this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
32 points (94.4% liked)

Good News Everyone

1002 readers
1 users here now

A place to post good news and prevent doom scrolling!

Rules for now:

  1. posts must link from a reliable news source
  2. no reposts
  3. paywalled articles must be made available
  4. avoid politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Using centripetal force puts it in trebuchet territory does it not?

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

SpinLaunch's approach seems closer to a sling than to a catapult or trebuchet.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Sling, that's it!

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you really believe that this will work anytime in the next decade, and that it doesn't need a rocket to circularize the projectile's orbit, I have a bridge to sell you.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

From 2022: "SpinLaunch plans to loft small satellites into low Earth orbit by 2026."

They're working on Elon Musk timelines. Two Starships on Mars by early 2024! Spinlaunch to Orbit in 2 years!

[–] Valmond 4 points 2 weeks ago

To make it work, just add one year every year.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

their "successful proof of concept" video was hilariously very visibly tumbling out of control

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Ignoring air resistance (which you really shouldn't, especially not when you're talking in the thousands of meters per second), you need to launch something at around 1400m/s get it to 100km high "suborbital". You need to launch it over 8000m/s to get it into orbit. In 2022, Spinlaunch were getting to ~450m/s, but that was two years ago and maybe they've improved.

Now, 1400m/s is in the neighborhood of a tank cannon, which is doable. But 8000m/s on the surface, or about 29.000 kph, is about mach 23. That's like running smack into a brick wall of air, every millisecond. And in reality, you need MUCH more speed, because you're shooting at a much shallower angle, so there's a lot more air to get through.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think they're too early. Kinetic launchers will be great for yeeting raw materials from moons and asteroids, but launching delicate satellites through Earth's thick atmosphere seems fraught with challenges.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, it would work great on the moon. Not so much down here.

[–] DempstersBox 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So the article says they've done ten successful launches.

What does that actually mean? It's real short on details.

They've successfully put ten payloads in orbit? Or what?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

They've not put any payload into orbit yet. They've been conducting suborbital flights with a 1/3-scale launcher.

[–] marcos 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Either way, it's good that the article spends some space on the possible uses of satellites. Otherwise people could get the impression it's all for fun, or something like that.

[–] spittingimage 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The ultimate (meaning final) fairground attraction.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

"You think the teacup ride is underwhelming? Well, have we got the ride for you! Brace yourself for a 10,000 G ride of a lifetime!"

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago

They have been trying to find somewhere to build their next scale up for a few years now.