DOCSLIB.ORG

Quantifying Extravehicular Activity Performance Degradation Due to Sustenance Deprivation Eryn Beisner

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Quantifying Extravehicular Activity Performance Degradation Due to Sustenance Deprivation Eryn Beisner University of North Dakota UND Scholarly Commons Theses and Dissertations Theses, Dissertations, and Senior Projects January 2018 Quantifying Extravehicular Activity Performance Degradation Due To Sustenance Deprivation Eryn Beisner Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/theses Recommended Citation Beisner, Eryn, "Quantifying Extravehicular Activity Performance Degradation Due To Sustenance Deprivation" (2018). Theses and Dissertations. 2166. https://commons.und.edu/theses/2166 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, and Senior Projects at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. QUANTIFYING EXTRAVEHICULAR ACTIVITY PERFORMANCE DEGRADATION DUE TO SUSTENANCE DEPRIVATION by Eryn Andrews Beisner Bachelor of Science, University of Nevada, Reno, 2008 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of North Dakota In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Grand Forks, North Dakota August 2018 Copyright 2018 Eryn Beisner ii This thesis, submitted by Eryn Beisner in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science from the University of North Dakota, has been read by the Faculty Advisory Committee under whom the work has been done and is hereby approved. _______________________________________ Dr. Pablo De Leon, Department of Space Studies, UND Ph.D. Committee Chair _______________________________________ Dr. James Casler Department of Space Studies, UND Member, Ph.D. Committee _______________________________________ Dr. Richard Ferraro Department of Psychology, UND Member, Ph.D. Committee _______________________________________ Dr. Laurie Carrillo Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rice University Member, Ph.D. Committee This thesis is being submitted by the appointed advisory committee as having met all of the requirements of the School of Graduate Studies at the University of North Dakota and is hereby approved. _______________________________________ Dr. Grant McGimpsey Dean of the School of Graduate Studies _______________________________________ Date iii PERMISSION Title Quantifying Extravehicular Activity Performance Degradation Due To Sustenance Deprivation Department Space Studies Degree Master of Science In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a graduate degree from the University of North Dakota, I agree that the library of this University shall make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for extensive copying for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor who supervised my thesis work or, in his absence, by the Chairperson of the department or the dean of the School of Graduate Studies. It is understood that any copying or publication or other use of this thesis or part thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of North Dakota in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis. Eryn Andrews Beisner May 1, 2018 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ V LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................... VIII LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................................... X LIST OF EQUATIONS ................................................................................................................................ XI ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................................... XII ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................. XIV CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 PROBLEM STATEMENT ..................................................................................................................................... 2 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS .................................................................................................................................... 3 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Effects of IF during a spacewalk ........................................................................................................... 7 Performance Improvement .................................................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER II EVOLUTION OF U.S. SPACESUITS, FOOD, AND PREBREATHE PROTOCOLS ............................ 10 EARLY PRESSURE SUITS .................................................................................................................................. 10 NORTH AMERICAN X-15 PRESSURE SUIT .......................................................................................................... 15 LOCKHEED U-2 PRESSURE SUIT ....................................................................................................................... 17 PROJECT MERCURY ....................................................................................................................................... 21 PROJECT GEMINI ........................................................................................................................................... 23 APOLLO & SKYLAB ........................................................................................................................................ 25 v SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM (S HUTTLE ) ..................................................................................................... 29 INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION ...................................................................................................................... 33 THE FUTURE OF EVA S .................................................................................................................................... 34 CHAPTER III METHOD ............................................................................................................................. 36 EXPERIMENT DESIGN OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 36 NEUTRAL BUOYANCY LAB ............................................................................................................................... 36 IN-SUIT SUSTENANCE ..................................................................................................................................... 41 TEST SUBJECTS .............................................................................................................................................. 44 Institutional Review Board Considerations ........................................................................................ 45 DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................................................................ 46 COGNITIVE TESTING ....................................................................................................................................... 46 Working Memory ................................................................................................................................ 47 Processing Speed ................................................................................................................................. 49 PHYSIOLOGICAL TESTING ................................................................................................................................. 50 Dexterity .............................................................................................................................................. 51 Grip Strength ....................................................................................................................................... 52 Test Subject Experience ....................................................................................................................... 54 CHAPTER IV RESULTS ............................................................................................................................. 55 WORKING MEMORY : LIST SORTING TEST .......................................................................................................... 56 PROCESSING SPEED : PATTERN COMPARISON TEST .............................................................................................. 57 DEXTERITY : 9-HOLE PEG BOARD TEST .............................................................................................................. 59 GRIP STRENGTH : HAND GRIP DYNAMOMETER TEST .............................................................................................. 60 CHAPTER V DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................... 63 TEST SUBJECT EXPERIENCE
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aerospace Dimensions Leader's Guide
    Leader Guide www.capmembers.com/ae Leader Guide for Aerospace Dimensions 2011 Published by National Headquarters Civil Air Patrol Aerospace Education Maxwell AFB, Alabama 3 LEADER GUIDES for AEROSPACE DIMENSIONS INTRODUCTION A Leader Guide has been provided for every lesson in each of the Aerospace Dimensions’ modules. These guides suggest possible ways of presenting the aerospace material and are for the leader’s use. Whether you are a classroom teacher or an Aerospace Education Officer leading the CAP squadron, how you use these guides is up to you. You may know of different and better methods for presenting the Aerospace Dimensions’ lessons, so please don’t hesitate to teach the lesson in a manner that works best for you. However, please consider covering the lesson outcomes since they represent important knowledge we would like the students and cadets to possess after they have finished the lesson. Aerospace Dimensions encourages hands-on participation, and we have included several hands-on activities with each of the modules. We hope you will consider allowing your students or cadets to participate in some of these educational activities. These activities will reinforce your lessons and help you accomplish your lesson out- comes. Additionally, the activities are fun and will encourage teamwork and participation among the students and cadets. Many of the hands-on activities are inexpensive to use and the materials are easy to acquire. The length of time needed to perform the activities varies from 15 minutes to 60 minutes or more. Depending on how much time you have for an activity, you should be able to find an activity that fits your schedule.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report of S.P
    ANNUAL REPORT OF S.P. KOROLEV ROCKET AND SPACE PUBLIC CORPORATION ENERGIA FOR 2019 This Annual Report of S.P.Korolev Rocket and Space Public Corporation Energia (RSC Energia) was prepared based upon its performance in 2019 with due regard for the requirements stated in the Russian Federation Government Decree of December 31, 2010 No. 1214 “On Improvement of the Procedure to Control Open Joint-Stock Companies whose Stock is in Federal Ownership and Federal State Unitary Enterprises”, and in accordance with the Regulations “On Information Disclosure by the Issuers of Outstanding Securities” No. 454-P approved by the Bank of Russia on December 30, 2014 Accuracy of the data contained in this Annual Report, including the Report on the interested-party transactions effected by RSC Energia in 2019, was confirmed by RSC Energia’s Auditing Committee Report as of 01.06.2020. This Annual Report was preliminary approved by RSC Energia’s Board of Directors on August 24, 2020 (Minutes No. 31). This Annual Report was approved at RSC Energia’s General Shareholders’ Meeting on September 28, 2020 (Minutes No 40 of 01.10.2020). 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT RSC ENERGIA ............................. 6 1.1. Company background .........................................................................................................................6 1.2. Period of the Company operation in the industry ...............................................................................6 1.3. Information about the purchase and sale contracts for participating interests, equities, shares of business partnerships and companies concluded by the Company in 2019 ..............................................7 1.4. Information about the holding structure and the organizations involved ...........................................8 2. PRIORITY DIRECTIONS OF RSC ENERGIA OPERATION ........................ 11 2.1.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Space Station and the Space Shuttle
    Order Code RL33568 The International Space Station and the Space Shuttle Updated November 9, 2007 Carl E. Behrens Specialist in Energy Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division The International Space Station and the Space Shuttle Summary The International Space Station (ISS) program began in 1993, with Russia joining the United States, Europe, Japan, and Canada. Crews have occupied ISS on a 4-6 month rotating basis since November 2000. The U.S. Space Shuttle, which first flew in April 1981, has been the major vehicle taking crews and cargo back and forth to ISS, but the shuttle system has encountered difficulties since the Columbia disaster in 2003. Russian Soyuz spacecraft are also used to take crews to and from ISS, and Russian Progress spacecraft deliver cargo, but cannot return anything to Earth, since they are not designed to survive reentry into the Earth’s atmosphere. A Soyuz is always attached to the station as a lifeboat in case of an emergency. President Bush, prompted in part by the Columbia tragedy, made a major space policy address on January 14, 2004, directing NASA to focus its activities on returning humans to the Moon and someday sending them to Mars. Included in this “Vision for Space Exploration” is a plan to retire the space shuttle in 2010. The President said the United States would fulfill its commitments to its space station partners, but the details of how to accomplish that without the shuttle were not announced. The shuttle Discovery was launched on July 4, 2006, and returned safely to Earth on July 17.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia Accident Investigation Board
    COLUMBIA ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD Report Volume I August 2003 COLUMBIA ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD On the Front Cover This was the crew patch for STS-107. The central element of the patch was the microgravity symbol, µg, flowing into the rays of the Astronaut symbol. The orbital inclination was portrayed by the 39-degree angle of the Earthʼs horizon to the Astronaut symbol. The sunrise was representative of the numerous science experiments that were the dawn of a new era for continued microgravity research on the International Space Station and beyond. The breadth of science conduct- ed on this mission had widespread benefits to life on Earth and the continued exploration of space, illustrated by the Earth and stars. The constellation Columba (the dove) was chosen to symbolize peace on Earth and the Space Shuttle Columbia. In addition, the seven stars represent the STS-107 crew members, as well as honoring the original Mercury 7 astronauts who paved the way to make research in space possible. The Israeli flag represented the first person from that country to fly on the Space Shuttle. On the Back Cover This emblem memorializes the three U.S. human space flight accidents – Apollo 1, Challenger, and Columbia. The words across the top translate to: “To The Stars, Despite Adversity – Always Explore“ Limited First Printing, August 2003, by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board Subsequent Printing and Distribution by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 2 Report Volume I August 2003 COLUMBIA ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD IN MEMORIAM Rick D. Husband Commander William C.
    [Show full text]
  • STS-132 Mission Summary
    NASA Mission Summary National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, D.C. 20546 (202) 358-1100 STS-132 MISSION SUMMARY May 2010 SPACE SHUTTLE ATLANTIS Atlantis’ 12-day mission will deliver the Russian-built Mini Research Module-1 that will provide additional storage space and a new docking port for Russian Soyuz and Progress spacecraft. MRM-1, also known as Rassvet, which means dawn in Russian, will be permanently attached to the bottom port of the station’s Zarya module. MRM-1 will carry important hardware on its exterior including a radiator, airlock and a European robotic arm. Atlantis also will deliver addi- tional station hardware stored inside a cargo carrier. Three spacewalks are planned to stage spare components outside the station, including six spare batteries, a Ku-band antenna and spare parts for the Canadian Dextre robotic arm. Shuttle mission STS-132 is the final sched- uled flight for Atlantis . CREW Ken Ham Tony Antonelli (an-tuh-NEL-lee) Commander (Captain, U.S. Navy) Pilot (Commander, U.S. Navy) ● Veteran of one spaceflight, STS-124 pilot ● Veteran of one spaceflight, STS-119 pilot ● Age: 45, Born: Plainfield, N.J. ● Born: Detroit ● Married with two children ● Married with two children ● Logged 5,000+ hours in 40 different aircraft ● Logged 3,200+ hours in 41 different aircraft ● Call sign: Hock ● Interests include snow boarding and NASCAR Garrett Reisman (REESE-man) Michael Good Mission Specialist-1 Mission Specialist-2 (Col., U.S. Air Force, Ret.) ● Veteran flight engineer on Expedition 16 & 17 ● Veteran of one spaceflight, STS-125 ● Launched on STS-123; returned STS-124 ● Age: 47, Hometown: Broadview Heights, Ohio ● Age: 42, Hometown: Parsippany, N.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    The 2008 Annual Report of the International Space Exploration Coordination Group Released March 2009 International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG) – Annual Report:2008 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK 1 International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG) – Annual Report:2008 CONTENTS Introduction …………………………………………………………………………… 4 Part 1: The Role of the ISECG 1.1 Overview …………………………………………………………………………. 6 1.2 Working Groups of the ISECG …………………………………………………… 7 1.2.1 Enhancement of Public Engagement …………………………………………… 7 1.2.2 Establishment of Relationships with Existing International Working Groups …. 7 1.2.3 The International Space Exploration Coordination Tool (INTERSECT) ……. 8 1.2.4 The Space Exploration Interface Standards Working Group (ISWG) ………….. 8 1.2.5 Mapping the Space Exploration Journey ………………………………………... 8 Part 2: Current and Near-Term Activities of ISECG Members 2.1 Low Earth Orbit (LEO) …………………………………………………………… 10 2.1.1 The International Space Station (ISS) …………………………………………… 10 2.1.2 Emerging Government Capabilities …………………………………………….. 10 2.1.3 Emerging Commercial Providers ……………………………………………….. 11 2.2 Beyond LEO – The Moon and Mars ……………………………………………….. 11 2.2.1 Moon ……………………………………………………………………………… 11 2.2.2 Mars ………………………………………………………………………………. 12 Part 3: Progress in 2008 towards Opportunities for Integrated and Collaborative Space Exploration 3.1 Robotic Network Science – The International Lunar Network ……………………… 16 3.2 Joint Development for Robotic Exploration – Mars Sample Return ………………………… 17 3.3 Collaborative
    [Show full text]
  • Interviews with the Apollo Lunar Surface Astronauts in Support of Planning for EVA Systems Design
    NASA Technical Memorandum 108846 Interviews with the Apollo Lunar Surface Astronauts in Support of Planning for EVA Systems Design Mary M. Connors, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California Dean B. Eppler, SAIC, Houston, Texas Daniel G. Morrow, Decision Systems, Los Altos, California September 1994 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035-1000 Interviews with the Apollo Lunar Surface Astronauts in Support of Planning for EVA Systems Design MARY M. CONNORS, DEAN B. EPPLER,* AND DANIEL G. MORROW** Ames Research Center Summary was to explicate any other insights that could help further the planning process. Focused interviews were conducted with the Apollo astronauts who landed on the Moon. The purpose of The intended primary audience for this study is mission these interviews was to help define extravehicular activity planners and scientists and engineers responsible for (EVA) system requirements for future lunar and planetary EVA system design. However, we anticipate that various missions. Information from the interviews was examined aspects of the report may also be of interest to a wider with particular attention to identifying areas of consensus, readership and it is written to be accessible to anyone since some commonality of experience is necessary to aid with a general interest in EVA. the design of advanced systems. Results are presented This study followed a request made by the Office of under the following categories: mission approach; Exploration, NASA Headquarters, to the New Initiatives mission structure; suits; portable life support systems; Office at Johnson Space Center (JSC). The study team dust control; gloves; automation; information, displays, was headed by Robert Callaway of the New Initiative and controls; rovers and remotes; tools; operations; Office and included members of the Crew and Thermal training; and general comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Of S.P. Korolev Rocket and Space Public Corporation Energia for 2013
    OF S.P. KOROLEV ROCKET AND SPACE PUBLIC CORPORATION ENERGIA FOR 2013 This Annual Report of S.P. Korolev Rocket and Space Public Corporation Energia (also hereinafter called “OAO RSC Energia”, “RSC Energia”, “the Corporation”) by the 2013 performance is drawn up in accordance with the RF Government Decree No 1214 as of December 31, 2010 “On Improvement of the Procedure for Management of Open Joint-Stock Companies Whose Stock is in Federal Ownership and Federal State Unitary Enterprises” with due regard for the requirements set forth in the Order issued by the RF Federal Financial Markets Service No 11-46/pz-n as of October 4, 2011 “On Approval of the Provision on Information Disclosure of Issuers of Registered Securities”. This Annual Report was preliminarily approved by RSC Energia’s Board of Directors on April 29, 2014. Minutes No10 as of May 6, 2014. Accuracy of the data contained in this Annual Report was confirmed by RSC Energia’s Auditing Committee Report as of April 17, 2014. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ........................................................................... 6 ON CORPORATION ACTIVITIES ................................................................................. 8 Corporation background ................................................................................................................................8 Corporation structure (its participation in subsidiary and affiliated companies) ...........................................9 Information about purchase and sale contracts for
    [Show full text]
  • Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) and Mission Support Center (MSC)
    Planetary Science Vision 2050 Workshop 2017 (LPI Contrib. No. 1989) 8201.pdf EXTRAVEHICULAR ACTIVITY (EVA) AND MISSION SUPPORT CENTER (MSC) DESIGN ELEMENTS FOR FUTURE HUMAN SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION OF OUR SOLAR SYSTEM. M. J. Miller1, A. F. J. Abercromby2, S. Chappell2, K. Beaton2, S. Kobs Nawotniak3, A. L. Brady4, W. B. Garry5 and D. S. S. Lim6,7. 1Department of Aerospace Engineering, 270 Ferst Dr, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30313, [email protected]; 2NASA Johnson Space Center, 2101 NASA Parkway, Houston, TX 77058; 3Department of Geosciences, Idaho State University, 921 S. 8th Ave, M-S 8072, Pocatello, ID 83209; 4McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; 5NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Green- belt Road, Greenbelt, MD, 20771; 6Bay Area Environmental Research Institute, 625 2nd St Ste. 209, Petaluma, CA 94952; 7NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, [email protected] Introduction: NASA’s Journey to Mars outlines a ration involves peering into the unknown and reacting vision that includes sending humans to an asteroid by to the observed. The quest for scientific discovery is an 2025 and to Mars in the 2030s. While it is expected iterative and ceaseless process, as answers to research that most of the design elements for prospective capa- questions reveal more refined and sometimes unex- bilities and operational concepts will focus on issues pected research questions. In stark contrast, current concerning astronaut safety and planetary protection, EVA execution is highly scripted, with procedures we also envision mission architectures that are strongly arranged as a prioritized set of tasks, configured to driven by scientific requirements that fully leverage the maximize the likelihood of accomplishing the a priori presence of human assets in deep space.
    [Show full text]
  • IAG09.B6.3.6 21St CENTURY EXTRAVEHICULAR ACTIVITIES
    IAG09.B6.3.6 21 St CENTURY EXTRAVEHICULAR ACTIVITIES: SYNERGIZING PAST AND PRESENT TRAINING METHODS FOR FUTURE SPACEWALKING Si"CCESS Sandra K. Moore, Ph.D. United Space Alliance, LLC 600 Gelrlini, Houston TX; 77058-2783 ;USA sandra.k.moore@rasa. gov Matthew A. Gast United Space Alliance, LLC 600 Gelrlini, Houston TX, 77058-2783; USA lnatthew.gast-1 @nasa.gov Abstract Neil Armstrong's understated words, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." were spoken from Tranquility Base forty years ago. Even today, those words resonate in the ears of millions, including many who had yet to be born when man first landed on the surface of the moon. By their very nature, and in the tnie spirit of exploration, extravehicular activities (EVAs) have generated much excitement throughout the history of manned spaceflight. From Ed White's first space walk in June of 1965, to the first steps on the moon in 1969, to the expected completion of the International Space Station (ISS), the ability to exist, live and work in the vacuum of space has stood as a beacon of what is possible. It was NASA's first spacewalk that taught engineers on the ground the valuable lesson that successful spacewalking requires a unique set of learned skills. That lesson sparked extensive efforts to develop and define the training requirements necessary to ensure success. As focus shifted from orbital activities to lunar surface activities, the required skill-set and subsequently the training methods, changed. The requirements duly changed again when NASA left the moon for the last time in 1972 and have continued to evolve through the Skylab, Space Shuttle ; and ISS eras.
    [Show full text]
  • Extravehicular Activity Operations and Advancements
    Extravehicular A dramatic expansion in extravehicular activity (EVA)—or “spacewalkin g”—capability occurred during the Space Shuttle Activity Program; this capability will tremendously benefit future space Operations and exploration. Walking in space became almost a routine event during the program—a far cry from the extraordinary occurrence it had been. Advancements Engineers had to accommodate a new cadre of astronauts that included women, and the tasks these spacewalkers were asked to do proved Nancy Patrick significantly more challenging than before. Spacewalkers would be Joseph Kosmo charged with building and repairing the International Space Station. James Locke Luis Trevino Most of the early shuttle missions helped prepare astronauts, engineers, Robert Trevino and flight controllers to tackle this series of complicated missions while also contributing to the success of many significant national resources—most notably the Hubble Space Telescope. Shuttle spacewalkers manipulated elements up to 9,000 kg (20,000 pounds), relocated and installed large replacement parts, captured and repaired failed satellites, and performed surgical-like repairs of delicate solar arrays, rotating joints, and sensitive Orbiter Thermal Protection System components. These new tasks presented unique challenges for the engineers and flight controllers charged with making EVAs happen. The Space Shuttle Program matured the EVA capability with advances in operational techniques, suit and tool versatility and function, training techniques and venues, and physiological protocols to protect astronauts while providing better operational efficiency. Many of these advances were due to the sheer number of EVAs performed. Prior to the start of the program, 38 EVAs had been performed by all prior US spaceflights combined.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Symbols and Flags in the US Manned Space Program
    SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER 2007 #230 THE FLAG BULLETIN THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF VEXILLOLOGY www.flagresearchcenter.com 225 [email protected] THE FLAG BULLETIN THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF VEXILLOLOGY September-December 2007 No. 230 Volume XLVI, Nos. 5-6 FLAGS IN SPACE: NASA SYMBOLS AND FLAGS IN THE U.S. MANNED SPACE PROGRAM Anne M. Platoff 143-221 COVER PICTURES 222 INDEX 223-224 The Flag Bulletin is officially recognized by the International Federation of Vexillological Associations for the publication of scholarly articles relating to vexillology Art layout for this issue by Terri Malgieri Funding for addition of color pages and binding of this combined issue was provided by the University of California, Santa Barbara Library and by the University of California Research Grants for Librarians Program. The Flag Bulletin at the time of publication was behind schedule and therefore the references in the article to dates after December 2007 reflect events that occurred after that date but before the publication of this issue in 2010. © Copyright 2007 by the Flag Research Center; all rights reserved. Postmaster: Send address changes to THE FLAG BULLETIN, 3 Edgehill Rd., Winchester, Mass. 01890 U.S.A. THE FLAG BULLETIN (ISSN 0015-3370) is published bimonthly; the annual subscription rate is $68.00. Periodicals postage paid at Winchester. www.flagresearchcenter.com www.flagresearchcenter.com 141 [email protected] ANNE M. PLATOFF (Annie) is a librarian at the University of Cali- fornia, Santa Barbara Library. From 1989-1996 she was a contrac- tor employee at NASA’s Johnson Space Center. During this time she worked as an Information Specialist for the New Initiatives Of- fice and the Exploration Programs Office, and later as a Policy Ana- lyst for the Public Affairs Office.
    [Show full text]