It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New way of Space Launching?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 12:10 AM
link   
Why cant we take a monorail, the tracks that use magnetism, and use them to launch a vehicle into space?
Im thinking maybe 20 miles long or so and curve the track upwards towards the end kinda like a ramp.
Couldnt you make a vehicle go faster and faster with the magnet approach and then launch them like a bullet?




posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 01:01 AM
link   
It's called a "railgun" or, more precisely, a "MagLev" Launcher.

The biggest problem with such a system is the extremely high "G-forces" your payload would have to endure to achieve the speed necessary to reach orbit by essentially "coasting" all the way from the end of the launcher to orbital insertion.

Although you could build up speed gradually over the course of a very long track, the track would have to be hundreds, if not thousands of miles long to slowly build up the roughly 17,000-18,000 MPH you'd need to achieve a stable orbit without exceeding g-forces that would crush a human to a ripe red pulp.

And then of course, there's the problem of the intense frictional heating your spacecraft would have to endure as a result of hurtling at orbital speed (actually, you would have to hurtle at better than orbital speed, atmosphereic drag upon launch would slow your craft considerably) through the dense lower atmosphere.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 01:09 AM
link   
No.

Orbital speed to typically around Mach 25- Mach 30. To get into space you'd need to be going faster than that, AND the monorail wouldn't be high altitude.

Imagine going Mach 20 at sealevel. ANYTHING would fly to bits. ANYTHING!



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 01:37 AM
link   
You would need a track almost 6,000 miles long to go that fast without sustaining any more than 5gs. Please correct me if I am wrong, but thats some serious stuff to figure out.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 02:00 AM
link   
There was an idea that was being discussed here something like 6 months ago, not been able to find it yet - will look later.

Kinda similar to your monorail idea in that it uses mag propulsion. As Quasar pointed out the track would have to be very long - or circular.

If I’m remembering correctly a circular track about 10 miles circumference would be used to gradually build up to escape velocity, then as the veh was on its final lap part of the track would divert to the launcher ramp, hey presto!

It wasn't intended for humans tho due to the G forces, instead it would be to launch equipment to be received in orbit by the shuttle. The whole plan was a cheaper / quicker alternative to a space elevator.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 02:11 AM
link   
The billions of dollars spent on such a project would be suited if put towards research of interdimensional travel, or antigrav propulsion.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 02:31 AM
link   
Also the current Space Shuttle has to throttle back in the lower atmosphere because atmospheric friction would destroy the craft if it reached escape velocity in the lower atmosphere. The Space Shuttle has to wait until it reaches altitude before it can throttle up.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Why do you think this method, if it did work, should be used?

I have a feeling it would be a much more expensive alternative. Maybe in the long run we would get it back from saving on fuel costs?

[edit on 3-7-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 06:24 AM
link   
Cos its cool!

Like I posted the plans for the space elevator are well beyond the nano tech we have ATM, every thing about this is possable now - and cheaper than a shuttle.

Heres the article


If the ring launched hundreds of satellites a year, it would be cheaper than conventional rocket launches. With 300 launches per year, the team estimates the ring could put payloads into orbit for $745 per kilogram. If the launch rate reached 3000 launches per year, they calculate that would drop to $189 per kilogram. Today, it costs more than 100 times that to send payloads into space.


2000g's though, any thing sent better be built well.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
Cos its cool!


Well that's definitely enough motive for me!
I was speaking from the governments standpoint.


If the ring launched hundreds of satellites a year, it would be cheaper than conventional rocket launches. With 300 launches per year, the team estimates the ring could put payloads into orbit for $745 per kilogram. If the launch rate reached 3000 launches per year, they calculate that would drop to $189 per kilogram. Today, it costs more than 100 times that to send payloads into space.


Are these figures taking into account the costs of its original construction or just the expense for the launches?

[edit on 3-7-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 06:59 AM
link   
Probably it would be fairly cheap to launch piggyback from a high flying jet too.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I had an idea a couple of months ago, doesn't involve a track, but more like a huge fan. The centripetal force might be a little too much, but it's still fun to think about.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 07:51 PM
link   
I recall hearing that this would be a good way to send things from the moon to mars and back. Both have negligible atmospheres, so drag shouldn't be much of a problem.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:35 AM
link   
The moon would be a good place to launch from - 1- 6th Earths gravity, give the projectile retros and I suppose you could get your payload into orbit around whichever planet / moon you choose.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:43 AM
link   
mmmmmm.......me thinks

What about launching from the sea (like they do already) and using steam in a certain way, salt water gets hotter quicker so that may help the situation, any steam experts out there?

Val



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 06:54 PM
link   
I'm no steam expert but didn't we move away from steam trains for the faster and more conventional diesel ones....


I heard of an electric propulsion cord into space before some crazy scientist thought it would work. Those crazy scientists when will they ever learn


Ah I found it with a simple google search...



Sept 9, 1997: So proclaimed comic strip character Diet Smith in the 1960s when he would fly Dick Tracy from Earth to Moon in a magnetically driven Space Coupe. Smith's proclamation was a bit over the top, but it carried a kernel of truth: you can cut space travel costs by using an extension cord to tap into a planet's magnetic field.


Full Article here

[edit on 10-7-2007 by ScepticEireGuy]



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   
You couldn't use a mag lev rail set to do the entire launch, but what about imparting some of the velocity? Use the rails to get the mass of the ship moving at say mach 2 in an upward direction, with the engines firing to maintain and then augment the speed. A great deal of fuel is used just to lift the shuttle off the launch pad, and the solid fuel boosters are jetisonned well inside the atmosphere. If you could remove them from the equation,it would mean a considerable savings in weight and money.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join