Community > Forum > Wirefly X Prize Cup > magic altitudes etc.?

magic altitudes etc.?

Posted by: Ekkehard Augustin - Mon Aug 30, 2004 10:59 am
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 13 posts ] 
magic altitudes etc.? 
Author Message
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post magic altitudes etc.?   Posted on: Mon Aug 30, 2004 10:59 am
The altitude of 100 km is a magic altitude because it's defined as the beginning of space.

Are there additional magic altitudes like this except the geostationary altitude? If yes a list of these altitudes might be interesting as goals further increasing the XPRIZE CUP competition for maximum altitude. They would be something the public and the competing teams could look at with the question in mind " Who will reach that magic altitude first?" and at least some teams may be struggling for the next magic altitude.

What about magicals concerning maximum number of passengers during one flight, fastest turn-around-time etc.?

What about this idea? What might be the criteria?



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:09 pm
Posts: 485
Location: Maastricht, The Netherlands
Post    Posted on: Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:57 am
Complete geostatic orbit altitude off course :D

(though i dont have a clue how high that is....)


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Tue Aug 31, 2004 1:35 pm
36.000 km is geostationary.

But there may be additional magic altitudes to be identified I suppose. Which do you propose and what are their characteristics and their advantages?



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 1:42 pm
Posts: 59
Post    Posted on: Sat Sep 04, 2004 1:03 pm
The obvious one is ISS orbital altitude. (350km). Even if the X-Cup vehicle doesn't achieve orbital *velocity*, it's still good publicity, and NASA will doubtless make encouraging noises about station replenishment contracts.

Passenger capacity: First vehicle to carry more people in a single launch than the Shuttle does (seven).

Turnaround: First vehicle to turn round in 24 hours. First vehicle to turn round in 1 hour ('kick the tires, light the fires', which Armadillo might actually accomplish).


Back to top
Profile
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
avatar
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:56 am
Posts: 1104
Location: Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA
Post    Posted on: Sat Sep 04, 2004 9:56 pm
Y'all can have your magic numbers. My magic number is the first vehicle to make it to Mars. I don't care who's making that ship, or how much it costs; I'm buying one.

_________________
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Daniel Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering

In Memoriam...
Apollo I - Soyuz I - Soyuz XI - STS-51L - STS-107


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 4:01 am
Posts: 747
Location: New Zealand
Post    Posted on: Mon Sep 06, 2004 3:23 am
Ya have the radiation belts... Each of thems is an important altitude, possibly more so than being "offically" in space because you are suddenly "offically being fried".

_________________
What goes up better doggone well stay up! - Morgan Gravitronics, Company Slogan.


Back to top
Profile ICQ YIM
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 9:09 pm
Posts: 268
Location: Orlando, FL
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 07, 2004 2:25 am
idiom wrote:
Ya have the radiation belts... Each of thems is an important altitude, possibly more so than being "offically" in space because you are suddenly "offically being fried".


Very eloquently put... Fried space kabobs. :P

_________________
University of Central Florida
Industrial Engineering Dept.
Class of 2010

UCF-LM CWEP Intern
Lockheed Martin Orlando
Missiles & Fire Control


Back to top
Profile YIM WWW
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Mon Sep 20, 2004 1:37 pm
I myself add the distance of 43.000 km an asteroid passed earth at earlier this year. Are there more distances of asteroids passing earth closer than 50.000 km in the past?

These altitudes/distances are "magic" because they are providing realistic possibilities for initial mining.

What else to add?



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Last edited by Ekkehard Augustin on Tue Sep 21, 2004 7:27 am, edited 2 times in total.



Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 1:42 pm
Posts: 59
Post    Posted on: Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:45 pm
Shuttle maximum operating altitude (600km). "Hey NASA, we can go higher than you can, so ner" :twisted:


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Wed Sep 22, 2004 12:13 pm
What might be magic velocities? Orbit velocity of the moon? Escape velocity at moon, Mars or Earth? GEO-velocity? Velocities of those asteroids passing Earth at the closest distances? ...

...

Seems to be relevant concerning private mining of asteroids or private Mars missions etc..



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 4:16 am
Posts: 322
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 9:09 pm
Trans-lunar Injection, baby :)


Back to top
Profile YIM
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Wed Sep 29, 2004 10:27 am
Thinking of the altitudes asteroids are passing earth I myself too sometimes randomly thinking of this proposal.

But can such an altitude achieved by suborbital flights? I'm doubting intensively. Only the fact that the moon is orbiting and would be falling to earth at a little less speed suggests that suborbital flights to the altitude of the moon at least theoretically are possible. I propose an maximum apogee-velocity to add that is still parabolic or hyperbolic.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:40 am
In between - the lower and the upper edge of the debris belt should be included. Within the belt of debris there might be other certain edges that should be included too.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


© 2014 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use