3 ms·
What about vertical launch from 10k feet up, or even higher on a mountain or something, would that provide a better energy savings?
by gremlinsinc 5y ago
What about vertical launch from 10k feet up, or even higher on a mountain or something, would that provide a better energy savings?
- SonicScrub 5y agoThat savings has to be worth the building of expensive infrastructure at altitude, which is unlikely to happen. Air density at 10k feet yields is only 25% less than sea-level, so you're not going to see substantial performance gains. It's much better to focus efforts on choosing a launch location as close to the equator as possible where you can shoot due East (to take advantage of Earth's rotation) without flying over-top of people. This will yield much greater energy savings. There's a good reason why the world's launch locations are where they are.
- gameswithgo 5y agoyou get more savings being near the equator than being high. if you can manage both you get a very small win that might not be worth it if you are far from infrastructure. better to add a little more fuel than make the satellite get shipped to your remote equatorial mountain