Slashdot Mirror


Startram — Maglev Train To Low Earth Orbit

Zothecula writes "Getting into space is one of the harder tasks to be taken on by humanity. The present cost of inserting a kilogram of cargo by rocket into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) is about US$10,000. A manned launch to LEO costs about $100,000 per kilogram of passenger. But who says we have to reach orbit by means of rocket propulsion alone? Instead, imagine sitting back in a comfortable magnetic levitation train and taking a train ride into orbit."

18 of 356 comments (clear)

  1. Train romance by Tangy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Every step towards "Galaxy Express 999" is a step in the right direction.

  2. Re:I can imagine quite a bit by vux984 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    She sounds dreadfully boring. You'd probably hate her within a few months.

  3. Re:I can imagine quite a bit by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A robot like that would never settle for a slash dotter.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  4. Re:now it's just a minor matter of engineering by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All they need is a trillion $ and a bunch of technology that hasn't been invented yet. Easy Peasy.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  5. Re:Fucking magnets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If you bothered to read the article, you wouldn't look like such an idiot.

  6. Energy requirements are the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The energy requirements to get into orbit are practically the same no matter what method you use. Yes there is some savings from air resistance if you do it at a slower speed but it's not that much.

    The only savings will be from a safety standpoint or similar. The energy costs will still be enormous.

    1. Re:Energy requirements are the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Posting Anon to save my mods. Don't the savings come in not accelerating your fuel?

    2. Re:Energy requirements are the same by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, that's true, except in as much that it's not. This system would save you all the fuel it takes to launch all your fuel. The air resistance is anything but negligible at 7 times the speed of sound. That's disregarding the propulsion inefficiency of rocket fuel compared to magnetic force. Not to mention the risk/preparation costs for a launch. All estimates I've seen of the differences are measured in orders of magnitude. While a space elevator is generally considered impossible at this time, it really would be worth the cost.

  7. Re:Fucking magnets by camperdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do I want to know what the induced magnetic field capable of levitating 4 tons at a distance of 20km is going to do to my hemoglobin, or to my laptop?

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  8. How is this possible? by Karmashock · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I was reading through it and initially thought it was just flinging the train from the ground up... but apparently it needs a TWELVE MILE HIGH RAMP!... that is not practical. If you used Mount Everest to get a head start it would help but it wouldn't get it near enough to that mark to matter. How the hell does anyone think building this would be possible?

    the space elevator ideas are less crazy and they're kookoo for cocopuffs...

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  9. Re:Fucking magnets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm guessing accelerate it at 3gs for a period of 5 minutes.

    If the craft is designed with any level of extraplanetary shielding in mind, it'll be able to reduce the EM bleedthrough to significantly below MRI levels, and 5 minutes in an MRI is generally not considered hazardous for a human. If they can't reasonably reduce the EM effect onboard low enough to be safe for electronics, you will probably have a secure faraday box to stow them in during launch.

  10. Re:cost, $60 billion? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To put $180 billion in perspective, that's about the same cost 400 shuttle launches.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  11. Re:Fucking magnets by Entropius · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow. That's pretty damn impressive -- that despite the fluid nature of blood the spins retained magnetic order over macroscopic distances *after* bouncing around through his arteries.

  12. Re:Fucking magnets by WillDraven · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think he was maybe referring to the people on the ground in the area of the launch tube. I would imagine that you would have to build this thing on the ocean or in the Sahara desert to keep it from playing havoc with nearby electronics.

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
  13. Re:now it's just a minor matter of engineering by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    $20 Billion is approximately NASA's yearly budget. Much more apt comparison.

  14. Re:I can imagine quite a bit by mcgrew · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Oswald, you really should read a lot less science fiction and a lot more nonfiction. If you're going for "funny" you failed miserably.

    That goes for the idiots that modded you "insightful" as well. A robot does not have emotions. A robot can not think. It's a mindless machine, and the only thing that makes it look like it's intelligent or sentient or having emotions is clever programming and anthropomorphism.

    That sex bot wouldn't care if you were President Obama, a movie star, or a fat alcoholic who hadn't bathed in a month. It wouldn't care. It's incapable of caring.

    Sheesh, doesn't anybody here understand how computers work?

  15. Re:I can imagine quite a bit by idontgno · · Score: 3, Insightful

    F that. I'd settle for understanding how magnets work.

    <deftly bringing the thread almost back on-topic.>

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  16. Re:Fucking magnets by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is one of the big problems with our society as I see it, and a giant impediment to us actually making any real technological progress beyond building ourselves more handheld gadgets to entertain ourselves with, which aren't going to help us much with upcoming resource and energy shortages. We need to be building big superconducting structures, vacuum tubes, maglev tracks, etc. A space elevator or maglev train to orbit or undersea intercontinental vacuum tunnel or whatever is a monumental undertaking, yet the only experience we have with these technologies is very small-scale lab experiments, not any real-world production examples in the medium scale to refine our knowledge and techniques before we try building something really huge. And without any proven experience outside the lab, there's not going to be many investors willing to fund the megascale projects.