RE: starship-design: Re: starships

["L. Clayton Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>]

Timothy,

Was that your post that I was responding to? I understand how a scoop would
be constructed using current technology. My point was that the post _seemed_
to be proposing a different method because of the way it was worded. If you
knew a different method was in the works I wanted to hear it.

We had already discounted the material based screen from consideration do to
force loading and the subsequent design restrictions, i.e. how do you
support this screen at 0.3 c without it collapsing from sheer pressure? By
the time you build a framework sufficiently strong enough to support the
force loading on the screen the ship just got VERY heavy. All of this
assumed a catcher that was only at most 1000 meters across. The original
post was talking about sizes that were WAY beyond practical engineering.

Just as an aside, if I were to make such a screen, I wouldn't use aluminum
or copper, I would use pure calcium metal. It is lighter and a better
conductor than copper. It does have a few interesting engineering
consideration though. Hint, there is a reason why we don't have calcium
wiring in our house, and the same reason is why it is perfect for this
purpose.


Lee Parker

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Janice Davis [mailto:jdavis@crcom.net]
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 1999 9:03 AM
> To: L. Clayton Parker
> Subject: Re: starship-design: Re: starships
>
>
> L. Clayton Parker wrote:
> >
> > Kelly,
> >
> > >
> > > Sorry its not a nuclear electric propulsion interstellar ramjet,
> > > its a fusion
> > > direct plasma drive.  We gave up on ramjets when we realized
> there was so
> > > little known mass in this area of interstellar space, the scoops
> > > would be hard
> > > pressed to scoop up as much mass as the scoop gear would weigh.
> > > (I wen't into
> > > that somewhere in the site but can't find it at the moment.
> > >
> > > Sorry for the delay geting back to you.  Been crazy around
> here lately.
> >
> > Timothy seems to be basing this on a non material based scoop
> design which
> > is bound to be several tons lighter. It is also about 600 times
> bigger than
> > we had envisioned, which might provide sufficient material after all. I
> > believe the difference in density is only a factor of ten locally.
> >
> > Lee
> An electrostatic field is created by putting an electric charge on a
> metal screen. This metal screen will be made of a material such as
> aluminuim or copper. Positiveley charged ions are attracted to the
> negative electric charge on the screen. Their electric field induced
> velocity , and momentum will then carry them into the engine of the
> ramjet. This negative electric field can attract positive ions from a
> distance of 100 s of thousands of kilometers or more from the screen.
> The metal screen need weigh only a few tons at most, and maybe not that
> much even.
> This how to solve the problem of creating a feasible, and workable,
> bussard ion collector for use by bussard interstellar ramjets, and
> rairs. Under the laws of physics, if an electrostatic ramscoop can not
> solve this problem then probably nothing in the universe can.
> Timothy J. Mayes
>