[CONTACT]

[ABOUT]

[POLICY]

[ADVERTISE]

Aucbvax.fa.spaceutzoo!decvax!

Found at: gopher.quux.org:70/Archives/usenet-a-news/FA.space/81.12.29_ucbvax.5658_fa.space.txt

Aucbvax.5658
fa.space
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!space
Tue Dec 29 03:35:24 1981
SPACE Digest V2 #73
>From OTA@S1-A Tue Dec 29 03:19:25 1981
SPACE Digest                                      Volume 2 : Issue 73
Today's Topics:
			     Cables to an SPS
			     Cables to an SPS
			 Otrag pulls out of Libya
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 December 1981 02:12-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM MIT-MC AT>
Subject: Cables to an SPS
To: p-btempl at CCA-UNIX
cc: SPACE at MIT-MC
    Date: 26 Dec 1981 00:05:43-EST
    From: p-btempl at CCA-UNIX (Brad Templeton)
    It occurs to me that even aiming at a reception station just above the
    atmosphere for cable transmission down to earth would not stop the
    complainers - it might cause them to complain more.
    If the SPS is at geosync orbit, then a station a few hundred miles up is
    effectively on the earth for most of the rotation cycle, so there would
    be lots of earth beyond the path of the beam, and worst of all, not just
    one place (like the desert)  Instead a whole circle of danger is sweeped
    out if any leakage occurs.
This doesn't make sense. If the station a few hundred miles up is in normal
orbit or otherwise moving with respect to the Earth, there's no way to
connect a cable between the station and a fixed point on the Earth, which
was the original idea of mine. On the other hand, if the station is fixed
with respect to the Earth, as I intended, the geometry is fixed, the beam
from the synchronous-orbit SPS always is aimed at the same place on or
off the Earth. It can be arranged for the low-relay-station to be a quarter
revolution away from the SPS (with respect to center of earth) so that the
beam from SPS to relay-station is essentially tangent to the Earth, missing
it at all times.  My original idea was to run the cable all the way from
the SPS to the Earth, but I think the relay-station idea is a viable
alterntive which doesn't involve part of the beam passing the relay station
and striking the Earth. Only the side lobes have a chance of striking
the Earth, and with the relay station several hundred miles from the Earth
the side lobes reaching the Earth can be made insignificant.
------------------------------
Date: 29 December 1981 02:41-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM MIT-MC AT>
Subject: Cables to an SPS
To: p-btempl at CCA-UNIX
cc: SPACE at MIT-MC
I don't see anything wrong with inventing a cheap way to put bulk
materials into space and then reserving the shuttle for humans and
fragile cargo. Thus the linear accelerator could be useful even
though it works only for bulk cargo, reducing the need to reserve
the shuttle for such loads, leaving it more free for other stuff.
If delicate cargo can be packaged correctly so it can withstand the
jarring of the accelerator, and if it's not too delicate to
withstand the average acceleration, then even delicate cargo can
be sent by accelerator.
Here's another idea I just thought of. How about a rotating catapult
in a vacuum chamber. There's a door that opens for a moment just as
the load is released from the catapult and then closes quickly so
not much air gets into the chamber.  The reason for the chamber is
so the catapult can spin up to speed without encountering much
air friction.  The whole contraption could be installed on a high
mountain top or flown up in a baloon, so the air outside the chamber
has much less pressure than sea-level, and the air inside could be a factor
of ten lower pressure. The combination of high initial speed (because
of spinning-up the catapult in a near vacuum) and nearness to the
top of the atmosphere (because of location) possibly means a good
shape (low friction, low turbulence) and a thin ablative coating
would enable tossing up to a 100-mile altitude where a spacecraft
could catch the projectiles and toss them to higher orbit etc.
There would be a high velocity difference between the projectile and
the orbiting relay (catch&re-toss) station, but that's easy to
handle, just have a long arm that catches the projectile while
withdrawing at high RPM (like the way a baseball player catches
a fly ball) and then just rotates around (at constant RPM) to another
position where it lets go of the projectile. Thus the catch&re-throw
catapult has to withstand only centrifugal force while actually
handling the load, no tangential force.  The force while spinning up
preparatory to catching the load and while spinning down afterward
is small (the computer can plan the catch a quarter to half orbit ahead of
catch-time, i.e. as soon as it's released from Earth, then make minor
adjustments in the spin-up as the projectile is tracked on its way
up from Earth, making the spin-up quite smoothe. Note that the
axis of the catapult-spin, the distance of the catcher from the
pivot point, and the RPM, can all be controlled, achieving a perfect
catch, the projectile exactly striking the catcher and the velocities
of the projectile&catcher being zero at the moment of catching).
------------------------------
Date: 29 Dec 1981 00:14:15-PST
From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley
In-real-life: Steven M. Bellovin
To: decvax!duke!unc!space@Berkeley
Subject: Otrag pulls out of Libya
Cc: POURNE@MIT-MC
Otrag, a West German company that has been developing rockets with
potential military applications, has halted testing work in Libya.
They began withdrawing personnel and abandoning their launching base
about two months ago.  American intelligence sources indicated that the
company was using its ostensibly peaceful rocket program to mask
efforts to sell military technology, including short-range rockets, to
Libya, Pakistan, Iraq, and other countries; the company has denied such
reports.
Sources claim that the pullout followed an internal battle, in which
Lutz Kayser, an aerospace engineer who founded the company, was fired.
Kayser is reported to have remained in Libya, and is still working on
missle development.
The company now says it will refrain from developing its own launch
facilities, instead using launch sites operated by other countries or
international groups.  "This will help eliminate the political problems
of Otrag-owned sites," said Frank Wukasch, president of Otrag.
	From a N.Y. Times News Service article
------------------------------
End of SPACE Digest
*******************
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 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.


AD:

NEW PAGES:

[ODDNUGGET]

[GOPHER]