egg changed the topic of #kspacademia to: https://git.io/JqLs2 | Dogs are cats. Spiders are cat interferometers. | Document well, for tomorrow you may get mauled by a ネコバス. | <UmbralRaptor> egg|nomz|egg: generally if your eyes are dewing over, that's not the weather. | <ferram4> I shall beat my problems to death with an engineer. | We can haz pdf | Logs: https://esper.irclog.whitequark.org/kspacademia
<WeylandsWings> raptop: https://amostech.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/AMOS-2025-Program.pdf lots of bad acronyms in here.
<WeylandsWings> Including PLASAR
<WeylandsWings> also "Alphabet Soup: How GNC, FD, FSW, GSW, and M&S interact with SDA " lol
<WeylandsWings> also this just sounds miserable "Adaptive Tracking of Space Objects using Riemannian Manifolds on the 2-Sphere" Martin Adams, Universidad de Chile
<WeylandsWings> Plasma Detection and Ranging (PLADAR):
<WeylandsWings> just aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh why
<WeylandsWings> or Pattern of Life Analysis Real-time Identification System (POLARIS)
<WeylandsWings> not an acronym, but i am really curious as to how this would work "On-Demand Additive Manufacturing of Astronomical Mirrors" because AFAIK no (large) 3d printer has anywhere near the resolution for optical mirrors
<WeylandsWings> VISION (Vigilant Integrated Space Information and mOnitoring Network) , why must you torture the acronyms
<WeylandsWings> this poster sounds fun "Use of Astronomical Photometric Methods for SDA EO System Optimization" Vincent Vella, First Light Sciences
<raptop> Those are some acronyms all right
<raptop> Also I'm pretty sure that the most sucessful telescopes that use additive manufacturing have traditional mirrors.
<raptop> ...and are 114 x 900 dobs
<WeylandsWings> yes but those dont use addititve manufacturing OF the mirrors like that pster's title is
<WeylandsWings> s/pster's/poster's
<WeylandsWings> and i have nothing against 3d printing for things like mounts/supports infact that could be a really good thing
<WeylandsWings> even for things like mirror or lens cells. 3d printing could help with things like stiffness/sag or thermal breaks for the glass/mount CTE mismatches
<raptop> optical mirrors mean λ/4 is tiny, and radio may as well have you bend sheet metal, so maybe somewhere in the IR?
<WeylandsWings> but IR needs exotic coatings and cooling
<raptop> Yeah, mirror/lens cells would be fascinating
<WeylandsWings> and i still think even LW IR would be too small because λ/4 for say 15 µm is still 4 µm, and even resin machines are like 35 µm
<WeylandsWings> so using that as the base you would be at least 0.1 mm wavelength? which is what THz?
<raptop> yeah. So unless there are fancy antenna shapes
<WeylandsWings> I mean people are looking a THz sensors, but they still seem more like lab novelties
<WeylandsWings> now i could see SOME benefit of using 3d printing for making molds and the like for mirrors, but you would still need a long polishing/grinding post processing which when compared to something like spin casting doesnt seem useful *
<WeylandsWings> * unless you are doing some wild off axis stuff and trying to do monolithic mirrors, which WHY
<WeylandsWings> like iirc even GMT used normal flat spin casting and then just ground the fuck out of the outer mirrors
<raptop> Yeah. GMT also hadonly 2 mirror shapes, which helped.
<raptop> Hrm, assuming you're doing an array, 3D printing would hopefully give you way more leeway there
<WeylandsWings> and i just looked it up, Verra Rubin (LSST) also jused a single spin cast and then a lot of griding for its mirror
<WeylandsWings> how would it give your more leeway?
<raptop> In terms of how eg: GMT has 2 kinds of mirrors and JWST 3, but something with a much larger array may need more shapes
<WeylandsWings> because the surface of the mirror would still be off by more than λ/4 I am not sure how much it would help without needing that long grinding step
<raptop> There is that
<WeylandsWings> but i will try to see that poster at some point
<WeylandsWings> too bad I am not actually AT the conference this year