cheap orbital insertion

Ed Minchau wrote:

> --- In spacesettlers@egroups.com, "Darren Brown" wrote:
> > --- In spacesettlers@egroups.com, "Ed Minchau"
> > wrote:
> > > The winds at the tops of the Himalayas can exceed 200mph, I
> know.
> > > This would require control surfaces on the craft, to keep it
> > centered
> > > on the solenoids.
> > >
> > > The sonic shock wave would be more of a problem for the solenoids
> > > than in terms of sound pollution. They would need a teardrop-
> > shaped
> > > cross section to allow the wave to pass by them.
> >
> > Greetings Ed,
> >
> > This is a great idea and if it was able to be done I'd say more
> > power to you but I think there are a few little problems that may
> > just slow down and maybe stop such a project.
> >
> > First, the wind is certainly going to give you a major headache but
> > nothing like the one you will get from the constant rebuilding of
> all
> > your supports. The Himalayas were created when two tectonic plates
> > collided. The impact buckled the plates and the mountains were
> > raised or I should they are still being raised, the Himalayas are
> not
> > a static range of mountains, they are a growing, moving mass of
> rock
> > that is going up in places, down in others and in different
> > directions all over the place and it's not just the rock that is
> > moving, the ice moves even faster. The movement is not much mind
> you
> > but enough to cause you problems over the course of a few years for
> > the rock and a few days/weeks for the ice.
> >
> > Next, 1500 Kms @ 3Gs will certainly get you to orbital speed, in
> fact
> > it should get you to +9 Km/sec but of course that's 1500 Kms at a
> > CONSTANT 3Gs. What you were describing sounds like the coils are
> > some distance apart and you would be getting a kick along gliding
> > for a bit then getting another kick long. In that case you would
> > need an average of 3Gs so depending on the size of the gap you
> would
> > need a kick that was +3Gs and the bigger the gap the size of the +.
>
> 1500 MILES ~ 2400 km. At 3g, that is almost 12km/s. Escape velocity
> (not orbital velocity) is about 11.2 km/s; for orbital velocity you
> could get by with a shorter accelerator or lower acceleration.
>
> Acceleration does not occur only at the solenoids, it occurs between
> them as well. Each solenoid provides both a pull as the craft
> approaches, and a push as the craft passes through amd recedes. The
> electromagnetic field along the accelerator is equivalent to a
> continuous magnetic tube, with a moving set of poles; one behind the
> craft pushing, and the other in front pulling. It is these poles
> which are accelerating, they just bring the craft along for the ride .
>
> > Finally, what I think may just be the biggest problem for is not
> > really a technical one, take good look at a map and look at the
> > length of the mountain range and mark out 1500 Kms, look at the
> angle
> > the range is inclined at (that is the direction it points), and
> then
> > consider which nations you would need to pass through and possibly
> > overfly for the best launch angle. When teams were trying for the
> > round the world balloon record they had problems getting permission
> > to overfly, you want a lot more than that. Not to mention that at
> > lest one of the countries you would need permission from is a
> > possible competitor. Good luck, you will need it.
> >
> > Darren Brown
>

Ed,

Sorry about the mistake with the mile and kilometres, problem is like
most of educated world I tend to deal in metric and you threw me by
starting metric with the dimensions of the rings, 100 metres and then
switching to imperial units, 1500 miles, seems I remember that NASA had
a small mishap with one of their Mars probes because of this kind of
mistake.

First, I don't understand why you need to get to escape velocity, once
your in orbit you can use slower but cheaper ways to manage that. It
will also give you a shorter and therefore cheaper magnetic driver.

Next, I would really like to know just how far apart you want the rings
of your driver? Magnetic fields, like all fields, works on an inverse
square factor as I'm sure you know, if you intent to have an actual
CONSTANT 3G field rather than an AVERAGE 3G field you are going to need
to be able to vary the power of your field and if your magnetic sources
are going to effect your craft while it is a distance away, what is to
stop it from moving other things around it. Unless you have found some
way making a magnetic field form itself into a tube, without something
outside forcing it to. You say above that what you are talking about is
the equivalent to a continuous magnetic tube. I don't see how that is
possible without some kind of device outside making it into a tube.

Next, Gimbals won't cut it, sorry, what you would be dealing with is a
constant, unpredictable and complex 3 dimensional motion. The big
problem is the unpredictable part. You must expect seismic movements in
that area.

Next, politics will play a major part of any large project in that part
of the world and you will also have problems with the lack of
infrastructure.

Finally, why bother with the whole thing, it's large, expensive, and
prone to a falling out between nations. A far better option would be
something that you do from wholly within a single nation. Your location
or at lest its elevation would assist with a laser launch system,
although I am unsure of how much and if the benefit would outweigh the
costs.

Darren Brown

Ed Minchau wrote:
--- In spacesettlers@egroups.com, "Darren Brown"
> --- In spacesettlers@egroups.com, "Ed Minchau"
> wrote:
> > The winds at the tops of the Himalayas can exceed 200mph, I
know.
> > This would require control surfaces on the craft, to keep it
> centered
> > on the solenoids.
> >
> > The sonic shock wave would be more of a problem for the solenoids
> > than in terms of sound pollution. They would need a teardrop-
> shaped
> > cross section to allow the wave to pass by them.
>
> Greetings Ed,
>
> This is a great idea and if it was able to be done I'dsay more
> power to you but I think there are a few little problems thatmay
> just slow down and maybe stop such a project.
>
> First, the wind is certainly going to give you a major headachebut
> nothing like the one you will get from the constant rebuildingof
all
> your supports. The Himalayas were created when two tectonicplates
> collided. The impact buckled the plates and the mountainswere
> raised or I should they are still being raised, the Himalayasare
not
> a static range of mountains, they are a growing, moving massof
rock
> that is going up in places, down in others and in different
> directions all over the place and it's not just the rock thatis
> moving, the ice moves even faster. The movement is notmuch mind
you
> but enough to cause you problems over the course of a few yearsfor
> the rock and a few days/weeks for the ice.
>
> Next, 1500 Kms @ 3Gs will certainly get you to orbital speed,in
fact
> it should get you to +9 Km/sec but of course that's 1500 Kmsat a
> CONSTANT 3Gs. What you were describing sounds like thecoils are
> some distance apart and you would be getting a kick along gliding
> for a bit then getting another kick long. In that caseyou would
> need an average of 3Gs so depending on the size of the gap you
would
> need a kick that was +3Gs and the bigger the gap the size ofthe +.
1500 MILES ~ 2400 km. At 3g, that is almost 12km/s. Escape velocity
(not orbital velocity) is about 11.2 km/s; for orbital velocityyou
could get by with a shorter accelerator or lower acceleration.
Acceleration does not occur only at the solenoids, it occurs between
them as well. Each solenoid provides both a pull as the craft
approaches, and a push as the craft passes through amd recedes. The
electromagnetic field along the accelerator is equivalent to a
continuous magnetic tube, with a moving set of poles; one behindthe
craft pushing, and the other in front pulling. It is thesepoles
which are accelerating, they just bring the craft along for theride .
>
> Finally, what I think may just be the biggest problem for isnot
> really a technical one, take good look at a map and look at the
> length of the mountain range and mark out 1500 Kms, look at the
angle
> the range is inclined at (that is the direction it points), and
then
> consider which nations you would need to pass through and possibly
> overfly for the best launch angle. When teams were tryingfor the
> round the world balloon record they had problems getting permission
> to overfly, you want a lot more than that. Not to mentionthat at
> lest one of the countries you would need permission from is a
> possible competitor. Good luck, you will need it.
>
> Darren Brown

Ed,
Sorry about the mistake with the mile and kilometres, problem is likemost of educated world I tend to deal in metric and you threw me by startingmetric with the dimensions of the rings, 100 metres and then switchingto imperial units, 1500 miles, seems I remember that NASA had a small mishapwith one of their Mars probes because of this kind of mistake.
First, I don't understand why you need to get to escape velocity, onceyour in orbit you can use slower but cheaper ways to manage that. It will also give you a shorter and therefore cheaper magnetic driver.
Next, I would really like to know just how far apart you want the ringsof your driver? Magnetic fields, like all fields, works on an inversesquare factor as I'm sure you know, if you intent to have an actual CONSTANT3G field rather than an AVERAGE 3G field you are going to need to be ableto vary the power of your field and if your magnetic sources are goingto effect your craft while it is a distance away, what is to stop it frommoving other things around it. Unless you have found some way makinga magnetic field form itself into a tube, without something outside forcingit to. You say above that what you are talking about is the equivalentto a continuous magnetic tube. I don't see how that is possiblewithout some kind of device outside making it into a tube.
Next, Gimbals won't cut it, sorry, what you would be dealing with isa constant, unpredictable and complex 3 dimensional motion. The bigproblem is the unpredictable part. You must expect seismic movementsin that area.
Next, politics will play a major part of any large project in that partof the world and you will also have problems with the lack of infrastructure.
Finally, why bother with the whole thing, it's large, expensive, andprone to a falling out between nations. A far better option wouldbe something that you do from wholly within a single nation. Yourlocation or at lest its elevation would assist with a laser launch system,although I am unsure of how much and if the benefit would outweigh thecosts.

Darren Brown