Quote from: ringsider on 07/02/2018 06:30 pmYou would have to assume to attract those investors that the concept is simple and easily proven, and doesn't need the entire satellite customer base to change they way they work to handle extreme loads.I don't think that assumption is at all warranted.
You would have to assume to attract those investors that the concept is simple and easily proven, and doesn't need the entire satellite customer base to change they way they work to handle extreme loads.
Quote from: chipguy on 07/03/2018 05:10 pmQuote from: ringsider on 07/02/2018 06:30 pmYou would have to assume to attract those investors that the concept is simple and easily proven, and doesn't need the entire satellite customer base to change they way they work to handle extreme loads.I don't think that assumption is at all warranted. they are.$40m is a massive A raise. An average A series is ~1/10th of that amount. Investors like Airbus, KPCB and Alphabet will go way deeper than basic physics, especially when the raise is so large and the valuation must by implication be sky high. http://www.nea.com/blog/what-size-series-a-round-can-you-expect-to-raise
Their patent.http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2018/0194496.html
That's why my original version of the post had a "lol" at the end. Hard to believe its worth at least 4x the 35 mil they put into it for the last round, right?
There seems to be nothing that any of us couldn't have come up with within a week of looking at the concept. All those hard engineering challenges to be solved, for maybe a 10x reduction in g/p?? And that's before including the potential mass fraction and isp penalties of dealing w such huge acceleration. Maybe they've merged their brains w the gods of FEA, CFD, MDO, and have properly manufactured and tested so many subscale components that building such a thing doesn't seem as unreasonable to them as a first pass analysis would seem to indicate, but if so, we should get these guys to build some other cool stuff first...
It seems as though the ever increasing and alarming tendency to sell a paper airplane as a jumbo jet, wave economics off to "first principles", wave off engineering to computer sims, and to have a complete disregard for the history and true underlying problems of the industry just works like magic on big time VCs, but we'll see if magic works on reality...
I for one welcome our new catapult overlords, and would love to launch 10000 tonnes of tungsten satellites per year. Anyone care to join on the kickstarter?
, but it is only their application. Given the obviousness and prior art, I'd personally say they are unlikely to get all – or perhaps any – of their claims granted. See for example DOI: 10.1109/TMAG.1982.1061770 in IEEE Transactions from January 1982.
Quote from: HMXHMX on 08/12/2018 03:10 pm, but it is only their application. Given the obviousness and prior art, I'd personally say they are unlikely to get all – or perhaps any – of their claims granted. See for example DOI: 10.1109/TMAG.1982.1061770 in IEEE Transactions from January 1982.I wouldn't. U.S. patent examiners are greatly restricted in their ability to deny patent applications in certain circumstances, the most relevant to the present situation being when claims in the application give previously unstated specifics that the examiner cannot be certain do not materially impact the effectiveness of the proposed invention. By specifying a three-segment, tapered tether, by specifying a synchronized release, by specifying a puncturable membrane/high-speed shutter, by giving a maximum chamber pressure, by specifying a an inverted, dome-shaped roof, where panels are kept under tension, by specifying a range of accelerations, by specifying a liquid-based counterweight, they make it more difficult for the examiner to reject their claims. This is to say nothing of the ever increasing pressure for examiners to process applications more quickly.
This concept seems loony to me, but still, since hearing about it I have been trying to imagine the noise this thing would make when its vehicle transitions from vacuum to ambient. Splat boom bang. Matthew
Build something like this on a body with lower gravity and no atmosphere like the moon or a large asteroid and it suddenly makes sense.Could it be that they are targeting extraterrestrial launch but don't advertise it? On earth I really don't see any advantage...
Quote from: matthewkantar on 08/13/2018 03:48 pmThis concept seems loony to me, but still, since hearing about it I have been trying to imagine the noise this thing would make when its vehicle transitions from vacuum to ambient. Splat boom bang. MatthewTo provide some quantitation, see below. "Big bada boom!"
Quote from: HMXHMX on 08/13/2018 04:18 pmQuote from: matthewkantar on 08/13/2018 03:48 pmThis concept seems loony to me, but still, since hearing about it I have been trying to imagine the noise this thing would make when its vehicle transitions from vacuum to ambient. Splat boom bang. MatthewTo provide some quantitation, see below. "Big bada boom!"But how does this compare with a rocket of similar payload capacity? IIRC, most rockets are up in the 150+ dB range at the pad--though I don't know how fast that drops off with distance. Also, this shows dB along the ground track, but since that would be out over the ocean, I wonder what it would look like in 2D off ground track.Not saying it isn't a problem, just trying to provide some context. Rockets of all sorts tend to be loud too.~Jon
Quote from: jongoff on 08/13/2018 08:34 pmQuote from: HMXHMX on 08/13/2018 04:18 pmQuote from: matthewkantar on 08/13/2018 03:48 pmThis concept seems loony to me, but still, since hearing about it I have been trying to imagine the noise this thing would make when its vehicle transitions from vacuum to ambient. Splat boom bang. MatthewTo provide some quantitation, see below. "Big bada boom!"But how does this compare with a rocket of similar payload capacity? IIRC, most rockets are up in the 150+ dB range at the pad--though I don't know how fast that drops off with distance. Also, this shows dB along the ground track, but since that would be out over the ocean, I wonder what it would look like in 2D off ground track.Not saying it isn't a problem, just trying to provide some context. Rockets of all sorts tend to be loud too.~JonIIRC, the shuttle generated around 90 decibels at 9000 meters from the launchpad. Meaning you'd have to be nearly 6 times further away for the same noise during a Spinlaunch release.Dont worry tho, they only want to launch 3 times a day in the beginning...We have to agree tho, that the sound of such a massively powerful thing would probably be an absolutely awesome thing to experience and behold. If its under 200 mil total cost, they should do it just for sh*ts and giggles.
I can't find a short clip of the 16" naval rifle discharge from the movie "Under Siege", but it is worth checking out...