Jeff Suzuki writes:

Charles Talleyrand wrote:

What's the cheapest cost to orbit a chemical rocket is likely to
yield in the next fifty years? Will we see $100/pound to orbit?
How about $10/pound? And what underlying technology will
this rocket use?

Depends on what you're planning to send. For example, if your payload
is capable of withstanding, say, 50 gravities, you could launch via a
railgun (a la Jules Verne). You'd only need a 60 km long rail.

Two problems:

1.) A railgun basically can only be used =ONCE=. After each firing, it needs
to be almost completely rebuilt, as the "rails" pretty much destroy themselves.
This is =NOT= a recipe for "cheap."

1.) You =CANNOT= build a 60 km long railgun, as they don't scale up well;
high-performance railguns are intrinsically ultra-high acceleration devices.
Your railgun will have to be MUCH shorter, and your payload will need
to be able to tolerate MUCH higher gees.

Hence, I strongly suggest you look at other types of "guns" or accelerators.


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'