Presentation Of New Launch Method

[Leovinus]

Actually,sending up a Saturn V sounds easier. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Leovinus]

I'm not sure that a 50-mile high tower is possible. It takes everything we have to build a building the size of the former WTC towers. Such a tower would likely collapse under its own weight unless it was solid rock. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[nacnud]

Solid rock would be too heavy and sink into the mantle, you need to use something realy light ie carbon fiber.

 

[Leovinus]

I wonder what would be cheaper and faster: launching 1000 rockets or building a 50-mile-high tower? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[formulaterp]

"I wonder what would be cheaper and faster: launching 1000 rockets or building a 50-mile-high tower? "<br /><br />Over the last 50 years, we have launched well in excess of 1000 rockets. Buildings haven't even approached 1 mile in height. OK, maybe that's not entirely fair, but food for thought.

 

[yavuzbasturk]

i changed my idea.<br />i got new patent on new idea.<br />we are creating animation with 3dsmax with a friend, and we do some math on idea. after we finish animation of idea, i'll post to this forum details of idea.<br /><br />we built a magnetic catapult with 90 degree angle inside a mountain. length of catapult will be 2km or 3km.<br />magnetic catapult will be in a vacuum tube so we can speed it up do 20km/s easily.<br />we also carry a vacum tube to 30-40km height with hundreds of ballons.(90 degree angle) ballons can carry high mass up to 42km, so we can use ballons to carry parts of vacum tube.<br />once all parts of tube is in air, with a mechanic system we clamp parts each other and we get 30-40km line of vacum tube. we clamp this tube to vacum tube of capatult which is inside a mountain, we vacuum air in tube and we <br />get air friction free launch tube !<br />there will be electric line on parts of vacum cubes. horizontal movement will be created with electric powered propollers. This is new idea and i patented this too.<br />with 3km catapult and 2500G launching speed, we can send nuclear & chemical waste to splease in bullets safely with 12,135 km/s speed. Bullet will pass catapult in 0,494s and pass vacum tunel (40km) in 3,049s.<br />if we cretae long catapult with on a side of mountain, we can send satellites and human witj low G too. i am trying to calculate necessary catapult designs for human & satellites.<br />a basic picture is http://www.yablam.org/VakumTunel_A.gif

 

[grooble]

It must cost a lot to get all these patents.

 

[yavuzbasturk]

here is my calculate ;<br /><br />our waste bullet is = mass = 100kg<br />result speed = 13.000m/s (bigger from earth escape velovity)<br /><br />Energy = (mass * Velocity²) / 2 <br />Energy = 100kg * (13.000 m/s * 13.000 m/s) / 2<br />Energy = 100kg * (169.000.000) / 2 <br />Energy = 8.450.000.000 Joule<br />Energy = 8.450.000.000 (watt*second)<br /><br />we assume efficient of magnetic catapult is %30, so ;<br />Energy Used = 28.166.000.000 Joule (rounded)<br /><br />Joule means (watts*second), to find KWH of joule we divide Joule to 3.600.000 and <br />Energy = 28.166.000.000 Joule / 3.600.000 = 7.825 KWh (rounded)<br /><br />if we spread this energy over the 3000m, each 1m segment has 2-3 KWh only and this wont be temperature problem i guess.<br /><br />we assume cost of KWh of electric is 5 cent. our launching cost is $400 per 100kg, means $4 per kg.<br />this is thousand times cheaper than rocket method,<br />any mistake on this calculation ? <br /><br />(we assume that air friction after 40km will descrease speed very small so bullets has escape velocity speed always.)<br /><br />there will be additional cost of electric for hundreds of propellers working on vacuum tunnel but i did not counted it.<br /><br />here is link for conversion of joule to KWH ;<br />http://www.answers.com/topic/joule<br />http://www.essex1.com/people/speer/units.html<br />

 

[le3119]

Welcome to Space.com. It's great to hear ideas from around the world for developing space, especially in these troubled times. I could not access your site, and I don't know much about the physics behind your concept, but it seems to be a variation on a space tether/elevator. Good luck. I'd like to learn more....

 

[yavuzbasturk]

we are working on a animation & pictures of my idea.<br />after we finish animations we will release from my web site. animation will include english speaking too. but this may take 5-10 days to finish. my new idea is basicly using a massdriver (in a vacuum tube) to accelerate payload. after acceleration finished, payload will ascend in a vacuum tube until 30km height. vacum tunnel will be lifted by baloons. if we eliminate air friction before 30km, it is vesy easy to access space or orbit. and launch price is thousand times cheaper with this method. <br /><br />if you want to ask details you can add my <br /><br />msn =yavuzbasturk @ hotmail.com (do not send mail pls)<br />icq = 127012544<br /><br />or u can ask here. <br />as a note i hope accessing space thousand times cheaper (with my metod or other method) has positive effect on creating global peace.

 

[nexium]

eburacum rarely makes an error, so the fuel moving upward does not reduce the amount of fuel required for the 85 kilometers of hose etc to levitate. Both ideas might be cost effective, if we had enough customers to operate the systems continously near maximum capacity. An idle system needs almost as much fuel. There is some probability that the hot rocket gases will damage the hose. A super conducting power line is needed to deliver enough electricity to power the pumps. A ten centimeter hose likely can not deliver enough fuel to keep the hose levitated.<br />15 kilometers per second at an altitude of 30 kilometers (Not even CNT balloons can lift significant pay load to 45 kilometers) would heat the bullet white hot and the bullet would loose perhaps half its speed due to air friction over the next 100 vertical kilometers. Putting bullets of high level nuclear waste in solar orbit will be trouble, if we have human colonies in solar orbit in a few decades. Faster than 15 kilometers per second is needed at an altitude of 160 kilometers to leave our Solar system, unless the bullets can do a gravity assist manuver at Jupiter. Crashing into Jupiter may be acceptable. Neil

 

[spacefire]

Here's my idea<br />why can't the fuel for a spaceship be shot in pellets from the ground and detonated behind a nozzle-plate. Kind of like Orion. I realize that the system only works up to a certain speed and altitude but you would be leaving a lot of hardware on the ground, where it's easy to maintain. A ring(or more rings) of mortars would ensure the ship gets pellets of fuel with enough frequency.<br />The pellets would be ignited by a laser. <br />The second stage would involve the same laser pointing at the aft end of a ramjet, where it would heat the compressed air and thus create thrust without the need for fuel.<br />The third stage would be a classic rocket motor. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Tried some of your links, non work. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Assuming your serious about this idea and that I understand exactly what your trying to accomplish with it. I suspect its practicality would be very limited. There would be no reason to believe it to be cost effective since you still have a rocket in the loop. Only now, you have added 2 balloons an enormously long pipe and enormously powerful pump and connection systems to join pipe to rocket.<br /><br />In fact, the rocket would be carrying an enormous amount of weight in the form of the propellant sitting in this pipe which would be well over 100,000 feet long. Some amount of propellant would have to continuously be fed to the rocket to prevent cutoff until cutoff was required.<br /><br />The pipe would have to be around quarter to half a million feet long to travel with the rocket until the rocket separated from it. It would also require one robust umbilical connection to prevent being jerked off the rocket during ascent, especially if any pogo effects occur. Any jerking of the pipe could also be disastrous for the rocket.<br /><br />Speed, range, this probably would not change all that much since most any rockets range is predetermined by the orbit, as is its velocity. Velocity required to enter LEO is 17,500 mph average. Whether you ascend for half an hour at less than 1 G, or ascend for 9 minutes at 3 or 6 Gs, the outcome is the same where velocity is concerned. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

yavuzbasturk:<br />as a note i hope accessing space thousand times cheaper (with my metod or other method) has positive effect on creating global peace.<br /><br />My response:<br />If it calms the mideast and terrorists, it'll have way more value than simply as cheap access to LEO. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>