[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: KellySt@aol.com*Subject*: Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)*From*: Kevin C Houston <hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu>*Date*: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 08:14:54 -0600 (CST)*cc*: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl, kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu, zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl, rddesign@wolfenet.com, David@interworld.com, lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, DotarSojat@aol.com*In-Reply-To*: <960403151211_504831460@emout04.mail.aol.com>

Kelly: > Kevin: > > If it's not too much trouble, can you figure this for > > a constant maser beam How much extra RM will we need? > > > A decreasing maser beam is possible, it's only a time > > delay calculation, but a constant beam would solve > > some engineering problems > > Don't wory. Most of the beam wount hit the sail/collector anyway. If you > want less beam, furl in the sail a little. Hey Kelly! that's a great idea. =8-) Ok Tim, never mind. Kelly's solution is much more elegant than the one I was thinking of using. This way earth sends a constant maser beam, and we decrease our collection of it as the need arises. hmm... must do some more thinking. Main problem now is how to make a sail/collector big enough and light enough to catch the energy, while having it be strong enough to withstand the forces. %^| Kevin

**References**:**Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)***From:*KellySt@aol.com

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Broken Draft on New Lit Server** - Next by Date:
**Optimum Interstellar Rockets** - Prev by thread:
**Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)** - Next by thread:
**Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)** - Index(es):