tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28823501.post1409450855661096506..comments2023-06-19T23:26:32.126+10:00Comments on QuantumG's Blog: Hating On Propellant DepotsQuantumGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17336493213317053535noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28823501.post-26337738524433863042010-07-25T18:40:48.629+10:002010-07-25T18:40:48.629+10:00ahh Joe in Texas I'd recognize that idiosyncra...ahh Joe in Texas I'd recognize that idiosyncratic punctuation anywhere :)QuantumGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336493213317053535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28823501.post-49630208764480169722010-07-25T13:26:08.265+10:002010-07-25T13:26:08.265+10:00I admire your blogs greatly and your mischievousne...I admire your blogs greatly and your mischievousness also.I do have to say the question you ask is kind of well,, <br />DUH?,,,question,,,I am sorry,I do not know more to say of this.<br /><br />Every calculation 20-50 per cent of the time is around fuel consumption as related to thrust or work done,We have had the same rocket motor since the German V-1. <br /><br />I like the argument much better when it is fuel to LEO depot I have finally put aside pencil and paper and have become a chemist/blacksmith as I experiment with carbon metals.And a<br />means to mold single piece engines with a single casting.I believe I am getting much closer to this,,,the exact design of the engine has lived in my mind in fine detail for several months,its the HOW,to build,that I am coming to grips with. I do seem to have one friend in this ,very well educated,that I believe I can state my problems to,,,whenever it is that I hit one,,,strange,the assemblage of all the tanks and plumbing are also becoming clear.<br />I am building a Wikipedia,page on this that is actually a preamble to a patent.<br /><br />On the takeoff point from LEO,,;;;think of LEO as being a bigger Earth,,,you will naturally have fewer launch windows because they are going to come and go more rapidly,(BUT YOU ARE OUT OF THE GRAVITY WELL,,) ,keep up the good work,,I admire you greatly.<br /><br />Yours is one of the names I look for in the aRocket Digest contents.<br /><br />I believe I have a rocket motor design that will use less fuel more thrust,'BUT'<br />the design is so radically different than the combustion chamber,funnel,,alas,,,(can you imagine the consternation,uproar if I were to broach this subject on aRocket???LMFAO,,ha,ha,ha,,,,by this time next year,the Good Lord Willing,,,,I will go 2 miles high.Turn off engine,,let heavy end fall first,then parachute/balloon to ground I will also carry a lead ballast of probably 8 to 20 pounds,,, ,,,,with fuel containers significantly fuller as would be expected,,<br />perhaps measuring by weight after bringing to ambient for 12-24 hr.<br />I will not know until I test..<br />I will call it the Green Rocket,,,,green as in dead green presidents,,,<br />~~~~Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28823501.post-31806680339458046492010-07-23T06:39:20.983+10:002010-07-23T06:39:20.983+10:00The first LEO propellant depot does not prevent su...The first LEO propellant depot does not prevent subsequent LEO depots from being launched, it just proves the technology and helps retire risk. LEO orbital depots do not need to be the final stage before the big interplanetary push, either. Having LEO depots would facilitate the development, construction and operation of L-1 or L-2 depots. And it is the L1/L2 depots that would end up being the primary launch areas for interplanetary voyages.<br /><br />Having multiple depots in multiple orbits - first LEO and then L1 or L2 - eliminates Adamo's objection about launch opportunities.<br /><br />Beinhoff's objection applies to any object in LEO. For a permanent structure station-keeping must be addressed, but it is one of a thousand such common issues and isn't a deal-breaker.Edhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01273835203670190756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28823501.post-83687068088727208692010-07-23T00:47:55.379+10:002010-07-23T00:47:55.379+10:00considering that a good rule of thumb for ground t...considering that a good rule of thumb for ground to *any* orbit is that >90percent of your propellant is simply to get you off planet, 10percent or so lost to change orbital planes instead from any arbitrary existing orbit is, in scale, reasonably designed for.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com