Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KillyScreams t1_j5t0dpy wrote

Reply to comment by Cheapskate-DM in Hey, can someone explain to me why we are not stending nuclear waste into space having a reliable rocket that can carry a decent amounts of cargo? I'm thinking about Falcon Heavy. One start a year would mean that US doesn't need to store anymore waste underground. by William0fBaskerville

Like a rail system, right? Not on a mountain but straight up

Why oh why don't people make investments like that? Space travel isnt going anywhere.

−4

Cheapskate-DM t1_j5t0sfw wrote

Laments about stupid human bullshit aside, it's no easy engineering feat.

An aboveground version would mean miles of electrified track exposed to the elements; assuming constant acceleration, you'd quickly reach speeds where a single nick or bump would be catastrophic.

A hyperloop or shielded underground version is plausible, but that's miles of tunneling - and unless you want to roll the dice on some retractable wing business, it'd need to be a wide tunnel.

And that's not even getting into property/territory.

2

KillyScreams t1_j5t19rm wrote

I gotcha. It's just it's not like humanity has never had incredible engineering feats when needed.

It will be interesting to see what does eventually replace rockets.

Maybe having planes carry things into low altitude orbit and take off from there.

−1

DistressedApple t1_j5talsj wrote

Why don’t people make investments into vertical rail? Because it’s stupid and it wouldn’t work. How would it be supported? How would it be powered efficiently, and how would many of these affect normal air travel? There are so many reasons why they’re a terrible idea and people much smarter than either of us have considered and rejected it

0