet format, reorganized it to make it more intelligible, and
identified almost all of the fraud, lies, and deceipt thrust upon the U.S.
citizenry via that data. That data is the baseline origin for my arguments
on prior posts on the subject of Mr. Lee along with the thrust mismatch
"DAR". To now belatedly inject this information as your own, Dad, with
copyright, with no other attribution, is arrogant and egotisitical IMO.
Enjoy your copyright time for now ;-)

I am trying to help you, but you keep kicking me in the head publicly and
privately which makes it diificult to say the least. I will still help if
you wnat me too. Your post is no way to get help.

Except for the initial set of data points below, all sets are the
first set provided by FOIA for the 1-second interval listed.
Thus this list necessarily uses a vastly reduced sample rate.

Where ~ deltas are given, at least 2 out of 3 sensors on the
right SRB exceeded in value the same ones on the left SRB.

The ignition interval is murkier and must be treated separately.

Define "murkier".

The STS 51-L data for the ignition transient is where in the Roger's report?

Let me be blunter. Where in the hell is the T=0 to T+1 second SRM ignition
transient data from the STS 51-L flight?

Of all of the times in the STS 51-L flight for data to turn up AWOL, you
would think one of the intellectuals here, some of whom have based their
entire private reputations on an SRB leak which allegedly began with black
smoke during the interval from zero to one seconds would know.

Any takers? Go look through the five volumes of the beloved Roger's report
and post up a storm on the above time interval or accept that just maybe you
were snookered by NASA. Not that my Dad goes into any of this data in
detail in his book. He did not do so. He does so now, because??? I
brought up Mr. Lee and called that man a liar. My Dad never even
acknowledged the unmatched SRM pair in his book. He suggested I withheld
that information here in a prior post.

The T=0 to T+1 second data for STS 51-L and other missions I requested from
NASA under the FOIA was manipulated in dramatic fashion. That action
obfuscated any real evaluation of the ignition transient timeframe I tried
to make. NASA admitted the data had been removed after I called them on it
in a phone call involving a MSFC engineer, a Public Affairs representative,
and one of their lawyers.

For mission 51-L, the data I have from MSFC has been altered to hide certain
data points. Some seconds during the flight have as many as 25 data points
(second number 0) and other seconds have as few as five data points (second
number 65). There are many seconds with a number of data points inbetween
these values.) Interesting given that the sample frequency is 12.5 samples
per second (every second.)

Note that below:

A=B47P1300C=Left SRB=1sample/second
B=B47P1301C=Left SRB=2/samples/second
C=B47P1302C=Left SRB=12.5samples/second

or

A=B47P2300C=Right SRB=1sample/second
B=B47P2301C=Right SRB=2/samples/second
C=B47P2302C=Right SRB=12.5samples/second

============================================
028:16:38:01.533 905.082 900.854 897.734 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 12) 897.240 909.343 903.504 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:02.013 903.097 900.854 895.765
(minmax ~ 13) 897.240 909.343 899.526

028:16:38:03.093 897.144 892.993 889.860 [data in PSIA]
(minmax ~ 15) 893.259 905.385 895.547

028:16:38:04.013 895.160 891.028 887.892
(minmax ~ 13) 891.268 901.428 895.547

028:16:38:05.013 895.160 891.028 887.892 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 16) 895.250 903.407 899.526 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:06.053 899.129 892.993 893.797
(minmax ~ 14) 899.231 907.364 903.504

028:16:38:07.053 903.097 896.923 895.765
(minmax ~ 14) 903.212 909.343 905.493

028:16:38:08.173 901.113 896.923 893.797
(minmax ~ 16) 899.231 909.343 903.504

028:16:38:09.053 897.144 892.993 891.829
(minmax ~ 16) 899.231 907.364 903.504

028:16:38:10.173 895.160 892.993 889.860 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 16) 895.250 905.385 899.526 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:11.053 893.175 891.028 887.892
(minmax ~ 18) 895.250 905.385 897.537

028:16:38:12.013 893.175 889.062 885.923
(minmax ~ 14) 893.259 899.450 895.547

028:16:38:13.173 893.175 889.062 885.923
(minmax ~ 14) 891.268 899.450 893.558

028:16:38:14.013 889.207 887.097 881.986
(minmax ~ 15) 887.287 897.471 891.569

028:16:38:15.013 885.238 883.167 880.018 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 14) 883.306 893.514 885.602 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:16.053 883.253 881.201 878.050
(minmax ~ 12) 881.315 889.557 883.613

028:16:38:17.133 879.285 877.271 874.113
(minmax ~ 14) 879.324 887.578 881.624

028:16:38:18.253 879.285 875.305 872.144
(minmax ~ 13) 877.333 885.600 879.635

028:16:38:19.173 877.300 873.340 872.144
(minmax ~ 12) 875.343 883.621 877.646

028:16:38:20.173 875.316 871.375 870.176 [LH - A, B, C]
(minmax ~ 12) 873.352 881.643 875.656 [RH - A, B, C]

028:16:38:21.173 871.347 869.410 866.239
(minmax ~ 13) 871.362 879.664 871.678

028:16:38:22.053 867.378 865.479 862.302
(minmax ~ 13) 861.408 875.707 863.722

028:16:38:23.013 853.487 855.653 846.555
(begin matching) 841.501 857.900 843.831

028:16:38:24.013 835.628 837.965 830.807
(begin matching) 827.567 840.093 827.918

028:16:38:25.013 817.768 820.278 813.092 [LH - A, B, C]
(begin matching) 811.642 824.264 812.005 [RH - A, B, C]

And they end matching where????

More importantly. Why don't you go into the details of the friggin
calibration of these pressure transducers if you can. That is where I was
going.

============================================

I will E-mail (by attachment) the MOD's Pc plot (which covers
this interval for JSC) to professionals and others who have been
respectful to me in the past (e.g., Dave Michelson and Stephen
Stocker), or to anyone who has never been disrespectful of me,
upon request presented to the sci.space.shuttle bulletin board.

Don't bother. They will see all of it on the net when I am ready. I have a
FOIA pending. I have a request for permission to publish a document on the
internet pending with NASA. I can only go so fast.

To the extent I have them, I am willing to take the trouble to post
comparative values from three other Challenger missions, and from
three early non-Challenger missions (military, high-orbit). Before
I do that, I would like to see more open-minded interest here.

Insufficient and not scientifically mathematical enough to be taken
seriously. You must post all High Performance Motor (HPM) SRM missions so
that we can discuss the true standard deviations etc., otherwise you will be
no more credible than NASA on this issue.


As posted earlier, according to JSC the maximum difference in Pc
seen previously for SRBs with an unmatched pair was "4-9 psi."
The three military missions reflect those unique chamber pressures.
I'm quite sure that you will find them extremely interesting.

No kidding.

Two of the other Challenger missions serve as controls, but you
are certain to find the third one, Mission 41-C, most intriguing.

There are no controls in this instance whatsoever. They are all real
flights with real data under varying launch temperatures and propellant
manufacturing processes. Hell five of the mission used unmatched pairs.
The only control if you will is NASA's normalization of the data to 60
degrees F and 625 PSI, IIRC.

=============================================
COPYRIGHT 2002 - John Thomas Maxson (All rights reserved.)
=============================================

Interesting copyright properties.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

Paul Maxson wrote in message
...

"Let me be blunter. Where in the hell is the T=0 to T+1
second SRM ignition transient data from the STS 51-L flight?"
------------------------

Well, let's see; that intriguing segment on the attached plot from
Kranz (et al) is dated February 18, 1986; isn't it.

It either doesn't exist or is taken from *other* flights. Period.

The above segment definitely exists. Which "other" flight was
it taken from?

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

"Paul Maxson" wrote:
"Charleston" wrote:

"Let me be blunter. Where in the hell is the T=0 to T+1 second SRM
ignition
transient data from the STS 51-L flight?"
------------------------

It either doesn't exist or is taken from *other* flights. Period.

Well I have looked for it in the Presidential Commission Report and maybe I
missed it; but, you are right that you can definetely see references to
other flights in lieu of Challenger's data, yep.

I'd put up an example but I cant get the Roger's report to load at this
moment.

http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/51lcover.htm

www.hq.nasa.gov

Hq is down.

Anyway, you'd think they might include the SRM thrust curves along with
those black puffs of smoke the first few seconds in the timeline. Right?

He went backwards a year in one post, probably kicking himself in the butt
too. LOL.

Ya.

How can you copyright a post to a public newsgroup?

I tried it a couple times too and got laughed at. Oh well :-)

You are in a win-win situation as I see it.

I think everyone who wants to see the truth is in that position.

A. NASA allows you to post the data you asked permission to post.

That would be great.

B. They explain why you can't, (open can of worms.)

I will point out it is in the National Archives anyway and there are a lot
of copy machines there.

P.S. Why the major delay for *this* request from them?

My best guess is that someone is on vacation or it is sitting in a NASA
attorney's in-basket.

Sucks to burn bridges doesn't it JTM?

To think, Paul, all you had to say is "I do see that parachute on E-204."
Then there is the issue of one's own credibility.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

"Charleston" wrote in message
news:1t99b.54677$cj1.1191@fed1read06...
"Paul Maxson" wrote:

How can you copyright a post to a public newsgroup?

I tried it a couple times too and got laughed at. Oh well :-)

Technically what you write here already IS copyrighted.

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

So really it seems to come down to if you post it to Usenet, you can pretty
much expect it to be copied around Usenet, etc.

Taking it, putting it into a book and selling the book though probably by
all means violates the original author's copyright.

However, case law has gone both ways on compilations of data. Some rulings
have said they have deserved copyright protection, others haven't. What it
seems to come down to is effort and originality. I can never copy your
FORMATING, but under specific cases I may be able to copy your data,
especially if it has come from public domain sources to begin with.

So, it's not completely absurd to claim a copyright on something posted to
Usenet. But one shouldn't take TOO much stock in it.

(and if Daniel, you are the originator of that data in that format... well,
read above again. :-)


P.S. Why the major delay for *this* request from them?

My best guess is that someone is on vacation or it is sitting in a NASA
attorney's in-basket.

That's probably most likely.

(and I think that's the most reasonable answer, to assume general
incompetence/etc than conspiracy. :-)


Sucks to burn bridges doesn't it JTM?

To think, Paul, all you had to say is "I do see that parachute on E-204."
Then there is the issue of one's own credibility.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

"Charleston" wrote in message news:1t99b.54677$cj1.1191@fed1read06...
"Paul Maxson" wrote:
"Charleston" wrote:

"Let me be blunter. Where in the hell is the T=0 to T+1 second SRM
ignition
transient data from the STS 51-L flight?"
------------------------

It either doesn't exist or is taken from *other* flights. Period.

Well I have looked for it in the Presidential Commission Report and maybe I
missed it; but, you are right that you can definetely see references to
other flights in lieu of Challenger's data, yep.

I'd put up an example but I cant get the Roger's report to load at this
moment.

http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/51lcover.htm

www.hq.nasa.gov

Hq is down.

Anyway, you'd think they might include the SRM thrust curves along with
those black puffs of smoke the first few seconds in the timeline. Right?

He went backwards a year in one post, probably kicking himself in the butt
too. LOL.

Ya.

How can you copyright a post to a public newsgroup?

I tried it a couple times too and got laughed at. Oh well :-)

You are in a win-win situation as I see it.

I think everyone who wants to see the truth is in that position.

A. NASA allows you to post the data you asked permission to post.

That would be great.

B. They explain why you can't, (open can of worms.)

I will point out it is in the National Archives anyway and there are a lot
of copy machines there.

P.S. Why the major delay for *this* request from them?

My best guess is that someone is on vacation or it is sitting in a NASA
attorney's in-basket.

Sucks to burn bridges doesn't it JTM?

To think, Paul, all you had to say is "I do see that parachute on E-204."
Then there is the issue of one's own credibility.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

Daniel,


Are you saying (surely you gest) that all I had to do to stay in JTM's good graces
is deny seeing something that I really **did** see?

I don't work that way, I saw it. I guess he didn't like that. But, I call it like I see it.

PM

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote:
"Charleston" wrote:
"Paul Maxson" wrote:

How can you copyright a post to a public newsgroup?

I tried it a couple times too and got laughed at. Oh well :-)

Technically what you write here already IS copyrighted.

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

So really it seems to come down to if you post it to Usenet, you can
pretty
much expect it to be copied around Usenet, etc.

Taking it, putting it into a book and selling the book though probably by
all means violates the original author's copyright.

However, case law has gone both ways on compilations of data. Some
rulings
have said they have deserved copyright protection, others haven't. What
it
seems to come down to is effort and originality. I can never copy your
FORMATING, but under specific cases I may be able to copy your data,
especially if it has come from public domain sources to begin with.

So, it's not completely absurd to claim a copyright on something posted to
Usenet. But one shouldn't take TOO much stock in it.

(and if Daniel, you are the originator of that data in that format...
well,
read above again. :-)

I appreciate that Greg. One thing that has held me back from sharing info
on Challenger is the fear of an opportunist lurking here and stealing if you
will, the work I have done. That is why I spend more time working on my
interests than posting here. After Columbia, I feel differently.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

"Paul Maxson" wrote:

Are you saying (surely you gest) that all I had to do to stay in JTM's
good graces
is deny seeing something that I really **did** see?

Well it sure came across that way to me. We will see soon enough I think.

I don't work that way, I saw it. I guess he didn't like that. But, I call
it like I see it.

I value your honesty.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

Charleston wrote
in message news:1t99b.54677$cj1.1191@fed1read06...
"Paul Maxson" wrote:

It either doesn't exist or is taken from *other* flights. Period.

Well I have looked for it in the Presidential Commission Report
and maybe I missed it; but, you are right that you can definetely
see references to other flights in lieu of Challenger's data, yep.

What's your memory of max Pc recorded for STS-8 (Challenger,
Richard Truly, first night launch)? All I'm looking for is a range
(e.g., 900-910 PSIA).

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)