If you need webspace I can help there. I have a co-location box in a datacenter in Texas. My partner and I run it. The box is completely ours do with as we please (except for porn or warez). I can setup a domain and some webspace (say 250MB) if that will work. The current webmaster will have complete control - I only set them up I don't babysit them. I might also be able to a graphic artist to help out and such.
I planned the box arround the idea on one day it will be slashdotted (1M + hits per hour) and the system is designed to take that kind of shock (on a temp load basis). Sooner or later something I am working on is going to get someone's attention :) Joe Latrell On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 19:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > someone pointed me to http://pluto.jhuapl.edu, which > is the web site for the new horizons missions; the > mission appears to be alive and well. hopefully the > leadership of icepic/proteus/whatever is a bit better > informed about the status of europa exploration than > pluto. :) > > Chalk that error to me, not to the website. I'm not as deeply into the loop > on the latest and greatest space science endeavors as Bruce Moomaw, Larry > Klaes, or the website moderators. > However, one of the central functions of this Europa site is to collect > information about upcoming space developments, and disperse it among the > members. That's just what you have done, by informing us of the New Horizons > missions.> > > > > > The purpose of the project IS clearly delineated. > > > We've listed them several > > > times in past posts. Again: > > > 1) Create a 3' long, 8" diameter metal tube as a > > > radio controlled > > > submersible that can slowly travel through 500' of > > > ice, and drop a series of > > > weak radio transponders behind it as it goes. > > > 2) The process of creating this thing would > > > necessarily involve a lot of > > > people, from all walks of life. We'd like to > > > involve a high school or two, > > > if we can find one that is interested. We'd like to > > > garner public support. > > > 3) There is no such thing, currently, as a > > > radio-controlled ice submersible. > > > The closest analog is NASA's drill, equipped with a > > > camera, currently being > > > tested in Antarctica. This is somewhat different, > > > as it is radio controlled, > > > and ideally, has a self-contained heating unit.> > > > > ok, thanks, i missed the discussion where the group > > hashed those goals out. (is it archived somewhere?) > > but i can't resist asking some questions about these: > > If you go to the IcePIC website (www.klx.com/europa) and then go to the > membership directory, there is an 'archives' tab at the bottom of the page. > Click on it. It will show you emails from the past 1 1/2 years or so. I > don't know if older archives are available, or if they are deleted after a > certain time period. > > Larry or Bruce might have the older archives on file somewhere. We need to > get the archives (all of the archives) accessible somewhere. There is about > 4 years worth of emails here, on any number of space related (and some not so > space related) issues. At the very least, there must be grist for 1000 good > science fiction novels floating around in those old emails, along with some > pretty interesting concepts and proposals. > > > > > 1) how and why were the specific dimensions and length > > (3 feet, 6 inches, 500 feet deep) chosen? do they > > have some special scientific or engineering > > significance? > > The dimensions were somewhat arbitrary. I chose them, while keeping in mind > the past emails and current developments, which require a model to be at > least 3' long or so, simply to have enough internal room for a heating > element, a guidance system, and a small payload. > What gives ME the right to arbitrarily choose something? Nothing but > priority. This is the second time that we've tried to come up with a working > model -- the first was in March 2001. This time, a new member asked: 'I > came onto the Europa website hoping to participate, and all I get are emails > discussing esoteric pseudo-science. Where's the beef?'. My reply was, 'put > your money where your mouth is -- here's a brief proposal for a working > model, along parameters already determined in earlier posts... let's see if > WE can do something like this.' If you're interested, the threads start with > Chris' email, about 1 or 2 emails prior to 'Wild Proposal #1'. > Why 500' through ice? It's attainable, but not such a short distance as to > be negligible. It demonstrates a concept, that an ice submersible CAN be > constructed, rather than just discussed. > > Yes, there are more technical or scientifically minded people than I am. > But, because we've been hammering on this thing for some 2 weeks now, a lot > of qualified engineers and scientists have jumped into the game. It's all a > question of taking that first step, to paraphrase Dostoevsky. > > > > 2) what are the intermediate steps leading up to this > > goal? i've seen people discuss drilling to all sorts > > of depths, from a few feet to 500 feet, so i assume > > these are some agreed-upon waypoints to the final > > goal. > > We're still in the planning stages. You've entered the game at a good time, > since we don't have anything solid just yet. Our first deadline is tonight: > 'come up with a name for a working model of a terrestial ice submersible'. > Our second deadline is November 15: 'come up with a list of 7-10 people who > can participate time/energy/money to this project, and post it on the > internet'. > > So far, we are keeping pace with our deadlines. > > Our next deadline is 'come up with a rough sketch, that we can break down and > assign groups to work on each part'. That deadline is, for now, December 1. > Joe Latrell's 'napkin drawing' is the first of many such sketches which we > must do. The process of sketching, erasing, and resketching will take up > several weeks of haggling. > > Once we figure out our preliminary sketches, we can make a nice sketch, and > really come up with a working model, on paper. We can also use that sketch > for presentation purposes (Gary has volunteered to help write grant > proposals) and for publicity, and posting here on the website. > > Again, we are still in the planning stages. This is the hard part: keeping > the impetus alive here, so we can get those sketches done, and so we can > start focusing people on individual tasks, and make progress.> > > > > > Besides: since these series of threads started, > > > this site has seen more > > > activity than it has for 6 months. People WANT to > > > participate in a project, > > > they want hands-on action, not more theories that > > > someone else has to test 10 > > > years from now. > > > > there's no harm in tinkering, of course, but i've seen > > too many proejcts started up on the internet and fall > > apart because of a lack of planning and leadership, > > regardless of the available resources and good > > intentions. why not take the time to do a little > > planning in advance first to increase the odds of > > success? > > We're doing the best we can. We don't have a central office to sit around > and drink coffee and brainstorm in. We're still in the planning stage. > We're doing the best we can on the leadership aspect -- all of us have seen > projects rise and fail for lack of planning and leadership. This project is > partly about taking a fairly small, doable task, and then doing it. If this > website can succeed in building a little ice submersible, who is to say what > we can't do in 2004, simply by working with the impetus we created in 2002? > We have to start somewhere. This is that somewhere. > > > > > -a.j. > > > > ps: what's the url of the site you're referring to > > above that has seen an increase in activity? > > Look at the archives. The terrestial test model subject threads started > about 2 weeks ago. The archives now list about a page of titles on the > subject. > Prior entries were often Larry dropping in a list of website references to > ongoing space science research and development, or Robt. Bradbury and I > bickering about would-be development in space, or SETI research. > > > i > checked the url appended to the end of each message > > and there's no sign of change there, so i assume > > there's another web site where all the planning > > documents and the like for this are? > > Gail Leatherwood is our project organizer. He is currently working on > creating two lists. One list is IcePIC members interested in working on this > model. The other will be a list of model proposals, and the pros and cons of > each. > > One final thing: if all of this looks disorganized to you, it is for two > reasons. One, you might not have the full background on the site that some > other members do, so it sounds as if we're just shooting ideas around willy > nilly. We're not. There IS a method to our madness... you have to reference > the archives to get a fuller picture. > The second reason for apparent disorganization is the nature of email. > People address those subjects which interest them. Because we are not in an > office environment, with 'tail assembly' or somesuch written on a chalkboard > up front, it is difficult to keep the subjects organized and focused. > Partly, that's my task: to provide some level of focus, and keep redirecting > everyone back to a set of central, limited tasks, without going off on a > technical / philosophical tangent. > > Please bear with us. Better yet, join our motley band, and volunteer some of > your talents and enthusiasm. Help Gail in the organization. Help come up > with a sketch. Come up with a list of people who might be interested in > working on this project. Come up with a proposal for a workable heating > element. > > Join us, Luke. Come over to the dark side. > > -- John Harlow Byrne > > > == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
