Dear Sir:

Your fact article, "The Future of Automotive Power Plants" (July 1972 issue), was very interesting, but based on the premise that the auto companies could not alter the demand for huge engines.

Maybe the auto companies can't alter demand, but the Internal Revenue Service sure as hell could. How about a tax to support antipollution research financed by an addition to the income tax rates based on a simple formula such as 5, corresponding to the year in the five-year tax plan? This plan would provide a tax rebate for owners of 50 hp cars, no change for 100 hp cars, and a scale progressively leading up to a 35 percent increase in the federal tax rate for the owners of 450 hp autos in the fifth year.

The polluters would pay to end pollution, the auto companies would have an instant demand for low-powered cars, and the use of irreplaceable fossil fuels would be sharply cut. Best of all, no technological advancements are required to reap immediate benefits!

DAN PLAMONDON

Homestead Park Family Campground

Route 2, Box 1122 Crescent City, California 95531

Interesting. If gasoline taxes are used to build highways, why not a hp tax?

Dear Mr. Bova:

I was looking through my collection of newspaper clippings on the Great Lakes shipping industry, and discovered an item written by Mr. Stephen Blossom, Marine Editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. I'm not certain of the date, but I don't believe it was written before 1965. Anyway, a proposal was made by a Mr. Kelly of Ralph M. Parsons Company of Los Angeles to build a navigation canal 730 feet wide and 50 feet deep from Lake Superior to the Pacific Coast, ostensibly to provide water for the thirsty Midwest and the southwestern states, but with a secondary purpose of providing cheap water transportation to the grain belts of both America and Canada. It would take approximately thirty years and a hundred billion dollars to build.

There are three reasons why this project is not as far out as it seems. First, much as I deplore the current government policy of ignoring space research except in defense areas, there are thousands of skilled scientists and technicians that are unemployed as a result. A canal of the above dimensions would employ literally hundreds of thousands of people, particularly scientists, both in the planning and building stages. It would be easy to convince the politicians, much easier than to convince them of the ultimate value of space research, because they could be shown the lucrative results to their respective regions. Then, sheer pork-barrel politics would take over, and voila, there are treaties with Canada and construction gangs begin work.

Second, the farmers of both the U.S. and Canada are sorely pressed by the low market price of grain, and the high costs of living. Given a cheap, easy means of transportation, the grain shipper would pass on the farmer his lower shipping costs in the form of higher grain prices.

Third, the Great Lakes shipping industry would be given a badly needed shot in the arm. They would be given a broader area to serve, and therefore, more money with which to operate. With this money, and government subsidies, the U.S. companies would be able to build new ships to replace the aging obsolete boats in their fleet. No length restriction was mentioned in the article, so I would assume the maximum dimensions now allowed on the Upper Lakes to be allowed in the canal. If and when this canal becomes reality, the current new ships might be out- moded, but, just for illustrative purposes, let me give two examples of the current efficiency of these giants of the Lakes.

The newest ship, Stewart J. Cort, of the Bethlehem fleet, can carry fifty-eight thousand tons of iron ore pellets, with a round trip ability of one week between Lake Superior and Burns Harbor, Indiana. Algocen, flagship of Algoma Central, can carry over a million bushels of grain in one trip. That's a big payload by anyone's standard! And she also has a weekly round-trip ability between Upper and Lower Lakes. Give this kind of large carrying capacity directly to the Midwest, with no middlemen, and a literal transportation revolution will take place.

There will be people who say that it is impossible, but they have short memories. Ask any Lakes shipping buff about the hassle over the Seaway! But once the politicking was over, and construction began, the idea became reality.

In conclusion, then, let me say just two things. First, with all of these anticipated results, the project is cheap at a hundred gigabucks. Second, let me say, in complete agreement with Mr. Blossom, "What are we waiting for?"

G. E. DRIFTMYER 424 South Patterson Street Gibsonburg, Ohio 43431

You'd get more Congressional support by having the canal wind through as many states as possible. But what about the Rocky Mountains? And the. environmental effects of linking the Great Lakes with the Pacific?

Dear Mr. Bova:

The July editorial propagates the myth of Joe McCarthy's reign of terror. ''When McCarthy was riding at his highest," you say, "scarcely a word was raised against him anywhere in the nation." This is just plain not true.

Without defending McCarthy at all, I must point out that this Great Silence simply didn't happen. The exceedingly public and vocal opposition to McCarthy was unmatched for sheer volume of vituperation until the peace movement took on Lyndon Johnson. The most cursory survey of newspapers and news magazines of the time will show that whatever else McCarthy might have been, he was not unopposed . . .

By the way, the reason that "no one accused by McCarthy was ever found legally guilty of espionage" was that he did not accuse them of being spies, but of being Communists, which was then, as now, not a crime. (The Smith Act tried to make it a crime, but was thrown out.)

Neither is it true that McCarthy's accusations "literally paralyzed much of our government and froze our foreign policy into a block of ice." Both the Truman and Eisenhower Administrations gave McCarthy no cooperation. His greatest frustration was that the people he accused very rarely lost their jobs or suffered any punishment for their alleged Communist sympathies. Indeed, among what is now called the "liberal intellectual establishment," it was practically a mark of honor to have been accused by McCarthy. What "froze our foreign policy" was, quite simply, the open aggression of the Communists. McCarthy attempted to ride the public's fear of the Communists, but he did not create that fear. The Soviets did that all by themselves.

As an old Cold Warrior, I must say that the current attempts to proclaim the Cold War out of existence impress me as wishful thinking completely unsupported by any observable change in Soviet intentions. The worst long-term effect of McCarthy's activities was that his "excesses" provided an eagerly-grasped excuse for the ostrich types to condemn all anti-Communist investigations and thus avoid confronting the reality of Soviet imperialism. The same refusal to face a frightening reality has now led us into the SALT agreement, by which, we have accepted permanent nuclear inferiority. I predict that if we are lucky we will live to regret SALT. If we're not lucky—well, then we won't live to regret it

GEORGE W. PRICE 1439 West North Shore Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60626

There was an upheaval in the State Department, during the McCarthy era, that is still unhealed. And for more than twenty years, it was political suicide to suggest any compromise with Red China. As for SALT, it moves the arms race from a question of quantity to quality: the brightest innovators will produce weapons superiority. Interesting possibilities, don't you think?

Dear Mr. Bova:

I am forced to point out your collaboration in the maintaining of a misconception. In your July editorial you said in effect that by some mysterious means of pouring dollars they ain't got into underdeveloped nations, organizations such as UNESCO, UNICEF, and WHO are bringing these nations into the Twentieth Century. I hope this was said in innocence for it is unfortunately wrong. I defy you to show me one nation—which was in the '50's an underdeveloped nation—that has taken a half-step toward this or any recent century. On an average all the nations so classified have slipped further back regardless of the already-shouted glories of mod technology.

People are the only thing they've a lot of, and so many more each day that if the same thing happened in scale in the U.S., we'd be hard-pressed to do anything except possibly turn our backs and ignore. All the aid the United Nations and anyone else could give them still would not succeed in raising that level to our standard.

In 1962 the world per capita product was $489, 17 percent of that of North America and half that of Europe. The world product could then only supply 1.5 billion persons at the European level and 500 million at the North American level.

Since '62 some shifting and increases in per capita product have changed the picture, true, but population increases have eaten up the lion's share and make of your comment an insult to an Indian's starvation.

On another point—brushfire wars—if you recall, we supported Castro in Cuba until it was too late, and he was a revolutionary. Equally, I'm told we have done similar things, which are supposed to be "un-nice," in other countries.

In Vietnam—and this will brand me a bad guy—we are seeing a renewal of China's Korean policy. The aim of China in Vietnam is to tie the U.S. into a war which at the same time puts a heavy burden on the U.S.S.R., which pays their bills, in order to insure its two biggest threats are effectively weakened and prevented from threatening China's security while she attempts to enter the big-power world.

That her policy is working better than she expected is due only to U.S. and Soviet willingness to fight over vague concepts of government neither really believes in or practices anymore. When people call Vietnam a silly war I agree for that reason.

What is made clear by this is that China is already acting like a third power whether she has the muscle for it or not, but years from now someone will call you, Ben, a prophet for seeing it coming. Sometimes, though,it takes a strong voice after the earthquake for people to really understand what has happened.

While I'm on your case, you should check the economics of the SST. According to the supporters' figures we would have gotten about half our money back in foreign trade and only likely broken even in the end. We need not lose a dime to foreign SST's since we can ban them from landing in the U.S., an act that would almost end their need.

M. TlCKLBBRIDGES c/o Advocate 2600 Mission Bell Drive San Pablo, California 94806

The people of nations such as Nigeria, Venezuela, Ceylon, Indonesia, and even India (to name a few) would argue strongly with your claim. They're moving! True, they'd move much faster if population growth didn't eat up so much of their GNP, but they're making progress despite the population boom, and the boom itself is beginning to slow.

As for Castro, the U.S. Government supported Batista, and our military personnel were pinning medals on Batista's personal guard while Castro was fighting in the hills. There was much popular sentiment for Castro in the U.S., but Batista used American-provided tanks, guns and planes, with American-trained troops. To no avail.

If China's policy is to debilitate the U.S. through Vietnam, it's one more reason to end our involvement in that sorry mess. And it's perfectly true that America holds the economic key to the success of the Anglo-French Concorde SST. The Russian SST, however, is a different matter.

Dear Editor:

Comments on a few things in the July issue:

P. Schuyler Miller's parallel between his proposed work and an older classic is an example of people unconsciously using things from their past reading. I once wrote a piece on sniping rifles for a shooting magazine (1966) and after I finished I tried to recall sources. One dated back to a 1947 magazine!

Someone else is paralleling, too. Pournelle's "The Mercenary" parallels an event in history, in one part. There was a government about to fold, a government member who inspired the legal head of things to act strongly, and a commander with a handful of trained and loyal troops. The Nika Riots of Justinian's day finished with a stadium massacre by Belisarius and a relative handful of trained soldiers exactly the same way. Except that Belisarius stayed on as commander for the Eastern Empire after that.

Mr. Eastman's letter about shooting sports and country troubles reminds me of a current drive to put the hunters out of business, "fat, red-faced men, expensively dressed from their down bootees to the knobs of their silver hip flasks. Little desire to search for game but a great desire to kill something that can be tied to a fender or held up in a barroom," et cetera, et cetera. I don't know about shooters killing all the songbirds, as it is not too much an American custom. The cultured French and Italian farmers are very fond of properly cooked songbirds of all sorts. One could blame some of it on people like the loon who imported starlings because they were mentioned in Shakespeare and he wanted the United States to have all the advantages. The English sparrow faded with the decline of horse apples in the streets, but starlings are still with us. Mao's lads managed to cure the birds of China of eating grain without guns. They did it by hand. (They also found that small birds often eat a lot more bugs than grain. Apres the bird kill, came the insects to the farms.)

Loss of habitat does a lot of it, as in the case of a Michigan bird only found in certain wooded spots. Log the place and the birds die. Same with the ivory-billed woodpeckers. It is thought that something like bad weather around 1888 and the loss of trees and native foods started the catastrophic end of the passenger pigeon.

Gun control is not as important as might be thought. What of nut control? Observe the fatuous grin on the lad who stalked various candidates and finally got a crack at George Wallace. And the idiotic violence of the Japanese student radicals who took a contract from the Arab guerillas and shot up the Lod Airport terminal. One Arab source chortled that there "were no innocent people in Israel." The hell there weren't. Most of the dead were Puerto Ricans on pilgrimage. I could view the boiling in oil of George Habash with little sorrow. I hope some of the relatives of the dead pilgrims get hold of him. They are not an unusually violent tribe, but I am sure they would think of something appropriate. After all, the Puerto Ricans number Carib Indians and Spanish buccaneers among their ancestors—tough hombres indeed.

Ireland has had tough arms controls since the Statutes of Kilkenny in the 1930's. To what end? Rebellion after rebellion, in spite of suppression by the Sassenachs. The I.R.A. is now getting help from the Marxist world. Another Vietnam, anyone?

JOHN P. CONLON (Korea, Clash of '52) 52 Columbia Street Newark, Ohio 43055

Laws only work as well as their enforcement!

Gentlemen:

It has been a pleasure to have our teen-age son exposed to the provocative and responsible political-social-economic philosophy of Mr. John Campbell's editorials and to know that he would not be exposed to pornographic stories but that the reader interest would be built around fantasy and other-world situations.

However, it becomes obvious that Analog was, indeed, an extension of Mr. Campbell's personality as was pointed out in the eulogy editorial concerning his passing. And it is evident that present editorial policy is as divergent from his as black is from white. All your post-Campbell editorials are typical of the current irresponsible drivel of the majority of magazine editors. More importantly to the parents of teen-age children, your abandonment of Mr. Campbell's sexual morality standards is even more unacceptable. No stories printed in the past few years could be called pornographic and only a few even had "suggestive" material in them. However, "Hero," in the June 1972 issue is pornographic, even in the legal sense, since sex acts described were not necessary to the development of the story plot and had "no redeeming social value." The single reference to fornication on page 103 of "Unfair Trade" in the July 1972 issue was absolutely unnecessary to the plot and did nothing to enhance a rather mediocre story. Several sexually suggestive comments could have been removed from "Collision Course" in the July issue without detracting from the story, to bring it completely into line with the accepted Judeo-Christian morality of our society. . . And may the fortunes smile upon you to the exact degree which you deserve for prostituting one of the few remaining decent magazines we had.

WALLACE I. PASSEY 1545 Westland Avenue Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401

Although there were references to the fact that men and women engage in sexual intercourse in these stories, there was no description of individual encounters that could—by the wildest stretch of legality—be considered pornographic. If you consider mere mention of the fact that human beings procreate sexually—and often enjoy it—as an affront to the Judeo-Christian morality of our society, then you'd better start expurgating your Bible!

Dear Ben:

I am writing this letter of congratulations for the June 1972 issue. In my opinion, Analog has finally come into maturity with Joe Haldeman's brilliant story, "Hero"! While it did have swearing and some sex in it, they rang true, thus fitting in with the whole mood of the story. Many of the current antiwar stories are so totally boring, hammering away at the theme with no thought to plot or characterization, that it is a pleasure to read a story as well written as this! Is there a Hugo award category for best prozine illustration? If there is, Kelly Freas surely would win for his excellent illustrations for the cover story.

KEN GAMMAGE, JR. 7865 East Roseland Dr. La Jolla, California 92037

"Hero" has elicited strong reactions— both pro and con: the mark of a strong story.

Dear Mr. Bova:

In the July 1972 issue, you printed a letter from Richard Lippa, who expresses the hope that your readers will write their congressmen in support of the space-shuttle program. I must echo Mr. Lippa's feelings. Aside from providing a "cheap" way to explore space, the shuttle opens up the possibility for manufacturing in space, as was covered in an article in your magazine about two years ago. Among other things, semiconductor crystals, vacuum tubes, and cultures for vaccines can be made very quickly and cheaply in an orbital space station's weightless environment.

If the space-shuttle program is continued, I believe it is safe to predict that space costs will be reduced by a factor of five in five years. Furthermore, when manufacturing is begun, the space program will become self-supporting and even profitable soon after. In twenty years, the space program may well be indispensable. At the end of Mr. Lippa's letter, you expressed concern over the environmental impact of a hundred launches a year. As a former engineer on the engine development project for one of the contractors, I must comment. (And lest your readers feel I am only trying to protect my job, I have since quit the space program and changed my specialty to environmental physics.) First of all, my information is that a hundred launches a year is a maximum figure—the actual number will probably be less than that. Secondly, the liquid-fueled engines use hydrogen and oxygen for fuel, and the exhaust products are pure steam. The last I heard, NASA was considering a solid-propellant booster, which admittedly pollutes more than the liquid engines. However, the total of the exhaust products for an entire flight would only be about the same order of magnitude as the quantity ejected by a 747 on a cross-country flight. And how many thousands of jets fly in this country every day?

We of the United States have a position with the space program similar to that of a man who has built a house. He has spent a large sum of money constructing it, but now desires to tear it down before getting any use out of it because "it's such an expensive house"—never realizing that upkeep is much cheaper than construction. Also, he can now reap the rewards of his labors!

GORDON WOLFE Physics Department University of California Davis, California 95616

The exhaust of a LH-LOX rocket is considerably more complex than simple steam, mainly because the hot exhaust gases mix with the surrounding air and cause chemical reactions among the oxygen and nitrogen molecules. At very high altitudes, this could cause reactions that might reduce the ozone content, and thus allow more solar UV radiation to reach the ground. Might. No one knows for certain, and the subject should be investigated.

As for manufacturing in orbit, G. Harry Stine has part one of a two-part article on the Third Industrial Revolution in this issue (page 30).