^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^------------------------------------------------------------------------------X-Sender: kgstar@pophost.fw.hac.comMime-Version: 1.0Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 10:28:58 -0500To: David@interworld.com (David Levine)From: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject: New LitCc: Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 <kgstar@most.fw.hac.com>,KellySt@aol.com At 3:45 PM 3/7/96, David Levine wrote:>Kelly,>I've got IIS up and running, finally.>The site is http://165.254.130.90/>And you can ftp to that IP address, too. >Your username is kstarks, and your password is venice. >Before I let everyone know about this, just give it a test and let me knowhow it works for you. >We're on our way.>-DavidHey Dave,I can surf to it fine, even bring up my old Explorer page, images and all.But I can't sign on to the ftp account. Possibly it (Versaterm Link) expectsa default director for my account. I've tryied all the variants (kstarks,/LIT/kstarks, /LIT/usr/kstarks, etc..) I can think of, but no joy. If you sendme the precise default directory I'll try again. Kelly---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kelly Starks	Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.comSr. Systems EngineerMagnavox Electronic Systems Company(Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html) ----------------------------------------------------------------------===========================================================>Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 13:07:55 -0500>To:T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden)From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re:Another piece of the puzzle? Cc:KellySt@aol.com,kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu,zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl, hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu,rddesign@wolfenet.com, David@InterWorld.com,lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, bmansur@oc.edu >At 5:39 PM 3/11/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >>To Lee,>>>>- A polarisation turner (at the retro-mirror) - A sail that reflectsonly horizontal or vertical polarized maserlight. >>>>Do such materials exist (and are they not to difficult to use in largequantities)?>>>Yes.>>>No.>>Do you know the name of such materials? Why are you so sure thesematerials aren't easely made? >>Tim>Some crystals twist the polarization of light that shines through it. Don'tknow about the power absorbtion thou. >Kelly===========================================================Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 09:27:58 -0500From: David@interworld.com (David Levine) Organization: InterWorld,Really Cool Stuff Division Mime-Version: 1.0To: Timothy van der Linden <T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl> Cc:KellySt@aol.com, kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu, zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl,hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu, rddesign@wolfenet.com,lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, bmansur@oc.edu Subject: New Design Team MemberI got this via email. Thought he might be interested in the continuingdiscussions. Please add him to your "To:" lists. Thanks!-DavidSubject: FYI: Rex Finke's Curriculum Vitae Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 22:03:10 -0500From: DotarSojat@aol.comTo: David@interworld.comTO: David Levine	March 11, 1996FROM: Rex FinkeIn view of the possibilities that 1) you might find a need for support in anarea in which I have experience, or 2) you might like to know where I'mcoming from when I send in a commenton some topic or activity of the Starship Design Project, I am providingyou with my curriculum vitae, as follows-- REINALD G. (REX) FINKE<DotarSojat@aol.com>SPECIALTIESSystems Analysis/Modeling, Flight Mechanics, Propulsion, Heat TransferEDUCATIONA.B., Astronomy and Physics, 1949; M.A., Physics, 1951, Ph.D., Nuclear Physics, 1954; UC BerkeleySELECTED EXPERIENCETeaching Assistant, Physics, UC Berkeley, 1949-50 Operation andmaintenance of 32-MeV proton linear accelerator, UCRL Berkeley, 1950-54Fast photography for high-explosives/nuclear-explosives testing,UCRL Livermore/Nevada, 1954-55Nuclear rocket (Project Rover) design, UCRL Livermore, 1955-57 Nuclearramjet (Project Pluto) design, UCRL Livermore, 1957-62 Nuclear reactoroperation, UCRL Livermore(Nevada), 1959-62 Thermonuclear-explosivesdesign, UCRL Livermore, 1961 Orion pusher-plate temperature calculation,IDA, 1962 Space station conceptual design, IDA, 1963-65 Reusable launchvehicle conceptual design, IDA, 1964-70 Space Shuttle design, IDA,1969-71Nuclear-propulsion analysis for lunar mission, IDA, 1970 Launch-vehicle(principally Shuttle) performance, operations and cost analyses, IDA, 1973-88, 1991Beam-weapons analyses, IDA, 1974-86, 1995 Strategic Defense Initiativeanalyses, IDA, 1983-92 Relativistic mechanics for interstellar flight,1987-present Mars-mission nuclear-propulsion analysis, 1990-91 Retired1992; presently Adjunct Staff Member, IDA Author or co-author of 14 openand 75 limited-distribution publicationsFellow, American Astronautical Society (conferred 1986)===========================================================>Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 10:10:33 -0500>To:David@interworld.com (David Levine)>From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re:New Design Team Member>Cc:Timothy van der Linden <T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl>,KellySt@aol.com, kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, stevev@efn.org,jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu, zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl,hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu, rddesign@wolfenet.com,lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, bmansur@oc.edu, DotarSojat@aol.com >At 9:27 AM 3/12/96, David Levine wrote: >>I got this via email. Thought he might be interested in the continuingdiscussions. Please add him to your "To:" lists. Thanks!>>-David>>=============================================================== >>Subject: FYI: Rex Finke's Curriculum Vitae >>Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 22:03:10 -0500>>From: DotarSojat@aol.com>>To: David@interworld.com>>TO: David Levine	March 11, 1996>>FROM: Rex Finke>>In view of the possibilities that 1) you might find a need for support inan area in which I have experience, or 2) you might like to know where I'mcoming from when I send in a comment>>on some topic or activity of the Starship Design Project, I am providingyou with my curriculum vitae, as follows-- >>REINALD G. (REX) FINKE>><DotarSojat@aol.com>>>SPECIALTIES>>Systems Analysis/Modeling, Flight Mechanics, Propulsion, Heat >>Transfer>>EDUCATION>>A.B., Astronomy and Physics, 1949; M.A., Physics, 1951, Ph.D., >>Nuclear Physics, 1954; UC Berkeley>>SELECTED EXPERIENCE>>Teaching Assistant, Physics, UC Berkeley, 1949-50 Operation andmaintenance of 32-MeV proton linear accelerator, >>UCRL Berkeley, 1950-54>>Fast photography for high-explosives/nuclear-explosives testing,>>UCRL Livermore/Nevada, 1954-55>>Nuclear rocket (Project Rover) design, UCRL Livermore, 1955-57 Nuclearramjet (Project Pluto) design, UCRL Livermore, 1957-62 Nuclear reactoroperation, UCRL Livermore(Nevada), 1959-62 Thermonuclear-explosivesdesign, UCRL Livermore, 1961 Orion pusher-plate temperature calculation,IDA, 1962 Space station conceptual design, IDA, 1963-65 Reusable launchvehicle conceptual design, IDA, 1964-70 Space Shuttle design, IDA, 1969-71>>Nuclear-propulsion analysis for lunar mission, IDA, 1970 Launch-vehicle(principally Shuttle) performance, operations >>and cost analyses, IDA, 1973-88, 1991>>Beam-weapons analyses, IDA, 1974-86, 1995 Strategic DefenseInitiative analyses, IDA, 1983-92 Relativistic mechanics for interstellarflight, 1987-present Mars-mission nuclear-propulsion analysis, 1990-91Retired 1992; presently Adjunct Staff Member, IDA Author or co-author of14 open and 75 limited-distribution >>publications>>Fellow, American Astronautical Society (conferred 1986) >P.S.>Dave, what have you forwarded to him of our recent correspondence? >Kelly===========================================================Date: Thu, 14 Mar 1996 03:30:21 -0500From: DotarSojat@aol.comTo: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl, kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu, zkulpa@zmitl.ippt.gov.pl,hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu, rddesign@wolfenet.com,David@interworld.com, lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, bmansur@oc.eduSubject: ThanksTO: SSD Discussion Group	March 13, 1996FROM: Rex FinkeThank you for including me in your design discussion group. Thanks also toKelly Starks for the excellent summary; it indicates to me that you havemade significant progress since week 29 (early Feb '95), which was thelast Project Newsletter that I have read through. I am familiar with mostof your names from your contributions up to that point. Regarding my future contribution to "mail-box overflow," I'm not known tobe wordy. "Terse" is the usual complaint. But in spite of my apparent age, Ihave not outgrown being an enthusiast, so you can expect activeparticipation. (Note: proper time is always less than apparent time.)I'll hold any other remarks until after I've digested Kelly's summary. (Ithink I still should review all the old Newsletters; it may be just asimportant to find out what you don't know as to find out what you doknow.)===========================================================Date: Thu, 14 Mar 1996 03:41:54 -0500From: DotarSojat@aol.comTo: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl, kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu, zkulpa@zmitl.ippt.gov.pl,hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu, rddesign@wolfenet.com,David@interworld.com, lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, bmansur@oc.eduSubject: Re: Close but no cigar? againI know. I promised no more remarks until I did my homework. The Stefan-Boltzmann law of radiation is P = s T^4, where s (theStefan-Boltzmann constant, usually written as the greek lower-caseletter sigma) does indeed have the value 5.67 E-8 W/(m^2 K^4). Ablack-body surface absorbing a power of 7.5E5 W/m^2 (your number) willbe heated to an ultimate equilibrium temperature Teq at which it willreradiate all the absorbed power. Therefore, 7.5E5 = 5.67E-8 Teq^4 .So Teq equals 1907 K, below the melting temperature of titanium (2073 K)and well below the melting temperature of tungsten. Unless I missed something, I believe you (I don't know who, because Ihaven't yet learned to read these quotes of quotes of quotes) equatedpower to energy in your calculation of no cigar. Rex Finke===========================================================>Date: Thu, 14 Mar 1996 11:42:42 -0500>To:Brian Mansur <bmansur@oc.edu>>From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re:Argosy Mission Overhaul>Cc:kgstar <kgstar@most.fw.hac.com>, "T.L.G.vanderLinden"<T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl>, bmansur <bmansur@oc.edu>,David <David@InterWorld.com>, hous0042 <hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu>,jim <jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu>, KellySt <KellySt@aol.com>, lparker<lparker@destin.gulfnet.com>, rddesign <rddesign@wolfenet.com>, stevev<stevev@efn.org>, zkulpa <zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> >At 10:06 AM 3/14/96, Brian Mansur wrote: >>---------->>From: kgstar>>To: T.L.G.vanderLinden>>Cc: KellySt; kgstar; stevev; jim; zkulpa; hous0042; rddesign; David;lparker; bmansur>>Subject: Re: Argosy Mission Overhaul>>Date: Tuesday, March 12, 1996 9:51AM>>At 3:11 PM 3/12/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >>>To Brian,>>>>>Tim>>>>>We "know" AI-robots could make anything work but that solutionwould be a >>>>bit >too simple, unless we could come up with a rough design for suchkind of >robot.>>>>Actually, I'm assuming that robots would have limits based on theirprogramming. I imagine that the first working, completely automated >>systems>>>>would, in some ways, be less efficient in computer controled handsthan if humans were doing the same job. For example: how do you thinkcomputers >>and>>>>robots would have handled the job of bringing home the Apollo 13crew? >>>In my opinion such robots are intelligent or they aren't (no waybetween). Say that you have figured out a machine with an IQ of 40. Thenyou could probably link them up in such a way that 10 of them togetherwould have an IQ of 100.>>>Kelly>>>Have you ever tried putting a room full of morons together and expectthem to do one inteligent persons work? It doesn't work. Mobs tend to beless equivelent then the sum of their parts. Given that we have no idea onhow to make an A.I. work its hard to tell what it could do, or what itslimitations would be. It could be far more inteligent than humamans, or bean idiot savant. Great at one thing, and hopeless in general. >>Point taken, but I see no other option than to assume that we can createthem. We need them to set up opposing maser arrays at TC. And theserobots may (or may not) be doing an "intelligent person's" work. Even by2050, we can expect automation in the factory to increase even beyondwhat we have today. We already make cars with minimal humansupervision. Why not maser cannons and solar arrays. Then we buildcomputers and program them to run the whole system.>The whole issue of heavy construction at the target star system(s) is amess. The Explorers would need a lot of minning to fuel them for thereturn flight, or a lot of prefab laser launchers. The sail systems wouldneed to mechaform (terraform to a machine world) a planet into a maseremmitter. These are the weakest parts of our ideas. >Given that the A.I.s would be forced to work in an uncontroledenvironment (I.E. not in a factory.) and expected to self replicate theywould be way over the top technically. >>Of course, if we want to lower our terminal velocity to .33c, we couldlaunch our ship via maser sail and decel into TC using a 144:1 fuel ratio asfigured in New idea Laser launcher/scoop systems. This would allow us toscale down AI's to mindless robotic machines that are task specific. Wetake some along with us to mine iron ore from asteroids for the trip home. >>Of course, going to TC would take forever at .33c (compared to what youguys want).>>Here is a thought I've heard before. We could even break down the sailfor added fuel. Still, the extra fuel is going to increase the sail size. Andfor the ions from the sail to be useful, they must be of the same kind. >>Unless we could separate them during the breakdown process and feedonly one kind of ion at a time into the ion drive. Oh boy. >Problem is, sails arn't built out of fuel. We could use them for reactionmass, but that doesn't help without power. ===========================================================>Date: Thu, 14 Mar 1996 16:12:27 -0500>To:T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden)From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re:New idea Laser launcher/scoop systems Cc:KellySt@aol.com,kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu,zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl, hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu,rddesign@wolfenet.com, David@InterWorld.com,lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, bmansur@oc.edu, DotarSojat@aol.com >At 9:43 PM 3/14/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote: >>>>No, what matters most is the pressure that is build up inside theengine. The higher the pressure, the higher the exhaust velocity. One canregulate that velocity by enlarging or reduce the ourlet. >>>I'm not sure that is possible with particals going a fraction of thespeed of light. Remember the G loads my mag launcher would have neededto get to fuel up to .3 of light. I think the nessisary voltage presure mightbe undoable. Certainly your not talking about a normal rocket chanbersituation.>>Maybe you have a point there, but since we haven't any clue let me dosome brainstorming:>>The pressure at one side is high anyway, namely the backside of the ship.Adding some extra engine walls may increase the pressure but also makesthe efficiency better, since the first extra walls will be at the side sothat the particle stream is more to the aft.>>I assume that all the particles will be ionized so that we can make thewalls of magnetic fields. If this doesn't work, I'm not sure what would,since the temperature of the particles would be very high (1E6 Kelvin?). >True. I'm starting to get woried that particals will lose energy to themag or voltage sheilding, rather than bounce back from the wall and outthe back. Anyone know how relativistic reflections work? >>Another way to decrease the pressure is simply to add less power(which is the smartest way, I think). So then the amount of particles goesdown and so does the pressure.>>Timothy>??? The power is related to the number of particals reactiong. I.E. a givenfusion reaction releases particals with x energy each. >Kelly===========================================================>Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 11:16:48 -0500>To:Brian Mansur <bmansur@oc.edu>>From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re:Argosy Paper Preview>Cc:bmansur <bmansur@oc.edu>, David <David@InterWorld.com>, DotarSojat<DotarSojat@aol.com>, hous0042 <hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu>, jim<jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu>, Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39<kgstar@most.fw.hac.com>, lparker <lparker@destin.gulfnet.com>, rddesign<rddesign@wolfenet.com>, Steve VanDevender <stevev@efn.org> >At 6:15 PM 3/14/96, Brian Mansur wrote: >>>From Brian>>Since I have just 23 hours before going off-line for then next week andthree days, I'd like to take care of a little last minute business concerningthe Argosy paper I'm working up. >>Note to Kelly Starks. You've wanted to help out with the paper. Thanks. >>You should know, however, that I am still limited to BMP drawings. Canyou convert or compress these to something usable on the web pages? Ifso, I'll have to send them to your e-mail account at the rate of one or twoa day. I apologize for this nuisance, but I just haven't been able to figureout how to download the other drawing programs (without going to a storeand paying for non-sharewares). On the bright side, the text can probablybe sent in one letter.>Hum, I'll see waht I can find. I don't remember using BMP, but I might beable to find a conversion. >>Note to group: When the Argosy paper text shows up in your mail boxes,look for material you wrote. I realized after reading over some letterstoday that you guys more than often explain things better then I can. >>Note about Argosy Paper Quality: I don't promise anything spectacular,just a summary written in similar style to the Explorer page but with alot of questions left unanswered. I'll go into pros and cons where I think itwill help Web surfers who come across the paper (not to mention you guyswho, like me, love to pick an idea apart). Also, I expect that some of thetext will come directly from the Explorer page. All in all, however, thispaper should be a decent enough draft for the group to consider. >>If you have anything specific that you'd like to contribute, mail me andI'll see if I can fit it in somewhere. I'd especially appreciate ideas andweight numbers on the sail (Kevin has provided some of this data alreadywhich I think will end up on the paper). You guys have a nice week.===========================================================>Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 14:02:58 -0500>To:David@interworld.com (David Levine)>From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re:Laser Aperture Size>Cc:Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 <kgstar@most.fw.hac.com>, Kevin CHouston <hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu>, Brian Mansur <bmansur@oc.edu>,"L. Parker" <lparker@destin.gulfnet.com>, jim <jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu>,KellySt <KellySt@aol.com>, rddesign <rddesign@wolfenet.com>, SteveVanDevender <stevev@efn.org>, "T.L.G.vanderLinden"<T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl>, zkulpa<zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> >At 1:46 PM 3/15/96, David Levine wrote: >>Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 wrote:>>>At 11:35 AM 3/15/96, Kevin C Houston wrote: >>>>it would generate ~1 G of Decell as long as you stayed above ~.93 of C.then it drops off rapidly until it accounts for less than .1Garound .88 of C.Please Note that this is for a solid sail, and not for a mesh. a >>>Why didn't you follow up on, or talk more about this? Whats thedragdrop off? >>It sounds like the decelleration is miniscule at fairly high speeds (0.5c)where we'd still need a bunch more decelleration.>Humm I missed the .1 G at around .88 part. Still if you could rig out aLARGE, light, charged, microwave transparent drag chute or mag scoop. Itcould get a good fraction of a G of drag. Given time dialation would cut thecrews apparent trip time way down. They could afford to spend a coupleyears deceling down to a low C fraction that we could brake from byrocket. It beats all this nonsence about reflector sails! >>-->>David Levine>>Application Engineer>>InterWorld Technology Ventures, Inc.>>http://www.interworld.com/staff/david/ david@interworld.com>Much more professional signature. ;)>Kelly===========================================================>Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 15:00:24 -0500>To:Kevin C Houston <hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu>From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re:Drag chutes.>Cc:Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39 <kgstar@most.fw.hac.com>, David Levine<David@interworld.com>, Brian Mansur <bmansur@oc.edu>, "L. Parker"<lparker@destin.gulfnet.com>, jim <jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu>, KellySt<KellySt@aol.com>, rddesign <rddesign@wolfenet.com>, Steve VanDevender<stevev@efn.org>, "T.L.G.vanderLinden"<T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl>, zkulpa<zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl> >At 1:21 PM 3/15/96, Kevin C Houston wrote: >>To: Kelly. (et al.)>>the main problem of a drag chute, is the thinness of ICM. The chutes onlyseem to work at high % of C (well above .80). we can't decell at a lowerfraction of G than we accelerated at, or else we would have to start muchearlier(in effect, moving the midpoint much closer to Sol) this would thencut down the top possible speed. because you had less time of 1 G accel. Ithink a Drag chute would work for a MARS, because you could save a largeamount of RM by using the Chute (for about a month of Crew's time if Irecall correctly), Then you could cut the sail loose, which would dropp theship's mass by about half. i still have some slim hopes for the MARS, but Iam going to need to spend a lot of time digging into it. if you want tocalculate drags, go ahead. but be warned. i will send the numberstommorrow (yes, Gov workers sometimes work on Sat.) but I don't think itwill help slow us downvery much. >>Kevin>Hey, its worth a try. We're desperate. ;) >Calculating it would be a bear thou. You'ld have to balence crew time overdistence traveled vs drag by speed ratios. Still, I guess relativisticnumbers would pretty much drop out below .6 C. So atleast you'ld havelinear effects. Pity I hate programing Excel. >Kelly===========================================================>Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 16:14:45 -0500>To:DotarSojat@aol.com>From:kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39) Subject:Re:Equations for relativistic calculationsCc:T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl, kgstar@most.fw.hac.com,stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu, zkulpa@zmitl.ippt.gov.pl,hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu, rddesign@wolfenet.com,David@interworld.com, lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, bmansur@oc.edu >At 3:39 PM 3/15/96, DotarSojat@aol.com wrote: >>Timothy wrote, on 3/14/96 at 06:27 EST: >>>If you like to bite in some equations, I've a document on-line at >>>http://indyl.cpedu.rug.nl/~N0642983/download/calc.txt >>When I try to contact that URL, I get the message-- >>"Netscape is unable to locate the server: >>indyl.cpedu.rug.nl>>The server does not have a DNS entry." >>Help! What am I doing wrong?>Don't panic, it could be the server is having a bad day. Or the net link towhatever country nl is might be bad. >>I'd very much like to see the equations. That's precisely the subject I'mmost interested in.>>Also, will someone please tell me why I get email returned that isaddressed to zkulpa@zmitl.ippt.gov.pl? It says "Host unknown (Nameserver: zmitl.ippt.gov.pl: host not found)". >I only got this once, so I assume that it was just a problem in poland (pl). >>I am a late arrival at the Internet. I thought I had no need for it until Iread about a "Starship Design Home Page" in the September/October 1995issue of Ad Astra. >>Rex>Trust us there is a lot out here, but it doesn't always work right. (Checkout the LIT list of related topics for other space related topics on theweb. >Hope you feel we are worth it.>Kelly