Somebody said this was impossible in 2007, why hasn't it been done yet?
If the guy with the MIG isn't game, I think a balloon might be easier and cheaper.
A balloon as big as the Hindenburg is big, but its not a problem. And a 1 kg payload is not a problem either. Nobody said it had to be a BIG object, it just has to be something that we can verify reached the moon. It could be a single solar cell and a single chip transmitter. Prop could do this?. I'm sure we could talk somebody with a giant radio telescope array to take a glance at the moon if we think we're there.
How's about lifting a linear accelerator with a balloon? Blast the projectile right through the balloon, straight to the moon! If it doesn't make lunar orbit the first time, repeat until success! We got a lot of props, and balloons are cheap.
As for "impossible", it's one thing when it's hobbyists tweaking a obscure micro-controller compared to those trying to put say a telemetry package on the moon with near non-existent budget.
As far as a Linear accelerator mounted in a gondola under a blimp. First, find or build on Earth that can place say a .5kg object in orbit. So far no one has.
Braino, it's sometimes fun to read what you write, but...
Please consider the forces involved...
No one can build a linear accellerator capable of launchng anything that far.
And even if they could, no blimp/airhip/zeppeliner would be able to lift it.
And even if one could lift it, it would pop because of the forces experienced...
How much did the accellerator cost?
To get an idea of what is needed to even reach orbit, read up on Project HARP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HARP
and also Project Baylon, designed by the same man.
Blimps/balloons and such also have another problem, that they are difficult to keep pointed in the exactly right direction before and during launch of the payload. This doesn't matter as much when 'the edge of space' is the destiny, but when aiming for the moon it gets kind of important.
I only know of ONE system that's capable of reaching a low orbit and that is carried up by a reuseable craft.
The US Navy's anti-satellite missiles...
They're carried by a F-14 Tomcat Twin-engine fighter to it 'service ceiling' (64.000 foot?). When the plane reach that altitude, they keep the nose pointed up and engines at full thrust while launching.
Needless to say, they need to replace those engines afterwards...
Lunar X is a nice idea, but I'm afraid that the Propeller isn't up to the task,at least not all by itself.
The goal isn't just to get a trinket to the moon,but a small rover capable of driving at least 500meters and capable of transmitting video back.
Braino, it's sometimes fun to read what you write, but...
Please consider the forces involved...
.....
Lunar X is a nice idea, but I'm afraid that the Propeller isn't up to the task,at least not all by itself.
The goal isn't just to get a trinket to the moon,but a small rover capable of driving at least 500meters and capable of transmitting video back.
Therefore, its impossible, and no-one should get out of bed, is this the conclusion? I agree, but I'm already up, so I may as well play.
Nobody suggested using the prop all by itself. I was going to add at least one wheel, and maybe some other parts. Maybe a battery.
I was simply breaking down the problem in its constituent parts, to see if any of the sub problems can be solved. Can't drive a rover on the moon if we can't even get a trinket there.
Break the big hard parts into easier pieces, then do the next hardest till we until out of problems, I always say.
You guys do realize that this thread was started in 2007. Brian, me and a few other guys looked into the Lunar X prize, and formed a group called PropelX. Brian built a protoype for the rover, and I wrote an orbital simulator. We investigated radio link budgets and did some thermal analysis. We looked into the problems with radiation and electronics, and investigated rad-hardening techniques and triple-redundancy computing. We investigate various rocket propulsion tecnologies and I build a model rocket that used a gyro and a gimballed motor to test out active stabalization.
In the end, we concluded that the technical hurdles could be overcome, but the biggest hurdle would be getting the millions of dollars of funding needed to procure a launch vehicle and cover the other costs of the mission.
You guys do realize that this thread was started in 2007. Brian, me and a few other guys looked into the Lunar X prize, and formed a group called PropelX. Brian built a protoype for the rover, and I wrote an orbital simulator. We investigated radio link budgets and did some thermal analysis. We looked into the problems with radiation and electronics, and investigated rad-hardening techniques and triple-redundancy computing. We investigate various rocket propulsion tecnologies and I build a model rocket that used a gyro and a gimballed motor to test out active stabalization. In the end, we concluded that the technical hurdles could be overcome, but the biggest hurdle would be getting the millions of dollars of funding needed to procure a launch vehicle and cover the other costs of the mission.
It takes all kinds of people working together on a project like this to make it successful, including engineers and those people strictly on the business side who can lobby for and procure investors. Dave, it sounds like you're already half the way there.
In the end, we concluded that the technical hurdles could be overcome, but the biggest hurdle would be getting the millions of dollars of funding needed to procure a launch vehicle and cover the other costs of the mission.
I, for one, am ALL FOR getting millions of dollars finding. I would even get around to finding a launch vehicle, eventually. Maybe.
Now that I think about it, I could just bring the rover along on my one-way ticket to mars from the other thread. We could just shove it out the door as we fly past.
Of course, then I wouldn't have a place to spend the prize money. Maybe I have to re-think this.
Comments
If the guy with the MIG isn't game, I think a balloon might be easier and cheaper.
A balloon as big as the Hindenburg is big, but its not a problem. And a 1 kg payload is not a problem either. Nobody said it had to be a BIG object, it just has to be something that we can verify reached the moon. It could be a single solar cell and a single chip transmitter. Prop could do this?. I'm sure we could talk somebody with a giant radio telescope array to take a glance at the moon if we think we're there.
How's about lifting a linear accelerator with a balloon? Blast the projectile right through the balloon, straight to the moon! If it doesn't make lunar orbit the first time, repeat until success! We got a lot of props, and balloons are cheap.
Hein nailed the reasons why a blimp can't cut it.
As for "impossible", it's one thing when it's hobbyists tweaking a obscure micro-controller compared to those trying to put say a telemetry package on the moon with near non-existent budget.
As far as a Linear accelerator mounted in a gondola under a blimp. First, find or build on Earth that can place say a .5kg object in orbit. So far no one has.
Please consider the forces involved...
No one can build a linear accellerator capable of launchng anything that far.
And even if they could, no blimp/airhip/zeppeliner would be able to lift it.
And even if one could lift it, it would pop because of the forces experienced...
How much did the accellerator cost?
To get an idea of what is needed to even reach orbit, read up on Project HARP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HARP
and also Project Baylon, designed by the same man.
Blimps/balloons and such also have another problem, that they are difficult to keep pointed in the exactly right direction before and during launch of the payload. This doesn't matter as much when 'the edge of space' is the destiny, but when aiming for the moon it gets kind of important.
I only know of ONE system that's capable of reaching a low orbit and that is carried up by a reuseable craft.
The US Navy's anti-satellite missiles...
They're carried by a F-14 Tomcat Twin-engine fighter to it 'service ceiling' (64.000 foot?). When the plane reach that altitude, they keep the nose pointed up and engines at full thrust while launching.
Needless to say, they need to replace those engines afterwards...
Lunar X is a nice idea, but I'm afraid that the Propeller isn't up to the task,at least not all by itself.
The goal isn't just to get a trinket to the moon,but a small rover capable of driving at least 500meters and capable of transmitting video back.
Therefore, its impossible, and no-one should get out of bed, is this the conclusion? I agree, but I'm already up, so I may as well play.
Nobody suggested using the prop all by itself. I was going to add at least one wheel, and maybe some other parts. Maybe a battery.
I was simply breaking down the problem in its constituent parts, to see if any of the sub problems can be solved. Can't drive a rover on the moon if we can't even get a trinket there.
Break the big hard parts into easier pieces, then do the next hardest till we until out of problems, I always say.
In the end, we concluded that the technical hurdles could be overcome, but the biggest hurdle would be getting the millions of dollars of funding needed to procure a launch vehicle and cover the other costs of the mission.
It takes all kinds of people working together on a project like this to make it successful, including engineers and those people strictly on the business side who can lobby for and procure investors. Dave, it sounds like you're already half the way there.
I, for one, am ALL FOR getting millions of dollars finding. I would even get around to finding a launch vehicle, eventually. Maybe.
Now that I think about it, I could just bring the rover along on my one-way ticket to mars from the other thread. We could just shove it out the door as we fly past.
Of course, then I wouldn't have a place to spend the prize money. Maybe I have to re-think this.