Flight paths in orbit around Ceres? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhat are the conditions like in Mercury orbit?Is space piracy orbitally practical?What material could be used for circuitry used for interstellar flight?In an elliptical orbit, where should a rocket fire its engines for maximum efficiency?Making a slow orbit around a large gas giantDetecting objects around other starsHow to 'store' a spacecraft for a long-term expedition?Satellite salvaging: safely de-orbit and retrieve spacecraft or other objectsAquatic aliens and the effects of acceleration in space-flightKeeping a retro style to sci-fi spaceships?
Can a flute soloist sit?
If I can cast sorceries at instant speed, can I use sorcery-speed activated abilities at instant speed?
Why couldn't they take pictures of a closer black hole?
Kerning for subscripts of sigma?
Can there be female White Walkers?
Geography at the pixel level
Is it okay to consider publishing in my first year of PhD?
How did passengers keep warm on sail ships?
What do hard-Brexiteers want with respect to the Irish border?
Why “相同意思的词” is called “同义词” instead of "同意词"?
How come people say “Would of”?
How can I define good in a religion that claims no moral authority?
How much of the clove should I use when using big garlic heads?
Why doesn't UInt have a toDouble()?
What is the motivation for a law requiring 2 parties to consent for recording a conversation
Cooking pasta in a water boiler
Does adding complexity mean a more secure cipher?
How to display lines in a file like ls displays files in a directory?
What is the most efficient way to store a numeric range?
APIPA and LAN Broadcast Domain
Did the UK government pay "millions and millions of dollars" to try to snag Julian Assange?
Worn-tile Scrabble
Why isn't the circumferential light around the M87 black hole's event horizon symmetric?
Are turbopumps lubricated?
Flight paths in orbit around Ceres?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhat are the conditions like in Mercury orbit?Is space piracy orbitally practical?What material could be used for circuitry used for interstellar flight?In an elliptical orbit, where should a rocket fire its engines for maximum efficiency?Making a slow orbit around a large gas giantDetecting objects around other starsHow to 'store' a spacecraft for a long-term expedition?Satellite salvaging: safely de-orbit and retrieve spacecraft or other objectsAquatic aliens and the effects of acceleration in space-flightKeeping a retro style to sci-fi spaceships?
$begingroup$
In my sci-fi world, mankind has begun colonization of the large asteroid Ceres. It's a mining hub, with a lot of cargo vessels transporting things in and out.
Hydrogen peroxide fuel is cheap and plentiful around Ceres, and the gravity well very shallow, so the kind of fuel efficient rendezvous moves we see in low earth orbit may not apply here. What kind of flight paths would be used by the small vessels loading and unloading the cargo from the big freighters (who sit in a parking orbit)? Would they just fly mostly in straightish lines?
A good answer will sketch out the kind of flight profile and rendezvous process likely to be employed, both in surface-orbit and orbit-orbit scenarios. Delta-v is naturally a concern but answers don't have to contain (much) math. I would love to know if complex flight planning would be required to calculate intercept trajectories, or if the pilots would just home in on a beacon, with little concern for orbital mechanics. Please try keep the technology to todays standard, or even a bit more retro, ie no warp drives or antimatter engines.
science-based space-travel spaceships
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In my sci-fi world, mankind has begun colonization of the large asteroid Ceres. It's a mining hub, with a lot of cargo vessels transporting things in and out.
Hydrogen peroxide fuel is cheap and plentiful around Ceres, and the gravity well very shallow, so the kind of fuel efficient rendezvous moves we see in low earth orbit may not apply here. What kind of flight paths would be used by the small vessels loading and unloading the cargo from the big freighters (who sit in a parking orbit)? Would they just fly mostly in straightish lines?
A good answer will sketch out the kind of flight profile and rendezvous process likely to be employed, both in surface-orbit and orbit-orbit scenarios. Delta-v is naturally a concern but answers don't have to contain (much) math. I would love to know if complex flight planning would be required to calculate intercept trajectories, or if the pilots would just home in on a beacon, with little concern for orbital mechanics. Please try keep the technology to todays standard, or even a bit more retro, ie no warp drives or antimatter engines.
science-based space-travel spaceships
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In my sci-fi world, mankind has begun colonization of the large asteroid Ceres. It's a mining hub, with a lot of cargo vessels transporting things in and out.
Hydrogen peroxide fuel is cheap and plentiful around Ceres, and the gravity well very shallow, so the kind of fuel efficient rendezvous moves we see in low earth orbit may not apply here. What kind of flight paths would be used by the small vessels loading and unloading the cargo from the big freighters (who sit in a parking orbit)? Would they just fly mostly in straightish lines?
A good answer will sketch out the kind of flight profile and rendezvous process likely to be employed, both in surface-orbit and orbit-orbit scenarios. Delta-v is naturally a concern but answers don't have to contain (much) math. I would love to know if complex flight planning would be required to calculate intercept trajectories, or if the pilots would just home in on a beacon, with little concern for orbital mechanics. Please try keep the technology to todays standard, or even a bit more retro, ie no warp drives or antimatter engines.
science-based space-travel spaceships
$endgroup$
In my sci-fi world, mankind has begun colonization of the large asteroid Ceres. It's a mining hub, with a lot of cargo vessels transporting things in and out.
Hydrogen peroxide fuel is cheap and plentiful around Ceres, and the gravity well very shallow, so the kind of fuel efficient rendezvous moves we see in low earth orbit may not apply here. What kind of flight paths would be used by the small vessels loading and unloading the cargo from the big freighters (who sit in a parking orbit)? Would they just fly mostly in straightish lines?
A good answer will sketch out the kind of flight profile and rendezvous process likely to be employed, both in surface-orbit and orbit-orbit scenarios. Delta-v is naturally a concern but answers don't have to contain (much) math. I would love to know if complex flight planning would be required to calculate intercept trajectories, or if the pilots would just home in on a beacon, with little concern for orbital mechanics. Please try keep the technology to todays standard, or even a bit more retro, ie no warp drives or antimatter engines.
science-based space-travel spaceships
science-based space-travel spaceships
edited 4 hours ago
Cyn
11.2k12453
11.2k12453
asked 5 hours ago
InnovineInnovine
3,690727
3,690727
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Space Elevators
Ceres's has a "Day" of 9 hours and low mass puts its Cere-stationary orbit about 1800km above its surface. With it's weaker gravity of 0.03g's, any number of modern polymers have sufficient strength to simply lower from a stationary orbit to any point on the surface.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Well, that just ruins my entire world. :(
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
with such low gravity, I suspect the friction and electrical dissipation loss of a space elevator would expend more energy than simply launching supplies into orbit.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nosajimiki you'd still want the elevator for bringing stuff back down without having to give every return trip a big retro-rocket. It might even be a net power generator in that mode, depending on losses in the system.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
(also, it might well be possible to make a solar-powered cable-climber, though I'm not going to work out the plausibility of that at Ceres' orbit)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
On a Cererian scale, a space elevator, even one made from nylon rope or whatever, is a megastructure. If you want to get into orbit, a simple catapult and an apogee kick motor is smaller, cheaper, and takes less time. Launch velocity from the equator into an eastward orbit is only 157 m/s (565 km/h).
$endgroup$
– Mark
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Escape velocity for a vertical take-off on Ceres is about 510 m/s with a gravitational resistance of 0.27 m/s and no atmosphere to cause drag, meaning you'd be spending a LOT more fuel just getting up to speeds appropriate for interplanetary travel than you would just getting stuff into deep space. This means that landing a heavy freighter to make loading easier might be more worthwhile than orbiting it and loading it one little shuttle at a time.
You could also maintain an orbit of about ~112 m/s flying at near surface altitudes making point to point transportation around the asteroid practically free; so, you could have a central loading airbase for your freighters that smaller shuttles bring stuff to from around the "globe". My guess is that people would focus more on time efficiency than fuel efficiency meaning flying in straight lines wherever possible would be the ideal way to go.
Complex flight planning may still be needed to the point of making sure people don't crash into each other, but by the time we're advanced enough to colonize Ceres, I'm sure AI will be far enough along to automate flight paths and navigation making local flight traffic a bit of a non-issue in the colonists daily lives.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A train that you have to hold down.
$endgroup$
– MongoTheGeek
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Regarding traffic, if point-to-point transport was popular I guess we'd see something like todays commercial airline airways and corridors. This would be cool in my world actually. I was already considering using beacons on the surface for navigation.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MongoTheGeek: trains would probably be fine, but moving more than half the speed of a commercial airliner would mean having to spend fuel to not fly away. I suspect this speed limit would probably become the standard flight velocity since it would be so much cheaper than going faster or slower, and the planetoid is small enough that you could still go anywhere in under 4hr at that speed.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine, Orbital GPS and communications satellites may still be ideal. A smaller planetary radius means that ground based beacons and radio towers will disappear over the horizon more quickly.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a benefit in my case, for other reasons.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Delta-v is naturally a concern but
$Delta_v$ isn't a concern. Escape velocity is ~514m/s, and using a peroxide rocket, a teeny-tiny mass ratio of 1.5 is enough to get you into solar orbit from Ceres' surface (for reference, the spaceshuttle had a mass ratio of 15, and it used engines with more than triple the specific impulse of peroxide). Not that you'd be doing such a thing, because you'd just use an electromagnetic or steam catapult to boost you up instead and use a tiny rocket motor to circularise your orbit. Orbital speed at cererean synchronous altitude is a miniscule ~186m/s so you don't need a whole lot of fuel to boost up and down or out as you wish.
In fact, $Delta_v$ is such a non-issue that it could easily make sense to not bother with your freighters at all, and simply boost stuff into space on an Earth (or wherever) intercept trajectory with a little engine to do mid-course correction and the final destination orbit injection burn. You'd either have to wait for a transfer window to open (which is infrequent, though I don't recall of the top of my head how infrequent) or you just put up with the fact that your cargo will take a few extra years to get home. If it is just dumb matter, that's not exactly a big deal. It is rather boring from a space-traffic-control-story point of view, however.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks. I see my next question is going to be about the role a human pilot would fill in this scenario :/ What do you think of popping up the cargo into cererian stationary orbit, catching and managing it with little tugs, and attaching it to the interplanetary engine?
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine the easiest way to justify the presence of humans is to make your setting a Heinlein-esque alt-history where computer technology simply hasn't developed enough yet. This won't help alt-present and near-future scenarios, which are much harder to justify, but I don't doubt there's plenty of material about that sort of thing out there already.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Even if no one else ever notices, its always an irritation to me if something isn't quite right. This is a thorn in my side. Having some plausible handwaving from this group is often a real help for getting me to relax into my own fiction.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine I think that's a common feeling on this site ;-)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
For plausible handwaving: Mankind is advanced, but this colony is still too small to have advanced manufacturing. It takes millions of people just to make a basically functioning infrastructure for modern technology today. Future tech would/should have an even higher ceiling to sustainably achieve. They use H2O2 fuel because it is just more cost effective than trying to make and fuel multi-billion dollar fusion reactors. This is much like how American pioneers often had to make due with stone-aged resources for many years until places developed enough to become industrialized.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Besides a static space elevator, we might also use a crane, or temporary space elevator. Basically a rope from a ship in stationary orbit unloading supplies and loading resources.
Catapulting things into orbit, as mentioned above, would also work. A ship could choose an elliptic orbit to catch the rocks at about the same speed and their highest elevation or or a suitable tangential movement. I'll leave the mathematics to you. It may collect the rocks or mount engines on them which put them onto desired paths and then return for refuelling - maybe after pushing something from another asteroid or moon towards ceres.
s os
s xCCCCx o s
s CCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s o
s CCCCCCCCCCo s o C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s o s=Ship/Station
s s o o=Resources
A gravity assist maneuver could put a ship at very slow speeds and synced to the rotation of Ceres very close to the surface - enough to push a large container with very little energy into the holding bay, and to push loads towards Ceres with just some balloons on the outside to cushion the impact. Once the ship is behind Ceres (as seen relativ to it's movement around the sun), gravity would accelerate the ship again, so no significant energy is lost.
<s
s
s
s xCCCCx
s <CCCCCCCC<
s <CCCCCCCCCC< s>
s #<CCCCCCCCCC< s >=Direction
s <CCCCCCCC< s C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s s=Ship
s s #=Resources
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Ceres is too small for a meaningful gravity assist.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Gravity assists have been used on much smaller asteroids to slow down and accelerate probes.
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Earth and Venus gravity assists have been used to send probes to asteroids. I'm not aware of a single mission that used an asteroid gravity assist to send a probe anywhere.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Here's one: theverge.com/2017/9/19/16327876/… Also, Galileo used the Jovian moons for the same...
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a slingshot around Earth
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143794%2fflight-paths-in-orbit-around-ceres%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Space Elevators
Ceres's has a "Day" of 9 hours and low mass puts its Cere-stationary orbit about 1800km above its surface. With it's weaker gravity of 0.03g's, any number of modern polymers have sufficient strength to simply lower from a stationary orbit to any point on the surface.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Well, that just ruins my entire world. :(
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
with such low gravity, I suspect the friction and electrical dissipation loss of a space elevator would expend more energy than simply launching supplies into orbit.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nosajimiki you'd still want the elevator for bringing stuff back down without having to give every return trip a big retro-rocket. It might even be a net power generator in that mode, depending on losses in the system.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
(also, it might well be possible to make a solar-powered cable-climber, though I'm not going to work out the plausibility of that at Ceres' orbit)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
On a Cererian scale, a space elevator, even one made from nylon rope or whatever, is a megastructure. If you want to get into orbit, a simple catapult and an apogee kick motor is smaller, cheaper, and takes less time. Launch velocity from the equator into an eastward orbit is only 157 m/s (565 km/h).
$endgroup$
– Mark
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Space Elevators
Ceres's has a "Day" of 9 hours and low mass puts its Cere-stationary orbit about 1800km above its surface. With it's weaker gravity of 0.03g's, any number of modern polymers have sufficient strength to simply lower from a stationary orbit to any point on the surface.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Well, that just ruins my entire world. :(
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
with such low gravity, I suspect the friction and electrical dissipation loss of a space elevator would expend more energy than simply launching supplies into orbit.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nosajimiki you'd still want the elevator for bringing stuff back down without having to give every return trip a big retro-rocket. It might even be a net power generator in that mode, depending on losses in the system.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
(also, it might well be possible to make a solar-powered cable-climber, though I'm not going to work out the plausibility of that at Ceres' orbit)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
On a Cererian scale, a space elevator, even one made from nylon rope or whatever, is a megastructure. If you want to get into orbit, a simple catapult and an apogee kick motor is smaller, cheaper, and takes less time. Launch velocity from the equator into an eastward orbit is only 157 m/s (565 km/h).
$endgroup$
– Mark
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Space Elevators
Ceres's has a "Day" of 9 hours and low mass puts its Cere-stationary orbit about 1800km above its surface. With it's weaker gravity of 0.03g's, any number of modern polymers have sufficient strength to simply lower from a stationary orbit to any point on the surface.
$endgroup$
Space Elevators
Ceres's has a "Day" of 9 hours and low mass puts its Cere-stationary orbit about 1800km above its surface. With it's weaker gravity of 0.03g's, any number of modern polymers have sufficient strength to simply lower from a stationary orbit to any point on the surface.
answered 5 hours ago
MongoTheGeekMongoTheGeek
1,010210
1,010210
$begingroup$
Well, that just ruins my entire world. :(
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
with such low gravity, I suspect the friction and electrical dissipation loss of a space elevator would expend more energy than simply launching supplies into orbit.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nosajimiki you'd still want the elevator for bringing stuff back down without having to give every return trip a big retro-rocket. It might even be a net power generator in that mode, depending on losses in the system.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
(also, it might well be possible to make a solar-powered cable-climber, though I'm not going to work out the plausibility of that at Ceres' orbit)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
On a Cererian scale, a space elevator, even one made from nylon rope or whatever, is a megastructure. If you want to get into orbit, a simple catapult and an apogee kick motor is smaller, cheaper, and takes less time. Launch velocity from the equator into an eastward orbit is only 157 m/s (565 km/h).
$endgroup$
– Mark
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Well, that just ruins my entire world. :(
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
with such low gravity, I suspect the friction and electrical dissipation loss of a space elevator would expend more energy than simply launching supplies into orbit.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nosajimiki you'd still want the elevator for bringing stuff back down without having to give every return trip a big retro-rocket. It might even be a net power generator in that mode, depending on losses in the system.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
(also, it might well be possible to make a solar-powered cable-climber, though I'm not going to work out the plausibility of that at Ceres' orbit)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
On a Cererian scale, a space elevator, even one made from nylon rope or whatever, is a megastructure. If you want to get into orbit, a simple catapult and an apogee kick motor is smaller, cheaper, and takes less time. Launch velocity from the equator into an eastward orbit is only 157 m/s (565 km/h).
$endgroup$
– Mark
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, that just ruins my entire world. :(
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, that just ruins my entire world. :(
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
with such low gravity, I suspect the friction and electrical dissipation loss of a space elevator would expend more energy than simply launching supplies into orbit.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
with such low gravity, I suspect the friction and electrical dissipation loss of a space elevator would expend more energy than simply launching supplies into orbit.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Nosajimiki you'd still want the elevator for bringing stuff back down without having to give every return trip a big retro-rocket. It might even be a net power generator in that mode, depending on losses in the system.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nosajimiki you'd still want the elevator for bringing stuff back down without having to give every return trip a big retro-rocket. It might even be a net power generator in that mode, depending on losses in the system.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
(also, it might well be possible to make a solar-powered cable-climber, though I'm not going to work out the plausibility of that at Ceres' orbit)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
(also, it might well be possible to make a solar-powered cable-climber, though I'm not going to work out the plausibility of that at Ceres' orbit)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
On a Cererian scale, a space elevator, even one made from nylon rope or whatever, is a megastructure. If you want to get into orbit, a simple catapult and an apogee kick motor is smaller, cheaper, and takes less time. Launch velocity from the equator into an eastward orbit is only 157 m/s (565 km/h).
$endgroup$
– Mark
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
On a Cererian scale, a space elevator, even one made from nylon rope or whatever, is a megastructure. If you want to get into orbit, a simple catapult and an apogee kick motor is smaller, cheaper, and takes less time. Launch velocity from the equator into an eastward orbit is only 157 m/s (565 km/h).
$endgroup$
– Mark
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Escape velocity for a vertical take-off on Ceres is about 510 m/s with a gravitational resistance of 0.27 m/s and no atmosphere to cause drag, meaning you'd be spending a LOT more fuel just getting up to speeds appropriate for interplanetary travel than you would just getting stuff into deep space. This means that landing a heavy freighter to make loading easier might be more worthwhile than orbiting it and loading it one little shuttle at a time.
You could also maintain an orbit of about ~112 m/s flying at near surface altitudes making point to point transportation around the asteroid practically free; so, you could have a central loading airbase for your freighters that smaller shuttles bring stuff to from around the "globe". My guess is that people would focus more on time efficiency than fuel efficiency meaning flying in straight lines wherever possible would be the ideal way to go.
Complex flight planning may still be needed to the point of making sure people don't crash into each other, but by the time we're advanced enough to colonize Ceres, I'm sure AI will be far enough along to automate flight paths and navigation making local flight traffic a bit of a non-issue in the colonists daily lives.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A train that you have to hold down.
$endgroup$
– MongoTheGeek
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Regarding traffic, if point-to-point transport was popular I guess we'd see something like todays commercial airline airways and corridors. This would be cool in my world actually. I was already considering using beacons on the surface for navigation.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MongoTheGeek: trains would probably be fine, but moving more than half the speed of a commercial airliner would mean having to spend fuel to not fly away. I suspect this speed limit would probably become the standard flight velocity since it would be so much cheaper than going faster or slower, and the planetoid is small enough that you could still go anywhere in under 4hr at that speed.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine, Orbital GPS and communications satellites may still be ideal. A smaller planetary radius means that ground based beacons and radio towers will disappear over the horizon more quickly.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a benefit in my case, for other reasons.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Escape velocity for a vertical take-off on Ceres is about 510 m/s with a gravitational resistance of 0.27 m/s and no atmosphere to cause drag, meaning you'd be spending a LOT more fuel just getting up to speeds appropriate for interplanetary travel than you would just getting stuff into deep space. This means that landing a heavy freighter to make loading easier might be more worthwhile than orbiting it and loading it one little shuttle at a time.
You could also maintain an orbit of about ~112 m/s flying at near surface altitudes making point to point transportation around the asteroid practically free; so, you could have a central loading airbase for your freighters that smaller shuttles bring stuff to from around the "globe". My guess is that people would focus more on time efficiency than fuel efficiency meaning flying in straight lines wherever possible would be the ideal way to go.
Complex flight planning may still be needed to the point of making sure people don't crash into each other, but by the time we're advanced enough to colonize Ceres, I'm sure AI will be far enough along to automate flight paths and navigation making local flight traffic a bit of a non-issue in the colonists daily lives.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A train that you have to hold down.
$endgroup$
– MongoTheGeek
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Regarding traffic, if point-to-point transport was popular I guess we'd see something like todays commercial airline airways and corridors. This would be cool in my world actually. I was already considering using beacons on the surface for navigation.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MongoTheGeek: trains would probably be fine, but moving more than half the speed of a commercial airliner would mean having to spend fuel to not fly away. I suspect this speed limit would probably become the standard flight velocity since it would be so much cheaper than going faster or slower, and the planetoid is small enough that you could still go anywhere in under 4hr at that speed.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine, Orbital GPS and communications satellites may still be ideal. A smaller planetary radius means that ground based beacons and radio towers will disappear over the horizon more quickly.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a benefit in my case, for other reasons.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Escape velocity for a vertical take-off on Ceres is about 510 m/s with a gravitational resistance of 0.27 m/s and no atmosphere to cause drag, meaning you'd be spending a LOT more fuel just getting up to speeds appropriate for interplanetary travel than you would just getting stuff into deep space. This means that landing a heavy freighter to make loading easier might be more worthwhile than orbiting it and loading it one little shuttle at a time.
You could also maintain an orbit of about ~112 m/s flying at near surface altitudes making point to point transportation around the asteroid practically free; so, you could have a central loading airbase for your freighters that smaller shuttles bring stuff to from around the "globe". My guess is that people would focus more on time efficiency than fuel efficiency meaning flying in straight lines wherever possible would be the ideal way to go.
Complex flight planning may still be needed to the point of making sure people don't crash into each other, but by the time we're advanced enough to colonize Ceres, I'm sure AI will be far enough along to automate flight paths and navigation making local flight traffic a bit of a non-issue in the colonists daily lives.
$endgroup$
Escape velocity for a vertical take-off on Ceres is about 510 m/s with a gravitational resistance of 0.27 m/s and no atmosphere to cause drag, meaning you'd be spending a LOT more fuel just getting up to speeds appropriate for interplanetary travel than you would just getting stuff into deep space. This means that landing a heavy freighter to make loading easier might be more worthwhile than orbiting it and loading it one little shuttle at a time.
You could also maintain an orbit of about ~112 m/s flying at near surface altitudes making point to point transportation around the asteroid practically free; so, you could have a central loading airbase for your freighters that smaller shuttles bring stuff to from around the "globe". My guess is that people would focus more on time efficiency than fuel efficiency meaning flying in straight lines wherever possible would be the ideal way to go.
Complex flight planning may still be needed to the point of making sure people don't crash into each other, but by the time we're advanced enough to colonize Ceres, I'm sure AI will be far enough along to automate flight paths and navigation making local flight traffic a bit of a non-issue in the colonists daily lives.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
NosajimikiNosajimiki
2,550119
2,550119
$begingroup$
A train that you have to hold down.
$endgroup$
– MongoTheGeek
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Regarding traffic, if point-to-point transport was popular I guess we'd see something like todays commercial airline airways and corridors. This would be cool in my world actually. I was already considering using beacons on the surface for navigation.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MongoTheGeek: trains would probably be fine, but moving more than half the speed of a commercial airliner would mean having to spend fuel to not fly away. I suspect this speed limit would probably become the standard flight velocity since it would be so much cheaper than going faster or slower, and the planetoid is small enough that you could still go anywhere in under 4hr at that speed.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine, Orbital GPS and communications satellites may still be ideal. A smaller planetary radius means that ground based beacons and radio towers will disappear over the horizon more quickly.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a benefit in my case, for other reasons.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A train that you have to hold down.
$endgroup$
– MongoTheGeek
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Regarding traffic, if point-to-point transport was popular I guess we'd see something like todays commercial airline airways and corridors. This would be cool in my world actually. I was already considering using beacons on the surface for navigation.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MongoTheGeek: trains would probably be fine, but moving more than half the speed of a commercial airliner would mean having to spend fuel to not fly away. I suspect this speed limit would probably become the standard flight velocity since it would be so much cheaper than going faster or slower, and the planetoid is small enough that you could still go anywhere in under 4hr at that speed.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine, Orbital GPS and communications satellites may still be ideal. A smaller planetary radius means that ground based beacons and radio towers will disappear over the horizon more quickly.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a benefit in my case, for other reasons.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
A train that you have to hold down.
$endgroup$
– MongoTheGeek
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
A train that you have to hold down.
$endgroup$
– MongoTheGeek
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Regarding traffic, if point-to-point transport was popular I guess we'd see something like todays commercial airline airways and corridors. This would be cool in my world actually. I was already considering using beacons on the surface for navigation.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Regarding traffic, if point-to-point transport was popular I guess we'd see something like todays commercial airline airways and corridors. This would be cool in my world actually. I was already considering using beacons on the surface for navigation.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MongoTheGeek: trains would probably be fine, but moving more than half the speed of a commercial airliner would mean having to spend fuel to not fly away. I suspect this speed limit would probably become the standard flight velocity since it would be so much cheaper than going faster or slower, and the planetoid is small enough that you could still go anywhere in under 4hr at that speed.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MongoTheGeek: trains would probably be fine, but moving more than half the speed of a commercial airliner would mean having to spend fuel to not fly away. I suspect this speed limit would probably become the standard flight velocity since it would be so much cheaper than going faster or slower, and the planetoid is small enough that you could still go anywhere in under 4hr at that speed.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine, Orbital GPS and communications satellites may still be ideal. A smaller planetary radius means that ground based beacons and radio towers will disappear over the horizon more quickly.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine, Orbital GPS and communications satellites may still be ideal. A smaller planetary radius means that ground based beacons and radio towers will disappear over the horizon more quickly.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a benefit in my case, for other reasons.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a benefit in my case, for other reasons.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Delta-v is naturally a concern but
$Delta_v$ isn't a concern. Escape velocity is ~514m/s, and using a peroxide rocket, a teeny-tiny mass ratio of 1.5 is enough to get you into solar orbit from Ceres' surface (for reference, the spaceshuttle had a mass ratio of 15, and it used engines with more than triple the specific impulse of peroxide). Not that you'd be doing such a thing, because you'd just use an electromagnetic or steam catapult to boost you up instead and use a tiny rocket motor to circularise your orbit. Orbital speed at cererean synchronous altitude is a miniscule ~186m/s so you don't need a whole lot of fuel to boost up and down or out as you wish.
In fact, $Delta_v$ is such a non-issue that it could easily make sense to not bother with your freighters at all, and simply boost stuff into space on an Earth (or wherever) intercept trajectory with a little engine to do mid-course correction and the final destination orbit injection burn. You'd either have to wait for a transfer window to open (which is infrequent, though I don't recall of the top of my head how infrequent) or you just put up with the fact that your cargo will take a few extra years to get home. If it is just dumb matter, that's not exactly a big deal. It is rather boring from a space-traffic-control-story point of view, however.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks. I see my next question is going to be about the role a human pilot would fill in this scenario :/ What do you think of popping up the cargo into cererian stationary orbit, catching and managing it with little tugs, and attaching it to the interplanetary engine?
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine the easiest way to justify the presence of humans is to make your setting a Heinlein-esque alt-history where computer technology simply hasn't developed enough yet. This won't help alt-present and near-future scenarios, which are much harder to justify, but I don't doubt there's plenty of material about that sort of thing out there already.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Even if no one else ever notices, its always an irritation to me if something isn't quite right. This is a thorn in my side. Having some plausible handwaving from this group is often a real help for getting me to relax into my own fiction.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine I think that's a common feeling on this site ;-)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
For plausible handwaving: Mankind is advanced, but this colony is still too small to have advanced manufacturing. It takes millions of people just to make a basically functioning infrastructure for modern technology today. Future tech would/should have an even higher ceiling to sustainably achieve. They use H2O2 fuel because it is just more cost effective than trying to make and fuel multi-billion dollar fusion reactors. This is much like how American pioneers often had to make due with stone-aged resources for many years until places developed enough to become industrialized.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Delta-v is naturally a concern but
$Delta_v$ isn't a concern. Escape velocity is ~514m/s, and using a peroxide rocket, a teeny-tiny mass ratio of 1.5 is enough to get you into solar orbit from Ceres' surface (for reference, the spaceshuttle had a mass ratio of 15, and it used engines with more than triple the specific impulse of peroxide). Not that you'd be doing such a thing, because you'd just use an electromagnetic or steam catapult to boost you up instead and use a tiny rocket motor to circularise your orbit. Orbital speed at cererean synchronous altitude is a miniscule ~186m/s so you don't need a whole lot of fuel to boost up and down or out as you wish.
In fact, $Delta_v$ is such a non-issue that it could easily make sense to not bother with your freighters at all, and simply boost stuff into space on an Earth (or wherever) intercept trajectory with a little engine to do mid-course correction and the final destination orbit injection burn. You'd either have to wait for a transfer window to open (which is infrequent, though I don't recall of the top of my head how infrequent) or you just put up with the fact that your cargo will take a few extra years to get home. If it is just dumb matter, that's not exactly a big deal. It is rather boring from a space-traffic-control-story point of view, however.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks. I see my next question is going to be about the role a human pilot would fill in this scenario :/ What do you think of popping up the cargo into cererian stationary orbit, catching and managing it with little tugs, and attaching it to the interplanetary engine?
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine the easiest way to justify the presence of humans is to make your setting a Heinlein-esque alt-history where computer technology simply hasn't developed enough yet. This won't help alt-present and near-future scenarios, which are much harder to justify, but I don't doubt there's plenty of material about that sort of thing out there already.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Even if no one else ever notices, its always an irritation to me if something isn't quite right. This is a thorn in my side. Having some plausible handwaving from this group is often a real help for getting me to relax into my own fiction.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine I think that's a common feeling on this site ;-)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
For plausible handwaving: Mankind is advanced, but this colony is still too small to have advanced manufacturing. It takes millions of people just to make a basically functioning infrastructure for modern technology today. Future tech would/should have an even higher ceiling to sustainably achieve. They use H2O2 fuel because it is just more cost effective than trying to make and fuel multi-billion dollar fusion reactors. This is much like how American pioneers often had to make due with stone-aged resources for many years until places developed enough to become industrialized.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Delta-v is naturally a concern but
$Delta_v$ isn't a concern. Escape velocity is ~514m/s, and using a peroxide rocket, a teeny-tiny mass ratio of 1.5 is enough to get you into solar orbit from Ceres' surface (for reference, the spaceshuttle had a mass ratio of 15, and it used engines with more than triple the specific impulse of peroxide). Not that you'd be doing such a thing, because you'd just use an electromagnetic or steam catapult to boost you up instead and use a tiny rocket motor to circularise your orbit. Orbital speed at cererean synchronous altitude is a miniscule ~186m/s so you don't need a whole lot of fuel to boost up and down or out as you wish.
In fact, $Delta_v$ is such a non-issue that it could easily make sense to not bother with your freighters at all, and simply boost stuff into space on an Earth (or wherever) intercept trajectory with a little engine to do mid-course correction and the final destination orbit injection burn. You'd either have to wait for a transfer window to open (which is infrequent, though I don't recall of the top of my head how infrequent) or you just put up with the fact that your cargo will take a few extra years to get home. If it is just dumb matter, that's not exactly a big deal. It is rather boring from a space-traffic-control-story point of view, however.
$endgroup$
Delta-v is naturally a concern but
$Delta_v$ isn't a concern. Escape velocity is ~514m/s, and using a peroxide rocket, a teeny-tiny mass ratio of 1.5 is enough to get you into solar orbit from Ceres' surface (for reference, the spaceshuttle had a mass ratio of 15, and it used engines with more than triple the specific impulse of peroxide). Not that you'd be doing such a thing, because you'd just use an electromagnetic or steam catapult to boost you up instead and use a tiny rocket motor to circularise your orbit. Orbital speed at cererean synchronous altitude is a miniscule ~186m/s so you don't need a whole lot of fuel to boost up and down or out as you wish.
In fact, $Delta_v$ is such a non-issue that it could easily make sense to not bother with your freighters at all, and simply boost stuff into space on an Earth (or wherever) intercept trajectory with a little engine to do mid-course correction and the final destination orbit injection burn. You'd either have to wait for a transfer window to open (which is infrequent, though I don't recall of the top of my head how infrequent) or you just put up with the fact that your cargo will take a few extra years to get home. If it is just dumb matter, that's not exactly a big deal. It is rather boring from a space-traffic-control-story point of view, however.
answered 4 hours ago
Starfish PrimeStarfish Prime
1,04112
1,04112
$begingroup$
Thanks. I see my next question is going to be about the role a human pilot would fill in this scenario :/ What do you think of popping up the cargo into cererian stationary orbit, catching and managing it with little tugs, and attaching it to the interplanetary engine?
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine the easiest way to justify the presence of humans is to make your setting a Heinlein-esque alt-history where computer technology simply hasn't developed enough yet. This won't help alt-present and near-future scenarios, which are much harder to justify, but I don't doubt there's plenty of material about that sort of thing out there already.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Even if no one else ever notices, its always an irritation to me if something isn't quite right. This is a thorn in my side. Having some plausible handwaving from this group is often a real help for getting me to relax into my own fiction.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine I think that's a common feeling on this site ;-)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
For plausible handwaving: Mankind is advanced, but this colony is still too small to have advanced manufacturing. It takes millions of people just to make a basically functioning infrastructure for modern technology today. Future tech would/should have an even higher ceiling to sustainably achieve. They use H2O2 fuel because it is just more cost effective than trying to make and fuel multi-billion dollar fusion reactors. This is much like how American pioneers often had to make due with stone-aged resources for many years until places developed enough to become industrialized.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Thanks. I see my next question is going to be about the role a human pilot would fill in this scenario :/ What do you think of popping up the cargo into cererian stationary orbit, catching and managing it with little tugs, and attaching it to the interplanetary engine?
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine the easiest way to justify the presence of humans is to make your setting a Heinlein-esque alt-history where computer technology simply hasn't developed enough yet. This won't help alt-present and near-future scenarios, which are much harder to justify, but I don't doubt there's plenty of material about that sort of thing out there already.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Even if no one else ever notices, its always an irritation to me if something isn't quite right. This is a thorn in my side. Having some plausible handwaving from this group is often a real help for getting me to relax into my own fiction.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine I think that's a common feeling on this site ;-)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
For plausible handwaving: Mankind is advanced, but this colony is still too small to have advanced manufacturing. It takes millions of people just to make a basically functioning infrastructure for modern technology today. Future tech would/should have an even higher ceiling to sustainably achieve. They use H2O2 fuel because it is just more cost effective than trying to make and fuel multi-billion dollar fusion reactors. This is much like how American pioneers often had to make due with stone-aged resources for many years until places developed enough to become industrialized.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thanks. I see my next question is going to be about the role a human pilot would fill in this scenario :/ What do you think of popping up the cargo into cererian stationary orbit, catching and managing it with little tugs, and attaching it to the interplanetary engine?
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thanks. I see my next question is going to be about the role a human pilot would fill in this scenario :/ What do you think of popping up the cargo into cererian stationary orbit, catching and managing it with little tugs, and attaching it to the interplanetary engine?
$endgroup$
– Innovine
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine the easiest way to justify the presence of humans is to make your setting a Heinlein-esque alt-history where computer technology simply hasn't developed enough yet. This won't help alt-present and near-future scenarios, which are much harder to justify, but I don't doubt there's plenty of material about that sort of thing out there already.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine the easiest way to justify the presence of humans is to make your setting a Heinlein-esque alt-history where computer technology simply hasn't developed enough yet. This won't help alt-present and near-future scenarios, which are much harder to justify, but I don't doubt there's plenty of material about that sort of thing out there already.
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Even if no one else ever notices, its always an irritation to me if something isn't quite right. This is a thorn in my side. Having some plausible handwaving from this group is often a real help for getting me to relax into my own fiction.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Even if no one else ever notices, its always an irritation to me if something isn't quite right. This is a thorn in my side. Having some plausible handwaving from this group is often a real help for getting me to relax into my own fiction.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
3 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine I think that's a common feeling on this site ;-)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Innovine I think that's a common feeling on this site ;-)
$endgroup$
– Starfish Prime
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
For plausible handwaving: Mankind is advanced, but this colony is still too small to have advanced manufacturing. It takes millions of people just to make a basically functioning infrastructure for modern technology today. Future tech would/should have an even higher ceiling to sustainably achieve. They use H2O2 fuel because it is just more cost effective than trying to make and fuel multi-billion dollar fusion reactors. This is much like how American pioneers often had to make due with stone-aged resources for many years until places developed enough to become industrialized.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
For plausible handwaving: Mankind is advanced, but this colony is still too small to have advanced manufacturing. It takes millions of people just to make a basically functioning infrastructure for modern technology today. Future tech would/should have an even higher ceiling to sustainably achieve. They use H2O2 fuel because it is just more cost effective than trying to make and fuel multi-billion dollar fusion reactors. This is much like how American pioneers often had to make due with stone-aged resources for many years until places developed enough to become industrialized.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Besides a static space elevator, we might also use a crane, or temporary space elevator. Basically a rope from a ship in stationary orbit unloading supplies and loading resources.
Catapulting things into orbit, as mentioned above, would also work. A ship could choose an elliptic orbit to catch the rocks at about the same speed and their highest elevation or or a suitable tangential movement. I'll leave the mathematics to you. It may collect the rocks or mount engines on them which put them onto desired paths and then return for refuelling - maybe after pushing something from another asteroid or moon towards ceres.
s os
s xCCCCx o s
s CCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s o
s CCCCCCCCCCo s o C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s o s=Ship/Station
s s o o=Resources
A gravity assist maneuver could put a ship at very slow speeds and synced to the rotation of Ceres very close to the surface - enough to push a large container with very little energy into the holding bay, and to push loads towards Ceres with just some balloons on the outside to cushion the impact. Once the ship is behind Ceres (as seen relativ to it's movement around the sun), gravity would accelerate the ship again, so no significant energy is lost.
<s
s
s
s xCCCCx
s <CCCCCCCC<
s <CCCCCCCCCC< s>
s #<CCCCCCCCCC< s >=Direction
s <CCCCCCCC< s C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s s=Ship
s s #=Resources
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Ceres is too small for a meaningful gravity assist.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Gravity assists have been used on much smaller asteroids to slow down and accelerate probes.
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Earth and Venus gravity assists have been used to send probes to asteroids. I'm not aware of a single mission that used an asteroid gravity assist to send a probe anywhere.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Here's one: theverge.com/2017/9/19/16327876/… Also, Galileo used the Jovian moons for the same...
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a slingshot around Earth
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Besides a static space elevator, we might also use a crane, or temporary space elevator. Basically a rope from a ship in stationary orbit unloading supplies and loading resources.
Catapulting things into orbit, as mentioned above, would also work. A ship could choose an elliptic orbit to catch the rocks at about the same speed and their highest elevation or or a suitable tangential movement. I'll leave the mathematics to you. It may collect the rocks or mount engines on them which put them onto desired paths and then return for refuelling - maybe after pushing something from another asteroid or moon towards ceres.
s os
s xCCCCx o s
s CCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s o
s CCCCCCCCCCo s o C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s o s=Ship/Station
s s o o=Resources
A gravity assist maneuver could put a ship at very slow speeds and synced to the rotation of Ceres very close to the surface - enough to push a large container with very little energy into the holding bay, and to push loads towards Ceres with just some balloons on the outside to cushion the impact. Once the ship is behind Ceres (as seen relativ to it's movement around the sun), gravity would accelerate the ship again, so no significant energy is lost.
<s
s
s
s xCCCCx
s <CCCCCCCC<
s <CCCCCCCCCC< s>
s #<CCCCCCCCCC< s >=Direction
s <CCCCCCCC< s C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s s=Ship
s s #=Resources
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Ceres is too small for a meaningful gravity assist.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Gravity assists have been used on much smaller asteroids to slow down and accelerate probes.
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Earth and Venus gravity assists have been used to send probes to asteroids. I'm not aware of a single mission that used an asteroid gravity assist to send a probe anywhere.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Here's one: theverge.com/2017/9/19/16327876/… Also, Galileo used the Jovian moons for the same...
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a slingshot around Earth
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Besides a static space elevator, we might also use a crane, or temporary space elevator. Basically a rope from a ship in stationary orbit unloading supplies and loading resources.
Catapulting things into orbit, as mentioned above, would also work. A ship could choose an elliptic orbit to catch the rocks at about the same speed and their highest elevation or or a suitable tangential movement. I'll leave the mathematics to you. It may collect the rocks or mount engines on them which put them onto desired paths and then return for refuelling - maybe after pushing something from another asteroid or moon towards ceres.
s os
s xCCCCx o s
s CCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s o
s CCCCCCCCCCo s o C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s o s=Ship/Station
s s o o=Resources
A gravity assist maneuver could put a ship at very slow speeds and synced to the rotation of Ceres very close to the surface - enough to push a large container with very little energy into the holding bay, and to push loads towards Ceres with just some balloons on the outside to cushion the impact. Once the ship is behind Ceres (as seen relativ to it's movement around the sun), gravity would accelerate the ship again, so no significant energy is lost.
<s
s
s
s xCCCCx
s <CCCCCCCC<
s <CCCCCCCCCC< s>
s #<CCCCCCCCCC< s >=Direction
s <CCCCCCCC< s C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s s=Ship
s s #=Resources
$endgroup$
Besides a static space elevator, we might also use a crane, or temporary space elevator. Basically a rope from a ship in stationary orbit unloading supplies and loading resources.
Catapulting things into orbit, as mentioned above, would also work. A ship could choose an elliptic orbit to catch the rocks at about the same speed and their highest elevation or or a suitable tangential movement. I'll leave the mathematics to you. It may collect the rocks or mount engines on them which put them onto desired paths and then return for refuelling - maybe after pushing something from another asteroid or moon towards ceres.
s os
s xCCCCx o s
s CCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s .
s CCCCCCCCCCCC o s o
s CCCCCCCCCCo s o C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s o s=Ship/Station
s s o o=Resources
A gravity assist maneuver could put a ship at very slow speeds and synced to the rotation of Ceres very close to the surface - enough to push a large container with very little energy into the holding bay, and to push loads towards Ceres with just some balloons on the outside to cushion the impact. Once the ship is behind Ceres (as seen relativ to it's movement around the sun), gravity would accelerate the ship again, so no significant energy is lost.
<s
s
s
s xCCCCx
s <CCCCCCCC<
s <CCCCCCCCCC< s>
s #<CCCCCCCCCC< s >=Direction
s <CCCCCCCC< s C=Ceres
s *CCCC* s s=Ship
s s #=Resources
answered 3 hours ago
Carl DombrowskiCarl Dombrowski
693
693
$begingroup$
Ceres is too small for a meaningful gravity assist.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Gravity assists have been used on much smaller asteroids to slow down and accelerate probes.
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Earth and Venus gravity assists have been used to send probes to asteroids. I'm not aware of a single mission that used an asteroid gravity assist to send a probe anywhere.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Here's one: theverge.com/2017/9/19/16327876/… Also, Galileo used the Jovian moons for the same...
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a slingshot around Earth
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Ceres is too small for a meaningful gravity assist.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Gravity assists have been used on much smaller asteroids to slow down and accelerate probes.
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Earth and Venus gravity assists have been used to send probes to asteroids. I'm not aware of a single mission that used an asteroid gravity assist to send a probe anywhere.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Here's one: theverge.com/2017/9/19/16327876/… Also, Galileo used the Jovian moons for the same...
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a slingshot around Earth
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ceres is too small for a meaningful gravity assist.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ceres is too small for a meaningful gravity assist.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Gravity assists have been used on much smaller asteroids to slow down and accelerate probes.
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Gravity assists have been used on much smaller asteroids to slow down and accelerate probes.
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Earth and Venus gravity assists have been used to send probes to asteroids. I'm not aware of a single mission that used an asteroid gravity assist to send a probe anywhere.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Earth and Venus gravity assists have been used to send probes to asteroids. I'm not aware of a single mission that used an asteroid gravity assist to send a probe anywhere.
$endgroup$
– Mark
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Here's one: theverge.com/2017/9/19/16327876/… Also, Galileo used the Jovian moons for the same...
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Here's one: theverge.com/2017/9/19/16327876/… Also, Galileo used the Jovian moons for the same...
$endgroup$
– Carl Dombrowski
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a slingshot around Earth
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is a slingshot around Earth
$endgroup$
– Innovine
2 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143794%2fflight-paths-in-orbit-around-ceres%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown