- Dec 27, 2005
- Reaction score
Overscan and Flateric were responding to my post, I am not quite sure how their replies now show up before mineOrionblamblam said:Hmmm? Did I miss something? ???
That one *is* a TSTO. Somewhat later than Star Raker, and unrelated. Star Raker was meant to haul vast amounts of payload into orbit to support megaprojects like SPS; the TSTO was one of the far smaller military TAV studies.flateric said:last one looks as TSTO...
Which thread were they in originally? I used the search feature and found no other threads on the Star-Rakeroverscan said:The posts above yours already were in the forum - flateric simply added your posts to an existing topic. Its what we do here, often the answer was already in here before you asked the question
Hmm, I wonder if it's just a scan of the 1979 AIAA paper you've already posted figures from ... how many pages does the paper have? (trying to work out if 18 MB is a credible file size!)flateric said:now, for the God's sake, who have this 18 Mb Star-Raker pdf?
I had thought about replying (to ozmosis) simply 'Good takes time while good enough is quicker.'Orionblamblam said:I suspect a lot of it is due to "ease." Back then, to make a decent painting of a concept, you had to make a decent model of it, then select the angle, lighting, etc. and then paint it. Today, to make a decent CG rendering, you still need to make a model of the concept (albeit in the computer, rather than carving it out of wood), then select angle, lighting, etc.... then hit the "rendwer" button. Render from a hundred different angles/lighting conditions by lunchtime. But with the painting, each painting was a definite effort over several man days. That which you have to work harder at, you tend to take greater care about.
The best I can make out is M. Alvares. I've attached an enhanced blow-up of the signature for others to give it a try. Doing a quick search of that name brought no aerospace leads - at least in doing an image search.ozmosis said:Does anyone know who's signature is on the bottom right of the very first image in this thread? I would like to know who that artist is. The painting itself is VERY similar to something Syd Mead would do, although I know this is not a Syd Mead work.
If the document has a lot of illustrations it can push the file size up to 1mb per page, especially if care has been taken to scan the pictures. I tried to retrieve the K L Reed website through the Internet Archive, but it looks like it was taken over by site squatters before it was scanned.FutureSpaceTourist said:Hmm, I wonder if it's just a scan of the 1979 AIAA paper you've already posted figures from ... how many pages does the paper have? (trying to work out if 18 MB is a credible file size!)flateric said:now, for the God's sake, who have this 18 Mb Star-Raker pdf?
For the time being, upload it to rapidshare and put the link here. I have been desperate to see itmartinbayer said:I found Reed's 18 MB file that I retrieved from one of his links a few years back. It does contain the aforementioned 1979 AIAA paper that was prepared for a Conference on Advanced Technology for Future Space Systems, as well as a number of additional black/white and color illustrations/slides, related excerpts from a Rockwell International IR&D technical plan for a project titled "Earth-to-LEO Transportation Systems for SPS", and a page with Reed's contact information for a total of 56 pages. I'd gladly upload it, but the maximum allowed attachment size here is 1.5 MB, so no dice - perhaps the admin/moderator can help? In the mean time, enclosed is a smaller related file with some background info and example pages that also came from Reed.
I just sent you a private message with my email address, send it there and I'll upload it to a file hosting sitemartinbayer said:That'll take a little. I've never put anything on Rapidshare (or similar sites) before, and I'll have to transfer the file to another computer early next week before I can even access any file sharing sites. Any alternative ideas/suggestions?