Sanity check for earth launched moon pod

  • Thread starter Thread starter sammorgan101
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earth Moon
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the feasibility of a proposed moon pod concept, with a focus on correcting mathematical inaccuracies in the initial calculations. Key corrections include the actual distance to the Moon being 360 million meters and Earth's escape velocity being 11,200 m/s, significantly higher than the proposed 49 m/s. The concept is likened to a space elevator, which would require an impractically tall structure of 35,000 km to achieve orbit. The conversation emphasizes the challenges of reaching escape velocity and the physical limitations of constructing such a tower. Overall, the idea is viewed as an interesting thought experiment, but fundamentally flawed in its current form.
sammorgan101
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi I've been scratching my head late into the night, and come up with some ideas for a moon pod, I could use a sanity check on the maths and basic idea. Very interested to hear feedback. Post comments here or on my blog...

http://wellybob.blogspot.com/2012/01/travel-to-moon.html

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your factual numbers are off by an order of magnitude. I assume "M" is metres.
Distance to Moon is 360,000,000 metres, not 36000000M. Radius of Earth is 6,353,000 metres not 635300M.

The speed at Earth's surface is 447m/s, not 46m/s.

Earth's escape velocity is 11,200m/s - a little higher than the 49m/s you calculated you'd achieve.

And you've done all this to gain a 6% increase in velocity - from 46m/s to 49m/s. Is it worth it?
Finally, what you're making is a junior version of a space elevator without the top half. Considering your tower would have to be 35,000 km tall to have its top achieve orbit, it will have to be even more ridiculously tall to gain enough speed to break orbit to go the Moon.

Seriously, look up space elevators.
But other than that, it looks great! Where do I book! :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the corrections, was done after a few whiskeys last night. Yes I saw the space elevator a while ago, very interesting, this was more a thought experiment in propulsion. Is the escape velocity that you quote from the surface? That's the next bit I need to look into.

Thanks Dave
 
sammorgan101 said:
Is the escape velocity that you quote from the surface?
It is, and yes the escape velocity drops with altitude but the problem is that, with your method, you don't each reach geosync orbit without a tower that is 35,000 km tall, let alone escape velocity.

It is physically impossible to build a tower that tall. Thus, the space elevator.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
Back
Top