Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Let's Do Some Rocketry !?

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • topspeed
    replied
    Here are my landing strips on the Mars on Holden Crater. These could be checked with the faster ships klander and 2 electric cars and then flagged for the big mothership for landing. Each are 20 km long.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    New feature added and comparison with 1979 designed shuttle.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Bridge explained and habitat rolling G force. Also comparison with the 1979 Space Shuttle.

    https://pulinajakso.ilmailuliitto.fi...le.php?id=2108

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Solar arrays are coming... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8SUrR8Rb7o

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Nuclear power is obsolete in space; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXiitWK_6Qg

    Isaac Arthus tells us that Zubrin mentioned that 1 kg of nuclear power delivers only 10 watts...when solar panels actually do make 1000 watts per kg.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXiitWK_6Qg

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Calculations for investors to make this more believable.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    I ended up on this concept. This gives a change to put 52 people on orbit or ISS. Considering that americans pay 70 mio usd to russian per astronaut to get them to ISS the 115 000 € fuel cost per customer does not sound ja too bad does it ? Fuel cost is estimated to be 3% of the expenses in space travel today.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    This is a win win situation...even if the mothership crashes a bit the orbiter can sent the lander to pickem 2 pilots up. Plane could have the stuff to start a colony whole 30 metric ton of it. Also the mothership could be a shelter as it is.

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Hello!

    Fanny thing happened on this design today. I counted if it could land on Mars.... The mothership...and it could at 200 km/t speed only. As it has 1/3 wing loading of the space Shuttle....and the Mars gravity is just 38%. How come nobody realized this...on fumes it can land on Mars at 100 mph.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Aeroplane like design for going to space have been studied.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Some tuning to get more Delta-V for the LEO with initial booster/mothership.

    You have to do 25 trips to Mars with T-bird 2 ( on send one every week for 5 months ) to get 100 people on Mars like Elon Musk is doing with one shot.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    My claim is here. Based on limited amount of calculations.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    ISP figure corrected...it is 14500 s at its best.

    This is bigger now...a bit heavier than shuttle but smaller.

    If you wanna make it profitabale the tickets must be pretty expensive as the fuel alone s 6-7 million euros.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Comparison with Skylon.

    Solid rocket boosters have 11 x more density than the pure LH2/LOX engine. I think that explains the size difference.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Systems explained and 10% increase in size.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    This here to display how systems are converted to serve new functions once in space.

    Lander will be removed under the belly ( fuselage has hinges to do this ) serves as extra room and escape pod.

    Solar arrays housing will be the beds for 4 people ( yes this is a 4 astronaut ship ).
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Let us speculate a bit. If the theory above allows us to travel 37,5 % more efficiently to orbit it actually means that we can get 37,5 % more stuff to orgit than regular rocket. Then I am able to even increase the theorethical delta-v of the 100 000 s ISP of the MPDT engine. At half of that 830 km/s speed I am travelling at 420 km/s ( added orbital speed ) and trip to Xenon rich Jupiter would only take 16 days....and if it was possible to harvest Xenon on a flyby of Jupiter and I pushed the metal to the pedal I would reach Jupiter is just 8 days for "refueling".

    At any rate I would no reject the MPDT drive at this stage. I still have the planetary acceleration in my sleeve.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    It does not sound like great achievement, but it enables to make the trip at top speed of 136 km/s ( averaging possibly 80 km/s ).

    It means around 17 days ( 15 tops ) to get to Mars using MPDT. Coming back may take a bit longer ( 20-25 days ).
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    I switched to SRBs ( solid rocket boosters ) and started to get some serious numbers for this.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • topspeed
    replied
    Food and oxygen production.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

 

Working...
X