Prev: Re: Active vs Passive Next: Re: Active vs Passive

Re: Active vs Passive

From: Brian Quirt <baqrt@m...>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 16:32:45 -0300
Subject: Re: Active vs Passive

Popeyesays@aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 4/13/00 12:01:42 PM Central Daylight Time,
> Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil writes:
> 
> << Superconductors conduct two ways. Ambient solar radiation will heat
the
> side
>  of the spacecraft facing the system's star greater than the
background. You
>  can't duct this with superconductors without the superconductors
heating and
>  defeating the purpose of using them to direct the heat. If you trail
them
>  into space to allow them to radiate the heat away, you have a glowing
arrow
>  pointing to your ship. >>
> 
> In space there is nothing to conduct the heat. Superconductors and
heat sinks
> could funnel the heat away from the potentially engaged side of your
vessel
> and into space on the opposite side - the bulk of the ship itself
would mask
> that heat release, would it not?

	Yes, that would work (somewhat), although how are you going to
be sure
which side is safe to radiate on? If you're wrong, you've just become
VERY visible. Also, doing this requires extra power (heat sinks are NOT
super-efficient), which therefore means you have to radiate more heat,
which means....

	I'm just not sure it would be worth the effort.

-Brian


Prev: Re: Active vs Passive Next: Re: Active vs Passive