Airship to Orbit, Airship video.

jpowell · Apr 7, 2005

I just put a video of the Ascender airship on the JP Aerospace web site: www.jpaerospace.com The clip shows "working on the spaceship" in the hanger in Sacramento. Here's the caption: "A day in the life of an airship factory, or at least two minutes and forty seconds of one. This is a 'walk around' of the 175 foot Ascender from January 2004. That day we worked on inflation, float and a propeller spin up test." John Powell

jurgens · Apr 7, 2005

Wow that looks awesome! I hope you guys get that thing up high high and high! Question though, ive only done some minimal research on JP Aerospace so forgive me if im wrong, but are you planning on using anything other then just the bouyancy of the airlifter to get to the upper atmosphere? Also when are you planning on getting the thing tested out and actually trying to get it into the upper atmosphere. And from there what? Launch a rocket from there?

jurgens · Apr 7, 2005

Wow I was just reading over the site, and wow is all I have to say!! Wow wow wow! This thing could rival the space elevator in terms of costs to get to low earth orbit :-D (R&D + development costs) The Ship that is supposed to go from the DSS to orbit, what kind of carrying capacity is it going to have?

frodo1008 · Apr 16, 2005

Very interesting ideas. Some questions, I am not being critical, just curious. Are the parts of the DSS to be taken up in the Ascender? If so how are they to be assembled? The ship that gets eventually to orbit, has it been calculated how much heat such a vehicle would be taking on to reach orbital velocity? Even starting very slowly from 140,000 feet there is still quite a bit of atmosphere. I find it a little bit difficult to realize that any kind of balloon could reach 140,000 ft in altitude just using bouyance alone. It is not that I am trying to throw water on the ideas as presented. I am for ANY ideas that will result in Cheap Access to Space. However, there is very little real information that can answer the above questions on the site. Is their some reason for such a lack of details? I really don't think that anyone else is going to want to "steal" the information.

cmedwards · Jun 9, 2005

The ARCHIMEDES project proposed by the German Mars Society employed a large balloon for spacecraft atmospheric re-entry without a heat shield, similar to the ATO airship in concept if not in scale. That part of the idea is both theoretically possible and not unique to the JP Aerospace Team. I'm curious about the ATO concept myself. I crunched some numbers on the idea, and I believe it could work. It will require taking advantage of everything from Coriolis Force to daily thermal waves, with several major critical points during the ascent where even directed crew flatulence should not be neglected. But it is not a physical impossibility. If they can build it, they can fly it. I have a few questions about the project, too, such as: "Where do I sign up?" "Do you still have operations in Texas?", and "How do I get on one of your chase teams?" Things like that. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

spacester · Jun 11, 2005

Drag losses for launch from sea level are in the range of 0.8 km/s to 1.6 km/s out of around 10 km/s to LEO. The elevation gain is good for a bit more, I don't have those numbers handy. Since the trick to get CATS is to outsmart the rocket equation, cheating it with balloons is an attractive concept. IOW it makes sense mathematically. The whole question in my mind is if we can operate in that environment. It's great to know there are guys trying to find the answers for us. I've followed JP for years, he used to post to some boards I lurked at. Go JP go! If t/space can drop a rocket from a plane at lower altitudes, why can't a really high balloon do it? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

cmedwards · Jun 20, 2005

As I understand the Airship-To-Orbit idea, there may be no need for vertical thrust to orbit at all. The ship starts at equilibrium (floating) and flies, airship style, to orbit. An airship thrusting through the thick air at the surface would quickly stop rising and float at some new equilibrium if it tried the same thing. But the atmospheric changes with altitude are so great in the mesosphere and thermosphere that an ATO system could theoretically never reach a new equilibrium. It could continue slowly climbing and accelerating until it reached orbital heights and velocities. Not to mention that the Dark Sky Station is the coolest looking flying lawnchair I've ever seen. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

spacefire · Jun 21, 2005

I don't know, all this stuff seems really weird. and this is even weirder: It will require taking advantage of everything from Coriolis Force to daily thermal waves, with several major critical points during the ascent where even directed crew flatulence should not be neglected. But it is not a physical impossibility. If they can build it, they can fly it. accelerating to 7.9 km/s with farts <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> unless they mean to go directly to GEO. that could take a really long time just with buoyancy alone, but maybe with farts it could be done! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

nacnud · Jun 21, 2005

It is a bit weird but as I see it the airship has to fly high enough so that atmosphereic drag is lower that the force from the ion engines so the ship can accelerate up to orbital speeds. Using gravity waves (see the thread in ATA), compression lift, maybe areodynamic lift and other tricks to help.

spacefire · Jun 21, 2005

theoretically, a largeairship could be buoyant enough to reach Geosyncronous orbit altitude remaining stationary in relation to the point of departure. The atmosphere doesn't simply dissapear at one point so there should be some particles left. But an engine would help a little bit. Quite an interesting way to fo in space I might add. What of micrometeorites? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

mrmorris · Jun 21, 2005

"theoretically, a large airship could be buoyant enough to reach Geosyncronous orbit altitude" No -- it couldn't. You obviously have zero idea of exactly how high GEO is. 99% of the atmosphere is gone by 100km. By ~1000 km, air particles cease being notable even as a sourve of drag. GEO is ~35,900 kilometers.

spacefire · Jun 21, 2005

have you tried it? May I remind you space is not a perfect void? let's say that inside your airship you have an environment closer to vacuum than even the interplanetary medium. obvioulsy you will be pushed away from the denser medium, which gets less dense the farther you move from the planet. So, in theory it is possible to build an airship to GEO that would rise there through buoyancy alone. or, prove that you can't., mathematically, or through a law of physics. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

nacnud · Jun 21, 2005

Spacefire, will a helicopter work on the moon then? *turns and runs*

spacefire · Jun 21, 2005

sure.....a helicopter with blades 100 miles long spinning at a million revolutions per second might work. any planet or moon has at least a little atmosphere

<div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

mrmorris · Jun 22, 2005

"let's say that inside your airship you have an environment closer to vacuum than even the interplanetary medium. obvioulsy you will be pushed away from the denser medium, which gets less dense the farther you move from the planet. So, in theory it is possible to build an airship to GEO that would rise there through buoyancy alone." What an incredibly stupid theory. There are at least two problems. 1. There is no such thing as a perfect vacuum. Space is as close as it gets. Making an even *more* perfect vacuum than space is not an option. Pumps get less and less efficient at removing air as the number of molecules to be removed decreases. 2. While I'll agree that density and your theory go hand-in-hand -- there's a bit of a problem in terms of atmospheric density. Namely -- for your ('airship' is the wrong term, we'll have to call it a...) vacuumship to move away from the Earth to 'less dense' air, there must exist a reasonable gradient. The atmospheric pressure from sea-level to ~5km above the Earth has a significant gradient. Once you get to that height, however, atmospheric pressure is ~50% of sea-level. By 31km, it's about 1% of sea level. What's left between 31km and 36,000km does not provide enough of a pressure gradient to push your imaginary vacuumship anywhere -- even if you could generate the perfect vacuum.

spacefire · Jun 22, 2005

I said in theory...you can't seem to grasp that concept. Even an infinitesimal pressure gradient would provide enough buoyancy for a large enough airsship. but why am I wasting my time arguing with an accountant over physicis when I have an Aerospace Engineering degree?!!??!!? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

nacnud · Jun 22, 2005

I said in theory...you can't seem to grasp that concept. Even an infinitesimal pressure gradient would provide enough buoyancy for a large enough airship. But why am I wasting my time arguing with an accountant over physics when I have an Aerospace Engineering degree?!!??!!? How about arguing with a physicist. It won’t work. The airship would have to be made of a material less dense than LEO space, you couldn’t have material that was still bound together, and if you did somehow make it light enough at LEO altitudes it would be more effected by light pressure, the solar wind and magnetic fields than gravity and air pressure.

spacefire · Jun 22, 2005

so? you can't prove it would not rise. remember, I said 'in theory'. In theory we can disregard the solar wind and any other forces except gravity and the minute buoyancy of the atmosphere at those altitudes. In theory we can have an airship the size of the moon with perfect void inside. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

nacnud · Jun 22, 2005

teije · Jun 22, 2005

So.... in theory, an 'airship' ('vacuumship') that contains 'nothing' as a bouyancy medium, contained within a membrane that is made of material that has a mass of 'nothing' can lift a payload with a mass of 'nothing' to GEO altitude. I guess this indeed proves that 'nothing' can float to GEO. Wow... huge breakthrough.... <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> so sorry, I couldn't resist <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

spacefire · Jun 22, 2005

the payload could be an atom, or, worst case, a quark. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

mrmorris · Jun 22, 2005

"... when I have an Aerospace Engineering degree" Dang, the Sally Struthers Correspondence School is really branching out. Did you minor in TV/VCR Repair?

spacefire · Jun 22, 2005

this got me laughing...not with you...at you <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

tap_sa · Jun 22, 2005

"an 'airship' ('vacuumship') that contains 'nothing' as a bouyancy medium ... huge breakthroug" Uh, some 17th century dude worked this out already. Can't remember was it Torricelli, Pascal or somebody else, but do remember a vivid image from some history book where a boat floated in the air, lifted by vacuum filled copper spheres. Too bad it didn't work then, doesn't work now and probably never will <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

formulaterp · Jun 22, 2005

"but why am I wasting my time arguing with an accountant over physicis when I have an Aerospace Engineering degree?!!??!!? " Oh, come on man. Aren't you the same guy that said: "give me 100 able engineers and 1 billion dollars and I'll take you from the ground to Mars with a robust safe system that is 100% reusable. " Seriously, with your business plan, I would suggest 99 engineers and 1 able accountant.

Airship to Orbit, Airship video.

jpowell

Guest

jurgens

Guest

jurgens

Guest

frodo1008

Guest

cmedwards

Guest

spacester

Guest

cmedwards

Guest

spacefire

Guest

nacnud

Guest

spacefire

Guest

mrmorris

Guest

spacefire

Guest

nacnud

Guest

spacefire

Guest

mrmorris

Guest

spacefire

Guest

nacnud

Guest

spacefire

Guest

nacnud

Guest

teije

Guest

spacefire

Guest

mrmorris

Guest

spacefire

Guest

tap_sa

Guest

formulaterp

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page