Conventional rocketry with high operability, fully reusable stages is all we need to get costs WAAAAY down -- $100 / lb is completely possible after a few generations of improvements.
Lots of different combinations are workable, but my personal pet idea is a straight up / straight down booster stage and a nearly-SSTO upper stage. Coincidentally, this is the same configuration being featured in "The Rocket Company" at www.hobbyspace.com. If your booster stage tries to give much horizontal velocity to the upper stage, you wind up with a much harder recovery problem. A pure vertical trajectory with powered landing lets you land right back on the launch pad, ready to fly again within an hour if necessary. There is also a clear development path for this, with VTVL vehicles designed for space tourism serving as design studies and early prototypes for the booster.
Beyond that, I like rotating electrodynamic tethers in LEO to act as the second stage.
John Carmack
www.armadilloaerospace.com
Space/Science » in reply to What do you see as the long-term solution for low cost space flight? (If there is any at all.) My personal choice is the (sc)ramjet.
re: What do you see as the long-term solution for low cost space flight? (If there is any at all.) My personal choice is the (sc)ramjet.
The whole thread (7 posts)
- What do you see as the long-term solution for low cost space flight? (If there is any at all.) My personal choice is the (sc)ramjet. (n/t)
- Whatever the solution, the essential step is that the hardware be totally reusable with minimal turnaround time and maintenance costs.
- re: What do you see as the long-term solution for low cost space flight? (If there is any at all.) My personal choice is the (sc)ramjet.
- re: ELV launched from the equator (n/t)
- Bimese Two Stage to Orbit (TSTO) using conventional rockets
- Living off the land