Re: "Just say 'No' to key escrow."
At 2:08 PM 7/30/94 +0100, Graham Toal wrote:
: From: solman@mit.edu
: This is a relatively inane conspiracy theory. Gates hardly requires any : assistance since the feds were already committed to setting up licenses : in bands that are good for these types of networks. Both the FCC and Hughes : have sped up their efforts towards these systems in recent days.
That's just the terrestrial side. What about actually getting the birds up?
Oddly enough, they're discussing the use of a modified version of Orbital Sciences' Pegasus launcher. It currently uses a B-52 to carry the rocket to ~40K ft., and then lets it go on up to LEO. However, there's no reason they can't use a 747 as the "first stage". 747's are newer and cheaper and easier to maintain, and the result would be private enterprise from the ground up. At the risk of sounding like pollyanna, we may again be seeing fascists behind every Bush(?) here... Yet, conducting a public awareness campaign, in the shrillest possible terms, against SKE (or more properly, government mandated SKE) is a very good idea. It's easy to separate the two on a conceptual basis, and we should. Conspiracy theories about collusion between governments and big business, no matter how monopolistic those businesses, usually don't wash. Economic institutions really can't keep secrets for very long these days, especially secrets with significant economic impact. While I believe that they probably try, it's a little like pissing in the wind (if you're looking for the proper middle-class white northern european unconciousness-raised male metaphor ;-). However, I have to admit people do stupid things for uneconomic reasons. Windows is living proof of that. Microsoft offering a "security" package with SKE in it to their most lucrative market (Large, Hieropatriarchical, Semi-ossified, Ex-industrial Corporations), is very plausible without any collusion with the uncle necessary. Us howling like banshees about it makes real sense in that light. LHSECs really hate it when people howl at them like like banshees. Exhortatory prose (and action) about manning the barracades against SKE makes sense. Conspiracy theories will probably make potential allies laugh. Cheers, Robert Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923
[crypto relevance is basically nil; apologies] RH> == Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com> RH> Oddly enough, they're discussing the use of a modified version of RH> Orbital Sciences' Pegasus launcher. It currently uses a B-52 to RH> carry the rocket to ~40K ft., and then lets it go on up to LEO. RH> However, there's no reason they can't use a 747 as the "first RH> stage". 747's are newer and cheaper and easier to maintain, and the RH> result would be private enterprise from the ground up. I believe OSC is now ready to use (if they haven't started already) their modified L-1011 TriStar launch platform ("Stargazer"). I'm not sure the 747 would be as easily modified, based on the design of the wing box and landing gear. Similar issues would probably apply to the McDD DC-10/MD-11.
OSC has already used their modified L1011 to launch a Pegasus. Last month they launched a stretch Pegasus from the plane for the first time. Unfortunately they are using new control software in the Pegasus and it did not properly take into account the difference in the Phugoid frequency of the stretched bird. The result was positive feedback in the yaw control loop causing failure of the main wing. A self destruct charge was detonated from the control facility aboard the L1011. They are due to try again sometime soon. Lyman Finger lrh@crl.com for PGP 2.4 Public Key Block.
participants (3)
-
Christopher Davis -
Lyman Hazelton -
rah@shipwright.com