Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cica!gatech!udel!pezely From: pezely@udel.EDU (Dan Pezely) Newsgroups: sci.space Subject: Re: Space Quest Message-ID: <20259@louie.udel.EDU> Date: 22 Jul 89 21:39:24 GMT Organization: University of Delaware Lines: 77 Here's a summary of e-mailed replies in reference to my postings about The Space Quest Foundation. I originally quoted Seth Hollub with an incorrect e-mail address. The cocrrect one is . Sorry. Seth brought up the question of Anti-trust problems, and later shed some more light on it: >Since the advent of R. Reagan and G. Bush in 1980, the vagaries of >the anti-monopoly law have changed to be more liberal. That is, >one can run more of a monopoly than before. Consortia like >Sematech and such are living proof of our ability to form >such economic-social groups. (I think they are helpful for now >on the world market). >Hopefully when we're successful those who follow in our footsteps >will not curse our solution. We'll need a way to dissolve the >consortium when it becomes right & proper to avoid strangling >things NASA-DOD-like. If The Space Quest Foundation just sets up the adminestrative coproration, then there shouldn't be any problems of outside agencies having too much control. * * * From: Marc Ringuette , >I have similar reservations to those of Fred Walter. What role >do you see a volunteer group playing in the scheme of things? That's what we'll need to get things off the ground. Whether we decide to change the status of the volunteers, that can be done later. >It seems to me that requirements for a successful effort are > (a) a good, obvious reason for setting up such an agency > (b) credibility and negotiating skill >What is the reason for its existence, and do you see the skills and >credibility being available? I think that enough qualified people would come forward to help once we're sufficiently organized. >I have an idea which I have based on the skills I see available around >me (physical sciences students): the construction of small satellites >and exploratory probes using cleverness and appropriate use of snazzy >technology. Its answers to the key questions are > (a) the reason: there are lots of un-sexy experiments and exploration > (e.g. search for water on the moon) that just aren't being done, but > are genuinely possible with a small directed effort > (b) the ability: Graduate students are the manpower; university robotics > and physics labs are the location; and very little money is > required. Piggyback space on commercial launches is rumored to > be available but is currently the biggest question mark. I am a sophmore at the University of Delaware. And as I told Marc, I hope to work on such projects when I am in grad school. * * * Keith Henson (if it bounces try keith@toad.com) wrote in responce to my original posting: >>I will do anything I can to live in a space station, or I will die trying! >*I* am making the best effort possible to get into space, *even if it takes >more than a normal life span.* Details on request. I think that I would have lived a full life even if my children's generation was the first to be able to LIVE in space stations. * * * Anyone else wish to comment? - Daniel