Re: Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- From: Ian Parker <ianparker2@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2008 09:03:40 -0700 (PDT)
On 9 Aug, 12:33, Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
I am not talking about a sub scale system. Phase linking produces aYou are assuming that heavy lift is need for SSP. In fact what you
require is the phase locking of small (a few Kw) units.
Not when you look at lowest system cost. There are cost differences
when scale changes. While it is feasible to build on the scale you
speak of, it is not AS cost effective. Demonstration projects using
subscale systems - will certainly be built as you suggest.
full size system. There is one other point too. The system must be
engineered to fail soft. This means that we need to divide up both
solar power and computer power. The Internet is composed of a lot of
small units. The Internet has never failed even if individual units
have.
The optimal size for a transportation system is far from being clear
cut. Weight goes up as L^3 whereas strength goes up only as L^2. Large
units go better through the lower atmosphere, bur small units reenter
better.
I think we need to concentrate on $/Kg at LEO and on building an ion
drive from LEO to GEO. Plus of course material from space.
The size I propose here is nearly optimal to transition from chemical
launcher, to chemical/laser launcher, and deep space laser probes, and
laser recovery of asteroidal feedstock.
haha.. even at 200 GW per satellite - which is broken down using
conjugate optics into many many beams some as small as 10 kW - you
still have to combine 100s of satellites to do heavy lifting with
laser energy - so 200 GW satellite size WILL also operate in phase
locked mode - sharing a common pilot beam from a common receiver to
usefully combine energies to do heavy lifting.
As I said $/Kg not Kg at one go. You need to ask the cost of the TOTAL
weight. Can the weight be reduced by contributions from space? I am
not convinced you need more than 1000Kg at one go.
If you choose a laser you can in fact supplement terrestrial
What's interesting is if you look at the consumption curve of each
person throughout the day and by season at each latititude in an
industrial society, and then you shift that curve by longitude and
latitutde for each person - and then sumall the component curves - to
get a global energy demand curve - you end up with something like 210
TW average power - which peaks at over 300 TW and drops to less than
100 TW - throughout the day. This means there will be 1,500
satellites of this size!! So, they'll certainly operate in a variety
of modes - including combining their outputs for space workmostly.
Harvesting asteroids, sending out space probes, sending out
interstellar probes, and so forth.
photovoltaics from space. This is quite interestin. I think you wil
find that peak demand tends to be daylight hours. Space would be very
useful in the early evening.
This means that there are certain times of the day that you'll have- Ian Parker
the 33 TW available for launch for 10 minutes or so at a time. You'll
be limited to launching fewer than 6 vehicles per day - once your
system is fully use and integrated into the world's economy.
Ultimately - 100 or so of the 200 GW satellites will be permanently
dedicate to supporting space operations.- Hide quoted text -
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- References:
- Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- From: Ian Parker
- Re: Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- Prev by Date: Re: Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- Next by Date: Re: Moon Base 'Questionable,' Glenn Says
- Previous by thread: Re: Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- Next by thread: Re: Super-heavy lift reusable launcher
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
