[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 46 KB, 1334x824, idea.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

8030484

Anonymous Mon Apr 25 19:25:42 2016 No.8030484 [Reply] [Original]

Why don't we put a giant nuclear powered linear accelerator in orbit and aim Earth-launched rockets through it? This way you can get the extra delta-v for deep space without needing to carry the extra fuel so long term this would be cheaper than keeping on building superheavies for every Mars mission.

Everyone has been chasing the mass driver idea the wrong way, trying to use them to get into orbit is a long way off because that needs a ridiculous amount of power. It would be much more immediately useful as a booster after you've reached orbit. On the Moon is even stupider because you need a superheavy to get there in the first place. My way would remove the need for superheavies completely. You could land men on the Moon in a Falcon 9.

Advanced option, have one in orbit around Mars as well to get a delta-v boost for outer solar system missions. It will be like a "delta-v fuel station"

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 20:13:50 2016 No.8030549 If /sci/ can't say why my idea wouldn't work then I guess it's time for me to write a letter to NASA

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 21:35:42 2016 No.8030662 >>8030484 I feel like getting it into orbit would be pretty tricky. Then what happens once you launch something off it, you'd change the inertia of the thing pretty drastically.

>>

Anonymous Mon Apr 25 21:43:53 2016 No.8030673
File: 42 KB, 662x350, mxtether.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

every action has an equal and opposite reaction, after so many launches, the launcher will change orbit. Also we don't have nukes that work in space.

But, we could build a momentum exchange tether with materials we have today.

We could even build one that could accelerate a suborbital spacecraft to orbital velocities.

If you make the tether electrodynamic, you can reboost it without using any fuel.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum_exchange_tether

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 21:49:19 2016 No.8030680 >>8030484 Sound like a very good idea. A spacial gun that uses rockets as bullets, what could go wrong?

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 21:56:38 2016 No.8030695 Newton's third law of motion

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:00:10 2016 No.8030704 File: 95 KB, 1334x1510, Untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] because this, you fucking idiot.

>>

Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:11:17 2016 No.8030723

>>8030704
>>8030695
>>8030673
The delta V of the accelerator will be small enough to cancel out with some small thrusters because it would weigh over 500 tons while the spacecraft going through it weighs only 10 tons. So you would need some extra fuel but it's not on the thing your trying to accelerate therefore the advantage still exists.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:15:42 2016 No.8030735 >>8030673 >Also we don't have nukes that work in space Wait what? Really?

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:24:58 2016 No.8030748 >>8030735 he's full of shit, nukes and nuclear reactors work fine in space. Why do you think nuclear rockets are a thing?

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:25:36 2016 No.8030750 >>8030723 What is inertia?

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:26:39 2016 No.8030754 >>8030748 That's what I thought...

>>

Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:41:02 2016 No.8030791

>>8030750
You know what. Have two parallel linear accelerators joined together. launch a pair of rockets in opposite directions and have them pass through the two tubes at the same time. then it all cancels out thus putting the /sci/ haters to bed and making me the next Einstein.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:42:02 2016 No.8030795 File: 54 KB, 1414x840, cant fault this.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8030750 >>8030791 Forgot pic

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:51:05 2016 No.8030819 >>8030795 >>8030791 Then it would be spinning.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 22:55:52 2016 No.8030828 >>8030673 This >>8030723 >small thrusters You'll still need the same amount of impulse. >>8030795 Do you understand how hyperbolic orbits work?

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 23:05:14 2016 No.8030853 >>8030828 Both don't need to be going to Mars.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 23:37:44 2016 No.8030915 >>8030750 the bait is strong with this one

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 23:42:17 2016 No.8030921 >>8030795 We launch everything eastbound, so it gets a boost from the Earth's rotation. A westbound launch would be going against the flow of everything already in orbit. Much higher chance of catastrophic collision.

>>	Anonymous Mon Apr 25 23:56:48 2016 No.8030946 not certain but isn't there a treaty banning nukes in space

>>

Anonymous Tue Apr 26 13:07:18 2016 No.8032027

>>8030946
Weapons, yes. Reactors for power, no.
However the general population will be very unhappy whenever something with the word nuclear is about to be launched. There is a lot of hassle. Also a reactor needs some shielding which is rather heavy.

A nuclear powered launcher on the Moon is better and you will not have problems in orbital maintenance everytime you fire it up.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 26 13:23:18 2016 No.8032049 >>8030723 >The delta V of the accelerator will be small enough to cancel out with some small thrusters because it would weigh over 500 tons how the fuck did you get it into space?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 26 13:30:01 2016 No.8032060 >>8030723 That's not how momentum works.