Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: taxcontrol

Perhaps orbits are overrated. How high could a craft eventually go if it could always maintain a propulsion force of 9.82m/ss?!


77 posted on 10/04/2006 1:21:41 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: Southack

If you could just get some kind of thermonukleer rocket with about a hundred thousand times the specific thrust of chemical rockets, then everything becomes (almost) easy.

Ascend to medium earth orbit in 40 minutes, never exceeding 1.3 felt G's, never exceeding 100 M/S in the lower atmosphere. Most of the structural and aerodynamic constraints on the vehicle are removed; it doesn't have to look much like a "rocket" any more.

Reentry? Come back down the same way you went up. Slowly, with rockets burning. None of this fireball-with-thermal-tiles crap.

And you do this by using a few KG's of fuel. The lifting platform is mostly structure and engines, and up to half payload (including human environment, if manned).

And for a few KG more fuel and human provisions, why stop at orbit? A craft like this could take you to the Moon or Mars, and back, almost as easily.

Just a small matter of getting that nukleer rocket technology--and figuring out how to take off and land without burning a hole down to the middle of the planet.

< }B^)


84 posted on 10/04/2006 4:59:48 PM PDT by Erasmus (I invited Benoit Mandelbrot to the Shoreline Grill, but he never got there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson