Re: cheap space flight

Michael Lorrey (
Mon, 18 Nov 1996 20:24:29 -0500

Chris Hind wrote:
> What about the Roton design?

It seems to be a pretty good concept, and if Gary Hudson is working on
it, then it must be feasible, though it has a major drawback:

1) Using the reaction jet to move a rotor for greater efficiency is a
bright idea, but it relies on the atmosphere as a working fluid, so once
you get to an altitude where you can actually gain some speed, the air
is so thin that you lose a lot of that efficiency.

also 2) if the whole ship rotates, you've got major centrifugal
problems, and if its a free spinning rotor, you've got major wear
problems with the main bearings you are going to need, which adds up to
big maintenance.

Using my drive system, a launcher burning JP-4/LOX in a turbine motor
would be directly linked to the Lorrey Drives for maximum efficiency and
power. The internal working mass would be the same in every part of the
flight envelope, so your would have the same efficiency. Burning JP-4
enables one to hold the fuel in the wings, with LOX in the fuselage,
and possibly some small turbofan engines for takeoff and landing burning
air and JP-4 instead of LOX for more weight savings. If you look up the
Black Horse project or Pioneer Rocketplane for the type of vehicle I am
talking about. They are using conventional rockets though, which is why
they are only a suborbital sytem.

This sort of launcher could take off from any 8,000 foot runway, with no
in air refueling (as BH and PR talk about).


Note: this email composed under the influence of Soundgarden....