You're telling me that a country (Say China, which has the most advanced space and missile program after the 4 countries I mention) which cannot reliably put a can with a guy in it into LEO (About 100 miles up) will be able to hit a device the size of a large car at Geosync (22,700 or so miles up)?
Sorry, ICBM's are easy compared to that. Even LEO ASAT missions are easier. -Adam P. J. Alling wrote: > Dreamer. > > Adam Maas wrote: >> Not all that vulnerable at geosync. LEO is easy and vulnerable, Geosync >> is not (Essentially, the Russians, US, French and Japanese are the only >> people who could currently cause trouble at geosync). >> >> -Adam >> >> >> P. J. Alling wrote: >> >>> Orbital solar power stations would be wonderful, but very vulnerable. >>> This would truly lead to a militarization of space, either with some >>> kind of international policing force or more likely national aerospace >>> forces or space navies or all three. This would be almost as >>> unacceptable as nuclear power in some quarters, maybe even more so. >>> >>> Adam Maas wrote: >>> >>>> William Robb wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" >>>>> Subject: Re: OT - Prius Fuel Economy >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Technically, I don't think your reservations about the batteries in >>>>>> cold climates are that big a deal (block heaters are regularly used >>>>>> for ICEs in such environments, no reason you couldn't do the same for >>>>>> a battery >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> All that does is change where the emissions are being generated, and >>>>> takes away most if not all of the environmental advantages of the hybrid >>>>> technology. >>>>> A block heater doesn't take more than a few hundred watts of power. I >>>>> expect that keeping several hundred pounds of batteries 40-50 degrees >>>>> above ambient temperature would take quite a bit of power, many amps at >>>>> least. >>>>> Most commuter vehicles aren't allowed to plug in more than a block >>>>> heater in daytime parking because of loading on the electrical grid. >>>>> All this would put more load on the power generating infrastructure, >>>>> which at some point creates the need to build more power generating >>>>> stations, generally at the expense of the environment. >>>>> >>>>> William Robb >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> The solution to the environmental issue is to outlaw coal power and push >>>> through nukes (Which are very safe and the disposal issue for spent fuel >>>> is far less of an actual issue than anti-nuke luddites insist that it is). >>>> >>>> And even better long-term solution is Solar Power Satellites, which have >>>> a serious lead time to get active, but make solar power a viable option >>>> for power (as opposed to a good method for supplementing power). The >>>> basic technology was worked out and proven 30 years ago. >>>> >>>> -Adan >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
