StarTram
StarTram is a proposed
History
A StarTram design was first published in a 2001 paper[3] and patent,[4] making reference to a 1994 paper on MagLifter. Developed by John C. Mankins, who was manager of Advanced Concept Studies at NASA,[5] the MagLifter concept involved maglev launch assist for a few hundred m/s with a short track, 90% projected efficiency.[6] Noting StarTram is essentially MagLifter taken to a much greater extreme, both MagLifter and StarTram were discussed the following year in a concept study performed by ZHA for NASA's Kennedy Space Center, also considered together by Maglev 2000 with Powell and Danby.[7][8][9]
Subsequent design modifies StarTram into a generation 1 version, a generation 2 version, and an alternative generation 1.5 variant.[1]
John Rather, who served as assistant director for Space Technology (Program Development) at NASA,[10] said:
It is a little known fact that an effort was made in the mid-1990s by NASA HQ, Marshall Space Flight Center, and key private innovators to change the basic paradigms of space access and development. Generically these efforts involved electromagnetic launch methods and new approaches for high power electrical systems in space. ...
StarTram was conceived from first principles to reduce the cost and improve the efficiency of space access by a factor of more than a hundred. ...
The overall feasibility and cost of the StarTram approach was validated in 2005 by a thorough “murder board” study conducted at Sandia National Laboratory.— Dr. Rather[11]
Description
Generation 1 System
The Gen-1 system proposes to accelerate uncrewed craft at 30
A 40-ton cargo craft, 2 metres (6 ft 7 in) diameter and 13 metres (43 ft) length, would experience briefly the effects of atmospheric passage. With an effective drag coefficient of 0.09, peak deceleration for the mountain-launched elongated projectile is momentarily 20 g but halves within the first 4 seconds and continues to decrease as it quickly passes above the bulk of the remaining atmosphere.
In the first moments after exiting the launch tube, the heating rate with an optimal nose shape is around 30 kW/cm2 at the stagnation point, though much less over most of the nose, but drops below 10 kW/cm2 within a few seconds.[1] Transpiration water cooling is planned, briefly consuming up to ≈ 100 liters/m2 of water per second. Several percent of the projectile's mass in water is calculated to suffice.[1]
The tunnel tube itself for Gen-1 has no superconductors, no cryogenic cooling requirements, and none of it is at higher elevation than the local ground surface. Except for probable usage of
Generation 2 System
The Gen-2 variant of the StarTram is supposed to be for reusable crewed capsules, intended to be low
With such relatively slow acceleration, the Gen-2 system requires 1,000 to 1,500 kilometres (620 to 930 mi) length. The cost for the non-elevated majority of the tube's length is estimated to be several tens of millions of dollars per kilometer, proportionately a semi-similar expense per unit length to the tunneling portion of the former
For the elevated end portion, the design considers magnetic levitation to be relatively less expensive than alternatives for elevating a launch tube of a mass driver (tethered balloons,[19] compressive or inflated aerospace-material megastructures).[20] A 280-megaamp current in ground cables creates a magnetic field of 30
Generation 1.5 System (lower-velocity option)
An alternative, Gen-1.5, would launch passenger spacecraft at 4 kilometres per second (2.5 mi/s) from a mountaintop at around 6000 meters above sea level from a
Though construction costs would be lower than the Gen-2 version, Gen-1.5 would differ from other StarTram variants by requiring 4+ km/s to be provided by other means, like rocket propulsion. However, the non-linear nature of the
Alternatively, Gen-1.5 could be combined with another
The launch tunnel length in this proposal could be reduced by accepting correspondingly larger forces on the passengers. A
Economics and potential
The StarTram ground facility concept is claimed to be reusable after each launch without extensive maintenance, as it would essentially be a large
The alternative Generation 1.5 design, such as 4 kilometres per second (2.5 mi/s) launch velocity, would be intermediate in velocity terms between Gen-1's 8.8 kilometres per second (5.5 mi/s) and the Maglifter design (which had $0.2 billion estimated cost for 0.3 kilometres per second (0.19 mi/s) launch assist in the case of a 50-ton vehicle).[1][25]
The Generation 2 goal is $13,000 per person. Up to 4 million people could be sent to orbit per decade per Gen-2 facility if as estimated.[1]
Challenges
Gen-1
The largest challenge for Gen-1 is considered by the researchers to be sufficiently affordable storage, rapid delivery, and handling of the power requirements.[18]
For needed electrical energy storage (discharged over 30 seconds with about 50 gigawatt average and about 100 gigawatts peak),
For MagLifter, General Electric estimated in 1997-2000 that a set of hydroelectric flywheel pulse power generators could be manufactured for a cost equating to $5.40 per kJ and $27 per kW-peak.[6] For StarTram, the SMES design choice is a better (less expensive) approach than pulse generators according to Powell.[1]
The single largest predicted capital cost for Gen-1 is the power conditioning, from an initially DC discharge to the AC current wave, dealing for a few seconds with very high power, up to 100 gigawatts, at a cost estimated to be $100 per kW-peak.[1] Yet, compared to some other potential implementations of a coilgun launcher with relatively higher requirements for pulse power switching devices (an example being an escape velocity design of 7.8 kilometres (4.8 mi) length after a 1977 NASA Ames study determined how to survive atmospheric passage from ground launch),[27] which are not always semiconductor-based,[28] the 130-km acceleration tube length of Gen-1 spreads out energy input requirements over a longer acceleration duration. Such makes peak input power handling requirements be not more than about 2 GW per ton of the vehicle. The tradeoff of greater expense for the tunnel itself is incurred, but the tunnel is estimated to be about $4.4 billion including $1500 per cubic meter excavation, a minority of total system cost.[1]
Gen-1.5
The current land speed record of 2.9 km/s was obtained by a sled on 5 kilometers of rail track mostly in a helium-filled tunnel, in a $20 million project.
Gen-2
Gen-2 introduces particular extra challenge with its elevated launch tube, levitating both the vehicle and part of the tube (unlike Gen-1 and Gen-1.5 which only levitate the vehicle). As of 2010 operating
For the Gen-2 version of the StarTram, it is necessary to levitate the track over up to 22 kilometres (72,000 ft), a distance greater by a factor of 1.5 million.The force between two conducting lines is given by , (Ampère's force law). Here F is the force, the permeability, the
While the performance of
If considering a design with an acceleration up to 10
The researchers themselves do not consider there to be any doubt whether the levitation would work in terms of force exerted (a consequence of Ampère's force law) but see the primary challenge as the practical engineering complexities of erection of the tube,[18] while a substantial portion of engineering analysis focused on handling bending caused by wind.[4] The active structure is calculated to bend by a fraction of a meter per kilometer under wind in the very thin air at its high altitude, a slight curvature theoretically handled by guidance loops, with net levitation force beyond structure weight exceeding wind force by a factor of 200+ to keep tethers taut, and with the help of computer-controlled control tethers.[4]
See also
- Non-rocket spacelaunch
- Rocket sled launch
- Vactrain
- High altitude platform stationas a space port
- ThothX Tower
References
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u "StarTram2010: Maglev Launch: Ultra Low Cost Ultra High Volume Access to Space for Cargo and Humans". startram.com. Retrieved April 23, 2011.
- ^ "StarTram Inventors". Retrieved April 25, 2011.
- ^ a b "StarTram: A New Approach for Low-Cost Earth-to-Orbit Transport". Retrieved April 23, 2011.
- ^ a b c d e f g U.S. Patent #6311926: "Space tram" (PDF). Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ "John C. Mankins" (PDF). Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ CiteSeerX 10.1.1.110.9317.
- ^ "Spaceport Visioning Project Description". Archived from the original on March 23, 2012. Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ a b NASA: "Spaceport Visioning" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on November 3, 2008. Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ "MagLifter". Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ "President of RCIG, Dr. John D.G. Rather". Retrieved April 27, 2011.
- ^ "Transformational Technologies to Expedite Space Access and Development". Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum. Archived from the original on March 23, 2012. Retrieved March 23, 2012.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link) - ^ "StarTram - a revolution in transport into orbit?". Retrieved November 11, 2011.
- ^ "StarTram Technology". Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ "SpaceCast 2020" Report to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, 22 Jun 94.
- ^ spaceagepub.com. "StarTram" (PDF). spaceagepub.com. Retrieved June 4, 2009.
- ^ "Atmosphere Table". Retrieved April 28, 2011.
- ^ a b NASA: Bioastronautics Data Book SP-3006, page 173, Figure 4-24: Human Experience of Sustained Acceleration
- ^ a b c "Frequently Asked Questions About StarTram". Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ISBN 9780671242572.
- ^ Canonical List of Space Transportation and Engineering Methods
- ^ "StarTram - The Key to Low-Cost Lunar Bases and Human Exploration" (PDF). Retrieved April 29, 2011.[permanent dead link]
- ^ U.S. Air Force Research Report No. AU-ARI-93-8: LEO On The Cheap. Retrieved April 29, 2011.
- ^ Paper, AIAA 00-3615 "Design and Simulation of Tether Facilities for HASTOL Architecture" R. Hoyt, 17-19 Jul 00.
- ^ "Constant Acceleration". Retrieved April 29, 2011.
- ^ "The Maglifter: An Advanced Concept Using Electromagnetic Propulsion in Reducing the Cost of Space Launch". NASA. Retrieved 24 May 2011. Maglifter cost estimates are from 1994.
- ^ Bush, Steve (1 March 2006). "Supercapacitors See Growth As Costs Fall". Electronics Weekly. Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ "L5 News, Sept 1980: Mass Driver Update". Archived from the original on 2017-12-01. Retrieved 2011-04-25.
- ^ "Pulse Power Switching Devices". Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ a b U.S. Air Force: "Test Sets World Land Speed Record". Archived from the original on June 1, 2013. Retrieved October 25, 2015.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link) - ^ U.S. Air Force: "846TS Magnetic Levitation (MAGLEV) Sled Track Capability". Retrieved October 25, 2015.
- doi:10.1109/20.908940.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - .
- ^ "Cost Projections for High Temperature Superconductors" (PDF). Retrieved April 24, 2011.
- ^ NASA: Table 2: Apollo Manned Space Flight Reentry G Levels Archived 2009-02-26 at the Wayback Machine