Re: Venus Air****ps / by Brad Guth

On Jun 8, 2:16 pm, More_Flaps <Morefl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Jun 9, 4:50 am, BradGuth <bradg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 28, 10:22 am, dean...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>
> > > ?
>
> > > > I'm still trying to figure out what this topic has to do with
> > > > rec.aviation.piloting.
> > > > --
>
> > > Or reality for that matter...
>
> > Obviously your DARPA brown-nosed expertise is insurmountable, just the
> > way them Zionist/Nazi always intended.
>
> > What is it about the rigid composite air****p idea of such applied
> > technology that's over your DARPA head?
>
> I'd like you to explain how you make a rigid shell light enought.
> Remember increased atmosphere density also implies increased pressure.
>
> Cheers

Correct, even pressure plus full interior vacuum if you like.

Or, one could simply offset or displace the mostly CO2 with good old
reliable and failsafe H2.

How much pressure will a good sphere made of a tough composite take?

Remember that for robotics, conventional viewing ****ts or pilot/crew
escape hatches are not required, and there could be several of these
tough spheres per rigid air****p.

The rigid air****p quest and of the R&D give and take of this topic is
intended to argue exactly this kind of related technical issue.  I do
not have all the answers that I honestly believe others do have at
their disposal.  Go figure as to why such public funded expertise
isn't being touted or much less shared.

It seems to me that a given planet of terrific pressure and good
atmospheric density beats most anything moon like or Mars vacuum like,
especially nifty if that planet were at times only 100X as far away as
our moon.

These robotic composite rigid air****ps could be rather nicely remote
piloted from a manned station (aka POOF City) as safely and
efficiently kept within Venus L2.

Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth