Beaming rockets into space
January 21, 2011 By Prachi Patel
A space shuttle launch, using traditional chemical rockets. Credit: NASA
Space launches have evoked the same image for decades: bright orange flames exploding beneath a rocket as it lifts, hovers and takes off into the sky. But an alternative propulsion system proposed by some researchers could change that vision.
Instead of explosive chemical reactions on-board a rocket, the new concept, called beamed thermal propulsion, involves propelling a rocket by shining laser light or microwaves at it from the ground. The technology would make possible a reusable single-stage rocket that has two to five times more payload space than conventional rockets, which would cut the cost of sending payloads into low-Earth orbit.
NASA is now conducting a study to examine the possibility of using beamed energy propulsion for space launches. The study is expected to conclude by March 2011.
In a traditional chemical rocket propulsion system, fuel and oxidizer are pumped into the combustion chamber under high pressure and burnt, which creates exhaust gases that are ejected down from a nozzle at high velocity, thrusting the rocket upwards.
A beamed thermal propulsion system would involve focusing microwave or laser beams on a heat exchanger aboard the rocket. The heat exchanger would transfer the radiation's energy to the liquid propellant, most likely hydrogen, converting it into a hot gas that is pushed out of the nozzle.
A conceptual microwave-propelled lightcraft receives microwave beams from an array of microwave sources on the ground. Credit: Kevin Parkin
The basic idea is to build rockets that leave their energy source on the ground, says Jordin Kare, president of Kare Technical Consulting, who developed the laser thermal launch system concept in 1991. You transmit the energy from the ground to the vehicle.With the beam shining on the vehicle continually, it would take 8 to 10 minutes for a laser to put a craft into orbit, while microwaves would do the trick in 3 to 4 minutes. The vehicle would have to be designed without shiny surfaces that could reflect dangerous beams, and aircraft and satellites would have to be kept out of the beams path. Any launch system would be built in high-altitude desert areas, so danger to wildlife shouldnt be a concern, Kare says.
Thermal propulsion vehicles would be safer than chemical rockets since they cant explode and dont drop off pieces as they fly. They are also smaller and lighter because most of the complexity is on the ground, which makes them easier and cheaper to launch.
People can launch small satellites for education, science experiments, engineering tests, etc. whenever they want, instead of having to wait for a chance to share a ride with a large satellite, Kare says.
An artist’s rendering of a laser launch system. Each beam module can fit on a shipping container. Credit: Jordin Kare
Another cost advantage comes from larger payload space. While conventional propulsion systems are limited by the amount of chemical energy in the propellant that's released by combustion, in beamed systems you can add more energy externally. That means a spacecraft can gain a certain momentum using less than half the amount of propellant of a conventional system, allowing more room for the payload.Usually in a conventional rocket you have to have three stages with a payload fraction of three percent overall, says Kevin Parkin, leader of the Microwave Thermal Rocket project at the NASA Ames Research Center. This propulsion system will be single stage with a payload fraction of five to fifteen percent.
Having a higher payload space along with a reusable rocket could make beamed thermal propulsion a low-cost way to get material into low Earth orbit, Parkin says.
Parkin developed the idea of microwave thermal propulsion in 2001 and described a laboratory prototype in his 2006 PhD thesis. A practical real-world system should be possible to build now because microwave sources called gyrotrons have transformed in the last five decades, he says. One megawatt devices are now on the market for about a million US dollars.
"They're going up in power and down in cost by orders of magnitude over the last few decades, he says. We've reached a point where you can combine about a hundred and make a launch system."
Meanwhile, the biggest obstacle to using lasers to beam energy has been the misconception that it would require a very large, expensive laser, Kare says. But you could buy commercially available lasers that fit on a shipping container and build an array of a few hundred. "Each would have its own telescope and pointing system," he says. "The array would cover an area about the size of a golf course."
The smallest real laser launch system would have 25 to 100 megawatts of power while a microwave system would have 100 to 200 megawatts. Building such an array would be expensive, says Kare, although similar to or even less expensive than developing and testing a chemical rocket. The system would make most economic sense if it was used for at least a few hundred launches a year.
In addition, says Parkin, the main components of the beam facility should last for well over ten thousand hours of operation, typical of this class of hardware, so the savings can more than repay the initial cost.
In the near term, beamed energy propulsion would be useful for putting microsatellites into low Earth orbit, for altitude changes or for slowing down spacecraft as they descend to Earth. But the technology could in the future be used to send missions to the Moon or to other planets and for space tourism.
Kare has looked into the possibility of using lasers to propel interstellar probes for NASAs Institute of Advanced Concepts. A deep space launch would require higher power lasers with larger telescope systems as well as laser relay stations in space. Powering missions over interplanetary distance would require even bigger lasers and telescopes, as well as different propulsion techniques using propellants easier to store than liquid hydrogen.
Sending a spacecraft to a moon of Jupiter, for instance, would require a laser that gives billions of watts of power. "You'd have to have another couple generations of space-based telescopes to do something like that, Kare says. You can in fact launch an interstellar probe that way but now youre talking about lasers that might be hundreds of billions of Watts of power." Laser technology could reach those levels in another 50 years, he says.
Source:
Astrobio.net
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
28 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
41 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
30 comments
-
Scotland passes turbine test to harness tidal power,
41 comments
-
revamping general concept and cosmological principle
May 25, 2012
-
Transiting Exoplanet Light Curve
May 25, 2012
-
Math behind Theoretical Physics
May 24, 2012
-
Do we know whats at the center of galaxies yet?
May 23, 2012
-
Structure of the Milky Way?
May 20, 2012
-
What would it take to terraform Pluto and Charon?
May 19, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - General Astronomy
More news stories
Australia hails surprise super-telescope decision
Australia has hailed a surprise decision giving it a role in a radio telescope project aimed at revolutionising astronomy, vowing to draw on its decades of experience in space science.
7 hours ago |
5 / 5 (2) |
0
Astronomers seize last chance in lifetime for Venus Transit
Astronomers are gearing for one the rarest events in the Solar System: an alignment of Earth, Venus and the Sun that will not be seen for another 105 years.
7 hours ago |
5 / 5 (1) |
0
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say
SpaceX's Dragon cargo vessel smells like a new car, said astronauts at the International Space Station after opening the hatches Saturday following the spacecraft's landmark mission to the orbiting lab.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
7 hours ago |
4.3 / 5 (9) |
0
Astronauts enter world's 1st private supply ship
(AP) -- Space station astronauts floated into the Dragon on Saturday, a day after its heralded arrival as the world's first commercial supply ship.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
7 hours ago |
5 / 5 (3) |
0
Dragon makes history with space station docking
The private company SpaceX made history Friday with the docking of its Dragon capsule to the International Space Station, the most impressive feat yet in turning routine spaceflight over to the commercial ...
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
22 hours ago |
4.9 / 5 (9) |
0
SpotterRF debuts Radar Backpack Kit (w/ Video)
(Phys.org) -- SpotterRF has announced a special radar backpack kit designed to enhance situational awareness for soldiers on the ground. The company says its special radar is designed for warfighters as part ...
Thousands of shellfish found dead in Peru
Thousands of crustaceans were found dead off the coast of Lima following the mystery mass death of dolphins and pelicans, the Peruvian Navy said Friday.
Family history of Alzheimer's affects functional connectivity
(HealthDay) -- Cognitively normal individuals with a family history of late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) may display lower resting state functional connectivity in the default mode network (DMN) of the brain, ...
Transvaginal mesh op restores pelvic organ prolapse at price
(HealthDay) -- Transvaginal mesh (TVM) procedures are effective for anatomical restoration of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), but patients report a worsening of sexual function following surgery, according to ...
High-speed method to aid search for solar energy storage catalysts
Eons ago, nature solved the problem of converting solar energy to fuels by inventing the process of photosynthesis.
Travel to high altitudes tied to Crohn's, colitis flare-ups
(HealthDay) -- People with inflammatory bowel disease, which includes Crohn's disease and colitis, may be at increased risk for flare-ups when they fly or travel to high altitudes for skiing or mountain climbing, ...


Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 1.1 / 5 (7)
Your primary laser would need to be on the surface of the moon, or on an orbital platform or dyson swarm in order to accomplish this. Additionally, you'd need a completely ludicrous degree of accuracy and precision in your targeting system if you seriously wanted to power a craft to say, 0.01c or greater. Not to mention, relativistic consequences have never actually been tested with regards to prolonged deep space craft acceleration and escaping the solar system's gravity. If calculations are off by a nanometer or nanosecond, you die?
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
You realize that lasers disperse even in space, right? Meaning that the energy received drops off exponentially with distance from the source... Meaning that such a system will not apply significant acceleration for very long at all.
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (4)
They do disperse, but not according to the inverse square law. The whole reason regular EM radiation disperses is the sperical nature of the wave propagation, which naturally leads to the inverse square law since surface area of a sphere is the square of radius.
Lasers do not dispers in exactly the same manner because they are coherent.
Additionally, this system would only be useful for a probe on a fly-by mission, because it offers no solution for the braking phase of travel on the other end. So the craft wouldn't be able to slow down to an orbital velocity for the distant star or planet. You'd only have a one-shot fly-by, like the New Horizons spacecraft passing Pluto...
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (5)
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (1)
True, if we could scatter these stations throughout the solar system they could be used as relays to either accelerate or brake space craft that pass them by... that would be useful... I was mostly commenting on the idea of reaching any large fraction of light speed with such a system, I doubt it would be possible with current technology to reach even 1%
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (1)
I wonder if we could get elephants into space with it?
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Sure Gomer, why not?
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
I don't rightly care what either 'caust'.
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
You could channel the expanding gas to different directions quite easily, so even braking would be possible, assuming you laser is coherent enough to reach a few lightyears (probably not).
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
If you're talking solar-sail probes, IIRC, this issue has been solved: The sail is circular, and the outer ring 'stages' when braking begins. It reflects beamed energy back, onto the probe's now smaller sail, slowing it...
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
You are missing a blindingly obvious point. Let's Imagine a system using LiH (very solid) fuel to deal with the long term fuel storage issue.
Launch is of course near the laser array on Earth, and achieves LEO before the launch vehicle passes beyond the horizon. In a later orbital pass over the laser array you provide enough delta-v to put it on a free return trajectory around the moon. When it returns to Earth? Hit it again, this time sending it to Jupiter.
At Jupiter, the launcher makes a right turn, just using orbital mechanics, and it is on a Sun grazing elliptical orbit. As it approaches the Sun the main engines fire again--no need for lasers with the Sun right there. Delta-v close to the Sun can preserve much of the velocity from falling into the Sun's gravity well.
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Thats a lot of effort and treasure for a 16 hour fly-by.
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Nope. It would give you a longer range and better precision as the craft gets farther away.
You launch lasers into space using the ground-based lasers. Then for your deep space probe, you'd launch from the ground using ground-based lasers, then once it gets into space you continue to accelerate using space-based lasers.
Of course, with existing space program caliber solar panels, you'd need an orbital solar array of dimensions roughly 1km x 2.65km in order to power just one gigawatt laser...In order to get the hundreds of gigawatts of power for interstellar probe, you'd need 10km by 26.5km solar array.
In the near future this is impossible, but it might be possible in several decades if self-replicating lunar robots can be invented to construct such megastructures.
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
goal: accelerate to 1 percent of c
acceleration: they say they can get to orbit (I suppose this means LEO = 200km in 3-4 minutes). Using the 3 minute mark this means an acceleration of 1.2g. Let's add a g because when we accelerate in space we don't have to work against earth gravity: so that's 2.2g we can get from a space battery of lasers.
To get to 3000km/sec at 2.2g takes roughly 38 hours by which time you have travelled some 204 million kilometers (which is one and a half times the distance between the earth and the sun)
And no: lasers do NOT stay focussed over these distances. Not by a very long shot.
Note that the craft in the article do not lug around enough acceleration mass for 40 hours but for just 3-4 minutes. More mass sharply reduces the acceleration (or drastically increases the laser power needed). As for braking? Who's gonna brake you at the destination?
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (2)
For the longer ranged or deep space probe, the alleged 100 gigawatts of lasers should be able to produce something like 1 meganewton of thrust.
If you had an un-manned probe ten times the mass of the Voyager probes, which were about 1500kg, you could still accelerate at 66.66 m/s^2, or about 6.7g until the craft was out of safe operational range.
Round trip to the moon at apogee is about 811,000km and we use reflectors and lasers to measure it. So lasers are useful at least over a distance of 811,000km.
So with the proposed 100 gigawatts of lasers you should be able to accelerate an unmanned probe of ten Voyager masses for roughly 4932 seconds, obtaining a velocity of 329 km/s, or about 1/1000th of c...
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (5)
Also: a craft that weighs 1500kg (assuming 99% of that were reaction mass) could accelerate for...erm.. a minute or so until all mass was used up? Not nearly enough. Pile on more (reaction)mass and the acceleration drops proportionally.
This type of thrust is high mass, high impulse, low speed (as opposed to ion engines which are low mass, low impulse but high speed).
The laser idea is for getting craft off the ground because we need to constantly exceed the 1g pull of earth.
In space ion engines are _way_ better. 0.01g for months/years beats a short burst of high acceleration any time. And you have a thruster which will give you the option to slow down at ypur destination (something you don't have with the laser boost mechanism)
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
If it was on earth they wouldn't object because you couldn't point it at anyone easily. On the near side of the moon would be a different story. I would think that neither would be very good for space travel. Maybe on a lunar pole or Antarctica. The best solution would be a Deathstar and no one would object to that (at least not after it was operational).
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Small mirror(s) in orbit? With 2 of those you could target any place on earth from an earthbound firing station.
Would be a lot more effective than on the near side of the moon (because the distance would be orders of magnitude smaller to the target)
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
And by then nuclear is out of fashion. So, try this with wind or solar power. ROTFLMAO!
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
No, you wouldn't. You could power the ground-based lasers using solar power. You'd need a rather large solar farm.
Commercial grade solar panels right now make about 220 watts per 1.5 square meters.
So 1 billion watts divided by 220 watts, and then multiply by 1.5 square meters to get the area of panels needed for 1 gigawatt.
My numbers above assumed ISS grade solar panels. Here I assume commercial grade solar panels.
1000000000 * 1.5 / 220 = 6818181m^2
which is 1km x 6.818km of solar panels per gigawatt, which is 2.664 square miles.
In theory, you would eventually have a giant array of solar panels on the moon, constructed by self-replicating robots.
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Of course, it would take almost 700,000 of these to make 100 gigawatts...
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (6)
-And aren't we supposed to have solar power stations in orbit soon? Couldn't they serve dual purpose for placing payloads in orbit? Or burning cities lexington? Inappropriate uses will be impossible once we have world govt and everybody are brothers. 8-/
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
OK, then how about just using one and a small model as proof o concept?
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Ok, then how about using just one module and a small model to provide proof of concept? I mean, companies are spending multiple millions of dollars developing private lift capability right now. Why aren't the using this technology?
Jan 21, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
If microwaves were used how would you shield the occupants and electrical systems to keep them from frying?
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
I still don't know whether you simply hate and wish to discredit science, or are merely a runner in the special olympics. In either regard, do you not tire of further ruining any shred of a reputation you might have left? Almost as bad as Skeptic Heretic...
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
The only real obstacle here is the lasers. As I hinted at above, this is not a new idea. It has been floating around in sci-fi books for at least 30 years and likely before that.
The targeting is straightforward and shouldn't be an issue for the first LEO launches. Shielding follows the targeting and really shouldn't be an issue. The heat exchanger and propellant would be the new tech, but, again, the laser had been the sticking point.
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
That's the point. The lasers hit the propllant which then evaporates and the resulting explosive impulse drives the craft.
An issue would be that this leaves a plume of gas behind the craft which would disperse the followng laser shots - ut I think they should try this out with simulations/a small demonstrator
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Heh, guess not . But the spacecraft would look probably look like Dumbo.
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Replacement modules can be made and sent from Earth, or future outposts on the Moon or Mars or the Asteroid Belts. They will get into required the required slot by sails or ion drives, powered by beam power of the existing network. Then the whole thing will be powered by the Sun, literally, to get other crafts to the stars. If a viable world is at a reasonable distance, the whole scheme can be replicated there (slowly..!) for two-way traffic.
...Unless some smartarses invented the Warp drive by then!:-))
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
We will NOT be able to make a single propulsion system that can take off from Earth and fly around the solar system. But we can have two separate systems that combined are vastly superior to the 60+ year old chemical rocket technology.
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Because we all know how many airports and spaceports are build up at high altitude because it's always affordable to go uphill with trucks. How high are they talking? Get too high and I wouldn't want to work there (re observatories and thin air dangers).
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
youtube.com/watch?v=Z8Hwqg9_oA8
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
??? could you have the spacecraft use a gravity well (the sun for example) to do a slingshot maneuver and then the lasers would work to slow it down? I guess it's a question of how deep and compact a gravity well you need to do a 180 degree slingshot based on how fast the spacecraft is moving. For some speeds the distance to the center of gravity required for a 180 degree slingshot could put the spacecraft inside the suns corona or have it impact a planet.
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Th ability to place a craft into orbit or send it on its way on an interplanetary mission has no implications WHAT is being sent. There is no reason that the craft cannot contain the engine and fuel necessary for braking at the end of its flight.
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
done with all these band-aid solutions.
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Nice graphics. Linear accelerator using electrons and even one that creates anti-matter from the electrons has a patent pending.
The same inventor is proposing a linear thermonuclear reactor using DD or DLi along
with space matter.
No technical information is given as I understood from their reply they are working in secret and
not interested in support from public, private or
government sources.
Sounds like they expect to leave the planet as soon
as possible.
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
you uh...realise you're talking about having a braking stage the size of the existing space shuttle...
Jan 22, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 23, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Jan 23, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Would it make more or less sense to focus solar power in space and reflect it off a mirror or store it? How long would it take a launchable solar collector to pay for itself in energy costs?
Jan 23, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)