Hence there has to be an economic rationale for its existence.
Is that possible?
Just carrying forward a bit on my peregrinations on the subject of Lox-Leo.
The latest is about the economics of it. If the economics doesn't make sense, then it won't be done. So how does these economics work?
I'm looking at it in terms of how many launches from the ground that it will make unnecessary. It looks like Starship will need about 10 launches for re-fueling, so that it can go to places beyond low Earth orbit.
If you can reduce that number significantly, then Lox-Leo would at least make more sense that launching from the ground.
Other questions need to be answered though. How much does it take to service these facilities? If it doesn't net out positive, then it doesn't make sense. I don't have some numbers to toss around. There's this one number that might be handy. That number is the number of pounds of thrust that can be generated per MW of beamed energy from GEO. This will determine how much of a facility will be needed to generate the energy.
I think it is 50 pounds per MW. But that could be wrong. If it is correct, let's say that 12k lbs of thrust are needed. I got that number from what the OMS thrusters on the Shuttle needed in order to finish its ascent into orbit. The main engines were good for 98% of orbital velocity. The OMS thrusters had to do the rest.
If memory serves, the Shuttle massed out at 200k lbs. Let's assume that the lox-leo device masses out at that. In order to maintain orbit, you may need 12k lbs of thrust.
To generate 12k of thrust, then you need some multiple of MW of 50 MW increments in order to do the trick. That would be 12000/50 equals 240 MW.
Something less than 1 sq mile of solar panels might do the trick. You'd have to figure the upkeep of these massive structure in the calculations. (Not done here.)
It would have to be converted to an energy source to beam to the collecting vessel so as to maintain 12k of thrust for whatever amount of time is needed in order to maintain orbital velocity.
Once you know that, then perhaps you can calculate how much you can collect before having a full tank. This may require even more energy. Indeed, you may even have to count on that. ----12:58 PM, 12/14/24:
7:43 PM:
The 50 MW part is correct, according the source I was thinking about. ( The Nuclear Rocket )
Some reading of this Wikipedia source would seem to indicate that whatever gases found up there may not be what is down at sea level. Hmmm. This may not work like I thought it might. There's a lot of sodium up there!
Just carrying forward a bit on my peregrinations on the subject of Lox-Leo.
The latest is about the economics of it. If the economics doesn't make sense, then it won't be done. So how does these economics work?
I'm looking at it in terms of how many launches from the ground that it will make unnecessary. It looks like Starship will need about 10 launches for re-fueling, so that it can go to places beyond low Earth orbit.
If you can reduce that number significantly, then Lox-Leo would at least make more sense that launching from the ground.
Other questions need to be answered though. How much does it take to service these facilities? If it doesn't net out positive, then it doesn't make sense. I don't have some numbers to toss around. There's this one number that might be handy. That number is the number of pounds of thrust that can be generated per MW of beamed energy from GEO. This will determine how much of a facility will be needed to generate the energy.
I think it is 50 pounds per MW. But that could be wrong. If it is correct, let's say that 12k lbs of thrust are needed. I got that number from what the OMS thrusters on the Shuttle needed in order to finish its ascent into orbit. The main engines were good for 98% of orbital velocity. The OMS thrusters had to do the rest.
If memory serves, the Shuttle massed out at 200k lbs. Let's assume that the lox-leo device masses out at that. In order to maintain orbit, you may need 12k lbs of thrust.
To generate 12k of thrust, then you need some multiple of MW of 50 MW increments in order to do the trick. That would be 12000/50 equals 240 MW.
Something less than 1 sq mile of solar panels might do the trick. You'd have to figure the upkeep of these massive structure in the calculations. (Not done here.)
It would have to be converted to an energy source to beam to the collecting vessel so as to maintain 12k of thrust for whatever amount of time is needed in order to maintain orbital velocity.
Once you know that, then perhaps you can calculate how much you can collect before having a full tank. This may require even more energy. Indeed, you may even have to count on that. ----12:58 PM, 12/14/24:
7:43 PM:
The 50 MW part is correct, according the source I was thinking about. ( The Nuclear Rocket )
Some reading of this Wikipedia source would seem to indicate that whatever gases found up there may not be what is down at sea level. Hmmm. This may not work like I thought it might. There's a lot of sodium up there!
No comments:
Post a Comment