Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!markh
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark William Hopkins)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Propellant velocity
Message-ID: <12463@uwm.edu>
Date: 27 May 91 01:04:56 GMT
References: <1991May22.164754.22298@zoo.toronto.edu> <12430@uwm.edu> <1991May25.215849.15606@zoo.toronto.edu>
Sender: news@uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Lines: 24

In article <1991May25.215849.15606@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>At any given time, there are a handful of very small research projects
>in advanced propulsion active.  They come and go, and mostly don't lead
>anywhere because they never get funded to do anything more than research.

It sounds like to me, that we private sector people have a wonderful opportunity
to upstart the governmental space agencies of the world by applying our own
personal funds towards such a project.

The reality of the matter ... and irony ... is that relative speed of fuel
expulsion is the determining factor for everything: how much fuel you need to
bring on board, the size of the booster to accomodate it, how far you can get
under sustained acceleration, (and thus) how fast you can get to the moon and
Mars, (and thus) how much time you're forced to spend in weightlessness, as
opposed to 1 G artificial gravity, and a whole lot more.

The right fuel makes all the difference between having to take several whole
days to float to the moon on inertia, and a few hours to ram it in full gear
(and ram it to full stop when halfway there :)).  It makes all the difference
between a years' traversal to Mars on gravitation, and a week because of a few
hours sustained thrust and deceleration.

I am totally suprised that nobody seems to see how fundamental this one number
(propellant velocity) is.