Still not one soul of rigid air****p expertise to behold, or that of
any applied technology on behalf of robotics or us frail humans
accompli****ng any such extended Venus mission of 19.5 months (plus
their return commute should push this one well past 24 months, but not
likely more than 36 months).
Is this DARPA Usenet/newsgroup snookered and dumbfounded itself past
the point of no return, or what? (most likely afraid of their own
shadow, plus whatever those pesky MIB might have to offer)
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
On Jul 20, 4:06 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> That's extremely odd, when the all-knowing gods and wise old wizards
> of these DARPA saturated Usenet/newsgroups have become so unusually
> dead quiet on any topic the least bit related toVenus. Of course
> that's only because of what I'd uncovered that even a 5th grader
> should have figured out as of 8+ years ago, if not a whole lot before
> then.
>
> - BradGuthBrad_Guth Brad.GuthBradGuth
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 5:19 am, BradGuth <bradg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > If rigged air****p robotics isn=92t offering sufficient exploration
risk=
or
> > otherwise DARPA/NASA spendy enough, there=92s always a fully manned
> > mission of the very least 100 fold more spendy, plus their having to
> > navigate well above the hot geothermal surface ofVenusfor roughly 18
> > months before eventually upward exiting and returning to Earth. The
> > AI/robotic consideration would not only cost at least 100 fold less
> > than any manned mission, but it also doesn=92t have to ever return to
> > Earth, and thereby could stay on its mission throughout several 19
> > month cycles, as well as multiple surface landings becomes technically
> > doable without risk of harming a single strand of human DNA. So
> > therefore, a robotic rigid-air****p is actually a good thousand fold
> > cheaper than any kind of manned mission (perhaps even if POOF City
> > were set up atVenusL2 would likely still be 100 fold less spendy).
>
> > TheVenusenvironment at one of the likely rigid-air****p cruising
> > altitudes of 25 km is only a bit 500K (440F) toasty warm by season of
> > day, and otherwise somewhat considerably cooler by season of night,
> > perhaps in places of negative draft getting drawn down to as low as
> > 400K (260F).
>
> > The closer you get to that geothermally hot surface the less day/night
> > thermal differential you=92ve got to work with. Increasing upon the
> > operational altitude to 35 km by season of nighttime is almost humanly
> > tolerable, although you=92re also getting into that lower acidic cloud
> > haze. Much above 35 km by season of nighttime you may need to
> > consider navigating by radar, as well as remain submarine like fully
> > enclosed within the rigid composite air****p. By season of day should
> > allow cruising as high as 45 km, although there too is that pesky
> > acidic/S8 cloud haze to deal with.
>
> > - BradGuthBrad_Guth Brad.GuthBradGuth
>
> > On May 4, 1:31 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > Being a little hot, buoyant and having 10% less gravity is actually
a
> > > darn good thing if you were a Venusian air****p, even if limited as
to
> > > an oven-wrap or KetaSpire PEEK polyether etherketone and fiber
> > > reinforced balloon. Such fiber reinforced composites do exist,
> > > although an outer skin of something in basic titanium shouldn=92t be
> > > excluded for this rigid air****p configuration.
>
> > > For this topic I have this unusual air****p to R&D, as intended for a
> > > rather toasty dry and calm environment. Think of this application
as
> > > a floating city if you like, or consider this one as merely a small
o=
r
> > > as large as need be robotic probe that can remain efficiently aloft
> > > for nearly unlimited time without much energy demand while drifting
o=
r
> > > even when cruising along at perhaps an average air-speed of less
than
> > > 10 m/s, as such wouldn=92t demand but a few KW for managing a good
si=
zed
> > > robotic managed rigid air****p.
>
> > > Taking into account the 1.75 kg/m3 by day and perhaps 2.5 kg/m3 of
> > > nighttime buoyancy at 50 km is roughly worth twice that of any
> > > terrestrial air****p application, and for the most part it=92s
actuall=
y
> > > fairly calm, kind of dry inert and nice enough and even relatively
co=
ol
> > > because it=92s at such a good deal of altitude away from that
geother=
mal
> > > radiating planet, and otherwise operating within the nighttime
season=
,
> > > and still situated well enough below the bulk of those otherwise
thic=
k
> > > and perfectly nasty acidic clouds.
>
> > > Because the inert infrastructure of this rigid air****p doesn=92t
chan=
ge
> > > per given altitude means that its hauling capacity or usable payload
=
is
> > > capable of becoming downright impressive, getting much better as one
> > > operates at lower altitudes, such as below 35 km by season of day
and
> > > below 25 km by season of nighttime is where that robust S8/CO2
> > > atmosphere is nearly crystal dry and otherwise clear for as far as
yo=
u
> > > can see (depending on terrain, roughly 500 km in all directions).
>
> > > Initially, this is a very rigid composite and robust kind of mostly
> > > robotic air****p, intended as an extended expedition probe. It=92s
> > > somewhat of a conventional blimp like craft, except using a rigid
> > > composite hull with a 6:1 L/W ratio instead of the more common
> > > terrestrial 5:1.
>
> > > In my way of thinking, this has a rather thick outer composite hull
> > > that=92s nicely insulative (critical science instrument/components
ar=
ea
> > > being insulated by R-128 or better) as obviously acidic proof, not
to
> > > mention melt proof, not that its failsafe hydrogen gas displacement
o=
r
> > > that of its vacuum worth of artificial buoyancy need be all that
acid
> > > proof or even having to be excessively cooled, because the bulk of
> > > this air****p can be rated for 811 K (1000=B0F).
>
> > > There are four rather over-sized longitudinal stabilizer fins, used
> > > for obvious flight stability, but also utilized for their heat-
> > > exchanging functions, and otherwise a pair of mid****p underbelly
> > > landing skids (just in case).
>
> > > Its configuration might incor****ate one fully ducted set of large
> > > diameter counter-rotating pusher fans, plus four other fully
rotatabl=
e
> > > thrusters (two on either forward/aft side for a total boost of 10%
> > > main engine thrust), that collectively can also be utilized as
forwar=
d/
> > > reverse motion thrusters. The maximum velocity potential of 100 m/s
> > > need not be necessary, and certainly not one of those all or nothing
> > > considerations, because 10 m/s is more than good enough unless
> > > striving to migrate though those acidic clouds in order to cruise
> > > essentially above the 75 km nighttime worth of those fast moving
> > > clouds (solar elevated to 80~85 km by day) .
>
> > > This craft is not going to be your average Hindenburg, much less
> > > flammable or otherwise combustible, although intended for
efficiently
> > > cruising aboutVenuswhere size and mass are of little concern when
> > > having 64+ kg/m3 worth of buoyancy, and only 90.5% gravity to work
> > > with is certainly going to avoid all sorts of various inert mass
rela=
ted
> > > considerations that would have more than grounded the Hindenburg.
>
> > > In addition to certain liquid fuels that can be safely incor****ated,
> > > there will be a pair of custom RTGs running at more than hot enough
t=
o
> > > melt aluminum, and a likely Stirling thermal dynamic added process
of
> > > utilizing that heat at roughly 25+% efficiency for all of the
onboard
> > > systems and main propulsion.
>
> > > Getting rid of 75% worth of RTG heat shouldn=92t be all that
> > > insurmountable, especially with such a thermally conductive flow of
> > > that toasty Venusian atmosphere flowing past, as worthy of roughly
> > > 10% the density of water, in that the closer we cruise above that
> > > geothermally active surface the more dense and thermally conductive
> > > becomes the surrounding S8 and CO2 atmosphere.
>
> > > Once again, on behalf of Usenet/Group diehard naysayers, this topic
i=
s
> > > not about our having to terraformVenus, or that of our having to
> > > prance ourselves about in the buff, at least not without our trusty
> > > OveGlove jumpsuit and ****table CO2-->co/o2 plus heat-exchanging
unit.
> > > Instead, we=92re talking mostly about a fully robotic craft that
real=
ly
> > > doesn=92t care how hot and nasty it is outside, and may never have
to
> > > land for the next hundred years, with a future human flight
configure=
d
> > > version that=92s clearly scaled in sufficient volume in order to
suit
> > > the applications of sustaining human our frail life for extended
> > > periods of time while cruising extensively at or below 25 km.
>
> > > Even though Geoffrey Landis wisely publishes most everything of his
> > > expertise as science fiction, it=92s based entirely upon the regular
> > > laws of physics, and for the most part using the best available
> > > science. This doesn=92t mean that I=92d wor****p each and every
publi=
shed
> > > word of Landis or from others of his kind, although it does fully
> > > demonstrate that I=92m not the one and only wise enough individual
> > > that=92s deductively thinking constructively and thus positively
abou=
t
> > > accompli****ng thoseVenu***peditions.
>
> > >Venu***ploration papers / Geoffrey A. Landis
> > > http://www.sff.net/people/geoffrey.landis/papers.html
>
> > > Evaluation of Long Duration Flight onVenus/ by Anthony J. Colozza
> > > and Geoffrey A. Landis
> > > http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/re****ts/2006/TM-2006-214452.pdf
> > > This paper was for the most part generated long after my having
> > > insisted that such a mission via aircraft/air****p was technically
> > > doable, although this Geoffrey and Anthony version focused mostly on
> > > behalf of solar powered and RTG as necessary, whereas such there=92s
> > > nothing much innovative or all that ground breaking to re****t,
> > > especially since much of their air****p application is operated
within
> > > a terrestrial like environment by way of keeping good altitude.
>
> > > This is not saying that my ideas are of the one and only do-or-die
> > > alternatives, as I=92m not the least bit opposed to incor****ating
via=
ble
> > > alternatives, or having to share most of the credits with those
havin=
g
> > > contributed their honest expertise. In other words, I=92m not the
ba=
d
> > > guy here, nor am I interested in hearing from those having ulterior
> > > motives or counter intentions of merely topic/author stalking and
> > > ba****ng for all the grief they can muster.
>
> If other intelligent life existing/coexisting onVenusis too much for
> your pathetic, snookered and dumbfounded brain to fathom, then don=92t
..=
..
>
> read more =BB
|
