The Moon or Mars?

There have been a lot of articles in the news about either returning to the Moon or going to Mars of late.  I think they are great.  Either destination is fine as long as we build the infrastructure that will make spaceflight affordable to everyone in the process.

My reasons for this are simple; whichever program we choose, I don’t want it to be canceled after a handful of missions due to excessive cost like the Apollo program was.  If we make spaceflight really affordable the program will continue and people will find a way to make money in space.  Once that happens we will be on our way towards building a spacefaring civilization and there will be no turning back.

Returning to the Moon or going to Mars without building the infrastructure to make spaceflight affordable will only result in another canceled program and another 40 to 50-year wait before we try again.  The reason for this is simple.  Currently, it costs over $12,000 per pound to go to the International Space Station.  You can check this yourself by going to the SpaceX website and looking up the cost of flying the Falcon 9 launch vehicle.  It is $62 million per flight.  If you look up the amount of useful payload that it can deliver to the International Space Station, the answer is 5,000 pounds.  $62 million divided by 5,000 equals $12,400 per pound.

Another example is the Space Launch System, NASA’s new heavy-lift rocket that is currently in the process of being developed.  The Block 1 version of this rocket is supposed to be able to lift 150,000 pounds into low Earth orbit.  The cost per flight is estimated to be $1.86 billion.  That also comes out to $12,400 per pound.

The Saturn V rocket that was used to go to the Moon in the 1960s would launch 3 astronauts and 140,000 kilograms into low Earth orbit for each Moon mission.  That is a little over 300,000 pounds or 100,000 pounds per astronaut.  100,000 times 12,400 equals $1.24 billion per astronaut in today’s dollars to go to the Moon.  You can be sure that sending an astronaut to Mars will cost more than that.  Even if the reusable first stage rocket technology that is being developed by SpaceX and Blue Origin is able to reduce the cost of getting into Earth orbit by half, the cost per astronaut for going to either the Moon or Mars will still be in excess of $600 million per person.  That is a lot of money.  So much money that no one has been able to come up with a commercial activity in space that can make enough money to justify the expense of manned spaceflight.

As much as I want to see us build a spacefaring civilization, it just isn’t going to happen with launch costs this high.  Anyone who tells you otherwise is either living in a fantasy world or expects to make money on it via government contracts.

So what can we do?

There are 3 things we need to do to make spaceflight affordable if we want to build a spacefaring civilization.

First, build a combination launch system that includes either an air-launched reusable first stage rocket for flying to the lower end of a non-rotating Skyhook or build a 600 MPH ground accelerator for launching a reusable first stage rocket to a non-rotating Skyhook.

Second, build a reusable spacecraft for launching from the upper end of the Skyhook for going either to the Moon or to Mars, as well as single stage reusable lander for the Moon or Mars.

Third, build outpost space stations with local sources of propellant for refueling those spacecraft and landers.

It doesn’t all have to be built at once.  It can be built a piece at a time with jointly funded government/industry programs.  SpaceX and Blue Origin are working on reusable rockets.  Vulcan Inc. is developing the Stratolaunch carrier aircraft for air-launching launch vehicles.  Bigelow Aerospace is developing inflatable space stations.  NASA is building the Orion spacecraft for cis-lunar spaceflight and possibly for going to Mars.  And finally, the US Air Force is developing a Maglev test track that could be used to accelerate a launch vehicle up to 600 MPH.

What else do we need?

Vulcan Inc. needs to develop a horizontal landing reusable first stage launch vehicle for its Stratolaunch carrier aircraft, and either NASA or Bigelow Aerospace needs to add a 200-kilometer long tether to the International Space Station or to a Bigelow space station along the lines of the one shown in this video.

Air-launching and the 200-kilometer long Skyhook will reduce the cost to orbit to 1/3 of what it is today, from $12,000 per pound to $4,000 per pound.  Making the air-launched first stage reusable should reduce the cost to $2,000 per pound.  Increase the length of the Skyhook to 380 kilometers and the cost will drop to $1,500 per pound.  Continue making the Skyhook longer and the price drops even more.  Once the Skyhook is long enough that the upper end is moving at close to escape velocity it becomes possible to place an Orion spacecraft on a free-return orbit to the Moon without the need for an expendable upper stage.  Add a single stage reusable lunar lander and an outpost space station in lunar orbit and now we have an affordable transportation system for going to the Moon.

Before the Space Shuttle was retired we had the beginnings of a space tourism industry with people like Dennis Tito flying to the International Space Station.  The cost for such a flight was $20 million.  An air-launched reusable first stage launch vehicle flying to the lower end of a 380-kilometer long Skyhook equipped space station would cost 1/8th of that, or approximately $2.5 million.  Obviously, there will be more people wanting to go into space at that price than for what Dennis Tito paid.  Increased demand for flights will justify additional investment in the Skyhook to make it longer as a longer Skyhook will decrease the price even more.  Every time the price goes down the demand for flights will increase.  The increased demand will lead to further increases in the length of the Skyhook.  Eventually, it will reduce the cost of a ride to orbit to $20,000 per person.  That is what I call affordable to everyone spaceflight.

As the number of people in orbit increases, it will eventually become economically worthwhile to develop an off-planet source of consumables such as water and oxygen.  No matter how affordable the combination launch system becomes, it will always be more affordable to get basics such as water, oxygen, and shielding materials from either the Moon or an asteroid due to the lower energy requirements for going to those places.  Once we have access to those materials, building farm modules for growing food in space will also become worthwhile.

Having a NASA program for returning to the Moon or going to Mars will speed up the development of the combination launch system due to the increased demand for flights.  This will speed up the pace of development in commercial manned spaceflight as well as reduce the cost of the NASA program.  It is a win-win combination that will propel us into the solar system and kickstart the building of a spacefaring civilization.

We are that close to making it all happen.

Ad Astra

Dreams of Space

What are your dreams of space?

People have dreamed about building cities on the Moon and Mars for years.

Some people even dream of making Mars into an earthlike planet – a true second home for mankind.

Others want to go asteroid mining so as to bring home the wealth of the solar system.

There are others who want to build cities in the stars, O’Neill style space colonies scattered throughout the solar system, to develop a truly space based civilization.

They are all worthy and wonderful dreams.  Yet none of them will happen until a way is found to make space travel affordable to everyone.  Affordable to the individual spaceflight is the foundation of all these dreams if any of them are ever to be made real.

Affordable to everyone spaceflight is not just about the big dreams, it is also about the personal dreams of every person who has the courage to dream.  For some, that personal dream might be to spend a week or two in an orbiting hotel watching the Earth pass by underneath.

For others, it might be to get a job in one of the orbiting factories or research stations so as to become part of the new frontier.

Then there are those who dream of starting their own business in space such as a repair and refueling service for satellites that orbit the Earth or to build a farm module where they can make a living growing food for the people who live and work in space.

Other still might dream of getting a job in space so they can use their spare time to build a small spaceship that will allow them to homestead an asteroid.

The possibilities are endless.  The only limitation is your imagination and how hard you are willing to work.

Whatever your dreams of space are, affordable to everyone spaceflight is what will make them possible.  Without it, all these dreams, both large and small, will remain forever unattainable.

Isn’t it time we built a combination launch system that will make all this possible?

Outpost Space Stations

The idea of using a network of outpost space stations (also known as deep space habitats) scattered around the solar system to assist in making manned spaceflight between the planets affordable has been around for at least 25 years.  Who came up with the idea originally I don’t know, but it is an idea that has its roots in the network of coaling stations that were built all around the world for refueling steamships back in the 1800s.  The steam engines that powered the early steamships were not very efficient and they burned a lot of coal.  So much coal that if a ship had to carry the coal for an entire voyage there wasn’t much room left for cargo to pay for the voyage.  To solve this problem coaling stations were built at strategic locations all around the world so that the steamships would only have to carry enough coal for the journey to the next station.  This reduced the steamship’s propellant fraction and increased its payload fraction, which reduced the cost of shipping people and cargo all around the world to an amount that just about anyone could afford.

This idea also applies to automobiles.  The average automobile only carries enough fuel to give it a range of about 300 miles.  Not a lot of range if you are planning a cross-country trip.  If it was necessary to design a car so that it could go across the country and back on a single tank of fuel, the car would be much larger and much more expensive to build, buy, and operate.  So much more expensive that very few people could afford them.  To solve this problem, a network of gas stations was built around the country.  It is the existence of this network of gas stations that makes automobiles so effective and affordable.  They decrease the car’s propellant fraction and increase its payload fraction.

This is what outpost space stations are about.  They are the refueling stations on the trade routes to the planets and asteroids.  They allow the spaceships traveling between the planets and asteroids around the solar system to only carry the propellant that is needed to travel to the next outpost space station along the route.  This reduces the amount of propellant the spaceship needs to carry and allows it to carry a much larger payload.  This reduces the cost of space travel to an amount that just about anyone can afford.

An example of this are the spaceships that were designed by Wernher von Braun for going to Mars in 1948.  These ships were designed for four major propulsive events: first, to accelerate from Earth orbit velocity to Mars transfer orbit velocity; second, to decelerate from Mars transfer orbit velocity to Mars orbit velocity; third, to accelerate from Mars orbit velocity to Earth transfer orbit velocity; and fourth, to decelerate from Earth transfer orbit velocity to Earth orbit velocity.  The total amount of change in velocity required for these four maneuvers is 11.48 kilometers per second.  The amount of propellant required to do this using the low-performance rocket motors of the day required that the spaceships be over 98 percent propellant when departing from Earth orbit.  This meant the empty weight of the spaceship, plus the weight of the crew and all their supplies and equipment, had to be less than 2 percent of the departure mass.  In all of human history, no one has ever come close to building any type of vehicle with a propellant fraction that high and with an empty weight fraction that low.  Even if it were possible to build such a vehicle with existing technology, it would not be affordable on a commercial basis due to the extremely low payload fraction.

Now assume a non-rotating Skyhook in Earth orbit that has an upper endpoint velocity of just short of Earth escape velocity, an outpost space station at the Earth-Moon L2 Lagrange Point with a local source of propellant (either the Moon or a near-Earth asteroid that has been moved to L2), and a non-rotating Skyhook in Mars orbit that has an upper endpoint velocity of just short of Mars escape velocity as well as a local source of propellant (either Mars or one of the Martian moons), and look at what happens to the change in velocity requirement and the propellant fraction of an Earth-Mars spaceship.

Passengers and cargo bound for Mars, fly to the lower end of the Skyhook that is in Earth orbit using the fully reusable combination launch system described in previous posts.  From there they transfer to the upper end of the Skyhook where they transfer to the spaceship that will take them to the outpost space station at the Earth-Moon L2 Lagrange Point where they board the Earth-Mars spaceship.

On the day of departure, the Earth-Mars spaceship leaves the halo orbit at L2 and heads toward Earth where it will perform a gravitational slingshot maneuver as it accelerates to Mars transfer orbit velocity.  The change in velocity for these two maneuvers is approximately 1,500 meters per second.  When the Earth-Mars spaceship gets to Mars it slows down to just under Mars escape velocity and enters a high Mars orbit.  The change in velocity required for this maneuver is approximately 900 meters per second.  The total change in velocity required for this voyage is 2.4 kilometers per second.  That is 1/5th the amount of change in velocity required by the spaceships used in Wernher von Braun’s original Mars fleet.  This difference is due to both the Skyhooks and the outpost space stations with local sources of propellant at both Earth and Mars.

The transfer of passengers and cargo from the Earth-Mars spaceship to Mars will be performed by smaller spacecraft operating from the upper end of the Martian Skyhook using locally supplied propellant.  These spacecraft will also be used to carry locally supplied propellant to the Earth-Mars spaceship for its return trip to Earth.  If it is assumed that the Earth-Mars spaceship uses existing LOX/LH2 chemical rocket motors with oversized expansion nozzles (a specific impulse of 480 seconds), the propellant fraction for the journey to Mars will be 40 percent.  This will leave plenty of room in the mass budget for the Earth-Mars spaceship to make it completely reusable (no drop-off propellant tanks or stages), allow for a spinning section with artificial gravity for the crew and passengers, a hydroponics garden for fresh vegetables, plus plenty of radiation shielding.  If it is assumed that the empty weight fraction for this Earth-Mars spaceship is 40 percent of the departure mass, that will leave 20 percent for the payload.

If a nuclear thermal rocket motor that uses water for reaction mass is used for the propulsion system for the Earth-Mars spaceship, the propellant fraction for the trip to Mars drops to 25 percent and the payload fraction increases to 35 percent.  When used with a combination launch system that includes an escape velocity capable Skyhook, either of these Earth-Mars spaceships would make a trip to Mars mass market affordable on a commercial basis and would operate at a profit for the owners.

Either of these spaceships would also be capable of making trips to the asteroid belt, and to dwarf planets like Ceres, both affordable and possible.  Put an outpost space station in orbit around Ceres with a reusable lander that has the ability to lift water from the surface of Ceres into orbit, and these spaceships would have the ability to take a manned expedition to the moons of Jupiter and to explore the Greek and Trojan asteroids.

As hard as this might be to believe, we really are on the cusp of another Great Age of Exploration.  Only this time, instead of exploring a single planet, we will have people exploring the entire solar system.  All that is required is a combination launch system with a Skyhook and a couple of outpost space stations.  It truly is the beginning of our reaching out to the stars.

Mars: how to get there

The first technically feasible idea for going to Mars was proposed by Wernher von Braun over 65 years ago.  It consisted of a fleet of 10 chemical rocket powered spaceships that were to be assembled in Earth orbit.  Total crew size for the fleet was 70 people.

mars-project-1

the-mars-project

slideshow01

It was an incredible vision.

Total planned Earth orbit departure mass for the fleet was 37,200 metric tons.  That is 90 times the mass of the International Space Station that currently orbits the Earth.  It was also a use once fleet.

Obviously, cost was a very significant issue.

So people began looking for ways to reduce the cost to something that was actually affordable.

One of the first follow-on proposals was the solar electric Sun Ship.

This was followed by the nuclear electric Umbrella Ship.

After that came the nuclear electric Mars Ion Rocket.

All of these were significant improvements over von Braun’s original proposal, but they were still too expensive.

There have been many others.

 

Back in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s, “Project Orion” studied the idea of using nuclear pulse propulsion.  This was a concept that used small nuclear bombs and a pusher plate to accelerate a spacecraft.  It was a great idea in that it offered both high thrust and high performance.  Unfortunately, it also meant mass producing thousands of small easily transported nuclear bombs.

 

Nuclear thermal powered rockets are another type of spacecraft that have been considered for going to Mars.

 

Variable thrust ion rockets, otherwise known as VASIMR (Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket), are another.

They all work.  They all have advantages and disadvantages.  Unfortunately, none of them are affordable enough to make large scale colonization or trips by private individuals possible.

So what is the answer?

A big part of the problem is that all of these spacecraft have to carry the propellant and supplies for a round trip.  Afterall, there are no gas stations and grocery stores in space.  This leads us to the ideas of outpost space stations, local sources of propellant, prepositioned supplies, and cycler spacecraft.

 

and someday . . . Starships

Look at what has happened to aviation since the Wright brothers made their first powered flight.  Look at how it has changed the world.

Imagine what will happen over the next 100 years once spaceflight becomes affordable to everyone.  Imagine how that will change the world.

Will we return to the Moon and go to Mars?

Will we mine the asteroids and build space colonies?

Without a doubt.

Will there be starships?

I think so.  Unmanned probes on one-way missions at first, and maybe crewed ships sometime after that assuming the EmDrive really does work.

oosgudestinydeck

If the EmDrive does work, imagine a space colony equipped with a nuclear electric EmDrive that is capable of accelerating to 20% of light speed.  Such a ship could make the trip to Alpha Centauri in 20 to 25 years.

It will be awhile before that happens.  First, we will need to build the affordable to everyone combination launch system followed by developing the infrastructure for building space colonies.  That will take some time.  But once that happens, star travel won’t be far behind.

Between now and then, we will have to make do with watching videos like these.  Obviously not the same as the real thing, but it sure is fun to think about what the future might be like as we watch them.

 

Outward Bound: Beyond Low Earth Orbit

Once a combination launch system that includes a Skyhook has been built and orbiting hotels and factories are in the process of being built, where do we go next?  Low Earth orbit is only two hundred to three hundred miles up, and some astronauts have described low Earth orbit spaceflight as “skimming the cloud tops.”  By comparison, the Moon is 240,000 miles away and Mars is measured in many millions of miles.  Based on this, low Earth orbit is the equivalent of standing on our doorstep.

So again, where do we go next in our outward bound journey?

s93_45585

Some people want to return to the Moon to mine it for water, oxygen, minerals, helium 3, and as practice before going to Mars.

1024px-artist_concept_-_astronaut_performs_tethering_maneuvers_at_asteroid

Some people want to explore the near Earth asteriods with the idea of either mining them or moving them closer to the Earth where they could be processed.

EM6

Others want to build an outpost space station near the Moon that would serve as a jumping of point for trips to the Moon, the near Earth asteroids, and eventually to Mars.

pressurized_rovers_on_mars

Some people want to go directly to Mars,

and some want to build space colonies and satellite solar power stations.

The one thing that all of these ideas have in common is the need to go from low Earth orbit to escape velocity.  It takes a lot of velocity to do that. Velocity that requires an upper stage and a lot of propellant.  Building an upper stage, filling it with propellant and lifting it into low Earth orbit costs a lot of money even when using a combination launch system.  Even if you make the upper stage reusable you would still have to launch another load of propellant to refill it and use it again, and the propellant would still have to be contained in tanks.  Bottom line, making the upper stage reusable doesn’t save you very much.  So how do we make going from low Earth orbit to escape velocity as affordable as going from the surface of the Earth to orbit on a combination launch system?

The answer to this is the Skyhook that was built for the combination launch system.

In the same way that the lower end of the Skyhook cable is moving at less than orbital velocity for its altitude, the upper end of the Skyhook cable is moving faster than orbital velocity for its altitude.  Once the Skyhook is long enough, the upper end of the Skyhook cable will be moving at escape velocity.  That means that a spacecraft that releases from the upper end of the Skyhook cable can be placed on a free return orbit to the Moon, on a path to an outpost space station at L-2, or on an escape trajectory to a near Earth asteroid without the need to use an upper stage or any of its onboard propellant.  In other words, the upper end of the Skyhook will make low Earth orbit to escape velocity spaceflight affordable to everyone.

Once we have this we won’t need to choose between the Moon, Mars, or the asteroids as we will be able to afford all of them all on a commercial basis as profit making ventures.

 

Combination Launch Systems, part 2

Component One    The first component in a combination launch system is a choice between using an air assisted launch as shown in this video

or a ground assisted launch as shown in this picture.

argus2

As with any concept, there are advantages and disadvantages to both of these systems.  Some of the advantages and disadvantages are technical, some are operational, some are financial, some of them vary depending on the other components of the combination launch system, and some are political.  There are also a number of design variations to both of these systems, the selection of which is usually determined by the specific needs and goals of the developer.  For example, air assisted launch can be either subsonic or supersonic, ground assisted launch can be on rails, with maglev, or trackless.  Ground assisted launch can also be enclosed in a tunnel as shown in the picture, out in the open on a mountainside, or on a vertical tower.

Component Two    The second key component in a combination launch system is making the launch vehicle reusable.  There are a number of ways this can be done with the best choice being determined by the total amount of velocity reduction that is made possible by the air assist/ground assist launch, the non-rotating Skyhook (component three), and the type of propulsion system being used on the launch vehicle (component four).  If it is an all-rocket powered launch vehicle with an entry level length Skyhook, the best choice for the initial launch vehicle will be a reusable first stage/expendable upper stage configuration.  If air-launched, the launch vehicle will use a winged horizontal landing first stage, if ground accelerator launched on a steep enough track so that wings are not needed, a vertical landing first stage like the ones being developed by SpaceX and Blue Origin will be best.

xs1-640x353

As the length of the Skyhook is increased and the velocity reduction for the launch vehicle increases, it will become possible to combine the expendable upper stage of the launch vehicle with the spacecraft.  This will make the launch vehicle into a fully reusable two stage to Skyhook launch system which will further reduce the cost of getting to orbit.  As the Skyhook continues to be made longer and the velocity reduction increases even more, it will eventually become possible to make the launch vehicle into a single stage to Skyhook vehicle.  This will reduce the cost of getting into space even more.

Component Three    The third key component in a combination launch system is a non-rotating Skyhook (see section 3.2.1 on page 7).  A non-rotating Skyhook is a vertically oriented cable that is attached to a space station.  Since the speed of orbit goes down with increasing altitude, the lower end of the cable is moving at less than orbital velocity for its altitude, and the upper end of the cable is moving faster than orbital velocity for its altitude.  The end result it that a launch vehicle arriving at the lower end of the cable does not have to go as fast as it would need to without the Skyhook.  This reduced velocity requirement allows the launch vehicle to carry a larger payload which reduces the cost of getting to orbit.

non-rotating_skyhook_with_spaceplane

A non-rotating Skyhook works on the same principles as an Earth surface to geostationary orbit Space Elevator.  The main differences beyween them are that the Skyhook is much shorter, it does not reach down to the surface of the Earth, and it can be affordable built with currently existing materials and technology.

Component Four   The fourth key component in a combination launch system is a combination air-breathing and rocket motor propulsion system.  This works by reducing the amount of oxidizer the launch vehicle needs to carry which makes for a smaller and more affordable launch vehicle.  The reduced propellant requirement also increases the payload fraction and thereby reduces the cost to orbit.

There are many ways to make a combination air-breathing and rocket motor propulsion system.  They can be rocket/ramjet combinations, ducted rocket/ramjet combinations, ducted rocket/ramjet/scramjet combinations, and so on.  All of them have different costs, different weights, and different performance advantages.  Some of them will require extensive development effort, some will not.  The one that reduces the cost to orbit the most will depend on the details of all the other components of the combination launch system, the amount of development work required, and the flight rate.

step1lg

air-breathing-rocket

gtx-5880trefny-f2

air-breathing_rocket_spaceplane_9906267

 

The Call of an Unlimited Future

In 2014, Erik Wernquist released a short film about his vision of our future called “Wanderers”.  It shows an incredible and wondrous future that sets no limits on what we can do and on what we might become.  Every bit of it is within our reach.  The only thing that is missing is the vision on how to make that first step, the step from the surface of the Earth to orbit and to escape velocity, affordable to everyone.

Think about that as you watch it.

All it will take to make this happen in the real world are the four components of a combination launch system.  Components that can be affordably built right now with existing materials and technology.       Four components that will give us an unlimited future.

In the closing lines of the film, it says,

“Maybe it’s a little early, maybe the time is not quite yet, but those are the worlds promising untold opportunity.  [They] beckon.  Silently they orbit the sun . . . . waiting.”

Why are we waiting?

 

Visions of the Future

Where are we headed, as individuals, as a civilization?

What does the future hold in store for all of us?

Will we destroy ourselves in a nuclear war?

Will our civilization collapse due to overpopulation?

Will we muddle on with an ever growing divide between the haves and the have-nots?

Or will we take the next step and build a spacefaring civilization that sets no limits on what we might become?

We have been exploring space on a limited basis for over 50 years.  Limited because of the cost.  All the dreams and visions of large commercial passenger-carrying spaceships traveling between the planets, of cities on the Moon and Mars, of asteroid mining, and of space colonies scattered throughout the solar system, have remained dreams due to the high cost of spaceflight.  Isn’t it time we came up with a workable vision on how to make spaceflight affordable to everyone?  A vision that can be affordably built right now with existing technology?

Lunar City

Building a space transportation system that is affordable to everyone will allow us to make all of these dreams into reality.

cloud-city

Seriously, what other choice do we have?

The ideas and technologies that will make spaceflight affordable to everyone have existed for a long time.

The first component consists of choosing between air assisted launch or a ground assisted launch.  Two ideas that have been around for a long time.

The second component is making the launch vehicle reusable.

The third component is some form of a combination air-breathing and rocket motor propulsion system.

The fourth component is a non-rotating Skyhook with an ion propulsion system.

These four components, when used together, will reduce the cost of going to orbit from the current price of over $20 million per person to $20,000 per person.  And the best part of all this is that all four of these components can be affordably built with currently existing materials and technology, right now, today, no waiting.

 

It’s All About Speed!

When a rocket takes off from the surface of the Earth and flies into orbit it increases its velocity by approximately 9,100 meters per second.  That breaks down to 7,800 meters per second for the speed of orbit and 1,300 meters per second for drag and gravity losses.  That is a lot of speed and it takes a lot of propellant to go that fast.

An example of just how much propellant is required is the Space Shuttle.  Sitting on the launch pad waiting to take-off, the Space Shuttle was 85% propellant, 14% launch vehicle, and 1% payload.  If Earth to orbit spaceflight is ever going to be affordable to everyone, the launch vehicle will need to be both fully reusable, and able to carry a large enough payload that it makes it worth all the trouble.  Up to now that has not been possible.  To make the Space Shuttle fully reusable it would have been necessary to make it both larger and heavier which would have required a larger propellant fraction and that would have made the payload go to zero.  Obviously, not a very workable solution.

This is where reducing the speed to orbit comes in.

There are a number of ways to do this.  One is to use a ground accelerator that is located on the side of a tall mountain to boost the launch vehicle up to 600 MPH before starting its engines.  This reduces the speed to orbit in two ways, by the speed added to the launch vehicle by the ground accelerator, and by reducing the drag and gravity losses that would have been incurred by the launch vehicle if it had accelerated to this speed and altitude on its own.

Another way to reduce the speed to orbit is to use a Skyhook at the upper end of the flight profile.  Skyhooks can be short or long.  The best way to use a Skyhook is to start small while the flight rate is low and gradually grow it into a longer and stronger version as demand increases.  For this example, a short Skyhook, like the one shown in this video was selected.

The total velocity reduction made possible by the 600 MPH ground accelerator and 200-kilometer long basic Skyhook used in this example is 1,060 meters per second.  This reduction in velocity will triple the amount of useful payload that can be delivered to the Skyhook compared to the same expendable launch vehicle flying to a space station without a ground accelerator or Skyhook.  Increasing the amount of useful payload by a factor of three will reduce the cost to orbit to 1/3 of what it was without the ground accelerator and Skyhook.  If it is assumed that the first stage of this launch vehicle is made reusable like the first stage of the Falcon 9, it then becomes reasonable to assume an additional 50% reduction in launch costs.  This will reduce the cost to orbit to 1/6 of the cost of flying the expendable version of this launch vehicle without the ground accelerator and Skyhook.

And this is only the beginning.  The longer the Skyhook becomes the lower the price becomes.  Once the Skyhook is long enough it then becomes possible to use a fully reusable single stage launch vehicle that will reduce the cost even more.  Best of all, the 600 MPH ground accelerator, the basic Skyhook, the reusable first stage launch vehicle, they can all be affordably built right now with existing materials and technology.

For more information about this and other related cost reducing concepts, read the book “Opening the High Frontier”.