Priligy online now, save money

OCT 04

Recent Comment

"I did some calculations and a ring with a 2km diameter will have a G f..."

View all Comments

Giant Electromagnetic Space Launch Ring


Satellites are important for our gadgets. For our cell phones, GPS units, Google Earth pictures and more. But sending satellites into space is a pretty darned unsustainable prospect.  We're talking $2000 per kilogram of payload and almost all of best price levitra that goes into fossil fuels.  So what's the alternative?  A space elevator would certainly be more efficient, and would only cost several trillion dollars to build. Well, we could just stop sending up satellites and let our gadgets crumble into museum pieces. 

Or how 'bout this. We build a gigantic ring superconducting electromagnetic track with a diameter of 2 kilometers in the desert and continuously increase the speed of an object until it reaches 10 k/s and then shift the track to an inclined portion that rockets the object into orbit! Amazing! This has been proposed before, but usually with a straight length of track that would have to either be extremely long, or give the satellite a massive amount of speed in a short time.
A recent AirForce study of this very concept has concluded that this device could decrease the viagra oral gel cost of launches (and fuel consumed) 100 fold.  
The space ring shown here could increase the speed of the object over a period of hours on an infinite length of track.  The problem being, of course, that anything travelling in a circle at high speeds is going to have to deal with unfortunate G-forces.  The kind of visit web site viagra to buy G forces that would have any living organism seeping into the upholstery before launch.  Most communications satellites are too fragile for this kind of treatment. 

Which is making a lot of people wonder why the Air Force really put together the plan to study the device. Is it really efficient satellite launches they're after, or is it efficient and constant weapons launches. I might have thought that we were beyond that, but I'm marking this one down under 'cool, but dangerous.'
Via NewScientist

Hits: 79592
Comments (23)Add Comment
That's really fast!!!!
written by rob, October 05, 2006
If my maths is correct (school was a long time ago), the track would have a circumference of 6.28k, so at 10k/s, the spaceship would be making almost two laps a second.
That I would like to see, I wouldn't want to be in it, but I would like to see it. ;D
First stage
written by Paul Barthle, October 05, 2006
If a re-usable space plane were to use this concept as a first stage rather than solid fuel, o-ring equipped rockets, the g-forces wouldn't have to be as high and past disasters could be avoided as well. The real application might be on the tramadol online that ships to florida proposed moon base, using solar power to launch toward Mars. Fewer G's necessary under less gravity and low cost cialis no need to ferry fuels from here.
Tech. Ed.
written by S. E. Robinson, October 05, 2006
Great idea, but a couple concerns. The constant earth rotation would create a problem for the stationary Ring on earth or either its free floating point in space and the airspace this object would demand and tie up. Move on it, this could be wonderful.
You're over a bit on the cost
written by Brian, October 06, 2006
So what's the alternative? A space elevator would certainly be more efficient, and would only cost several trillion dollars to build.

We think you're over just a wee bit on how much a space elevator will cost. Dr. Edwards guess-timates 10 billion, we think based on the work we've done this summer it will be about twice that.
garbage gun?
written by SauZheR, October 07, 2006
What about a ring-garbage gun?? Is really stupid to think to levitra 20mg shot straight into the space (or the sun) tons of grabage? i don't think so. bye
Never mind satellites
written by John O'Leary, October 07, 2006
I've worked all my life in the space industry and I appreciate any progress. But this is probably only realistic if placed on one of the lunar poles.

But as a means of safely disposing of nuclear waste, by launching it into the sun, it sounds like a good idea placed on Earth's north pole.
problem and solution
written by Fred steel, October 07, 2006
at 10k/s you can not shift any sensitive equipment of buy ultram no prescription any mass grater than a few grams on purchasing viagra to an inclined track as you propose. The inertial forces would be far to great. However, if you instead of building your ring horisontally, build it vertically, you would eliminate the problem intierly. Naturally, you would have to construct your ring below ground, wich raises a new problem. Tectonic movements and other ground displacing phenomena (these problems exist for a horisontal ring aswell but are easily solved by letting the ring move with some freedom). This could be solved by finding a solid, dense and homogeneous mountain into which you drill your ring hole using conventional tunnel drilling equipment.
written by John, October 07, 2006
Great idea fred, at 10k/s it really wouldnt make much difference if you were vertical. and building it underground gives your track the strength it would need to handle the drug cialis forces. I do think that 2km might be a little short, but I have seen some jet cars on those crazy little tracks go insanely fast held only by a thin wire. I wonder if thats where this idea was spawned. Either way, what an Idea!
Another problem
written by John, October 07, 2006
If the payload is revolving around the track 2 times a second you will have to switch the tracks 'very' quickly.
A couple things not being taken into aco
written by ElAsturiano, October 07, 2006
At the speeds you are talking pre launch, the air resistance would be significant, keeping a vacuum on the ring while accelerating would solve that, but then, when you divert the payload to the launching ramp you would loose a lot of your energy to air resistance (and lets not talk about the supersonic boom at the spot where the vehicle touches air for the first time).
I am sure you get my idea...
written by Moto, October 10, 2006
I'm not en engineer, but I would think speed and force factors are going to be very hard to overcome. The G force acting on the projectile would be insane I know that we can make some strong components, but if you break it before you launch it you just shot a billion dollar chunk of metal into space. It’s a good idea but they might need to revise some of the technical specifications.
"Durable goods"
written by Obvious, October 22, 2006
Sensitive electronics aren't the only thing sent into space. What about structural components of sattelites and space stations? What about fuels and consumables for those living in space (milk, green beans, toilet paper.)

Who says we have to send stuff up all in one expensive chunk. Anything that can't survive this kind of treatment can be sent the $2,000/kg way. We can send the socks and liquid 02 using this thing and go up and collect them from orbit as needed.
written by Rick, October 23, 2006
10k/s 10 kilo... per second? With those units this thing won't be launching anything.

Did you mean 10 km/s ?
written by Govind, March 19, 2007
My question is that exactly how many Mkwh would be required considering a payload like 500 kg.Also I have a suggestion.Its basically an update of Mr.Berthes idea.launch the payload with a small rocket motor(say it wants to go geosynchronous) and launch another motor,make it dock with the paload in space so it can boost it from Gto to canada levitra Gso
weapons launching
written by Dustin, July 25, 2007
weapons have a lot of sensitive electronics in them too. we've come a long way from gunpowder in an iron ball. also, the navy is already developing a railgun( that they would be fitting to their ships. so what would be the point of a stationary railgun in the middle of discount viagra united kingdom a desert?
What about nuclear waste?
written by Perry, September 10, 2007
If this thing could be developed as a highly reliable means of delivering material to space, would it be possible to collect nuclear waste in space and then send out of earth orbit as a low risk operation?

Let's watch.
written by Randy, December 27, 2007
I agree with Rob, this would be an awesome thing to watch, but I would hope that he would join me in the 'center' of the circle. At least that way, we would have a chance to ponder the reasons surrounding a track failure, maybe.
Why not use a cylindrical electromagnetic elevator to launch space veihicles
written by frankM, April 20, 2010
They could build one say 10 miles straight into the sky, kind of like the ones they use at amuzement parks. This one would use electro-magnetic energy which at specified intervals would kick in more juice to boost the vehicle faster until the end (use advanced bullet train tech). You could even use a little rocket fuel for the last few miles to get where you wanna go, OK, I am not a physics major or rocket scientist but something like this seems practical. smilies/cheesy.gif
written by kevin, May 02, 2010
Whatever projectile is shot out of something like this would still have to have a rocket attached. Any ballistic trajectory that intersects the planet's surface once, will intersect it again...
Get real about technology
written by For Fuddsake, March 18, 2012
"Ben Rich Lockheed Skunk Works CEO had admitted in his Deathbed Confession that Extraterrestrial UFO visitors are real and the U.S. Military travel among stars.
According to article published in May 2010 issue of the Mufon UFO Journal …- Ben Rich, the “Father of the Stealth Fighter-Bomber” and former head of Lockheed Skunk Works,
had once let out information about Extraterrestrial UFO Visitors Are Real And U.S. Military Travel To Stars"
And it ain't with entertainment-for-the-masses rockets.
written by Preston Maness, April 01, 2012
The word "superconducting" and the phrase "decrease the cost of launches (and fuel consumed) 100 fold" seem contradictory to me. Just how do you intend to keep


cubic kilometers of material in a superconductive state for hours at a time? That sounds pretty expensive to me. Not to mention the rising cost of raw materials to it's great! buy levitra soft tabs make up this track and the cost of the coolant...
Larger Ring
written by James, May 01, 2013
2 km is lowest prices on viagra very small for the ring. If money was going to be put into make it at least 7km in diameter, about a 22km circumference, this would make the G force substantially less. And the inital speed does not have to be 10km/s, that is only to get it into orbit. If it was something like 2km/s then it could get about half way to space and then use conventional fuel the rest of the way. (if you have ever seen a rocket take off the first few seconds it looks like it is barley moving up nd burning massive amounts of usa generic cialis fuel). This would solve the problem of having too many G's for sensitive equipment. Tell me what you think.
more info
written by James, May 01, 2013
I did some calculations and a ring with a 2km diameter will have a G force of about 17G's when going at 10km/s. Much to high for humans and maybe some sensitive satellite equipment. But this would be fine for other things like water or part for the space station. However if the ring was larger, 10km in diameter, the G force would only be 3.2 G's at 10km/s. This is easily survivable for humans, so it could be used to launch humans into space.

Write comment

security code
Write the displayed characters


Are you an EcoGeek?

We've got to keep 7 billion people happy without destroying our planet. It's the biggest challenge we've ever faced....but we're taking it on. Are you with us?

The Most Popular Articles