RE: Contour - OT or not?

From: McConahy, Ralph (
Date: Fri Aug 16 2002 - 11:11:22 EDT

  • Next message: Ted Molczan: "RE: Unk Flasher Again"

    Since the subject of "off topic" was first mentioned by me, I want to
    clarify something. When I responded that I felt that a post was off topic, I
    was not implying that CONTOUR or any aspects of rocket motor firings or
    other items related to visual observing of CONTOUR was off topic. The post I
    responded to was short, dealt with no aspect of viewing CONTOUR, but aimed
    at bringing NASA policy into question concerning doing a burn while not
    having radio contact with the spacecraft. It may be debatable if that policy
    was right or wrong, and I don't have any problems with the fact that the
    question was raised. I simply stated that I'd answer it offline. But I still
    feel that those discussions should be held somewhere other than on list set
    aside for visual satellite observing. I fully agree with all of you who
    point out the benefits of this topic for visually observing CONTOUR.
      Ralph McConahy
      34.8829N  117.0064W  670m
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Willie Koorts []
    Sent: Friday, 16 August 2002 4:06 AM
    To: SeeSat-L Mailing List
    Subject: Contour - OT or not?
    This is indeed not OT at all.  If you log onto
    now you are greeted with this caption:
         Missing Spacecraft
      The Contour spacecraft is lost, and NASA is turning to
      amateur astronomers to help recover it.
    Unsubscribe from SeeSat-L by sending a message with 'unsubscribe'
    in the SUBJECT to

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 16 2002 - 11:21:16 EDT