I've had two ideas, in terms of massive infrastructure projects to lessen the cost of getting into space. Please correct me.
1. Use zeppelins, connected in a circle, to push a platform high into the atmosphere to launch rockets. There of course is wind, increased radiation for crew, the enormous pressure released from the rocket would most definitely tear the platform apart and take all the zeppelins with it, but is it possible if the platform is meant to be destroyed and fall to the earth to absorb most of the rocket shock? And is it worth it from, say launch a rocket from 90,000 feet?
2. Use a massive magnetic rail, going up a mountain or some other structure to at least get the rocket going to maybe 800 mph. There are some roller coasters that achieve 100mph in just 3.5 seconds. Essentially taking this for a rocket.
Hello and welcome to Zig Forums. Both ideas suffer from a serious lack of tokenization
Matthew Lopez
thanks just bought 100k
Leo Gray
Not possible since the earth is flat and there is a dome above us.
Matthew Bailey
>zeppelins
The higher you go the thinner the air gets. Greatly reduces the lifting power of airships. Furthermore, orbital flight is mostly about horizontal velocity, since you have to stay in orbit. You have to be moving about 7km/s horizontally just to stay up I think.
Hey retard, I did a thesis just about that. See pic related of the increase in payload mass of a SSTO hydrolox or kerolox vehicle with different altitude and velocity assists. 800mph is way more valuable than 90000 feet.
One of my conclusions: >The assist velocity has a larger impact on the performance of the launcher than the assist altitude. This holds for both launcher types investigated but more so for kerolox launchers than hydrolox launchers. >The performance surplus generated by an assist altitude of 40 km compared with an assist altitude of 0 km roughly corresponds with the performance increase generated by having an assist velocity of 540 m/s instead of 0 m/s for hydrolox launchers. For a kerolox launcher this performance increase is already met at assist velocities of about 400 m/s. >This implies that when given a fast assist platform, the trade-off between a kerolox launcher and a hydrolox launcher is more in favor of the kerolox launcher than it would be when a high assist platform would be used.
m8 take your meds, if you want to accelerate progress build a USV (unmanned space vehicle) that scans the moons craters for water. Then stuff will move
>800mph is way more valuable than 90000 feet. Scrap that it's actually fairly close. 90000 feet is as valuable as about 600 mph.
Josiah Howard
I would like to invest $10 million each into these projects
Camden Hernandez
Where you are wrong is that. 1) such a rail is a big infrastructure investment 2) you want flexibility as to what orbits you want to shoot it to. With a rail that limited. 3) safety. All launch tracks go over unpopulated areas. For the US and Europe it always is positioned so they go straight over the ocean. 4) ground handling. Way easier to integrate a satellite to a launcher at a spaceport instead of on a mountainside or have special requirements to the spacecraft because of the transport by zeppelin.
Jaxson Brooks
The nazis actually had a concept jet plane that took off from a rail launch system back in 1945. Germans are pretty clever
Parker Fisher
This is the exact sort of white elephant tomfoolery I will be investing in when XRP hits $2000 a coin. If the ring of zeppelins doesn't work, we shall pay for a second ring below that, lifting up the first.
Nobody on this board gets to call me a retard. You're all retards here.
Who said this would be in the US?
So a small magnetic ring, lifted on by zeppelins would be the optimal launch platform.
Where do you think I got it from?
Owen Campbell
You're trying to solve problems originating from obsolete tech. We antigrav and cold fusion now, have been for quite some time but only in sekrit military tech, watch what happens when it goes civilian.
Jeremiah Green
A rollercoaster than launches rockets off a mountain top is a great idea. You should apply at NASA bro
Caleb James
What about donut shaped blimp with a rocket inside? That would be more stable. With hydrogen economy comming we could lift rockets kilometers to the sky.
Or maybe a 3 gigantic stationary blimps full of hydrogen used as a lift. With cheap hydrogen pumped to them from the ocean it could work.
Julian King
All you have to do is negate gravity within a defined region of space, or reverse the polarity of your vessel's mass, and *bang* you're in space.
Wyatt Thompson
jfc people.
For every action is an equal and opposite reaction.
The rocket needs something to push against. It has to be launched from solid ground, or it's not going to work. The thrust is going to overpower any lift you're going to get from any kind of baloon 100x over.
Thomas Miller
So many brainlets here. Just build a tower up to the stratosphere and launch of the top
Landon Morgan
I'm pretty sure the whole reason musk did those launches recently was to cut costs on space travel.. By recycling the bulk of the shit by having it come back.
Dominic Price
How do you negate gravity or reverse the "polarity" (that cannot be the correct) or your vessal's mass?
Jason Ortiz
Government shill. Build a space elevator.
Austin Rodriguez
You introduced yourself as Retard. I thought that was your given name. >small magnetic ring, lifted on by zeppelins No. what g's do you intend to accelerate your rocket with? 100 g's? anything bearable for astronauts will require about 1 km of rail to get any decent speed out of it.
This is the formula for distance travelled at constant acceleration: dx = x+v⋅t+½⋅a·t2 it's important to note that both x and v are initial values and are 0 assuming you start at rest at place 0. Now for your final speed we can import a new value named ve since speed is ve = a·t this means a = ve/t or t = ve/a we get dx = ½⋅a·t2 = ½⋅ve·t = dx So for 800 mph or 270 m/s at say 4g you get 6.9 seconds as t dx = 0.5*5.5*270 = 929 m That's quite a long rail to carry. Also your zeppelins will have to deal with the massive recoil of accelerating a say 10 ton rocket with a force of 400kN.
It's a nice first step, but a launch loop has the potential to be even better, by a factor of a metric fuckton. Inb4 space elevator, aint gonna happen before we figure out carbon nanotubes of effectively infinite length.
