Space Shot Catapult Out of Fighter Jets.

People had great hopes in the beginning to mid 20th century. Lots of imaginative works were produced; novels, movies, screenplays to name a few. Apollo missions to the moon were the living proof of space advancement and incited great interest. Then everything fizzled away, even Hollywood started to cut corners when producing Science fiction movies especially involving space exploration. Most people feel as though space exploration will be in a great distant future and that they will never live that long to experience it. Rocket technology is prohibitively expensive and unreliable. Increasing production in rocket sector will increase its cost and at the same time decrease the demand for the rocket services. The jet technology is by far more efficient than rocketry. They have much greater propellant body atmosphere; they bite in with their turbines to produce cheaper thrust. Also, jets use atmospheric oxygen to oxidize its fuel.

The rocket need to be used as a ~2nd-to-3rd~ stage. In other words the rocket will be catapulted with other means to compensate for the 1st stage. To imagine a simple model of this idea is to think of two aircraft pulling a projectile on two cables each couple miles long. As the aircrafts reach their maximum speed they spread apart and fly that way but still pull the projectile just for a short time. The cables will look like a ‘v’ with its sharp point at the projectile dragging behind. Afterwards the aircrafts will swing back but now the ‘v’ tension helps them to swing towards the center of the long axis of travel. As they fly through the center they keep on going because they need this sideways momentum and keep on turning so as to make their velocity close to perpendicular to the long axis. This will mimic the effects of a bow whet it shoots an arrow. The aircrafts will mostly be stopped against the mass of the projectile by the cables. This method is similar but not the same as classical aircraft-launch proposed. It is a catapult.

These aircrafts need to be fighter jets, namely the F-14, F-15, SU-27, or Mig-29. They will provide kinetic energy from its jet technology, and in addition they will use its agile airframe to mimic the limbs of a bow. These jets and the rocket may takeoff from the rail-carriage. Initially, the rail-carriage may be pushed by a fast train then the jets will fire up and propel that carriage and rocket away from the pusher-train to yet greater speeds. Lets say the rocket weighs 30t and there are six aircraft weighing 20t each, so the total mass 150t. This package achieves 2,000km/h, theoretically, or by very simple calculations the speed of the projectile will be 2,000X150=300,000/30=10,000km/h. That will be enough for a 1st stage and the energy loss associated with this catapult will probably be close to 30-40%. The jets can fly faster than 2,000km/h up to 2500km/h. Plus adding two more jets and bringing the speed at round 2300km/h should send 30t at 10,000km/h. The liftoff velocity should be roughly double the normal liftoff for safety considerations. Doubling the velocity will provide redundancy in case if one jet malfunctions or during high crosswinds.

Sorry for probably sounding a bit harsh, but

in which reality is this a better idea than the classic carrier-plane configuration?

Examples:
Pegasus
WK1 & SS1
WK2 & SS2


oh and btw: increased production does neiher increase the cost of a rocket nor decrease the demand for rockets, where did you come up with that one?

Thanks,
Classic carrier-plane confuguration does not work as a catapult. This works as a bow (planes) and arrow (rocket). In this case the 1st stage will be forgone completely and the kinetic energy harvested from jet power is more efficient and much, much cheaper. No, you didn't sound harsh at all, we are here to critic one another.
Eugene Kovalenko

Here you go guy
http://space.skyrocket.de/index_frame.h ... /nots1.htm
That should wet your whistle.
I have lost information about this project. This project was top secret until 1995 all the way back from 1958 this information is part of the basis of our N-Prize attempt. At some point in the near future I intend to release that information once we have tested our full scale motors.

Monroe

P.S. This one is a dud I believe. The wire or web would be way too heavy and way to much drag not counting the payload and the sling shot would not be effective enough. I have seen a sparrow missile drag from a three mile long line attached to a fighter at our ship the USS Antietam and saw the phalanx cut the line and then scatter the pieces as the missile dove for our deck. Another interesting event was a booster from a tomahawk nearly missed us after a launch.

The link that you provided is not the same to what I explained. The wire or the cable will be heavy, that's not a question. Initially, when I came up with the idea I thought that the cables will be made out of carbon fibers, but then reconsidered. The cables used may be steel cables and may be around 10 tonnes each. This weight actually is helpful, - instead of loading the jets with on-board weight, - the cables will be that extra weight. I suspect that as the jets will turn the cables will follow them nicely because the cables' aerodynamics. The jets will have to be pilot-less and modified to withstand sudden stop of roughly 20gs.