On Sep 3, 6:02*pm, William Mook wrote:
On Sep 3, 8:37*pm, William Mook wrote:



On Sep 2, 9:37*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Aug 22, 8:40*am, William Mook wrote:

On Aug 7, 7:44*pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"

wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Aug 7, 3:42 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
I have developed a system that masses 600+ tonnes and is lofted into
orbit by a reusable vehicle derived from our experience with the
External Tank only.

Really? Where is the hardware?

Oh that's right. That's "I've designed on paper."

We've been done this road before Mook. Bend metal, get someone to
bend metal or go away.

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

I didn't know this Usenet/newsgroup was a certified shop-class for
fly- by-rocket expertise. *Where's your better rocket or satellite of
bent metal?

When I claim to have developed one, I'll be more than willing to show it.
Notice, I don't make those claims.

There have been others here who HAVE made those claims and some have
actually bent metal.

Mook simply wears out keyboards.

*~ BG

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

Greg, you obviously don't know a damn thing about how to get things
done. *Clearly a thing must be designed before it is built. *Plainly
that means things have to be worked out in detail on computer.
Surely, I am free to discuss and share the results of my efforts here
or anywhere. *You sound like you suffer from 'small man' syndrome, and
are merely jealous of the ideas, capabilities, knowledge and women I
have. *lol. * I got a new keyboard, and that's not the only thing I
wear out with my 6 ft 3 in frame! *lol.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/35449912/S...e-Orbitshttp:/...

My company operates along the successful project financing model. *TO
that end we promote and sponsor a wide range of projects that create
value using solar energy and my proprietary technology throughout the
world, and in this case, beyond it.

I have recently developed a business plan for four satellites like
those described here with the four powering 32,000 ground stations
totaling 40,000 MW capacity. *This energy when sold at $0.06 per kWh
generates revenue valued at $275 billion the day it is switched on.

Selling off nearly half this value to investors over the five year
construction program provides them with a compounded 40% annual rate
of return for the $44 billion placed at risk.

This is quite an exciting program and has the potential to radically
alter our relationship to the cosmos.

Half the budget is used to build a fleet of reusable heavy lift
launchers. *The other half is used to build a supply chain and operate
it to build four satellites described above, along with the compact
ground stations.

The project plan ends here. *However, success opens other
possibilities.

Once the initial complement of satellites is operational half the
revenue generated by those satellites is used to continue building and
launching five satellites per year adding $300 billion per year to the
project's valuation. *Within a few years the project is worth over $1
trillion.

Rather than blindly launching a continuous stream of 10 GW satellites,
it makes sense to consider what might be done with a small portion of
the revenue in developing more advanced systems. *Systems that are too
complex to consider out of the box. *These more advanced systems will
service smaller users directly, send energy to mobile as well as
stationary users, and operate more efficiently in the solar system,
rather than be bound to Earth.

So, accepting a little higher risk, following initial success at lower
risk, the same launchers may also launch an advanced satellite system
that builds on the knowledge gained by building the first generation
satellite. *Here, there are a two satellites consisting of two 500 m
diameter CPV targets with no concentrator. *One satellite, the
Receiver, flies from LEO to GEO using solar powered ion rockets
normally used for station keeping. *Another satellite, the
Transmitter, flies from LEO to L1 using its ion station keeping
rockets.

The transmitter beams 160 MW of energy from L1 to GEO which then gets
reformed and directed into 160,000 beams of 1 kW each. *Unlike its
predecessor, this satellite is capable of beaming energy to moving as
well as stationary targets, at far higher energy than previously.

This satellite test proves out some of the most difficult elements of
the advanced satellite system.

If successful, the advanced satellite will restart its ion engines and
fly a Hohmann transfer orbit to Jupiter. *There it will execute a
sling shot maneuver to bring it to zero speed relative to the Sun. *It
will then fall into the Sun.

When the Transmitter's altitude reaches a mere 3.75 million km from
the Sun, it executes a method of station keeping using controlled
reflection of ineffective photons. *In this way it hovers above the
solar surface beneath the Earth as it orbits the Sun.

At this distance the Transmitter is now capable of beaming 250,000 MW
of laser energy to the Receiver, which generates 220 million laser
beams, each 1 kW to stationary and mobile receivers throughout the
world. *At $0.04 per kWh the revenue stream generated by the satellite
pair is worth over $1 trillion.

A successful installation of this very difficult and risky system,
will result in the installation of 70 more over the three years
following the first one. *70 of these satellites replaces all our
present energy use and captures the revenues now earned by OPEC and
others in the energy business.

Success at this level allows us to consider taking some risks in our
launch infrastructure to expand capabilities there.

At this point a program to develop a replacement engine for the RS-68
derived aerospike engine using 220 GW of laser power beamed to a
launcher, will be funded. *The result will be the conversion of the
five multi-element launchers into a fleet of thirty-five SSTO
launchers of similar capacity. *This combined with improvements in the
CPV arrays will allow pairs of satellites each 2.5 km in diameter to
be placed in space. * When operated at 3.75 million km these will
generate 7.8 trillion watts of laser energy. *This energy is beamed
throughout the solar system to be used for any of a variety of
industrial processes, including making use of asteroids to feed space
factories that make things on orbit by remote control and dispatch
them to any point on Earth. *Also, MEMS based laser rocket arrays make
possible the personal spaceship and personal ballistic travel to all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxV2F...utube.com/watc...

Do we get to hear that tiny pin dropping again?

What is it about my 1.2 TW platform of laser cannons as part of my LSE-
CM/ISS package deal that you didn't like?

*~ BG

From what I've seen of your system Brad is it won't work for several
sound reasons.

Also, GEO is a much better locale for a power satellite to serve Earth
and lunar Lagrange point. *However, to supply lunar bases, and power
laser powered rockets, lunar Lagrange points have some things to
recommend them.

Obviously, starting by serving well defined terrestrial markets is a
better first step. *Should demand for power beyond Earth develop for
any reason, then more advanced systems can be considered.

A 10,000 MW beam can energize a 221.7 metric ton force rocket with an
exhaust velocity of 9.2 km/sec. *Since things are not 100% efficient,
this should be reduced to 150 metric tons of force for early systems,
rising to 200 metric tons of force for later systems.

A two stage lunar rocket, massing 125 metric tons at lift off, would
consists of 58 % propellant mass. * With 12% structure fraction,
that's 30% payload. * A two stage system would consist of 9% of
payload. *That's 11.25 metric tons of payload. *The first stage is
recovered downrange.

The RLV that launched the power satellites could launch a 700 ton
lunar stage which is launched into LEO. *It is *powered by a laser
rocket and would burn off 62% of its starting weight as propellant.
That's 434 metric tons of propellant. *With 86 tons of structure, this
leaves 180 tons of payload on the moon and back!

11.25 metric tons of payload is about that 1/3 that of a 747
180 ton *metric tons of paylod is about 5x that of a 747

So, these two developments based around the 10,000 MW power satellite
- four in GEO and one at LL1 - would give us an interesting capability
when combined with the HLRLV described here.

The smaller vehicle can be considered a quick response low cost
passenger vehicle, the larger stage a slower cargo vehicle.

Similar calculations can be done for Mars operations as well as other
interplanetary operations.

So far so good, and this by itself is worth how many billions per year?