|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Here's another of my replies that's not been easily getting into GOOGLE
or even MAILGATE. Whereas this time I was attempting to share some of my usual ulterior motive as feedback into a supposedly open to public GOOGLE turf, as actually applauding something perfectly terrific as posted by; The Ghost In The Machine Dec 12, 12:00 pm, offering the subject: The Ultimate Engine My ulterior motive was to learn something on behalf of extending the scope of my topic: Relocation of ISS to ME-L1, persay that of getting ISS away from mother Earth. As such, there's still this perfectly good and ongoing topic of a helium fusion powered rocket engine that's worth yet another good look-see, as if this method might be applied as to accomplishing something like moving ISS. I've tried to post into this recent topic with respect to the possibilities of salvaging something like ISS (obviously no one within this all-knowing group is the least bit interested in salvaging any stinking ISS). Although, all that has transpired is their usual banishment upon absolutely anything having to do with whatever I'm interested in, or perhaps of anything that might actually benefit humanity is what's being summarily rejected just out of spite. I think I finally realize what my problem is; I'm indirectly asking too many embarrassing questions that the upper most 0.1% of humanity doesn't want the rest of the world (lower 99.9% that represents the apparent scum of the Earth) to ever realize the truth about certain things, such as the fact that we've all been summarily snookered the most part by all those nice folks having "the right stuff". GOOGLE Subject: "The Ultimate Engine" http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...rch+this+group The GOOGLE/MAILGATE version of accessing this same ongoing topic that I'm not being allowed to participate, but perhaps you can share some words of wisdom: http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...art&p =1/1126 Taking the absolute positive approach, as to an honest application of such a fusion rocket engine, such as for the "Relocation of ISS to ME-L1", as for the initial task getting ISS away from mother Earth. I'm actually totally impressed by the original context of what this post as entroduced by "The Ghost In The Machine" is suggesting about "The Ultimate Engine" but, what I'd really like to know, are we talking of further R&D of months, years or what? For just example, the notion of relocating ISS needs a great deal of sustained thrust energy, but perhaps only 10 hours worth of .1 m/s/s acceleration as to obtaining another 3.3 km/s on top of the existing 7.7 km/s. If need be as little as 0.01 m/s/s of 100 hours, plus all of the same as for stopping if we assumed a slight remaining differential of inbound velocity that'll need to be nullifiied, or else. I totally agree that appropriate rigging as previously suggested by "Dr John Stockton", as applied in order to sufficiently brace whatever's flimsy about ISS is doable, especially if that rate of acceleration were limited to 0.01 m/s/s, thus taking a bit longer as to bust ISS lose from Earth's gravity, whereas 1 m/s/s should make things a wee bit testy, although doable if absolutely everything was secured. My previously banished and/or ignored questions for this group of all-knowing wizards discussing "The Ultimate Engine" were as before and still are; 1) Is there any chance this fusion engine could directly or indirectly utilize the likes of lunar He3 as fuel? 2) Doesn't the storage of helium (much like hydrogen) or even He3 require a fair amount of space? 3) As for a spacecraft having to take along this required 25 MeV energy resource into account, what's the net fusion energy per kg of helium that's actually available or leftover for thrust? Even frozen/liquid helium should be a rather testy substance, in that a fairly good amount of insulation becomes a bit more than a slight issue, as well as for pressurized storage is yet another option. Unless the few kg worth of said Helium that's supposedly good for the 9e16 J/kg is all that's needed for achieving this rocket engine fuel requirement, that's solely responsible for creating 603e12 Joules worth of thrust per kg of said helium is actually obtainable. It seems as though, coming up with the necessary product of 25 MeV and of whatever mega+ joules of what that portion represents, as extracted from some mystical auxiliary power source that's capable of going along for the ride, that such just might impose another good number of cubic meters plus whatever tonnes of something other that's not going to operate all by itself without some negative impact upon the overall package. I believe the age old physics law of energy input must equal energy output still holds true. So, I guess that I don't quite understand from where's such 25 MeV and the good number of joules that this fusion energy resource potentially represents is coming from. An electrodynamic or some other tether dipole energy-extractor might suggest upon such an alternative as for coming up with the 25 MeV, such as the one I've associated with the LSE-CM/ISS dipole tether element having a primary element that's obviously connected to the moon, and otherwise the other element of this dipole is deployed towards mother Earth, as coming to within the magnetosphere where the termination CM or tethered instrument platform that's hosting a few of those 100 GW laser cannons are situated as cruising perhaps 50,000 km from Earth, even a bit closer if you'd dare. Regards, Brad GUTH / GASA~IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Sorry about the above multiple replies, as I've been having trouble
within the GOOGLE archives using my mds-brad@juno account, whereas several attempts at getting a given reply to stick just wasn't happening. Although, here they are showing up in MAILGATE, and I can't even get myself back into GOOGLE as to removing the ones that need to be pulled. Eventually this topic should become more suitable, either that or I'll have to start this one over from scratch. Regards, Brad GUTH / GASA~IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Here's another of my reply that's not been getting properly set into
GOOGLE. If given the opportunity I'll eliminate a good number of such duplicate replies that somehow only ended up as being recorded within the MailGate index and not otherwise recorded by GOOGLE. This time I was merely attempting to share some of my usual ulterior motive as feedback into a supposedly open to public GOOGLE turf, as actually applauding something perfectly terrific as posted by; The Ghost In The Machine Dec 12, 12:00 pm, offering the subject: The Ultimate Engine My ulterior motive was to learn something on behalf of extending the scope of my topic: Relocation of ISS to ME-L1, persay that of getting ISS away from mother Earth. As such, there's still this perfectly good and ongoing topic of a helium fusion powered rocket engine that's worth yet another good look-see, as if this method might be applied as to accomplishing something like moving ISS. I've tried to post into this recent topic with respect to the possibilities of salvaging something like ISS (obviously no one within this all-knowing group is the least bit interested in salvaging any stinking ISS). Although, all that has transpired is their usual banishment upon absolutely anything having to do with whatever I'm interested in, or perhaps of anything that might actually benefit humanity is what's being summarily rejected just out of spite. I think I finally realize what my problem is; I'm indirectly asking too many embarrassing questions that the upper most 0.1% of humanity doesn't want the rest of the world (lower 99.9% that represents the apparent scum of the Earth) to ever realize the truth about certain things, such as the fact that we've all been summarily snookered the most part by all those nice folks having "the right stuff". GOOGLE Subject: "The Ultimate Engine" http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...rch+this+group The GOOGLE/MAILGATE version of accessing this same ongoing topic that I'm not being allowed to participate, but perhaps you can share some words of wisdom: http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...art&p =1/1126 Taking the absolute positive approach, as to an honest application of such a fusion rocket engine, such as for the "Relocation of ISS to ME-L1", as for the initial task getting ISS away from mother Earth. I'm actually totally impressed by the original context of what this post as entroduced by "The Ghost In The Machine" is suggesting about "The Ultimate Engine" but, what I'd really like to know, are we talking of further R&D of months, years or what? For just example, the notion of relocating ISS needs a great deal of sustained thrust energy, but perhaps only 10 hours worth of .1 m/s/s acceleration as to obtaining another 3.3 km/s on top of the existing 7.7 km/s. If need be as little as 0.01 m/s/s of 100 hours, plus all of the same as for stopping if we assumed a slight remaining differential of inbound velocity that'll need to be nullifiied, or else. I totally agree that appropriate rigging as previously suggested by "Dr John Stockton", as applied in order to sufficiently brace whatever's flimsy about ISS is doable, especially if that rate of acceleration were limited to 0.01 m/s/s, thus taking a bit longer as to bust ISS lose from Earth's gravity, whereas 1 m/s/s should make things a wee bit testy, although doable if absolutely everything was secured. My previously banished and/or ignored questions for this group of all-knowing wizards discussing "The Ultimate Engine" were as before and still are; 1) Is there any chance this fusion engine could directly or indirectly utilize the likes of lunar He3 as fuel? 2) Doesn't the storage of helium (much like hydrogen) or even He3 require a fair amount of space? 3) As for a spacecraft having to take along this required 25 MeV energy resource into account, what's the net fusion energy per kg of helium that's actually available or leftover for thrust? Even frozen/liquid helium should be a rather testy substance, in that a fairly good amount of insulation becomes a bit more than a slight issue, as well as for pressurized storage is yet another option. Unless the few kg worth of said Helium that's supposedly good for the 9e16 J/kg is all that's needed for achieving this rocket engine fuel requirement, that's solely responsible for creating 603e12 Joules worth of thrust per kg of said helium is actually obtainable. It seems as though, coming up with the necessary product of 25 MeV and of whatever mega+ joules of what that portion represents, as extracted from some mystical auxiliary power source that's capable of going along for the ride, that such just might impose another good number of cubic meters plus whatever tonnes of something other that's not going to operate all by itself without some negative impact upon the overall package. I believe the age old physics law of energy input must equal energy output still holds true. So, I guess that I don't quite understand from where's such 25 MeV and the good number of joules that this fusion energy resource potentially represents is coming from. An electrodynamic or some other tether dipole energy-extractor might suggest upon such an alternative as for coming up with the 25 MeV, such as the one I've associated with the LSE-CM/ISS dipole tether element having a primary element that's obviously connected to the moon, and otherwise the other element of this dipole is deployed towards mother Earth, as coming to within the magnetosphere where the termination CM or tethered instrument platform that's hosting a few of those 100 GW laser cannons are situated as cruising perhaps 50,000 km from Earth, even a bit closer if you'd dare. Regards, Brad GUTH / GASA~IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"Dr John Stockton" wrote in message
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. Dr John Stockton, Clearly there's still an ongoing GOOGLE "Server error" as they'd like to call it, that which is clearly hindering my posting of replies even into my own topics. I can't get myself back into the ones that I've repeated, as to removing all those that need not remain as for showing up in MAILGATE but not in the original GOOGLE format. It seems that I'm being banished once again. Either that or the GOOGLE wizards have things really messed up. For some reason I can't seem to publicly reply to your comments via GOOGLE, such as to the appropriate usage of rigging on behalf of shipping ISS off to visit the wizard of Oz at ME-L1, in which case I'll just have to try this MAILGATE method out for size. In spite of such methods of ongoing orchestrated opposition, I'll attempt to reply to what "Dr John Stockton" was suggesting as being a fairly good notion of securing whatever's necessary by way of using cables, ropes or whatever is suitable as rigging that'll take all of the stress that could possibly be induced by continually thrusting ISS for 10+ hours, or even 100+ hours if limited to 0.01 m/s/s. Of course, the EVAs for applying such rigging should be a real nasty TBI dosage, though perhaps via moonshine might cut those extra rads down to a survivable factor. Frankly, I and apparently a few others that reside outside of the NASA/Apollo box foresee nothing that's insurmountable about relocating ISS into the ME-L1 nullification sweet-spot. However, it's as though our NASA want's nothing better than seeing the likes of ISS and Hubble bite the dust. Perhaps they're wagering good odds on the failure of the next resupply mission, and if need be their Boeing/TRW Phantom Works ABL team could perhaps accomplish some of their field testing that'll essentially kill off two birds with one friendly cannon shot. BTW; Dr John Stockton seems to offer a rather interesting URL that's absolutely chuck full of interesting items. http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ Any chance you could help with the notion of terraforming our moon, and otherwise of dealing with what's supposedly so hot and nasty about Venus? If need be, I'll have to start editing this one into my growing topics page, or create yet another entirely specific report as to addressing these and other issues, whereas that way there's darn little if anything the mainstream status quo can manage as to foil my efforts at sharing upon whatever I believe is worth doing, or at least openly discussing. Regards, Brad GUTH / GASA~IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Soyuz TMA-5 transport spacecraft relocation to the ISS module Zarya | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | December 6th 04 08:09 PM |
Soyuz Relocation Preps Continue; Expedition 10 to Have Quiet Thanksgiving | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | November 25th 04 04:22 PM |