Do you know how much it costs to go to space?
It varies, of course, depending on what’s being sent and where, and what type of infrastructure exists that’s capable of getting whatever you’re sending to wherever you want it to go.
But just to give you an idea, it currently costs about $100,000 to send a standard 3-pound satellite into low Earth orbit. Larger masses can be a little bit more affordable, but can still cost up to $5,000 per pound.
But who cares, right?
That’s a great question. And the answer is everyone. Well, that should be the answer, and I’ll give you two reasons why…
First of all, traveling the cosmos is relatively cheap compared with the cost of actually getting off the planet. That costs a whole lot of dough, and all that money has to come from somewhere.
While it’s true that there are many privately owned space companies out there, there are still plenty of government programs sending people (and things) into space.
In a nutshell, that means when the NSA launches a satellite they plan on using to spy on us, they turn around and hand us a bill.
So reducing the cost of throwing chunks of metal into orbit could mean that more of your tax dollars go toward something you actually care about (but I wouldn’t get my hopes up).
Secondly, space exploration is vital. It’s the future of humanity. And as our presence and activity outside our own atmosphere increases, there will be a massive demand for supplies that we aren’t yet able to produce anywhere else.
Food. Water. Fuel. Building materials. Manufactured goods.
These kinds of supplies will be essential during the infancy of our forays into the stars.
And they’re all heavy.
Lucky for the human race, there are smart people out there trying to solve this problem.
One company, HyperV Technologies Corp., has proposed a “railroad to space using a mechanical hypervelocity launcher to enable large-scale space utilization” that will be only one-hundredth of the cost of the rockets we currently use.
Fancy, I know.
They’re calling it the Slingatron.
The Slingatron is designed to work by “slinging” bulk payloads into orbit using a unique mechanical acceleration approach that can launch payloads at up to 7 kilometers per second, matching the velocity of vehicles that are currently in low Earth orbit (LEO).
If it works on the scale they’re planning, the end result will be a 100% electrically powered, land-based Earth-to-orbit launcher capable of hurling virtually any g-force-resistant payload into orbit.
The math to how it works is somewhat technical, but it basically uses a gyrating spiral rail (hence the train analogy) to harness centripetal force.
By placing the payload at the center and releasing it once the rail has reached launch speed, the payload continues to accelerate as it travels outward on the spiral arm until it’s launched, hopefully into space.
The technology is very promising, and even though they haven’t sent anything into space yet, the company has already successfully built and tested two prototypes, each a scale up from the last.
The Mark I Slingatron was the first demonstration of a spiral launch track, but still using a rolling sphere. They were able to launch a 1-ounce, ¾-inch-diameter steel ball bearing at 152 meters per second.
The Mark II Slingatron was the first attempt at a semi-modular design for launching a heavy sliding payload. With this design, they were able to launch a sliding, half-pound payload at 100 meters per second.
These are impressive results, if you ask me…
Right now the company is running a Kickstarter campaign to raise money for their third prototype, which will be used to launch a quarter-pound payload to 1 kilometer per second. This latest model will be the largest yet, and I’m sure they’re hoping its success will lead to larger-scale funding for research and development.
I, for one, am excited, not just about this idea, but about the face of the future in general. With all these people coming up with so many unique ideas and working so diligently, it seems inevitable that we’ll see a real expansion into space in our lifetime.
For more information on the Slingatron project, check out their Kickstarter page, below.
Here’s to the future,
Patrick Copelandfor Tomorrow in Review
In the United States, a line has been drawn in the sand between areas that cultivate innovation and technology - and the places that refuse to push the envelope. Tomorrow in Review's Josh Grasmick explains the economic impact of allowing innovation to flourish.
Patrick Copeland is a copywriter for Agora Financial and writes an editorial that is published in Tomorrow in Review. Before working for Agora, he worked as a freelance writer, writing mostly for the fitness and hydroponics industries.
This has been a rough week for the stock market. Almost everything is down, and only a handful of stocks are propping up the major indexes. Is this just a typical October slump? Or is there more to it than that? Today, Greg Guenthner shows you how to navigate these markets heading into the final trading months of the year. Read on...
There have been quite a few disappointing numbers in the global economy recently. But as these numbers are just economic "snowflakes" building toward a financial avalanche. All you need is one to push it over the edge. And as Dave Gonigam explains, the deciding snowflake may come from Switzerland. Read on...
After the 2008 financial crisis, little could be heard over the deafening cries of "mission accomplished." And while the Fed's massive QE program seemed to work, the question remains: for how long? Addison Wiggin explains why the next round of QE will fail miserably, paving the way for the IMF to step in with something called "special drawing rights." Read on...
Global warming is one of the most debated subjects of the last few years. But regardless of whether you're a "true believer" or a merely an unconvinced skeptic, there are significant ways to make serious money from this controversial topic. Today, Addison Wiggin brings you three of them. Read on...
Under the auspices of benefiting public health, the government has been administering medication to you and your family for generations. But is it really necessary? Or worse... Could it actually be harmful? Chris Campbell takes a closer look at this, and other personal health decisions the feds don't trust you to make...
The inflation vs. deflation debate is a heated one. Heck, it almost brought Peter Schiff and Harry Dent to blows. But at the core of this debate is a common misunderstanding of the nature of both inflation and deflation. Today, Jim Mosquera seeks to explain each... and which one the U.S. is more likely to experience. Read on...