If you want to support us directly, hit the join button or go to https://www.patreon.com/whataboutit
2025-07-17 00:02
🔍 Link0u Search Engine
과학/테크/IT트렌드
Can We Launch Stuff Into Space Without Rockets?
- What about it!? 10일 전 2025.07.17 00:00 인기
-
79,323
340
Instead of using a rocket (boring!), let's nuke Neil Armstrong to space - or maybe we just use a mass driver, a space tram, ...
- 이전글A blackboard that can protect life#science #shorts #viralvideo2025.07.18
- 다음글How Zero Gravity Planes Work2025.07.17
댓글목록
orbital airship is a cool concept
2025-07-20 21:05
28:43 "it was a close race" sir i have no idea where the hell did you learn math from but saying 8 = 10 is not close at all. im more annoyed about this than the fact that these ideas are very impossible and wont happen. it feels like you gave it 10/10 spesificly because it was number 1 as a forced number and not actually because it makes no sense how it would be posssible. i hate these type of people who have no respect for ranking systems because theres no point in using one in first place if it makes no sense
2025-07-20 20:39
I wonder is a combination of Airship and Space Elevator would be a thing… Imagine a space station with elevator in geo orbit, letting down a hook and a contra-weight the other way. As low as physically possible. The Airship can just about reach it and attaches a payload capsule, the elevator wheels it in and places the capsule along one of the airlocks of the station… getting a old capsule down works the same way in reverse… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
2025-07-20 19:59
Small hint: you can NEVER accelerate a thing enough to leave earths gravitational field since when you only accelerate on earth, the projectile will have an orbit that cuts earths surface and the object will return.
2025-07-20 19:57
Antimatter would be crazier and more efficient than nuclear
2025-07-20 18:07
You didn't mention beamed laser launching, as demonstrated by Leik Myrabo many years ago, which is probably the only real viable alternative to rockets. But only for mass-to-orbit, not people.
2025-07-20 16:03
@Whataboutit The Space Fountain was invented to solve the problems with the Space Elevator.
The Orbital Ring was was invented to solve the problems with the Space Fountain.
The Lofstrom Loop was invented to solve the problems with the Orbital Ring.
And finally the Tethered Ring was invented to solve the problems with both the Lofstom Loop and the Orbital Ring.
I'm definitely look forward to your follow up video! But first read the paper: "The Techno-Economic Viability of Actively Supported Structures for Terrestrial Transit and Space Launch".
2025-07-20 15:51
Wow - "What about it!?" just obliterated "Everyday Astronaut" in a head-to-head competition on who can produce the most well-researched video!
2025-07-20 15:42
You'll have to add "Variable Pitch Screw Launch" to your list. Learn about it in articles entitled, "Human-Rated Launch Infrastructure for the Interplanetary Era: Breaking Rocket and Legacy EML Cost Barriers" or "Revolutionizing Space Launch - The Economic and Operational Benefits of the Variable-Pitch Screw Architecture".
2025-07-20 15:37
I put three trillion dollars in a bank account and the one percent interest funds space travel.
2025-07-20 15:05
Laser propulsion to put a payload to orbit?
2025-07-20 14:55
Re Orion...Dyson called these "Bomblets" because at 0.3kt each they are TINY. Hiroshima was 15kt or about 50 of the total 800 by which time I'm guessing the ship would be well and truly in orbit So someone really needs to do the maths on how much radiation would be released over the course of a launch and not just ASSUME it would be a planet killing event. Chernobyl released 400 times the radiation of Hiroshima, Fukushima 40x and we are still here and we got nothing for it as a civilization. Remember that big chemical explosion in Beirut a few years back?...well that was the equivalent of 0.3kt and of course Beirut is still standing...I would say tow it out to the middle of the ocean and launch from there. ALSO remember as with any atomic bomb they can be built "dirty" or clean. The French tested some really big nukes in the pacific for decades but the fallout amount was tiny....BUT the "Elephant in room" you missed is that you would only have to launch ONE, under its own atomic steam into orbit. Once there it could be refueled with more bomblets for years to come as it shuttles around the solar system. Think of it, 6000 tons to mars in ONE GO...that would save 600 starship loads...you would not even have to wait for the 2 year window to mars with that amount of delta V you could go whenever you wished...so...let the flaming begin....
2025-07-20 13:06
with spin launch. What hold it together once it releases the 500 pounds.? spinning at that speed wouldn’t it just shake itself apart? I am no engineer. It’s the my only question I think about.
2025-07-20 10:22
This was such a light glossing of these subjects as to be extremely misleading for most of these options. Isaac Arthur does a much better rundown of these, and even his are overly optimistic, ignoring some of the pitfalls. I think that if you make videos on these subjects, you need to be more sceptical and less optimistic, and link to real data and conversations. I come here for space updates, not speculative science fiction. And that is what all but one of these are currently.
2025-07-20 05:12
What do think about one Martian space fountain upward towards Phobos and another one downward from Phobos towards the Martian space fountain?
2025-07-20 04:58
I got some comments as an aerospace engineer and a few more modern updates that i think should be mentioned.
Spin Launch:
Even though it probably technically works from a physics perspective, it doesn't make much engineering sense. For one thing, it's pretty limited in payload because you just can't scale it up that much, and those paylods have a segnificant mass penalty because they have to take 60k gs sideways, which realistically means you can't use most deployable structures, and the propellent mass fraction for any propulsion system is going to be terible, so extra delta-V is comparatively really expensive. You also need some way to reload it and reset the counterweight without opening the vaccum chamber because pumping it back down every time really eats into your launch cadence. It could be interesting for throwing slugs of refined material off the moon though.
Star Tram / Mass Driver:
These are really cool and make a lot of sense, but they work best for a rapid series of small paylods because the cost is really driven by how much mass you're trying to throw per shot and how fast you need to throw it, and how often you're using it is just a question of power generation. These are also much easier to build on the moon where you get the vaccum for for free and don't need to throw nearly as fast, and lots of small paylods is much better suited to raw materials than finished goods.
The biggest issue with mass drivers is really that switching powerful enough magnets on and off fast enough to acutally keep accelerating the projectile to orbital velocity is a rediculously hard probelm, and the only good solution I've heard involves quenching superconducting magnets by saturating them with a supercritical field from the projectile, which is both really expensive and wastes a lot of energy as heat.
Project Orion:
At least if you're staying in the solar system and at tiny fission bomb scale, there is actually a much more modern and paletable version called mini-mag orion, where instead of using 0.3kt conventional fission bombs, you use basically a giant magnetic can crusher to set off the nuclear reaction by imploding a shell of mylar foil around a much smaller ammount of fissile material, which keeps the explosion small enough to direct it out an actual magnetic nozzle and increase the puse rate so you can have smaller dampers. it ends up with about the same ISP because you loose some fission efficiency with a smaller bomb, but you also get a much more directed blast and less non-fissionable material. It would also work with a smaller spacecraft than a conventional orion drive which would be more practical to build, and could be more paletable to use in LEO since the better containment means it wouldn't set off a series of EMPs.
Space Elevators:
Why do people always talk about space elevators and never talk about orbital rings? Orbital rings can get too and from space much faster with short tethers and use mass drivers on the ring to hit orbital velocity, provide efficient supersonic intercontinental rail travel around the ring, can support intercontinental superconducting power transmission, and can be made with existing materials, and building an orbtial ring out of lunar steel should be cheaper than building a space elevator from advanced carbon materials launched from earth once you're considering building either.
Space Fountain:
I think this is a suprisingly practical idea. Among other things, the extreme altitude would allow it to do a lot of jobs currently done by satalites in a way that is much easier to service, upgrade, expand, and defend. it would also be useful as an alternative to tethers for getting to and from an orbital ring or holding up an earth based mass driver.
Active support structures sound a little crazy, but it's a relatively simple idea, wouldn't be that hard to build, and it would probably be powered by solar pannels at the top of the tower with plenty of redundancy, so I think the acutal risk is more about natural disasters or sabotage effecting the base, which isn't much different from a regular sky scraper.
2025-07-20 03:00
JP Aerospace, air ships to orbit
2025-07-20 02:59
There is the hypersonic dirigibles concept I found presented here on YouTube recently produced by the company working on it. Apparently according to them a lighter than air vehicle can be accelerated to such speeds as needed and that they have done scaled down tests to show the practicality of a concept first tested back in the 60s. It would apparently incorporate a dirigible ‘way stage’ too floating in the stratosphere as a form of suborbital space station from which the final launch into orbit would take place.
2025-07-20 01:41
Why not building a high start tower structure for Starship on top of a high mountain? Skipping a couple of km compared to sea level should reduce energy consumption significantly, so its effect could be similar to the Space Fountain (you need those vacuum tube structures for the Space Fountain, too...). But with less risk and most certainly less cost.
2025-07-19 22:02
29:01 I feel like the space fountain is a WAY more complicated method than is necessary. It seems ya could basically achieve the same thing with a really large high altitude balloon for a fraction of a fraction of the cost!
2025-07-19 20:18
You’re throwing a small amount of weight. Current sats I suspect would fail infinitely.
2025-07-19 20:17
1:50 lol have you seen a pilot at 9g’s. Not plausible.
2025-07-19 20:14
0:51 No proof that space elevators will work. How do you think they will keep a satellite in Geo sync orbit?
2025-07-19 20:13
There is a very good book on Project Orion , it is definitely feasible but immoral. They calculated the effects of fall out from each launch at (IIRC) 3-6 deaths around the world. Dyson couldn’t go ahead with this.
One of the side effects was the development of directional fission weapons and small suitcase sized nukes. For this reason much of the detailed research was classified and I assume still is.
Arthur C Clarke used a pusher spacecraft called Orion in the book of 2001 as a nod to the research.
2025-07-19 19:44
They won't use centrifugal rockets for any good cause. They'll probably use them to hit people they want to hit on the other side of the world.
2025-07-19 18:44
really great deep dive?
2025-07-19 14:01
Awesome video! One option that I wished you had included and that is my favourite is Project Atlantis TETHERED RING! Not an Orbital ring but a smaller ring only 80 kilometers in the atmosphere. It is a combination of the physics od a startram and space elevator but using regular materials. And yes Issac Arhur also did a video on the Tetheted Ring and actually liked the idea.
2025-07-19 11:10
?
2025-07-19 09:02
Space elevators are a stupid idea for the simple reason.They would be vaporized from the voltage potential across the atmosphere.
2025-07-19 08:58
What about a space fountain using a large laser? No chance for trash in the atmosphere.
2025-07-19 08:45
Or you could use a Casimir drive as described in a white paper recently published on the Interenet Archive. The drive is based on Erik Verline's entropic gravity and uses metamaterials and the Casimir effect to create a lower concentration of vacuum fluctuations around the craft. This creates a sort of "osmotic pressure gradient" that space-time can push on to propel the craft.
2025-07-19 05:01
Use a massive rubber band.
Need 5 miles per second, velocity.
2025-07-19 04:27
My biggest worry about nuke-based transport would be having to trigger the Launch Termination System while still on the way up ...
2025-07-19 02:51
That was fun!
2025-07-19 01:37
I don't think spin launch is very realistic . The only thing I think could be launched is liquid or gasses. Everything else is going to have insane gravitational forces put on it. I guess supplies of certain types. Well. Maybe it does have a place?
2025-07-19 00:21
A scaled down alcubierre drive for solid state subluminal locomotion between ground and orbit... probably a 10/10 on crazy until the exotic matter issue is resolved.
2025-07-18 23:48
Quantum Teleportation gets my vote
2025-07-18 23:25
Thanks for the awesome side video, those alternatives were a lot of fun! I remember seeing a cool idea called a Lofstrom Loop in an old Isaac Arthur video about Launch Loops which seemed much more feasible than Space Elevators or Mass Drivers. Instead of a massive vacuum tube with the vehicle INSIDE (RIP Hyperloop!) it involved a vacuum tube only 5cm wide(!) supporting an EXTERNAL track for launch vehicles "only" 1,000 kms long and "only" 80 kilometers high to get the vehicle above the atmosphere to eliminate carrying onboard fuel for that first part of the flight. Lofstrom apparently published a detailed paper in 2009.
2025-07-18 22:05
Even if you had the material for a space elevator, you would need to solve the problem of dealing with all the other crap that's in orbit under it, ready to smash into it
2025-07-18 21:38
Hey you know what? When you are talking about temps like -250 C it's actually better to use Kelvin. All the people who work in this field use Kelvin
2025-07-18 21:20
You don't need to build towers to hold your launch tube --- the other end has to be in orbit anyway, so suspend it from above on skyhooks
(skyhooks are large weights in LEO holding up your launch tube)
Not to mention the magnetic fields generated by that other design would destroy all the electronics around
2025-07-18 21:17
Spinlaunch sounds like a decent idea, but I worry about the idea of the military getting this sort of technology. Scaled down and converted, these become veeeeery deadly missile launchers
2025-07-18 19:22
You know. Drones can breach the atmosphere with very little resistance. But NASA and that pesky "astronaut" thing.
I'd thought about it. Figured why not use the hull of a rocket? Use electromagnetic coupling plus physical anchor point in case of failure or interruption.
Mother drone takes the capsule to 40,000. Drone drifters lift the capsule using electromagnetic energy. Glide up into the upper atmosphere.
From there, you get orbit breach and assist from those same drones or a new squad.
Drones assist in piloting the capsule. Then assist in docking.
Would it be expensive to do? Yes. Yes it would be for the first round. After that? What's that phrase again?
"Easy money"
It's infinitely reusable. Infinitely cheaper than "ooga booga rocket go boom." It's also a designed recursion to ensure survival. If one drone or even several get knocked out, it doesn't equate to mission critical.
But what do I know? I'm just a bum who only has a GED.
2025-07-18 19:07
Did Project Orion lead to the Rotating Detonation Engine? (but uses conventional propellants)
2025-07-18 18:33
Same info on the same same subject on two channels the same day, seems an odd way to do this, can't be co-incidence.
2025-07-18 17:58
You missed out hypersonic airships.
2025-07-18 17:03
spin launch, levitaton train and space fountain will be more praticable without atmosphere like on the moon, with no atmosphere and less gravity the major problems will be solved .
2025-07-18 16:54
wtb a hot air balloon lift cradle/platform? Air heated by nuclear thermal heaters (old nasa tech) once the platform is at at the stratosphere the vessel would use its thruster to reach low orbit.
Similarly, solar powered hydrogen/helium balloon airship, lift rockets to stratosphere/low orbit.... proven tested, almost a century old tech.
2025-07-18 16:53
I think Spinlaunch is best suited for lunar launches or launches from Mars for nonhuman payload. They need a small spin launch system to recover all the Mars samples that we have left on the surface.
2025-07-18 15:51
The MHD Pump was THE most interesting part of this engaging video. Think of the landing/launch bays on starships in Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, and the like. They all have openings to space that allow spacecraft to enter and exit while maintaining a livable atmosphere in the bay. Pure science fiction fantasy? Perhaps not!
Fascinating...
2025-07-18 14:56
They are lying to you.
2025-07-18 14:48
Spin laugh is a money pit.
Any believers are 4 of 10?
Spin spun meth.
It will never work. Never ever ever!
2025-07-18 14:44
What you cruising Lena Aba behind you sounds reasonable what were you sitting still on the surface of the Earth at first really hard
2025-07-18 13:38
One of the major hurdles of any of the mag-lift or super mag suspension cables is power availability, it would take massive power generation locally, and dedicated to make it happen.
2025-07-18 13:33
Yeet Launch.
2025-07-18 13:26
spinlaunch Imagine a catastrophic failure with the live missile attached
2025-07-18 13:05
My vote will always be for ol' boom-boom. Project Orion all the way.
2025-07-18 11:58
Any vertical structure as large as most of these things are going to be beaten by natural forces.
1. Weather will wreck your day.
2. Making an electrical wire +100km long and dragging it through a gigantic magnetic field and thinking it won't burn out.
3. Temperature extremes at different points in the system create an unwanted ad-hoc Sterling engine
4. Flocks of migrating birds pooping chemically active materials on hard to reach places
Etc, etc, etc....
2025-07-18 10:49
I would be concerned about anything extending as high as space. There are a lot of airplanes that fly and satellites as well.
2025-07-18 09:55
Imagine Orion being used to visit Titan and some nuclear waste enters the atmosphere and ... there was life on that planet but it wasn't resistant to the results of nuclear fission ...
2025-07-18 09:18
the only country crazy enough to do any of these projects is UAE
2025-07-18 08:36
The vertical magnetic space fountain might be realistic for the moon.
2025-07-18 07:57
we can build a rail gun on the ground between 2 hills. best if its in the black hills.. but a 10 mile long tube that starts at a 45° down angel and ends at a 60° up can launche a capsule at mock 2 or 3 without any of the project being built off the ground.. matter fact if the middle is under ground and the building is inside a mountain is best. . with laser switch electromagnets, a massive compressed air taint under ground, and 3 jumbo size fans feeding the tube. will reduce the amount of energy needed and nigate friction.. only thing it needs is shock walls at the end of the tube. to buffer the sonic boom.
2025-07-18 07:57
The material for the space elevator cable would also have to be impervious to the prevalent temperatures, complicating the problem definition.
2025-07-18 07:55
You know what’s soooo crazy.
I watched Tim’s episode last night and was thinking how badly yall should collab on some stuff and how great it would be but unlikely even post because who tf even am I right lol and bam. Collab
2025-07-18 07:49
You rock this time with so many crazy ideas...I guess because there is not much to talk about SpaceX...mmm?????
2025-07-18 07:34
Just ask yourself, "What would the Borg do?, then take away the identity erasing hive mind philosophy part and put everything everyone has in the pot and stir until we colonize the solar system.
2025-07-18 07:29
Most of your proposed ideas to get into space "are dangerous and science fiction". Also you are considering "steady and uniform Earth atmosphere which is unrealistic"; there are many things happening in the atmosphere which many times are reasons to delay rocket launch and will affect most of the proposed ideas.
I think the solution is wait 50 to 100 years for human technology find the way to control gravity (if still any human on Earth)
2025-07-18 07:26
All you need to get into space is "control gravity" as UFOs are doing it ?, no cable, no rockets, no spin launcher, JUST GRAVITY CONTROL.
2025-07-18 07:14
Felix--you've got to lay off the wine!
2025-07-18 07:06
The US government has already publicly revealed they have technology to manipulate space and time and are able to annihilate distance. Stargates and Antigravity are coming!!!
2025-07-18 06:59
It would be interesting to watch cheap craft in LEO freefall try to dock with a cable suspended station with 0 nader speed.
2025-07-18 06:31
We need to be honest, mankind isn't going anywhere much further than maybe Mars with rockets, and that's a stretch if people are on board ?
Until we discover antigravity? We're not going anywhere, anytime soon imo, if you believe the story of Bob lazar? Then it's possible, not only possible but we know how, but we can't find or make the elements, maybe it's all lies? Who knows, but something about that man and his story has felt truthful to me at least, one day, we may be told what has been going on?
1st things 1st, our smartest people need to figure out gravity, what it is, more than just the basic we know now and really get a handle on it in fine detail in the hope it will open up space for mankind, i only wish I'd be around in a few hundred years to see where we go if we can refrain from destroying ourselves and each other? ?????✌️
2025-07-18 06:31
Challenges from Combining Clean Bomb Innovations
From the previous analysis, the key challenges in combining the Soviet Union’s lead tamper (Tsar Bomba), U.S. neutron bomb triggers (W70), and UK’s compact warhead designs (Grapple/Chevaline) are:
1. Size vs. Yield: Lead tampers increase warhead size, conflicting with compact designs needed for Orion’s small, frequent pulses (0.1–10 kt range).
2. Tritium Dependency: High fusion yields require significant tritium, which is costly and has a short half-life (~12.3 years).
3. Engineering Complexity: Integrating precise fission triggers, lead tampers, and compact designs increases manufacturing difficulty and cost.
4. Yield Efficiency Trade-offs: Lead tampers reduce explosive yield compared to uranium-238 tampers, potentially affecting propulsion efficiency.
5. Testing Restrictions: The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT, 1996) prevents physical testing, requiring reliance on simulations.
Solutions to Challenges
To create a clean thermonuclear bomb suitable for Orion, each challenge must be addressed with feasible technical solutions, leveraging modern advancements in materials, manufacturing, and simulation.
1. Size vs. Yield:
• Solution: Use advanced materials like beryllium or high-density composites as tampers instead of lead. Beryllium is lighter and more effective at reflecting neutrons, allowing smaller secondaries while maintaining high fusion yield. Modern 3D printing and precision machining can miniaturize components, fitting warheads into Orion’s ~1-meter-diameter pulse units.
• Implementation: Design warheads with a beryllium tamper and a compact fusion secondary (deuterium-tritium or lithium-6 deuteride), achieving 95–97% fusion yield in a 0.1–1 kt range, suitable for Orion’s pulse frequency (1 explosion per second).
• Benefit: Reduces warhead size to ~50–100 kg, compatible with Orion’s payload constraints.
2. Tritium Dependency:
• Solution: Incorporate on-board tritium production via lithium-6 blankets in the Orion spacecraft. Neutrons from fusion reactions can breed tritium in situ (Li-6 + n → H-3 + He-4), reducing external supply needs. Alternatively, use deuterium-deuterium (D-D) fusion for some pulses, which is less efficient but avoids tritium’s half-life issue.
• Implementation: Store initial tritium in sealed microcapsules within warheads, regenerated by a lithium-6 blanket surrounding the pusher plate. D-D fusion could supplement 10–20% of pulses, balancing cost and efficiency.
• Benefit: Cuts tritium costs by 50–70%, extends warhead shelf life, and leverages fusion byproducts for sustainability.
3. Engineering Complexity:
• Solution: Utilize advanced computational modeling (e.g., supercomputers at Lawrence Livermore or Los Alamos) to simulate warhead performance without physical tests, compliant with CTBT. Additive manufacturing (3D printing) of high-precision components like beryllium tampers and plutonium triggers reduces production complexity.
• Implementation: Develop modular warhead designs with standardized interfaces, allowing automated assembly. Use AI-driven optimization to fine-tune trigger and tamper configurations for maximum fusion efficiency.
• Benefit: Reduces manufacturing costs by ~30% and ensures reliability through virtual testing.
4. Yield Efficiency Trade-offs:
• Solution: Enhance fusion yield with boosted fission triggers, using minimal fissile material (e.g., 0.5–1 kg Pu-239) and injecting deuterium-tritium gas to amplify neutron output. This maintains high fusion efficiency without U-238 tampers, compensating for lead/beryllium’s lower yield boost.
• Implementation: Design a two-stage warhead with a boosted fission primary (0.01–0.1 kt) and a beryllium-tamped fusion secondary (0.1–1 kt), achieving 95–98% fusion yield.
• Benefit: Matches or exceeds U-238 tamper yields while eliminating fast fission fallout.
5. Testing Restrictions:
• Solution: Leverage modern hydrodynamic and plasma physics simulations, validated by historical test data (e.g., Navajo, Tsar Bomba, Grapple Y). Use laser ignition facilities (e.g., National Ignition Facility) to test fusion micro-explosions non-destructively.
• Implementation: Simulate 10,000 virtual detonations to optimize warhead parameters, cross-referenced with 1950s–1960s test data. Conduct subcritical tests of fission triggers to ensure reliability.
• Benefit: Ensures design accuracy within 99% confidence, bypassing CTBT restrictions.
2025-07-18 05:58
Maybe you can do another similar video using magetic fields propulsion. Which may work in an atmosphere (Earth, Mars, Titan), and space. The Angry Astraunaut had a video on the topic. But more in depth video may be good to motivate other to research in this field. The only problem I see is it needs a huge magnetic field, so huge power source (which is then heavy). Small nuclear reactor in the ship. But 1st R&D may be possible using batteries (?)
2025-07-18 05:54
You can find my concept for penetrating Jupiter’s moon Europa, developed in 2015, on my YouTube channel under the name Martin Marandi.
2025-07-18 05:41
The question about most of these non-rocket alternatives is to consider what it would take to build them on the Moon, where the gravity is much weaker and air resistance is negligible.
2025-07-18 05:30
Robert A Heinlein's The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. They use a catapult to throw rocks at Earth. I think Spinlaunch or Space Tram would work in places with less gravity and atmosphere but I just don't see it practical here. Felix, since you now live on the Space Coast, I'm surprised that you didn't mention the impact of weather on all these technologies.
2025-07-18 05:26
Hold the mayo Felix?
2025-07-18 04:51
A space elevator would be a much more viable idea on Mars or Ceres. SpinLaunch and magnetic rail systems would also work on the Moon better than on Earth.
Something like Project Orion assembled in space with the nuclear engine first ignited a large distance from Earth might be an interesting idea to propel an interstellar probe.
2025-07-18 04:41
All of these fight air to get to space and YOU DON"T HAVE TOO you can float to near space dock with a platform launch facility station and then with 1/8 the fuel and rockets go to any orbit or place in the solar system.
2025-07-18 04:12
Spin launch is so bogus!
2025-07-18 03:38
The space elevators biggest problem isn't physics, it's politics and religion. At least your space fountain idea even looks like a tall version of the World Trade Center.
2025-07-18 03:25
Space elevators have NO safe failure modes. Regardless of where a failure occurs, the resultant cable stream will try to wrap around the planet at supersonic speed, creating a wide path of destruction.
2025-07-18 03:10
Spin-launch, aka Yeatmeister 9000, is clearly rediculous. What payload could possibly withstand 60,000 Gs? Even if it could, any object making contact with the lower atmosphere at orbital velocities would vaporize. I really wish people would stop talking about it as if it will ever work. What a waste of time and money.
2025-07-18 03:04
Helium filled floating air carrier that is positioned at the edge of space to launch rocket propelled vehicles
2025-07-18 02:33
Interesting video, thanks a lot Felix. Following are not ranked by the craziness but by "feasibility": SpinLaunch 1/10; Startram 2/10; Nuke propulsion starting from orbit 4/10; Space Elevator (if there wasn't thousands to millions space junk and significantly lower air traffic) 5/10, otherwise 0.2/10; Spacefountain 0.1/10.
2025-07-18 01:50
Gundam......Mass driver(Star Tram).....I never get enough of it.....awesome concept!!!.....WoW......on Gundam they use a Space Elevator too.....
2025-07-18 01:36
Pow! Right to the Moon, Alice. - Jackie Gleason solved this problem a long time ago.
2025-07-18 01:15
Bonjour à tous?
Votre émission est genial!!!!!!!!
Vous serait-il possible de remettre des pistes audio en français et autres ,ça serait génial
Merci d avance ?
2025-07-18 01:05
Sonic Wind I rocket-propelled sled with Dr. John Paul Stapp on board is still the fastest crewed rail vehicle
2025-07-18 00:50
Spinlaunch sounds perfect to send humans to space
2025-07-18 00:44
Keep an open mind . Explore every idea . Build the future
2025-07-18 00:36
a airplane to space
2025-07-18 00:07
18:48 Brain exploded here! If you building something the size of starship (5000 Tons) and power it by nuclear fusion. We are talking a week to mars. Just saying. It's coming maybe not in 10 years but eventually.
2025-07-18 00:05
What about changing nuclear explosives to Hydrogen bombs.
2025-07-17 23:53
The use of SpinLaunch's space catapult could be absolutely realistic on celestial bodies with lower gravity.
2025-07-17 23:49
The "star tram" concept could provide a single-stage rocket or a space plane with sufficient basic speed to reach Earth orbit. Of course, the construction of the maglev track can only be imagined through international cooperation or financing by a broad business consortium, but its return on investment would be certain in the long term.
2025-07-17 23:42
How about a giant sling shot. The proper attitude and rubber bands can assist man to space
2025-07-17 23:30