Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] OP t1_j6nkjqe wrote

Reply to comment by lets_bang_blue in If the concepts of Project Orion were proven, why don't we use them for space guns? by [deleted]

[deleted]

0

lets_bang_blue t1_j6nlush wrote

25 years from now sure. But what value would raw materials be in space currently? Need to have an assembly team up there, which no one has. Or a robot to assemble, which no one has. The concept or something similar will eventually be used for raw materials but we are not at that stage of space exploration where we can fabricate our structures in space

5

[deleted] OP t1_j6nqosz wrote

[deleted]

−2

zolikk t1_j6nso2v wrote

You have to make a rendezvous with the ISS which means you have to have propulsion on your "vehicle", it can't just be a "cannonball" fired from the ground once. And the engine and other delicate components necessary wouldn't survive being fired out of such a cannon.

To put it simply, you cannot shoot an unpowered object into orbit. Its path intersects the earth again, or it attains escape velocity and leaves earth permanently, but neither path makes an orbit.

2

[deleted] OP t1_j6nt4al wrote

[deleted]

0

zolikk t1_j6ntj8h wrote

Hmm, I guess it's possible? But then it requires quite a lot of constant fuel for your orbital retrieval vehicle. I suppose you could also "shoot" fuel up with the cannon constantly.

I'm not convinced it could be worth it. From the construction and maintenance of the cannon to the reliability of the method, even if possible, where if you don't catch a payload perfectly it just falls back to earth... rocket launches are probably more worthwhile for all this.

Since you need fuel to get into orbit you're still beholden to the rocket equation where you're using fuel that you catch to put the payload you also catch into orbit... I don't think you're necessarily that far from just using rockets, except the reliability problem.

2

lets_bang_blue t1_j6o072p wrote

If it's so hugely beneficial. It would be done or in the works but it's not? So we need to consider there are reasons. Your asking why it's not being done and I am giving you answers which your now saying are not valid. OK so your trying to argue thay the ISS is in desperate need or large steel structures? For what and how will it be assembled?

Water is a valid point but do you think designing an entirely new launch system just to bring water into space is economical.

"It's hugely beneficial for Artemis mission". Can you go into some details here about why Artemis needs to have a massive amount of stuff launched along side it? Does the mission not already have everything needed for success loaded onto a single rocket?

1