Better Ways to Get into Space

When it comes to getting into space, traditional rocketry is the pits. Gigantic tanks that cost millions of dollars, massive fuel requirements, trajectories that fight against the atmosphere instead of using it to their advantage. Out of the five space shuttles built, two have gone boom. If you’re going to build a Lifeboat in orbit, deploy solar power satellites, or visit space hotels, you’re going to need a better way to get into space.

Luckily, there are numerous ideas, including rocket planes, orbital airships, the space elevator, and the space pier. 3/4 of these ideas already have companies putting serious resources towards their realization. Let’s take a look at the details, shall we?

The rocket plane is currently the idea getting the most attention and funding. All current rocket planes are only capable of taking people to the edge of space and back, rather than going into orbit. Thus, trips on rocket planes are called suborbital space flights. The typical rocket plane launch consists of a larger plane that helps a smaller unit ascend to about 14km, where the air is several times thinner than at ground level, then releasing it.

The first rocket plane to reach space, as defined by 100km altitude, was the North American X-15, which was flown almost two hundred times throughout the 60s. Today, we have SpaceshipOne, with SpaceShipTwo on the way by 2008. Virgin Galactic, the company largely funding the present effort, has stated that if SpaceShipTwo is successful, it will follow up with a craft capable of making it into orbit, SpaceShipThree:

In general, craft that suck material directly from the atmosphere to use for oxidation offer superior specific impulse to traditional chemical rockets:

Earlier this year, Virgin Galactic started constructing the world’s first purpose-built commerical spaceport, SpacePortAmerica, in southwest New Mexico. Space Adventures Ltd. is partnering with the people behind the Ansari X Prize to plan and eventually build the Ras Al Khaimah spaceport in the United Arab Emirates, and the Singapore Spaceport in Singapore. Here’s what they would look like upon completion:

Spiffy, yes?

So what is an orbital airship? Proposed by JP Aerospace, the orbital airship concept is a three-staged process which includes a conventional airship, a permanent sky base, followed by a helium-filled, solar-powered ascender unit that slowly accelerates horizontally until it reaches escape velocity. Here’s a look into the crotch of the Y-shaped ascender unit:

Here’s a look at the inside:

The JP Aerospace website has several videos of both real flights and CG mockups. Problem is, engineers on the sci.space newsgroup confirmed that their plan is physically impossible. You can’t gather enough energy with solar cells to overcome the atmospheric drag on the ascender unit. Interesting idea, but seems as if it will require major breakthroughs to be feasible, if ever. Time to move on to the space elevator

The space elevator is a concept being championed by the Liftport Group. It’s one of the older alternative space ideas, dating back several decades. The proposed contruction method, as I understand it, is to guide an asteroid into geostationary orbit, launch a series of rockets filled with carbon nanotube fiber to it, and lower a thin “seed elevator” to the earth’s surface. From this point on, the elevator could be strengthened by using robotic climbers to add additional material to the initial thread.

The space elevator concept is very popular, in no small part due to its common presence in sci-fi, Tower of Babel-esque connotations, and the numerous CG mockups floating around on the net. I used to be a big space elevator advocate, but I’ve started to think that in the short term, it is not the ideal means of getting to space. To quote extropy list veteran Eugen Leitl:

I have problems with terrestrial space elevators (much less so with lunar elevators), largely because of need of actively moving the ribbon to avoid perforation by debris, because the tensile strenth required is borderline to what physics gives you, with not much safety margin, and if you fail only once you’ve wrapped all your infrastructure around the equator.

Forming a continuous rigid strand from earth to space, a space elevator would interfere with all sorts of low earth orbits, and also be an ideal target for terrorists of the future. Once that cable snaps, it would practically take the power of a god to grab the two ends and reconnect them without imminent disaster. My preferred alternative is the Space Pier:

The Space Pier is an idea from J. Storrs Hall, a pioneer in the field of nanotechnology and my colleague on the CRN Global Task Force. His site explaining the idea can be found here. Essentially, it’s a 100km-tall, 300km-structure topped with an electromagnetic linear accelerator. Air resistance at this altitude is lessened by a factor of one million, and the plan is less cumbersome and catastrophe-prone than a taut string that reaches six earth radii from the surface. It would be a compressive tower, that is, standing under its own weight rather than using a geosyncronous counterweight. If one of the legs were K.O.ed by a nuclear terrorist attack, the structure as a whole would still stand. Utility fog distributed around the legs would provide yet another failsafe. The trip to the top is much shorter than climbing up a 36,000 km space elevator, and the way to low earth orbit is fast and easy. Once in LEO, one could employ ion drives or other techniques to get to GEO or out of the earth’s gravity well.

Well, that’s my summary… dozens of other exotic earth-to-orbit schemes can be found on this site. Happy flying. ;)

Comments

  1. Jonathan

    Nice summary of possible futures in space flight. How about this one?

    http://advancednano.blogspot.com/2006/09/superconducting-version-of-em-drive.html

    Mentioned on Brian Wang’s blog recently. It is very very early stage, but interesting none the less.

  2. The proposed contruction method, as I understand it, is to guide an asteroid into geostationary orbit, launch a series of rockets filled with carbon nanotube fiber to it, and lower a thin “seed elevator” to the earth’s surface. From this point on, the elevator could be strengthened by using robotic climbers to add additional material to the initial thread.

    Spot on except for the bit about the asteroid. Simplisticly speaking, if we could afford to go get an asteroid the problem the space elevator is expected to solve (cheap access to space) is not an issue. What do we want to use for the counterweight? A really long bit of ribbon – 70,000 kms (rougly) past GEO.

    Eugen Leitl
    largely because of need of actively moving the ribbon to avoid perforation by debris,

    That is a problem I will admit.

    if you fail only once you’ve wrapped all your infrastructure around the equator.

    Hyperbole. The thing will shred from the stress or deorbiting, not ‘wrap’. The bits lower down will ‘flutter’. A mess, yes, and the insurance company is going to really jack our premiums but not a catastrophe.

  3. Keep in mind that 300 kms for the space pier means pretty rotten Gs for passengers. He’s written elsewhere of extending it to a 1 Mm length.

  4. MCP2012

    THANKS for this post, as well, Michael. And thanks to our colleagues for the comments &, especially, extra cites/sites.

  5. Kip,

    I dunno, it keeps scientists and engineers in a job… in 5-20 years with MNT we’ll make spaceships bigger than any structure on earth, so why should I really care about Orion?

    Chris,

    Can this be cancelled by temporarily suspending the passengers in a shock-absorbing fluid, LCL-style? T’would be much easier than building a longer pier.

  6. Ted

    Brian has already pointed out the more current thinking on the counterweight and what would happen in the event the elevator cable separated. There are other points to be mentioned in favor of the Space Elevator.

    1) The idea is to have several of them, not one. There will be a “first one”, but then others will be added. So losing one would not be the catastrophe many might expect.

    2) “Attacking” a Space Elevator will not be as easy as one might expect. This would be a national asset and guarded as such.

    3) I don’t understand the complaint about the supposed low safety margin. An elevator ribbon with a safety factor of two (twice as strong as needed to support the weight of the cable and a climber) can be built with carbon nanotubes that are less than half as strong as is theoretically possible. The technology is not there yet but its getting close.

    4) I do agree that the concept of moving the ribbon to avoid space debris seems problematic. I like the “Spaceguard” idea better – zapping it out of the way.

    5) Advantages of a Space Elevator (especially a bunch of them) are very significant. Most obvious is the low cost per pound to orbit. Also, low G’s for the ride, the ability to get to almost any orbit, the ability to launch craft, essentially for free, to the inner solar system, etc.

    You can visit Marc Boucher’s site, http://www.spaceelevator.com or my blog, http://www.spaceelevatorblog.com, to stay current on this.

    And come to Las Cruces, NM next month for the Space Elevator games! (http://www.elevator2010.org).

  7. lilosayni

    sick as!!!!!!

  8. The problem is with anything nano, its worst on your body than asbestos. Suck in a couple of those things and trial lawyers will eat you for lunch

  9. My friend on Orkut shared this link and I’m not dissapointed that I came to your blog.

  10. I really love your blog!!

    Can anybody tell me what´s the best Hotel in Paris for my honey moon? I going to married next month..

    Thank you

  11. lol

    hi this is sparta!!!

  12. lol

    whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

  13. Unknown message

  14. Dan

    what the brown!

  15. wonderful points altogether, you simply gained emblem reader. What may you suggest in regards to your put up that you just made a few days in the past? Any positive?

  16. Proximity sensors can have a high reliability and long functional life because of the absence of mechanical parts and lack of physical contact between sensor and the sensed object.接近开关.

  17. Should you aren’t playing well, the sport is not as much fun. When you do I tell myself only to go out and play as I did when I would have been a kid.
    What we’ve been subject to during the last a long period is mainly responsible for some individuals to question ‘Can we trust Microsoft?’

  18. Yesterday, while I was at work, my cousin stole my iphone and tested to see if it can survive a thirty foot drop, just so she can be a youtube sensation. My iPad is now broken and she has 83 views. I know this is completely off topic but I had to share it with someone!

  19. Will

    T’is a shame that at least one of these projects might never come into fruition because of idiots with bombs strapped to their chests; not matter how noble their cause is. Human Nature is the biggest boost and hindrance to scientific knowledge since the beginning of our existence.

  20. ChinesePrototype

    I, for one, am looking forward to working towards a future that provides us this kind of opportunity to travel to space. I don’t really care how long it takes or even if I would never see it in my lifetime, as long as we work towards this instead of fighting wars and profiting off of it. This way will lead us into possibilities we would never expect.

  21. I’ll immediately seize your rss feed as I can not to find your e-mail subscription link or e-newsletter service. Do you’ve any? Please let me realize in order that I may just subscribe. Thanks.

  22. Wow! This could be one particular of the most beneficial blogs We have ever arrive across on this subject. Actually Fantastic. I am also an expert in this topic so I can understand your hard work.

  23. This is the exact Better Ways to Get into Space | Accelerating Future blog for anyone who wants to move out out around this message. You mention so more its nigh effortful to converse with you (not that I truly would want…HaHa). You definitely put a new stunting on a matter thats been scripted nearly for years. Discriminating clog, simply outstanding!

  24. This is the reverse Better Ways to Get into Space | Accelerating Future diary for anyone who wants to attempt out out nigh this content. You observe so such its almost wearing to discourse with you (not that I rattling would want…HaHa). You definitely put a new spin on a message thats been graphic nearly for geezerhood. Fastidious object, only extraordinary!

  25. This is the penalise Better Ways to Get into Space | Accelerating Future blog for anyone who wants to seek out out most this message. You mention so untold its nigh debilitating to represent with you (not that I rattling would want…HaHa). You definitely put a new twirl on a content thats been inscribed roughly for geezerhood. Precise nonsense, only extraordinary!

  26. Wow, marvelous blog layout! How long have you been blogging for? you make blogging look easy. The overall look of your web site is great, let alone the content!. Thanks For Your article about Better Ways to Get into Space | Accelerating Future .

  27. nigga dave

    YOO NIGGA DIS SHIT BE PIMPING

  28. Appreciate it for helping out, wonderful information.

  29. We stumbled over here coming from a different web address and thought I may
    as well check things out. I like what I see so i am just following you.
    Look forward to looking at your web page for a second time.

Trackbacks for this post

  1. The Space Elevator Blog » Better Ways to Get into Space
  2. Tramadol withdrawal symptoms.
  3. TheFlax.org » Float On

Leave a Comment

Awesome! You've decided to leave a comment. Please keep in mind that comments are moderated.

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>