this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
61 points (98.4% liked)

technology

23673 readers
153 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] someone@hexbear.net 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

It's an interesting idea on worlds with lower gravity and little-to-no atmosphere, like Mars or the Moon. But frankly the fuel needed to get to Mach 1 on Earth is a pretty small fraction of the fuel needed to get to orbit. Orbital rockets get to mach 1 really early in flight. Maglev-assisted launch has never really been seriously developed because it's simpler to just design a rocket to carry a little more fuel.

Also, a lot of rockets aren't designed to handle horizontal loads. Neither are a lot of satellites with big mirror segments, like spy satellites or space telescopes. They live their lives either vertical on Earth, effectively-vertical while in flight due to acceleration, or in microgravity on deployment into orbit.

There's also the issue of being able to reach multiple orbital inclinations for different purposes. The fuel needed for dogleg maneuovers after launching from a maglev track could be more than needed to simply launch vertical from a conventional pad, and is way cheaper than building launch tracks for all the common inclinations.

Maglev-assisted launch also has the issue of engine start-up failures leading to disaster. A conventional liquid-fueled rocket will usually run for a few seconds while still clamped to the launch stand while the flight computers do automatic diagnostics. Issues on start-up mean an automatic safe shutdown is possible prior to releasing the launch clamps. If there's an engine start-up issue with a rocket late into its maglev launch, failure changes from "unload the propellants and try again tomorrow" with a vertical rocket on a pad to "yeeting an out of control rocket and its valuable payload into whatever is downrange".

[โ€“] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 week ago

I also expect that a moon launcher would probably be the most practical. There's no atmosphere to worry about, and very low gravity. Earth based launches like this do face a lot of challenges, but I guess we'll see if they manage to produce anything interesting. Even if they can't make it practical for use here, the research and development that will go into it will be useful for building this on the moon later.

load more comments (5 replies)