🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan11.202452.16251@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>,
kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov wrote:
> 
> 
> You also has to survive the launch.  With accellerations up to 5
> million G, temperatures in the 1000's C range, and some of the most
> serious electrical and magnetic fields you can find anywhere, you
> wouldn't want to be fired out of a rail gun.  Nor would you want to
> try to design a payload which could be fired out of a rail gun.
> 
> ...
> We now return you to discussions about the PEACEFUL use of space.
> 

You're probably right, but perhaps we just aren't being imaginative enough.
First, couldn't an aluminum or steel ingot survive this g-load without
deforming too badly? I can think of a few peaceful uses for a whole bunch
of these in orbit...  Second, is there no alternative to a rocket burn for
orbit stabilization?  How about giving the ingot a lifting body shape with
a very simple control, like a radio-controlled explosive charge that
deforms a control surface when detonated?  A satellite could precisely
determine the ingot's orbit, then deform the control surface at just the
right time during a skip off the atmosphere.

I highly doubt that what I described would be economical, or even work at
all.  Still, it makes me wonder if we should write mass drivers off just
yet.

Stu Schaffner, not speaking for
The MITRE Corp.
(And not involved professionally in this kind of stuff at all)
sch@mitre.org