3 ms·
> 2. Security. Not really. He talks about hijacking/terrorism, but these things won't have pilots or free movement on board. Everybody's going to be strapped in
by FlyMoreRockets 7y ago
> 2. Security. Not really. He talks about hijacking/terrorism, but these things won't have pilots or free movement on board. Everybody's going to be strapped into their seat for 45 minutes to withstand the forces and the rocket's gonna do all the flying.
It isn't just the cabin that is a potential terror threat, but a huge part of the supply chain and operations/management.
If these are built on water, a distance from land, it should be possible to construct a nearby floating rectenna to crack and cryocool hydrogen and oxygen for propellant via beamed energy from a solar sat. Granted, there is a fair bit of infrastructure requirement, but with interest rates so low, compounding interest isn't a big deal, like it was in the original SPS calculations.
- outworlder 7y ago> If these are built on water, a distance from land, it should be possible to construct a nearby floating rectenna to crack and cryocool hydrogen and oxygen for propellant via beamed energy from a solar sat. That's such an enormous undertaking that it dwarfs the rockets themselves. SpaceX, which is the only company that's even close to achieving this, prefers kerolox. So what threat are we trying to mitigate? Liquid oxygen is not very problematic. We transport large amounts of the stuff on roads with no issue. Kerosene is used everywhere.
- njarboe 7y agoThe Raptor engine for SpaceX's next rocket that would do these orbital/sub-orbital flights is fueled by liquid methane and LOX. A better fuel in many ways and much easier to make on Mars.