Jump to content

Illegal For Brits to be Astronauts ?


Recommended Posts

Guest Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
Posted

<scolbourne_2000@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

news:1185415256.831233.247520@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

> Here is a cheap easy way to get to space. I am surprised you lot do

> not think to use it instead of rockets. It would be obvious to even a

> five year old.

>

> Use a swing.

>

> Stick a swing in orbit so that the "seat" comes in to Earth in the

> opposite direction to the orbit, (and rotates over the top to avoid

> air drag). Ground speed can be arranged to be zero when payload or

> astronauts board. The swing will then transport you into orbit or

> further for very little energy.

> Any energy losses can be made up by working electrically against the

> Earths magentic fields.

>

> A more sensible version of this would keep the whole system in orbit

> not coming too far down into the Earths atmosphere.

> sub orbital rockets (such as Virgin will soon possess) will then be

> suitable for the transfer .

>

Guest Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
Posted

<scolbourne_2000@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

news:1185415256.831233.247520@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

> Here is a cheap easy way to get to space. I am surprised you lot do

> not think to use it instead of rockets. It would be obvious to even a

> five year old.

 

Hmm, funny that it has been thought of.

 

Look up rotovator.

 

>

> Use a swing.

>

> Stick a swing in orbit so that the "seat" comes in to Earth in the

> opposite direction to the orbit, (and rotates over the top to avoid

> air drag). Ground speed can be arranged to be zero when payload or

> astronauts board. The swing will then transport you into orbit or

> further for very little energy.

> Any energy losses can be made up by working electrically against the

> Earths magentic fields.

>

> A more sensible version of this would keep the whole system in orbit

> not coming too far down into the Earths atmosphere.

> sub orbital rockets (such as Virgin will soon possess) will then be

> suitable for the transfer .

>

 

 

 

--

Greg Moore

SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!

Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html

Guest scolbourne_2000@yahoo.co.uk
Posted

Well thats my afternoon wasted. How long does it take to get another

nationality ?

Guest mpautz@gmail.com
Posted

On Jul 26, 12:50 am, scolbourne_2...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> Well thats my afternoon wasted. How long does it take to get another

> nationality ?

 

This reminds me of a very old joke that was told by MGB and Triumph

car owners:

 

Who will be the bravest man in the world?

 

The first British Astronaut!

 

.........

Guest Alex Terrell
Posted

On 17 Jul, 13:07, b...@barrk.net (Blackwater) wrote:

> Odd Factoid revealed on BBC ...

>

> It's actually ILLEGAL for Brits to fly into space.

>

> http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_6900000/ne...

>

> Apparently the government implemented the policy long ago,

> assuming it would prevent aerospace resources from being

> "wasted" on human flight.

 

I think it means there's a ban on Government funding of astronauts in

Space. Unlike the American Government, the British Government has no

power to decide what their citizens can and can't do outside of the

Britain (though that is beginning to change in areas around sex

tourism).

 

The "British" astronauts with NASA took up American citizenship

because that is a NASA requirement. Since NASA is US taxpayer

(mis)funded, that's their right. (More so than say, forcing Murdoch to

become American so he can own a newspaper).

Guest Alex Terrell
Posted

On 18 Jul, 15:01, "Jeff Findley" <jeff.find...@ugs.nojunk.com> wrote:

> I doubt it. In many ways a reusable is far more complex than an expendable.

> You justify this complexity, and cost, by flying it more than once.

>

We virtually throw away microchips and memory these day. Something

with 10 billion switches for 10 dollars. You justify throwing away

this complexity by its low cost.

> > As for "efficiency" ... rocket efficiency isn't going to

> > increase much. It's the physics. Recovery/repair/reuse

> > efficiency COULD improve considerably, but then we still

> > need robust and simplistic designs to make that possible.

>

> Time for a reality check.

>

> The cost of fuel and oxidizer for a launch vehicle is absolutely tiny

> compared to overall launch costs. I personally like LOX/kerosene since both

> are widely available and the kerosene is pretty dense. The Saturn V first

> stage burned something like 200,000 gallons of "rocket grade" kerosene

> (RP-1). If you're paying $5 per gallon for your kerosene, that's only $1

> million dollars per launch. That's a pitiful fraction of the overall costs

> for an expendable Saturn V launch. And LOX is extremely cheap, litterally

> pennies per pound, in industrial quantities since air is the raw material

> you start with. One astronautix.com page says NASA was paying $0.08 per kg

> in the 1980's for LOX.

>

> Clearly, it's not physics that dictates the cost since the fuel and oxidizer

> needed are relatively cheap.

>

Is a rocket more complex than car? Does it have more working parts? I

don't think so, and yet the World turns out cars for $10,000. (What

its trying to do is more complex, but that's a computer which does

it).

 

Of course, a rocket has a lot more material, but the material costs,

whether carbon fibre, lithium alloy or silicon for microchips are

still trivial. Say <$1 million for a rocket.

 

In theory, with sufficient volume, a rocket could cost the cost of the

fuel and materials, plus a few 10s of thousands of dollars for

assembly.

 

Of course, sufficient volume means like a car production plant. As

someone said, extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary

markets.

 

A 10 ton launch, at $1 million, should be quite possible at a rate of

100 per day. $36 billion to launch 360,000 tons per year?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...