From: mikkelhaaheim@gmail.com   
      
   Le mercredi 21 septembre 2016 18:50:47 UTC+2, elie....@gmail.com a écrit :   
      
   > I am not sure how this is a disadvantage. Given that the ship has weeks,   
   months or even years of coast time, low acceleration is not a problem: small,   
   constant acceleration is about as good as high point acceleration, as seen   
   with probes using ion    
   drives.   
      
      
   I am not refering to the low acceleration. I take that as a granted. I am   
   refering to the fact that 7x as much energy is required to heat gaseous H2 by   
   1° as is required to heat water vapour by the same amount. A savings of 85%   
   energy (approximately),    
   means that you have that much energy available for other tasks. It is that   
   much energy that you don't have to generate, meaning less waste heat to   
   dissipate/absorb. It means you have that much more constant acceleration,   
   vastly decreasing the amount of    
   time for someone to observe you. It also means you have that much extra   
   delta-v available for course corrections or other manoeuvres.   
   Low acceleration is not a problem. Wasting energy is.   
      
   LH is not what is going to keep the outer shell temperature low. A good   
   insulator is. The heat sink is for absorbing all the extra heat being   
   generated by whatever systems you are using. It is NOT for cooling the outer   
   shell. Insulation helps to funnel    
   the heat flow into the heat sink, and to prevent that heat from flowing to the   
   outer shell. Even LH will be ineffective in preventing heat emission if you   
   don't use an appropriate insulator, no matter how cold that LH is.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)