3 ms·

Isn't this obviously impossible? What sort of launch vehicle or payload is going to tolerate the Gs of being spun at such a high rate. How on earth does this

Isn't this obviously impossible? What sort of launch vehicle or payload is going to tolerate the Gs of being spun at such a high rate. How on earth does this even raise a dollar of funding? It has crossed my mind in the past why we don't use something like a linear electric motor to help get rockets going off the pad, even just a hundred yards or so of acceleration assist might save a good chunk of fuel. But the rockets aren't exactly designed to have acceleration applied anywhere other than at the engine, so maybe you end up having to add the weight you'd save in fuel back in structure for the ancillary acceleration source.

gameswithgo 9y ago
Would a very large radius reduce the Gs for a given speed?
throwaway99OO 9y ago
At its face it does sound pretty crazy but I found some analogs of previous and ongoing projects that provide some reason to suspend disbelief. Here's what I can find on high G launch vehicle's and payloads: Breakthrough Starshot: Backed by physicist and VC Yuri Milner and lead by former director of NASA Ames, Peter Worden. 10,000 G's. Project Ongoing. [1] Hiller Hornet: US Army helicopter, powered by jet turbines located at the tips of the helicopter blades. The turbines operated under 14,000 Gs. Project Completed [2] HARP Project: Joint US Army & Canadian effort. Successfully launched electronics (radios, control systems, etc) and solid fueled rockets. 10,000+ Shock G's. Project Completed. [3] A variety of documents come up while researching g-hardening electronics. The US Army Research Lab a a few papers. Linked one of them. 30,000 + Shock G's. Various Projects Completed and Ongoing[4] The Hiller Hornet is likely the most applicable given it is a propulsion system operating at over 10,000 G's. I wonder how they designed the Hornet's turbine given Finite Element Analysis wasn't really a thing in 1950. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot [2] http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/hiller_hoe-1.php http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/hiller_hoe-1.php [3] http://www.astronautix.com/a/abriefhistoheharpproject.html http://www.astronautix.com/a/abriefhistoheharpproject.html [4] http://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/2006/ARL-TR-3705.pdf http://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/2006/ARL-TR-3705.pdf

gameswithgo 9y ago

Would a very large radius reduce the Gs for a given speed?

throwaway99OO 9y ago

At its face it does sound pretty crazy but I found some analogs of previous and ongoing projects that provide some reason to suspend disbelief. Here's what I can find on high G launch vehicle's and payloads: Breakthrough Starshot: Backed by physicist and VC Yuri Milner and lead by former director of NASA Ames, Peter Worden. 10,000 G's. Project Ongoing. [1] Hiller Hornet: US Army helicopter, powered by jet turbines located at the tips of the helicopter blades. The turbines operated under 14,000 Gs. Project Completed [2] HARP Project: Joint US Army & Canadian effort. Successfully launched electronics (radios, control systems, etc) and solid fueled rockets. 10,000+ Shock G's. Project Completed. [3] A variety of documents come up while researching g-hardening electronics. The US Army Research Lab a a few papers. Linked one of them. 30,000 + Shock G's. Various Projects Completed and Ongoing[4] The Hiller Hornet is likely the most applicable given it is a propulsion system operating at over 10,000 G's. I wonder how they designed the Hornet's turbine given Finite Element Analysis wasn't really a thing in 1950. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot [2] http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/hiller_hoe-1.php http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/hiller_hoe-1.php [3] http://www.astronautix.com/a/abriefhistoheharpproject.html http://www.astronautix.com/a/abriefhistoheharpproject.html [4] http://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/2006/ARL-TR-3705.pdf http://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/2006/ARL-TR-3705.pdf