From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Subject: Re: Command Loss Timer (Re: Galileo Update - 04/22/93)
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Lines: 23
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1993Apr26.193924.1189@bnr.ca>, jcobban@bnr.ca (Jim Cobban) writes:
=Having read in the past about the fail-safe mechanisms on spacecraft, I had
=assumed that the Command Loss Timer had that sort of function.  However I
=always find disturbing the oxymoron of a "NO-OP" command that does something.
=If the command changes the behavior or status of the spacecraft it is not
=a "NO-OP" command.

Using your argument, the NOOP operation in a computer isn't a NOOP, since it
causes the PC to be incremented.

=Of course this terminology comes from a Jet Propulsion Laboratory which has
=nothing to do with jet propulsion.

Of course, the complaint comes from someone who hasn't a clue as to what he's
talking about.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
