Quote:
Originally Posted by astromark
Hema... welcome, and we have learned that we can not get some thing from nothing. If energy is stored then it was not being used as would be the design such rocket or spring... Explosive energy can and is channeled into a directional force. A look at the solid fuel boosters of the shuttle program... If you are suggesting a catapult or slingshot... You are not gaining anything. Any catapult would need energy to load it. There are problem with the delivery of such energies. To much force on a weak structure or body could be a problem. Getting into orbit with your head still attached is the best plan... If this is not what you are asking of, please explain...It looks to be a 'Against the Mainstream' Idea. We have a special page just for this sort of thought... mark.
|
I disagree with you entirely, Astromark. A simple nested collapsable tube (10 sections, each 12 feet long, for about 100 feet of acceleration). Propulsion system? Compressed air. G's? Let's say 5 Gs (most satellites can handle that).
5 Gs for 100 ft. How much delta-V would that provide? Would it be worth the weight (probably 250 lbs), or could we do much better with an ion engine over a much longer duration?
It's not ATM. It's simply a different look at getting a satellite headed in the right direction.