I saw that as well, but thought it may simply be a reference to the contracting facility (China Lake).
In the mean time I now have a source for ongoing contract billing for EMC2. I will not go into details about how, but I am putting together a listing of total billings to date against the WB8 contract. Once done I will post it.
Recovery.Gov Project Tracker
I think they are place holding for 8.1, although that would actually kick in 3QFY11.
I do not think that they moved to China Lake. I think that they moved to a larger shop in Santa Fe.
I was in Arizona earlier this week, and am in SF right now. I had mused about a quick side trip to NM and knocking the door. But given I need to head up to Seattle on Wednesday, the timing is not going to play. Oh well.
I do not think that they moved to China Lake. I think that they moved to a larger shop in Santa Fe.
I was in Arizona earlier this week, and am in SF right now. I had mused about a quick side trip to NM and knocking the door. But given I need to head up to Seattle on Wednesday, the timing is not going to play. Oh well.
On 10 September 2010, EMC2 was paid $166,000 by Navair.
I have some other money data as well, but that is the most recent billing/payment.
I am going back thorugh the history and searching for other payments.
It is tedious, but also seems to show variable billing by EMC2. They do not seem to be on a set Terms plan, rather billing as they go.
Once I have the complete $ picture back to contract start I will post it.
Sorry for the delay, but it has been a little hectic with my work trip and all.
I have some other money data as well, but that is the most recent billing/payment.
I am going back thorugh the history and searching for other payments.
It is tedious, but also seems to show variable billing by EMC2. They do not seem to be on a set Terms plan, rather billing as they go.
Once I have the complete $ picture back to contract start I will post it.
Sorry for the delay, but it has been a little hectic with my work trip and all.
That's very good news. I was a bit worried arcing or other issues would prevent them from operating the machine.ladajo wrote:It would seem that the navy (ONR via NAVAIR) is anticipating moving forward in FY 11 with the optional contract. They have enough faith to make a funding placeholder on the official listing for future contracts.
http://www.navair.navy.mil/OSBP/index.c ... ost_id=119
See line 201 in the excel.
It seems that this is not a restatement of the standing contract which has already been executed, but would appear to be a forecast for additional funding for part 2 (WB8.1) in FY11.
Even if confinement isn't what we hope, if they can burn p-B11 in WB-8.1 that will be a notable achievement.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...
I am also giving my contact at Recovery.gov some breathing room to see what posts on the 30th.
To be fair, based on the last go-round, the stage is set if there is a reporting lapse again this time.
I am also interested to see if this cycle not just reports, but also reports on sub-contracts as is required. (Chamber, magrid, etc.)
To be fair, based on the last go-round, the stage is set if there is a reporting lapse again this time.
I am also interested to see if this cycle not just reports, but also reports on sub-contracts as is required. (Chamber, magrid, etc.)
From contacts I had when TP started up I believe it is on big Air Force's radar.ladajo wrote:I think ONR is sitting on it until the research solid as a defense mechanism. As I said before, this is not really on big navy's radar.
I would like to think that missing last quarter was an oversight based in the move and spin up for WB8 initial power. Only Nebel and Dolly knows.
As I said back at the beginning of the Recovery.gov saga, they are palying with fire by not meeting requirements. Government wheels may turn slow on average, but they do turn, and they sometimes speed up for short sprints.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
From my time in the USAF, I could easily see them wanting a Polywell if it could be small enough to fit into a C-5/C-17 or something similiarly sized. Not to mention the benefits for the AFs space programs.MSimon wrote:From contacts I had when TP started up I believe it is on big Air Force's radar.ladajo wrote:I think ONR is sitting on it until the research solid as a defense mechanism. As I said before, this is not really on big navy's radar.
I would like to think that missing last quarter was an oversight based in the move and spin up for WB8 initial power. Only Nebel and Dolly knows.
As I said back at the beginning of the Recovery.gov saga, they are palying with fire by not meeting requirements. Government wheels may turn slow on average, but they do turn, and they sometimes speed up for short sprints.
Polywell is not visible at the top of the navy food chain. It also has very limited visibility in the lanes you would think it would.
In fact, the Electric Ship shop also until recently was not really aware of it. There were comments made earlier in the former discussing Polywell being mentioned at a navy ship engineering conference. As I understand, this in fact did not happen.
It is currently being held very close and I believe this is being done as a protective measure from outside entities.
The just released CNO Energy Vision document also has no mention of it. This document was prepared at the CNO level by his immediate staff.
In fact, the Electric Ship shop also until recently was not really aware of it. There were comments made earlier in the former discussing Polywell being mentioned at a navy ship engineering conference. As I understand, this in fact did not happen.
It is currently being held very close and I believe this is being done as a protective measure from outside entities.
The just released CNO Energy Vision document also has no mention of it. This document was prepared at the CNO level by his immediate staff.