Tossing Satellites into Orbit with SpinLaunch: Is that Possible? | Interesting Engineering

Comments

• The_Mike_Drop@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It can also do laundry

  source

  • TehBamski@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Get back to your workbench, dad. /s

    source
• sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Usually when a SpinLaunch article or video is posted, all the armchair Physic PhDs show up pontificating on why it’s doomed to fail.

  source

  • Kbobabob@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Well it’s been almost ten years and they still aren’t launching into space so I’d say they’ve been correct so far.

    source

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Everything is impossible, until it isn’t.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    You’re dreaming of you think this is remotely feasible.

    source

    • c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Strange that a bunch of aerospace and mechanical engineers believe it is, and have tested the math, yet some random person who probably doesn’t even work on STEM believes they have the better idea.

      I can’t tell if you genuinely think you’re smarter than these people or if this is just the classic “space craft are stupid!” Rhetoric that’s become popular since Musk started SpaceX.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    You don’t need to be Stephen Hawkings to understand that the bottleneck is not in the launch sling but in the satellite themselves. The idea is in the same league as the space elevator; sure you can do it, but is it better than rockets?

    source
• mawkishdave@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I heard about this and it’s a great idea if it works. It’s not totally fuel free as the throwing pay gets it mostly out of the atmosphere and there is a small rocket (last stage for a normal rocket) that puts the payload in the right place.

  source

  • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It’s even far from fuel free, to reach Low Earth Orbit a rocket needs between 9.3 and 10km/s of delta-v.

    According to the video the system is launching the rocket at mach 6, which is equivalent to 2km/s.

    So the system is providing only 1/5 of the energy needed to get to orbit. It’s good but I’m not sure it is worth the drawback of having to handle the huge acceleration.

    On the other hand the same system on the moon would provide enough energy to reach orbit, it would just need a small amount of propellant to circularize.

    Or by increasing slightly the speed of the system it could even send stuff straight to earth with no propellant.

    source

    • scarabic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      20% of the delta-v is not the same as 20% of the energy or fuel. The early stage when the rocket is the heaviest and down in the thickest atmosphere is by far the most fuel-expensive.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • AA5B@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      So, you want to build a trebuchet on the moon to throw rocks at Earth?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• MossyFeathers@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The idea of throwing something into space isn’t anything new, tbh I’ve always kinda wondered why no one has spent more time developing it.

  source

  • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    The projectile experiences wicked g-forces when it is being spun up: around 10,000 times the force of gravity. This is enough to tear the skin and muscle off a human being. This means SpinLaunch will not be going into the astronaut business. They also won’t be able to drive large satellites into orbit. The projected weight limit for the system would be payloads of about 440 pounds. That is a lot less than something like the Hubble Space Telescope weighs. – source

    source

    • NotBillMurray@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I mean, you would in fact get the astronaut into orbit, provided your container was water tight.

      source
    • MossyFeathers@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Jesus fuck. I know humans can withstand extremely high g-forces for short periods of time, but 10,000 Gs is a lotta Gs.

      source
    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      So… Wouldn’t a railgun system be able to do the same thing with less energy consumption?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Bytemeister@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    …if a human could theoretically survive it long enough to get thrown into space.

    The answer is ‘no’. This thing would spin all the blood out of your body, and then when it actually launches you, your body would get shattered by the shock, and then shattered again a millisecond later as your spacecraft plows into the atmosphere at a few mach number.

    source
• CaptPretentious@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  youtu.be/9ziGI0i9VbE?si=cm35bEGTpAIcAxkK

  youtu.be/9ziGI0i9VbE?si=HngYX7MN-bFZ9ll_

  I recommend watching those videos.

  source

  • Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yeah I was gonna say…

    No, no it doesn’t work.

    source