Could it be possible so slingshot around the moon, then Mars, then Jupiter, then Staurn then Uranus and then Neptune and zoom out of the solar system at super velocity? and if it's possible what speed do you think would be possible? I know that generally the planets have to be lined up but what if they wern't? can't you still slingshot to each planet and then eventually leave the solar system? I know it would take a hell of a lot longer to do it but if the speeds are enormous wouldn't it be worth it to send a ship to the next star system?
Escape velocity from our star system is not a particularly big problem: we could theoretically build a rocket today that would do it without any slingshotting at all. Using Earth or its orbit as the launch platform leaves only some 42 km/s to be produced by the spacecraft. But i'm not sure even optimal use of slingshotting, probably using Jupiter for escaping the Sun, would ever produce enough of an added oomph to make interstellar travel any more feasible than it would otherwise be. Even if one adds a few dozen, hundred or thousand kilometers per second, that's still peanut crumbs; we'd only start talking this "enormous" business if the spacecraft reached something like 10% of lightspeed, which is at least one order of magnitude higher still. Timo Saloniemi
Well, using Jupiter and Saturn would get you only a bit under 10 billion miles (29 light hours compared to 4.3 light years for our closest stellar neighbor) in 30 years or so. http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/weekly-reports/index.htm In this example, alignment was critical since we simply don't have the technology to haul much fuel. It will get you to solar escape velocity, but don't be a hurry to get anywhere. AG
Dr. Robert Zubrin addressed this in one of his books regarding the highest possible velocity you could attain with chemical rockets using multiple flybys of the sun and Jupiter. The best you could do would be to reduce the travel time to Alpha Centauri to about 7,000 years one way.
I thuink a better solution would be a Vlasmir rocket with a huge nuclear reactor. Constant .01 G acceleration 1/2 way to alpha centari and deceleration the other 1/2 way, not sure how long it would take to get there using su7ch a system. But the reactor would have enough power to run the rocket and power life support/recycling facilities.
My calculations suggest the trip would take approximately 41 years from the perspective of Earth. And 40.7 years for people on the ship. It would take insane amounts of fuel though, a smaller robotic probe is more realistic.
If you want to build up speed, use the Sun and not the planets. In case you are young and didn't search anywhere, the Pioneer 10 & 11 and Voyager 1 & 2 and the New Horizons probes ALL used slingshotting and are headed out of the Solar System. New Horizons is heading for a Pluto flyby and currently holds the speed record at 12miles/second. So IF it was pointed in the right direction (and its not) it would reach the nearest star in about 100,000 YEARS. ...gonna be awhile before we can launch a starship, so put away your Starfleet Academy uniform.
Of all sci-fi ideas, I've always hated this one the most, because it is a common misconception. Sling-shotting doesn't give you extra energy (speed) in the absolute sense of wanting to go deeper into space. You only get increased speed as you approach the planet/moon/star, and loose ALL THAT YOU GAINED as you move away from that planet/moon/star. At best it allows you to change direction. It doesn't give you a boost/impulse to help you on your journey. It is more about borrowing energy to facilitate a change of direction. So that when you use your engines, you're not wasting fuel by working against your velocity, but instead adding to your velocity, so using the slingshot to change your direction, rather than your engines. In that TNG episode where Picard takes the helm around the asteroids, he used a slingshot to escape the belt. It is somewhat analogous to what high jumpers do, bending their bodies so their centre of gravity doesn't have to go as high as the bar. When Data talked about "we don't have the escape velocity to clear the belt", he should have known better -- yes you do Data, there's just stuff in your path that you have to dance around. (que picture of Data's dancing)
True enough in a frame of reference where the planet is stationary and you only consider the spacecraft and the planet. However due to the change in direction momentum and energy is exchanged between spacecraft and planet. The mass of the probe may be many orders of magnitude smaller than that of a planet, but the effect is still there. It just means that the change in the planet's velocity is extremely small compared to the change in velocity of the spacecraft. If this wasn't the case we couldn't accelerate a baseball by hitting it with a bat either. If you just consider the system of baseball and bat then momentum and energy is conserved of course, only the baseball's direction changes.
In the baseball system, energy is created by the batter, delivering this to the ball in the impulse of the collision. And the force applied to the baseball isn't a conservative field, whereas gravity is. What they try to show in sci-fi with slingshotting is to apply a forcefield to a probe, to transfer energy, to increase velocity. And then to conveniently ignore that forcefield, so the energy remains with the probe, and the probe heads back in the opposite direction much faster than it started. If planets with highly eccentric orbits did that, making a near pass to their parent star, gaining energy and speed, then they'd all fly off into outer space by this "slingshot effect".
No. The applicable example would be for example comets with highly eccentric orbits around the sun getting too close to another object in the solar system, then they'd be accelerated relative to the sun (though the change in direction alone would also very likely be enough make the orbit unstable). I'm too tired right now to write up the math myself (and I'm not used to writing about classical mechanics in English), so I'll borrow it from here: As you can see, in your example of planets with eccentric orbits you set your frame of reference to the sun's position so U1 = 0 and we have v2 = v1. Unless the planet comes close to another one that will make this into a three body system, the orbit remains stable.
ok how about this for an idea. You build a huge ring shaped rail line in orbit around Earth spinning with the orbit of the planet and you attach a space vehicle. The rail line will be powered by an unlimited amount of power from the Earths surface or attached nuclear reactors. The rail line will begin pushing the vehicle at enormous speeds around the orbit of the planet, now supposedly as long as you increase the speed gradually, g-forces won't be a problem for people onboard the vehicle and with an unlimited supply of power I think it would be possible to get that vehicle to some pretty astounding speeds. Anyway as the space vehicle reaches an arranged speed the rail line and vehicle disconnect from each other, the vehicle then uses onboard rockets to propel itself even faster and maneuver itself slightly on target incase the target was slightly out upon release. Now the crew can sit back, relax and enjoy the one way, suicidal trip to the next star system.
Lots of reasons for this latest idea to not work. Here are my top 3. I may have missed something more obvious than these, but I'm undercaffinated this morning. Mechanical issues like friction will be the first problem you encounter for the speeds you're proposing. Centrifugal force would be a second problem provided you get going fast enough. If you make it to a speed fast enough for centrifugal force to be a problem, then it'll be a problem for your passengers / cargo.
(1) Friction gets caused on trains on Earth but that doesn't stop high speeds, it just means you need to put more energy into it. (2) The rail isn't the same as a centrifuge, it would be just like running along a railway line on the surface of the planet because the rail is so huge and long. It's not like you're spinning around a central point just a few metres away. (3) See number 2 above.
centrifugal force is still there Fire, it is just weaker because of the bigger radius. = speed^2 / (radius of circle) so if you're talking about speeds 1000x that of earth trains, the magnitude is 100,000x !
More energy is all I need?... Ok. Please tell me what oil to use on wheel bearings of a locomotive traveling at 18,600 miles per second. That's 1/10th the speed of light, making Alpha Centauri only 43 years away! Does that lubricant work for less insane speeds? If a train left Alpha Centauri at the same time travelling at... oh, nevermind!
Hoses could constantly spray the line. Infact, depending on orbital height, would a Mag Lev rail line work in orbit?
ok ok ok ok, how about inter system travel? build the rail line on the moons surface going all the way around it and connecting as one big loop, have it do the same thing and build up gradually to a high speed and then have the track at one point raise up and release the craft so it zooms off beyond the Moons tiny gravitational pull, onboard rockets as I said before could be used for added velocity and/or maneuvering the craft on target for somewhere like Mars for example. We could get there within hours perhaps!!!