New form of electromagnetic launch

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Focused on the launching of raw materials due to high G forces, EML's discussions with NASA suggest a first application may be to move raw materials from the surface of the moon to lunar orbit

So, we're going to launch all the assemblies to build one of these things via conventional vehicles, land them on the moon, then assemble it there, where we will use it to put raw materials into orbit around the moon, then rendezvous with them via some sort of conventional vehicle, collect the materials, and from moon orbit, head off to Mars.

Right.

Sidebar: Unless you think you'll save a massive amount of money by mining and refining materials on the moon, what is the purpose of launching stuff into space, slowing it down to land it on the moon, relaunching it into moon orbit, then escaping from moon orbit to head off into space again? Why not just launch it into space from Earth and keep going? Or, if there's some benefit in collecting material at the moon before heading off into space, why not just stay in moon orbit and collect it? At that point, why bother with the moon? Why not just aggregate it in Earth orbit before heading off?

As for using the tech in an Earth-based launcher, imagine uncorking one of these vacuum tubes to the atmosphere just as the projectile gets to the end. Said projectile would have to be going not just fast enough to achieve orbit, but fast enough to achieve orbit after all the velocity it would lose going up through the atmosphere, encountering the densest atmosphere when it is going the fastest. Maybe if we can think of good reasons to send a bunch of tungsten slugs into Earth orbit, and don't mind insane shock waves at ground level...

Right.
 
Last edited:
Mining and smelting uses a lot of energy. Square miles of solar would need to be launched, landed, setup.
Moon is pretty much lava rock. Ever seen a real mine in lava?
Imagine the capacitor banks required to put significant mass into orbit.
 
In "Things to Come" HG Wells proposed the space gun, which would accelerate an object into space.
Of course, we know this won't work with humans, you'd turn them into jello.
This isn't any different, it's just using electromagnets instead of gunpowder.....
 
There was a fellow named Bull. He had a project called HARP. High Altitude Research Project. It was a gun pointing up at an angle. It was supposed to put satellites in orbit. When the US lost interest he ended up in Iraq with Saddam. Who wanted one. He planned to bombard Israel. Bull met with an unfortunate end. That is IIRC.
 
highly illogical and impractical. all of this time and energy should be spent on ending starvation here first. You know...something that would be practical and help our fellow humans.
 
highly illogical and impractical. all of this time and energy should be spent on ending starvation here first. You know...something that would be practical and help our fellow humans.
Oddly, some of these sorts of things may eventually solve problems that help end poverty and starvation. Satellites in orbit now give enormous advantages to increase agricultural production. Future developments that lead to orbital power plants (solar or otherwise) could vastly reduce the cost of electricity, increase its reliability, and reduce or eliminate the environmental cost on the surface. Of course, those things are probably decades, if not centuries, in the future, but you have to start somewhere.
 
highly illogical and impractical. all of this time and energy should be spent on ending starvation here first. You know...something that would be practical and help our fellow humans.
Why is the space industry always blamed for starvation? Go talk to the leasure boat industry, major league sports and art museum people! 😆
 
Why is the space industry always blamed for starvation? Go talk to the leasure boat industry, major league sports and art museum people! 😆
The 585 BILLION we spend on bombing and killing innocent people is the first thing to stop. That's the easy part, as all we need to do is never go beyond 500 miles outside our borders as Marine Gen Smedly Butler wrote in his book "War is a Racket" after he returned from WW1
 
So, we're going to launch all the assemblies to build one of these things via conventional vehicles, land them on the moon, then assemble it there, where we will use it to put raw materials into orbit around the moon, then rendezvous with them via some sort of conventional vehicle, collect the materials, and from moon orbit, head off to Mars.

Right.

Sidebar: Unless you think you'll save a massive amount of money by mining and refining materials on the moon, what is the purpose of launching stuff into space, slowing it down to land it on the moon, relaunching it into moon orbit, then escaping from moon orbit to head off into space again? Why not just launch it into space from Earth and keep going? Or, if there's some benefit in collecting material at the moon before heading off into space, why not just stay in moon orbit and collect it? At that point, why bother with the moon? Why not just aggregate it in Earth orbit before heading off?

As for using the tech in an Earth-based launcher, imagine uncorking one of these vacuum tubes to the atmosphere just as the projectile gets to the end. Said projectile would have to be going not just fast enough to achieve orbit, but fast enough to achieve orbit after all the velocity it would lose going up through the atmosphere, encountering the densest atmosphere when it is going the fastest. Maybe if we can think of good reasons to send a bunch of tungsten slugs into Earth orbit, and don't mind insane shock waves at ground level...

Right.
We launch a big site preparer robot mission, to be followed by a solar-panel-laying robot mission, etc. etc.

As for launching off the Earth's surface, borrow a hillside from Ecuador.
 
So we can only invade Canada and Mexico????? Wait, Russia too. Its right next to Alaska...
We don't need to invade anybody. So anything 500 miles outside of our lower 48 states, the second part was the before we decided to go fight, every politician had to sign an agreement that their immediate family members would be on the front lines. yep, that would keep us out of 99% of all the past wars. We are too far into breaking the forum rules, case closed.
 
Back
Top