|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Maglev assisted launch SSTO
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Maglev assisted launch SSTO
In article ,
Peter Fairbrother wrote: I can't see Mecapa being a problem. It's about 1800 miles downrange from Quito. There are no boosters to land on them. It would be a bit like Europeans complaining about launches from Kennedy. More precisely, like the citizens of St. John's, Newfoundland, objecting to high-inclination shuttle launches overflying them (which has happened, I believe). Note also that at that distance, quite a small change in ascent trajectory will take you well to one side of Macapá. Such avoidance maneuvers are not uncommon; e.g., Sea Launch flew slightly north of due east on its first few launches, to eliminate any chance of a failure dropping debris on the Galapagos. -- MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! | |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Maglev assisted launch SSTO
In article ,
Ross C. Bubba Nicholson wrote: Well, troopers, a mag lev launcher might do for returns from planets/moons without atmospheres, eh? On such a body, you'd want to use a catapult technology that achieved much higher velocity, reducing the demands on the rocket end. By rocketry standards, maglev is a low-speed technology. Hotter catapult systems achieve levitation almost incidentally. -- MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! | |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Maglev assisted launch SSTO
"Henry Spencer" wrote:
In article , Ross C. Bubba Nicholson wrote: Well, troopers, a mag lev launcher might do for returns from planets/moons without atmospheres, eh? On such a body, you'd want to use a catapult technology that achieved much higher velocity, reducing the demands on the rocket end. By rocketry standards, maglev is a low-speed technology. Hotter catapult systems achieve levitation almost incidentally. Technically, sure. But otherwise I'm not so sure. A planetary body without an atmosphere means almost certainly that the surface gravity is a lot less than Earth's. Plus, no atmosphere means no drag losses, easier insulation, and better Isp. I would be shocked if there were a planetary body with no atmosphere for which an SSTO using roughly our current state of technology weren't very easy. It'd almost be foolish not to use rocketry when you can get such huge leverage with it. But perhaps other concerns (especially, I'm thinking, resource abundance locally) might elevate an alternative to a higher level of practicality and cost effectiveness than rocketry. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Maglev assisted launch SSTO
Christopher M. Jones wrote: "Henry Spencer" wrote: In article , Ross C. Bubba Nicholson wrote: Well, troopers, a mag lev launcher might do for returns from planets/moons without atmospheres, eh? On such a body, you'd want to use a catapult technology that achieved much higher velocity, reducing the demands on the rocket end. By rocketry standards, maglev is a low-speed technology. Hotter catapult systems achieve levitation almost incidentally. Technically, sure. But otherwise I'm not so sure. A planetary body without an atmosphere means almost certainly that the surface gravity is a lot less than Earth's. Plus, no atmosphere means no drag losses, easier insulation, and better Isp. I would be shocked if there were a planetary body with no atmosphere for which an SSTO using roughly our current state of technology weren't very easy. It'd almost be foolish not to use rocketry when you can get such huge leverage with it. But perhaps other concerns (especially, I'm thinking, resource abundance locally) might elevate an alternative to a higher level of practicality and cost effectiveness than rocketry. Say an asteroid colony is exporting to another asteroid colony via a Hohmann transfer orbit. There would be two burns: one to enter the transfer orbit and the other to match velocities with destination. If the burns are done with fuel mined at the asteroid, they could be expensive burns. But if the transfer orbit insertion delta v could be accomplished by other means, much mass and fuel could be saved. I think you'd still need rockets to match velocities with your destination, but much less onboard fuel. Hop http://clowder.net/hop/index.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 2nd 04 12:01 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 2nd 04 03:33 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | September 12th 03 01:37 AM |
News: Russian space engineer speaks about new launch pad in French Guiana | Rusty B | Space Station | 0 | August 4th 03 04:52 PM |
Columbia Accident Investigation Board Issues Preliminary Recommendation Four: Launch and Ascent Imaging | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 0 | July 1st 03 06:45 PM |