[SpaceProgram] DARPA-RA-11-70 100YSS Notification

cole santos cksantos85 at gmail.com
Wed Jan 4 05:08:14 CET 2012

JP Aerospace is a perfect example of hackerspace possible projects.

I have some ideas for near term projects that can generate cashflow
with productization,

1. Magneto-hydrodynamic (MHD) generator for extracting power from
rocket exhaust. (help out JP, not much cash here though)
2. One man closed habitat - Pressurized co2 enriched algae tanks to
process co2 and provide food. Biogas to process waste and create
rocket fuel. Also methane for power using solid oxide fuel cells
3. Using hydrogen sulfide from biogas to leach ore. (used for asteroid
mining with human waste by products)
4. Electrostatic confinement fusion (see project promethius)
5. Mini chloralkali electrolysis as well as mini haber-bosch for
in-situ chemical synthesis
6. Aeroponic Aquaponics using biogas effluent as a nutrient source.

Long term projects should center around mining asteroids for platinum
everything else is just science and misplaced dreams. Going down a
gravity well for no apparent reason besides exploration seems silly to

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Atrus <atrus6 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Except, there really isn't that much difference in gravity from the surface
> of the earth, 10km or in orbit.
> g on the
> surface: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+%5Bg+%3D+%286.67*10%5E-11+*+5.9442*10%5E24%29+%2F+%286378100%29%5E2%2C+g%5D
> g 10km
> up: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+%5Bg+%3D+%286.67*10%5E-11+*+5.9442*10%5E24%29+%2F+%286378100%2B10000%29%5E2%2C+g%5D
> ISS orbit (410 km up)
> This is why launching rockets on a platform will only make the actual launch
> more difficult. You still have to reach escape velocity to obtain orbit, the
> only thing you would be doing by launching a rocket at a higher altitude
> would be the face that you would have to hit that velocity in a shorter
> distance.
> Tim Butram
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Stuart Young <cefiar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 3, 2012 11:27 AM, "Atrus" <atrus6 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > What exactly is the benefit of having a high altitude launch platform?
>> > You would still need to reach essentially the same escape velocity, but only
>> > have ~half the distance to achieve that velocity. That seems like a worse
>> > trade off (assuming that your perceived benefit is less air resistance).
>> Benefits (apart from air resistance):
>> 1. Less gravity to escape (inverse square law).
>> 2. Less fuel to carry in the actual rocket (less mass to move to get a
>> payload to escape velocity), which should make things simpler (no need for
>> multiple stages, simpler avionics).
>> 3. Less differences in engine design (high/low atmospheric pressure
>> compensation in design not necessary) which simplifies engine and avionics
>> design.
>> And that is just the ones that I can think off of the top of my head.
>> Btw: Written from my phone, while on site at a client, so pls excuse any
>> errors in the text.
>> --
>> Cef
>> _______________________________________________
>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> _______________________________________________
> SpaceProgram mailing list
> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram

More information about the SpaceProgram mailing list