"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On 07 Jan 2005 16:46:54 -0600, Allen Windhorn
wrote:
My speculation about selection
paths of ionization by RF excitation was just groping toward one way
to create those channels, and HAARP naturally came to mind.
A long time ago, there was some (theoretical at least) effort to see
whether UV lasers could be used to create an ionized channel over a
long distance.

Hi Guys,

One has to wonder about the consequence of double jeopardy standing
beneath that antenna (HAARP experiment) or holding the laser.

Think insurance covers this?

Supply shop foreman (perplexed):
"Another laser? What happened to the last one?"

Tech (smoke curling up from clothes):
"ummmm, burned out real quick-like. Could you hurry? They say
more rain is on the way!"

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC


Well, I could easily imagine a laser protected within a large conductive
lightning rod. All you need is a 1/" hole in an otherwise well-shielded
structure. Maybe a bit larger to allow for pointing, or you could put some
optics safely outside the rod.

Regarding the RF excitation, I assumed that a single-point source would be
dumb, because the best ionization path would be right back to YOU. But an
array of exciters, electronically steered to create a sufficient power
density at a focal point, is a lot smarter.

Again, I don't know if the technique would work, but an electronically
steered (more like focusing) array would be one way to do it.

One poster said that the ionized channel might blow away in the wind. Maybe
a quick system could "paint" an ionization channel fast enough. Maybe a
system could detect and take advantage of leaders, to create a shorter path.

Ed
wb6wsn

"Ed Price" wrote

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On 07 Jan 2005 16:46:54 -0600, Allen Windhorn
wrote:
My speculation about selection
paths of ionization by RF excitation was just groping toward one way
to create those channels, and HAARP naturally came to mind.
A long time ago, there was some (theoretical at least) effort to see
whether UV lasers could be used to create an ionized channel over a
long distance.

Hi Guys,

One has to wonder about the consequence of double jeopardy standing
beneath that antenna (HAARP experiment) or holding the laser.

Think insurance covers this?

Supply shop foreman (perplexed):
"Another laser? What happened to the last one?"

Tech (smoke curling up from clothes):
"ummmm, burned out real quick-like. Could you hurry? They say
more rain is on the way!"

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC


Well, I could easily imagine a laser protected within a large conductive
lightning rod. All you need is a 1/" hole in an otherwise well-shielded
structure. Maybe a bit larger to allow for pointing, or you could put some
optics safely outside the rod.

Regarding the RF excitation, I assumed that a single-point source would be
dumb, because the best ionization path would be right back to YOU. But an
array of exciters, electronically steered to create a sufficient power
density at a focal point, is a lot smarter.

Again, I don't know if the technique would work, but an electronically
steered (more like focusing) array would be one way to do it.

One poster said that the ionized channel might blow away in the wind.
Maybe
a quick system could "paint" an ionization channel fast enough. Maybe a
system could detect and take advantage of leaders, to create a shorter
path.

Ed
wb6wsn

Hi Ed, using high powered lasers to "paint" a thunderstorm cloud has been
done, and whether reliably or not, was able to trigger lightning. It hasn't
translated into practical protection schemes yet, but that could simply be
economics. As a means of triggering lightning to a safe point away from
vulnerable assets, it still leaves the possibility that some storms are so
powerful that nothing short of an extensive, multi-point array of lasers
could ever offer protection at an individual point. It is generally so much
less expensive to employ catenary wires overhead, build faraday-cages
around, and position air terminals in appropriate areas than the costs of
such a laser system. There would also be a new class of airspace required
for operation of such lasers. Something like a "no-fly zone" in fact! ;-)

73,
Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia

"Jack Painter" wrote in message
news:emUDd.11563$B95.6120@lakeread02...

"Ed Price" wrote

SNIP

Regarding the RF excitation, I assumed that a single-point source would
be
dumb, because the best ionization path would be right back to YOU. But an
array of exciters, electronically steered to create a sufficient power
density at a focal point, is a lot smarter.

Again, I don't know if the technique would work, but an electronically
steered (more like focusing) array would be one way to do it.

One poster said that the ionized channel might blow away in the wind.
Maybe
a quick system could "paint" an ionization channel fast enough. Maybe a
system could detect and take advantage of leaders, to create a shorter
path.

Ed
wb6wsn

Hi Ed, using high powered lasers to "paint" a thunderstorm cloud has been
done, and whether reliably or not, was able to trigger lightning. It
hasn't
translated into practical protection schemes yet, but that could simply be
economics. As a means of triggering lightning to a safe point away from
vulnerable assets, it still leaves the possibility that some storms are so
powerful that nothing short of an extensive, multi-point array of lasers
could ever offer protection at an individual point. It is generally so
much
less expensive to employ catenary wires overhead, build faraday-cages
around, and position air terminals in appropriate areas than the costs of
such a laser system. There would also be a new class of airspace required
for operation of such lasers. Something like a "no-fly zone" in fact!
;-)

73,
Jack Painter
Virginia Beach, Virginia




More like a "dead-fly" zone. Yeah, aircraft (and satellite / astronaut)
protection are not trivial concerns when you start squirting power into the
air.

BTW, I seem to recall the use of small (sounding?) rockets used around the
perimeter of the Kennedy launch complex. I don't recall if these rockets
trailed a thin wire, or if their exhaust plume was sufficient to trigger a
lightning discharge. Anyway, I thought I recall these small expendable
rockets being used as a lightning diversion technique to protect the exposed
launch vehicle. (Yes, I know they also use catenary wires from the tower to
the ground, but the rocket technique was supposedly to condition the area
around the vehicle just as launch occurred, and the tower was moved away
from the vehicle.)

Ed
wb6wsn

"Ed Price" wrote

BTW, I seem to recall the use of small (sounding?) rockets used around the
perimeter of the Kennedy launch complex. I don't recall if these rockets
trailed a thin wire, or if their exhaust plume was sufficient to trigger a
lightning discharge. Anyway, I thought I recall these small expendable
rockets being used as a lightning diversion technique to protect the
exposed
launch vehicle. (Yes, I know they also use catenary wires from the tower
to
the ground, but the rocket technique was supposedly to condition the area
around the vehicle just as launch occurred, and the tower was moved away
from the vehicle.)

Ed
wb6wsn

Yessir Ed. At NASA Wallops Island (Eastern Shore, VA) they regularly launch
sounding rockets. We have had one land well off course about 300 yards off
the Virginia Beach Oceanfront late one night. I was able to help call off
the extensive search involving air, sea and land assets when I convinced
District to check with Group Eastern Shore (who I had heard make the
Securite' announcement earlier, warning of the rocket launches). Witnesses
at the beach had reported a flaming plane crash in the water. When the CG
Helo pilot realized that it was probably a rocket, (and there were still
more scheduled) he bugged out fast.

As to triggering lightning with rockets, yes they do trail wire, and this
method of lightning experimentation provides excellent results. Makes sense
they would clear the air first before a launch, but I think they are pretty
sure lightning isn't likely before they light one of those candles, huh? The
static charges from a rocket alone must be impressive. Maybe it could
attract lightning from a lot farther than normally considered in the
risk-zone.

Jack
Va Beach

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 05:42:30 -0800, "Ed Price" wrote:

or you could put some optics safely outside

Supply shop foreman (shocked):
"You want WHAT?"

Tech (still smoldering):
"You know, one of those Disco Balls. We're gonna spread
the beam, hit it, and hope it -ummmmm- clears the air. You
got many in stock? We may need a few.

"Oh yeah, another laser too."

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC