Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (33)	12/29/2000 11:07:33 AM
From: Fangorn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23908

James, I have high hopes for the Delta Clipper and other SSTOs (Single Stage To Orbit) under development. The vast majority of energy is expended getting to LEO (Low Earth Orbit), once there it is pretty cheap energy wise to get anywhere else in the Solar System. Getting established on the moon is the key to the rest of the System IMO. It would be easy to launch material into Lunar orbit with electromagnetic launchers from the surface of the moon and there is plenty of Solar power for the taking there plus all the raw materials for making whatever is needed. A mission to Mars would most easily be assembled in Lunar orbit from resources mined on the Moon. Given the absolute certainty that an asteroid or comet of sufficient size to destroy civilization or even all human life is going to hit Earth in the future (maybe tomorrow, in which case we are out of luck) unless we stop it, any price to get off planet will be cheap. This is part of why I support SDI research and development as it may offer a way to divert or destroy such a comet or asteroid, provided we see it in time. We must declare war on possible extinction now. ggggg Had to tie this little essay to the topic somehow.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (33)	1/1/2001 2:16:18 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23908

but as I remember it costs $3000 to get a pound to geosynchronous altitude. That's only 22,000 miles- -not the 225,00 to the moon Well, once you get the payload beyond escape velocity and into orbit, I can't see there being much more expense in getting to the moon. It's that first 25,000mph that's the most difficult to achieve.... :0) Btw, if they ever decide to move forward with deploying magnetic "mass driver" technology, the cost per pound will be significantly less. Regards, Ron

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (33)	1/2/2001 6:30:45 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23908

Great topic... yeah, the bitch is always going to be getting mass into LEO. That has to be done in an environmentally sound manner, and that pretty much restricts it to hydroxygen chemical rockets right now. (OK, maybe methane-oxygen also) (I am discounting speculative things like the laser mirror drive - that thing is bound to spit out great clouds of NOXious byproducts.) Even if you write off the cost of all the launch hardware (vehicles, support facilities, bored controllers manning workstations and eating donuts and swilling Sprite), getting a kilo from Earth's surface into LEO will cost you at least the delivered mkt price of over a hundred kilos of LH2 and LOX. No matter how you slice'm apples, it comes up big $$$$. ...Once you ARE in LEO, all fat&happy... transfer to just about anywhere can be dead cheap. Low thrust, high-Isp drives (ion, magnetoplasma, ?other stuff) work great once you're above atmosphere. Sails might even be made to work after a few more decades of material engineering ... very low thrust but infinite Isp. No reaction mass a-tall, the rocket scientist's fondest wish! (not counting sharing a Soyuz lifeboat with Cindy Crawford, lol) cheers LRR