View Single Post
  #4  
Old December 14th 04, 01:24 PM
Dr John Stockton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

JRS: In article opsiyna7ptemtzlb@d3h1pn11, dated Mon, 13 Dec 2004
11:05:21, seen in news:sci.space.station, D Schneider
posted :
Dr John Stockton wrote:

[...] Since the acceleration, if at
all strong, need only be relatively brief, it should be perfectly
possible to work with only the solar energy from fixed arrays.


A brief (as in less than 1 day) period of acceleration would require
considerable effort to brace. The solar arrays have detectable responses
to docking and reboosts as it is. I suspect that any "chemical rocket"
type of boost of sufficient magnitude for journey would be tough on the
joints even with the solar arrays removed.


In FFU, the speed change needed would be of the order of 25000-18000 =
7000 mph = 10000 fps; spread over a day, that's only a little over a
tenth of a gee.

That may well be hard to accommodate by bolt-on reinforcement, but it
would be trivial to deal with if proper nautical-type rigging were used.
ISS would be fitted with a long bowsprit, itself braced with spreaders
and rigging, and lines would go from the end of that to points on the
solar arrays - along the centre line, and along the edges too if needed
- with further stays running aft, etc.

We're assuming the ability to launch 10000 fps * 500 tons of propulsion;
the mast and rigging would be an insignificant added burden; consult the
designers of the current holder of the America's Cup.

One would want the new engine system to be gentle in starting and
stopping.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. / ©
Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Correct = 4-line sig. separator as above, a line precisely "-- " (SoRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with "" or " " (SoRFC1036)