Space General Space News, Image and Discussion Thread

Ballistic launch systems have been advocated for a long time. There have just been engineering problems with making things accelerate that much in a short enough time to fit in something you can actually build.
 
Ballistic launch systems have been advocated for a long time. There have just been engineering problems with making things accelerate that much in a short enough time to fit in something you can actually build.

Verne wrote about big gun capable doing so.And some canadian inventors started built one,but was murdered.Pity.
 
Verne wrote about big gun capable doing so.And some canadian inventors started built one,but was murdered.Pity.
The G-forces were too high for the human body to survive and the velocity needed to reach orbit can not be done without using a multi-stage platform with the technology we've got.

Optimally, the take-off mass of a ground launhed orbital rocket is about 80% first stage fuel and that only gets you part of the way to orbit. The Rocket Equation and Earth's Gravity are harsh mistresses.
 
It'd say use this to sling hazmat trash into Jupiter; no need for a lot of fancy guidance gear, and no need to fear it coming back home contaminating anything.
 
It'd say use this to sling hazmat trash into Jupiter; no need for a lot of fancy guidance gear, and no need to fear it coming back home contaminating anything.
Better on sun.Less energy need for that,and shit would safely burn.On Jupiter local aliens could eat that,feel bad and conqer Earth.
 
Better on sun.Less energy need for that,and shit would safely burn.On Jupiter local aliens could eat that,feel bad and conqer Earth.
Nope.

Toss it at Jupiter is safer; dumping heavy metals or such into the sun does not seem smart to do as a sustained thing.

We do not want to screw up the sun's internal chemistry.
 
Nope.

Toss it at Jupiter is safer; dumping heavy metals or such into the sun does not seem smart to do as a sustained thing.

We do not want to screw up the sun's internal chemistry.
As long as it is less then ,let say,1%mass of Earth,it should not matter.Sun is big,you knew.And hot.
 
Just how many satellites... or in fact any debris, is orbiting around the Earth right now? Dozens? Hundreds? Thousands?

MILLIONS!!!?!?!?!1

Well...

Live Science said:
There are already at least 128 million pieces of debris in LEO. Of those, around 34,000 are over 4 inches (10 centimeters), according to the Natural History Museum in London, and there will be even more in the future.

And it looks to be only increasing... and at an alarming rate in the future despite the potential hazards being well known.

Live Science said:
The number of satellites in LEO, a region that spans up to 1,424 miles (2,000 kilometers) from Earth, will continue to increase at an exponential rate in the coming decades. That's because private companies are setting up their own megaconstellations, each containing thousands of individual satellites, which will be used to develop faster online networks and deliver a range of other services, such as monitoring climate change.

This increased activity is happening now largely because of dropping costs, said Aaron Boley, an astronomer at The University of British Columbia. "We know SpaceX, OneWeb, Amazon and StarNet/GW [China's satellite network] have proposed a combined satellite total of 65,000 when including all phases" of their satellite programs, Boley told Live Science. And "well over 100,000 satellites have been proposed" in total, he added.

In October 2021, Rwanda also announced its own megaconstellation, named Cinnamon, which could contain over 320,000 satellites. It is unclear when this project might become a reality, but the country has requested permission to begin the project, according to a tweet by the Rwanda Space Agency.

Huh... China, SpaceX, and... Rwanda...

 
Presuming they're paying someone else to get it into orbit, might not be too unreasonable? Payload outsourceable too, probably, if it has to be.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top