new topic

Ref:[pokchoy@... Mon, 24/06/02 @ 17:51 -0400]
> Hello again
> Since my personal 'hot button' is relative low tech projects that we
> non-NASA types can try, I want to propose another old idea.
> Why not suspend a rocket from a huge balloon? Take to 150000ft and drop it
> into parabolic trajectory.
> Sounds equally doable.
> Any thoughts?

Why would this be that much better than a standard launch?
You gain 28 miles in vertical ascent, but you're not
moving at all, you still have to get up to around 7km/s
for orbital velocity, so you shouldn't be saving that much in
terms of energy expended to reach orbit: but you're adding
complexity in terms of needing good weather, good wind
prediction, a release mechanism that absolutely won't fail
(I'd hate to see what happens if it does and you have to
launch *through* the balloon) and probably half-a-dozen other
things too, like cold-starting an engine 28 miles up!

I'd personally prefer to see something like the DC-X project
restarted and funded as an X-project properly, and to see the
aerospike engine used "in anger". Or did I miss something
from the SR-71 test they ran with it? Even in 1965 the
numbers said that SSTO was the cheapest way to orbit with
chemical rockets.

Oh well, who's going to listen to a space-happy Kerryman
anyway?

Mark Dennehy, Email : Mark.Dennehy@...
Computer Vision and Robotics Research Group,
Computer Science Dept., Trinity College Dublin