4 ms·
My point is that the insofar of the promise of space is "let's send lots and lots of stuff, especially people/food/air/water", then the fundamental economics ce
by spenrose 15y ago
My point is that the insofar of the promise of space is "let's send lots and lots of stuff, especially people/food/air/water", then the fundamental economics center on energy use. Are you saying that some of the orbital velocity can be recaptured or otherwise used to offset the cost of fuel?
- ColinWright 15y agoNo. Let me quote myself: ... I'm just confirming your observation that the energy requirement is huge, but you're understating the problem, ... With regards energy use you are underselling your position by a factor of 10 when you talk about getting things 200 miles in the air. The kinetic energy required is 10 times as much. By saying what you did ... The huge amount of energy required to lift mass out of Earth's gravity well. ... you are: 1) understating your case, and b) propagating a misconception (that getting out of the gravity well is the hard bit).
- excuse-me 15y agoIt would be more correct to say - the huge amount of power required to accelerate all the fuel + rocket + payload to high speed at the start. If you could fly up to orbit at walking pace and then boost the horizontal velocity to orbit you would need very little fuel - compared to firing a big rocket for a few minutes so that the huge mass can then coast to orbital heights.