Text File

Aucbvax.5504 fa.space utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!space Fri Dec 18 03:23:28 1981 SPACE Digest V2 #63 >From OTA@S1-A Fri Dec 18 03:17:35 1981

SPACE Digest Volume 2 : Issue 63

Today's Topics: skyhook disasters Re: Multiple-Laser Launching Systems Multiple-Laser Launching Systems ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 17 Dec 1981 0951-CST From: Clyde Hoover <CC.CLYDE AT UTEXAS-20> Subject: skyhook disasters To: space at MIT-MC

What makes you folks think that the surface-to-geosynch skyhook would only be ONE cable? All that needs be done is to build a triangle, say 100-200 meters on a side, with three cables (each able to support its own weight). If one snaps, you have cleanup work to do, but the replacement cable could be quickly strung up (or down) on ANY of the remaining. Placing them sufficently far apart would solve the collision problem. Oh yes, what makes you folks think the airspace around the skyhook would'nt be restricted from air/LEO traffic -- try flying over the Kennedy Space Center in your Piper Cub and see if the FAA doesn't get upset (especially when a launch is scheduled -- the Air Force will chase your ass away with T-38's). -------

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

Date: 17 Dec 1981 at 2159-PST From: Andrew Knutsen <KNUTSEN@SRI-UNIX> To: CSD.MCGRATH at SU-SCORE Cc: space at MIT-MC Subject: Re: Multiple-Laser Launching Systems In-reply-to: Your message of 16 Dec 1981 1604-PST. Sender: knutsen at SRI-UNIX

I dont think its obvious that one reaches a "point of diminishing returns" in the laser/mirror ratio. Its possible that a lot of little lasers are cheaper than a few big ones for reasons like mass production and using lower-spec materials. The question at least merits study...

I sure hope this is tried at least. If air can be heated to incandescence before blooming gets bad, the effect might be like a cone of light with the ship at the top, lighting up the desert if its done at night. Wouldnt help NASA's "showbiz" reputation any though...

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

Date: 18 December 1981 03:25-EST From: Robert Elton Maas <REM MIT-MC AT> Subject: Multiple-Laser Launching Systems To: CSD.MCGRATH at SU-SCORE cc: SPACE at MIT-MC

(relaxation time to return to normal) / (number of windows) isn't a number, it's a unit of time. Thus asking it to be a small number is totally meaningless. I think you mean instead: ((relaxation t)+(excitation t)) / ((number of windows)*(excitation t)) <HR> This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided: <P> 1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles. <BR> 2. The following notice remains appended to each copy: <P> <EM>The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright&copy 1981, 1996 <BR> Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.</EM> <P> <HR> Goto <A HREF="81.12.19_ucbvax.5508_fa.space.html">NEXT</A> article in FA.space Newsgroup <BR>Return to <A HREF="FA.space-index.html">FA.space index</A> <BR>Return to the <A HREF="../index.html">Usenet Oldnews Archive index</A> </HTML>

----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/

This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:

1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.

2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:

The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.