SpinLaunch: A Rocket Startup That Wants to Catapult Satellites Into Space | WSJ

Startup company SpinLaunch is developing new technology to launch rockets into space that reduces dependence on traditional fuels while significantly lowering the cost. WSJ visited SpinLaunch’s headquarters to see the technology in action and learn what its widespread adoption could mean for the emerging commercial space industry. Illustration: Ryan Trefes
More from the Wall Street Journal:
Visit WSJ.com: www.wsj.com
Visit the WSJ Video Center: wsj.com/video
On Facebook: / videos
On Twitter: / wsj
On Snapchat: on.wsj.com/2ratjSM
#Space #SpinLaunch #WSJ

[@hiei5040]

"Potentially Revolutionary Technology" - I see what you did there

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@rebaonegill1694]

Litterally, orbiting the earth?

[@carpathianhermit7228]

Thunder foot has joined the chat

[@NotJackAlderson]

"... and then the military bought it to create cheaper low heat signature missiles which became harder to detect than regular conventional missiles."

[@Joso997]

Thunderfoot already covered it

[@cr10001]

Yeah, I think it's here. Doesn't the WSJ employ anyone with basic physics knowledge as fact checkers? (Silly question) kzbin.info/www/bejne/b6vMeHxmnp6JmKc

[@dartmada9733]

IF they can actually make this work, I'd say it's very cool. If they can make it work

[@cordlxze9559]

@@SVThailand You’re not a physicist

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@regolith1350]

This is a great way to liquify your payload. Who wants a satellite smoothie? Telescope porridge?

[@brianchan8]

That also breaks your roof

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@ronhaefner7833]

Hyperloop meets trebuchet.

[@iPondR]

LOL!

[@pashacello4494]

If the arm's breaks, it's basically a bomb waiting to blow up. Well, compare to a rocket, it's like sitting on the top of bomb too. Rockets it's just a controlled explosion to get to space. So do the spinlaunch, is just a controlled spinning to get to space, although it's unsuitable for human because of high G, it's still needed to bring the cost down to send payload into space...

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@troymcclure1216]

the arms in the 12m chamber in Long Beach broke during a test...want to see photos ?

[@timokreuzer1820]

Conventional rockets are known to work. The cost has gone down dramatically and with reusable rockets it's pretty much limited by the energy it needs to overcome gravity. Yes, you need more energy because of the additional weight, but with cheap energy this is not a problem. And the energy of the future is not expensive and limited wind and solar, it's nuclear / fusion, which will eventually allow to create the needed fuel much cheaper than now.

[@Atipat12]

GREAT WSJ ++++++++++++++++++

[@ogedaykhan9909]

I m thinking of this idea since Im 12. I m so happy someone is actually testing it!!

[@randomxaos]

This looks soooooooo coooool!!!!!!!!

[@goupigoupi6953]

I like the concept but I'm somewhat skeptic.

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@bankfinanzas6348]

Greetings from PERU

[@JustinHunnicutt]

This was a great intro video but by looking at the comments it seems they didn't convey how this would most likely be used. Spin launch won't replace regular rockets, it'll work along side them. Imagine building a space station, rockets would bring people and telescopes. Spin launch would bring the all the structural components. Think long term to the point where you need supplies for additive manufacturing. SpaceX brings the 3d printer, spin launch brings the filament.

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@charlesvan13]

There are several reasons why it wont work. They're planning to build a 100m radius centrifuge, rotated at 450 rpm to achieve mach 5. But the projectile will be under 10,000 g of acceleration. A very small rocket, say 1000 kg, would be under 10 million Kg of force. That's more than the liftoff thrust of the Saturn V. The centrifuge will fly apart. It also wont send the rocket straight. When released it will be rotating at 450 rpm. It will be tumbling end over end. Mach 5 tumbling, in the dense lower atmosphere, will cause the rocket to fly apart.

[@JustinHunnicutt]

@@charlesvan13 I'm not saying it wouldn't be super hard but 450rpm aka 7.5hz could probably be brought to 0 rpm almost immediately using just aero surfaces. And using a 10,000G acceleration would mean a 10 million newton force for a 1,000kg mass. I'm not sure if that changes your point but just figured I'd mention it.

[@alparslankorkmaz2964]

Nice video.

[@joepeeer4830]

ty

[@ej87291]

The arguments against the technology that the associate physics professor made didn't requiere an actual physics professor... They are pretty basic observations and a bit dismissive of the expertise of the folks that are working on this. Their test launch already proved him wrong in some of the points. It's not like they have a guy looking at a camera and pressing a button to actually release the rocket from the arm. I'm sure that there are physics related issues with scaling this up, but his argument did not really play to that or amount to much.

[@DataGeek903]

Physics problem is exponential power curve. Going from 1000mph to 5000mph is 25x as hard. Designing a rocket fuel tank that can withstand 10,000G for an hour is impossible

[@davidg8497]

@@DataGeek903 not exponential but quadratic, (sorry for being a clever clocks...)

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@charlesvan13]

@@DataGeek903 The whole apparatus will explode. One basic observation that they've seemed to have ignored is that when released the rocket will be tumbling at the rotation of the centrifuge. It will be spinning at 450 rpm, and it wont just stop spinning. What's going to happen, is they wont be able to build a centrifuge that can hold together at 10,000 g. But even if they could, the rocket would disintegrate. Planes can only go a little over mach 1 at sea level. The high speed mach >2 planes fly that fast at high altitude. The rocket will explode.

[@chairmankaga2821]

Doesn't the rocket inside use chemical reaction for thrust? So it both does and doesn't simultaneously? Also, she states "170gs at mach 0.3 which means about 4000gs at 5000mph.

[@timokreuzer1820]

My thumbs up is for including at least one critical voice, even if it was very short.

[@Atipat12]

AMAZING 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎

[@rimckd825]

The people who comment negatively on ideas like this SHOULD KNOW BETTER THAN TO NEVER SAY NEVER. Haven't the last several years taught you A N Y T H I N G ?

[@deroux]

More fluffy vaporware. Too many issues with this idea for it to ever work. Seems like it will be retired along with Elon's silly hyperloop to become an amusement ride in Las Vegas...

[@troymcclure1216]

Coastal location is Alaska.

[@makalayp6689]

Well. I hope they able to make it work. For atleast small to medium payload. So other industry can focus on heavy ones.

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@ndev8593]

What power source do they use to make this spinner work

[@gregajezersek9473]

There are more chances that I will be next pope than this thing actually working

[@christopherclink6931]

Perhaps my feeble mind can't understand. But can a sensitive instrument be built to withstand such centrifugal forces? Can they truly send payloads safely into orbet?

[@DataGeek903]

@ryan lee black box doesn't carry rocket fuel or an engine. There is no technology that exists. A solid state recording device is a lot easier to design than a high precision rocket motor and rocket fuel tank that has to withstand 10000G

[@arthurwagar6224]

Centrifugal force is straight out from center. How do they turn 90° .

[@joevideo8023]

Reminds me of the old film by George Melies

[@brianethridge208]

5:14 The projectile is tumbling end over end! I'm no engineer, but I'm pretty sure the ballistics on that are screwed.

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@brianethridge208]

@@stephengantt9465 Musk said "SpinLaunch" would be useful on the moon; his low-key way of saying it wouldn't work on earth.

[@charlesvan13]

@@brianethridge208 You'd still have the problem with spinning. But there is no atmosphere on the moon so you wouldn't have the problem with high speed in the dense sea level atmosphere. Supersonic planes can only go much over mach 1 at high altitude where the air is thinner.

[@walli6388]

Not so sure how the velocity will affect rocket fuel and mechanical parts.

[@evanbarnes9984]

I'm pretty sure this is just the space industry's version of Theranos

[@mikemines2931]

''Things to Come''. H G Wells.

[@JozefK78]

It could be used to launch fuel refill capsules cheaply to be used for larger voyages (to Moon or to Mars). For such purposes, the large G-s are not an issue.

[@Nill757]

What's with the analogies about "steam ships" and other modes of transportation? Those methods carried people, which SpinLaunch never will. Neither is it suitable for a large share of satellites which can't survive those g loads, esp any satellite with its own propulsion and liquid fuel.

[@carpathianhermit7228]

You think these dumb dumb research what they say and write ?

[@Atipat12]

🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

[@ludmilaclemente4294]

Sem aviônica para se direcionar no espaço?

[@Waltham1892]

SpinLaunch: Don't worry about the technological difficulties because we sure don't!

[@Right-Is-Right]

Try ThunderFoot's vid on this BS and come back to me Wall Street Journal. It is not what it seems and would be impossible to launch a satellite this way. Well you might be able to launch a satellite, but it would quite quickly turn into a pile of parts of satellite. Something about the rotational force and then changing the direction of the force making the satellites increasingly heavier and having to make the launcher bigger, which would make the force stronger having to build stronger satellites, you get where this is going.

[@marktrain9498]

The financial press is always terrible at covering technology. You’d think they’d hire some competent staff in these areas, given what an enormous share of the modern economy technology is.

[@uneducatedseinor4962]

Thunderfoot also said the mars helicopter won’t work

[@marktrain9498]

@@uneducatedseinor4962 No, he didn't.

[@sterlingmarshel6299]

leave it to people smarter than you to theorize this technology

[@Right-Is-Right]

@@uneducatedseinor4962 He said one of the designs would not work, then NASA changed the rotors to something that would work, his math was spot on and the change made before the launch.

[@youngz13o]

Its a weapon Looks like an ion cannon, the centrifugal forces will destroy any delicate satellites you plan to launch in that thing.

[@charliew.1122]

even if it survives the effect from the centripetal force, just imaging it travelling from a near-perfect vacuum into turbulent atmospheric air with all that speed, no matter how cleanly they breach the film there is no way to do this without destroying the payload, and just try aiming it on top of that.

[@PotatoeJoe69]

"1000mph, approximately the speed of the jet, a little bit faster than the speed of a bullet" lol what? Bullets travel almost double that speed

[@kiloton1920]

No they don’t they travel feet per second not miles per hour

[@kalumbabwale3729]

This will be perfect for launches from the moon..

[@youwho6692]

This will be a great addition to US military for launching missiles, hypersonic missiles. Using this thing to launch missiles at hypersonic speed to at least 80 miles away before the missiles ignite and fly on it own. I can already see US defense department looking very closely at this project.

[@PotatoeJoe69]

But it needs too be massive to work. Way too massive. Fr more likely they just attach a booster rocket that breaks away from the missile when it's out of fuel

[@bradkubota6968]

Launcher is not going to travel well.

[@Acid31337]

I believe linear launcher is more viable

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@arthurwagar6224]

?? How do you turn centrifugal force 90°.

[@Waltham1892]

Simple, you connect a turbo-encabulator to the oscillating rotor which will convert the centrifugal force into a non-standard stator wave which can the be turned up to 102 degrees without defrangulating the system. Its engineering 101, dude...

[@carpathianhermit7228]

Where ya getting the electricity from

[@marktrain9498]

It’s powered by a hyper loop and cold fusion.

[@carpathianhermit7228]

@@marktrain9498 is it powered by thunderfoots sexual frustration

[@wadya69]

I don't think liquid oxygen used to fuel traditional rockets can be considered a fossil fuel

[@aarthanarumugam6962]

I also don't think you know that rockets require jet fuel to propel forward

[@GM-xk1nw]

Will fail 100%, they are happy with the money idiots give them.

[@trucksanddirt1506]

That's the whole objective

[@dns98rider]

thats bascially every tech startup these days

[@coolbluereview]

Tbh that’s just an anti satellite gun. There’s no way a business model would be able to compete with SpaceX of sending cargo to orbit.

[@rylandtappe-inglis6325]

SpaceEx can't even compete with SpaceEx

[@sn5301679]

the big question is this work? or will be ended like Theranos XD

[@DrAmirFadhel]

He is talking clear not fake like Elizabeth Holmes... Lesson learnt!

[@Superdada]

If he starts wearing a black turtleneck, they’re screwed.

[@danielrussell8083]

When what you do for a living requires it to be in a remote location in the desert, you put a camper at your job.

[@armandogonzalez328]

👏👏👏👏👏👏 Really SMART team thinking about the earth future 🌍

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@slevinshafel9395]

to me this sistem is better in space or moon.

[@Ripsticker45]

170g at 250mph. Is this thing going to melt steel at the final speed just from the compression?

[@evanjameswoodward]

No. The centrifuge only replaces the first stage of the rocket, which only adds a couple of mach. That is how SpaceX, and eventually Rocket Lab, can return their booster to the launch site after staging. They do not gain, lose, and than gain and lose orbital velocity; just back and forth between much smaller velocities...

[@evanbarnes9984]

I do think the compression heating from hitting the atmosphere after launching in a vacuum will be a huge problem. They're basically trying to launch at orbital velocities! That's like hitting the atmosphere at reentry speeds, but worse since they're down on the ground with more atmospheric density

[@evanjameswoodward]

@@evanbarnes9984 They won't hit the atmosphere at those speeds. The vehicle will likely exit the vacuum at ~5,000 mph, or mach 6.568. That is fast, but well within the current limits of aerospace materials and engineering. The remaining ~17.5 mach will be gained by the pressure feed rocket that makes up the vehicle's second stage; when the ballistic arc brings it to a 61 km altitude. In comparison, the sprint missile system, designed in the 1970's, would go through the lower atmosphere at >mach 10.

[@alexmalt]

Why does it go through that paper layer?

[@cons8501]

Probably vacuum inside the chamber

[@grahvis]

@@cons8501 . A sheet of paper that can withstand atmospheric pressure of 14.7 psi.

[@kalumbabwale3729]

Rarified atmosphere in the spin chamber to reduce drag.

[@alexmalt]

@@kalumbabwale3729 Thank you!

[@Ex-expat]

A massive commercial for unproven technology

[@PacoOtis]

Dr. Rhett acts like the designers have not thought of these things! Duh!!!

[@bkdexter79]

The technology involved to get this far along is truly remarkable. They have to strive for achievement, just like SpaceX, to succeed. Those that say it won't work probably belong on the losing side of history anyway. I applaud their commitment in trying new ideas and applying new technologies.

[@WilliamDye-willdye]

No, YT comments, this is not a "scam". The basic principles were tested decades ago under project HAARP. We've put working electronics into artillery shells since WW2. The problem with the tech has always been cost-effectiveness, not possibility.

[@charliew.1122]

No, it's a scam. Show me the "basic principles" that allow for a centrifuge spinning that fast to perfectly burst a cover and simultaneously release a payload, as it transfers from near percent vacuum to 1atm, without the trajectory being altered and without it being turned to pulp. Oh and it also has to do that with escape velocity or at least near escape velocity. It's laughable that you think comparing this to artillery shells is in any way analogous. Stupid YT commenters...

[@stancooper5436]

Except by their own admission they still need a second stage rocket to make it to orbit. Bick difference between hardening an electronics package to 10,000G and a rocket. Not gonna happen.

[@zeusstani4693]

New... Way to SEND PROBES SATELLITES 📡🛰️to SPACE STATION..... 👽

[@danjohnston9037]

And If Nothing Else Think What An Anti-Satellite Weapons It Is

[@evanbarnes9984]

I just have to ask. I see so many people do this, and I have to know why. Why do you capitalize the first letter of every word in your sentences? It's more work, it's not standard written English, it doesn't add any significance. I just genuinely don't get it, and I'm honestly just curious to know why.

[@danjohnston9037]

@@evanbarnes9984 Call it "Headline Style" it makes long sentences more easily graspable at a quick glance. Note That Many Titles To KZbin Clips Are Also Witten In The Same Style. You Will Understand better When You Need Glasses 😉

[@ozzyherrera1027]

Good luck aiming it

[@danjohnston9037]

@@ozzyherrera1027 Into a known orbit occupied by the target satellite, that will will then smack into whatever hunk of steel we put there ? I think we will do fine.

[@ozzyherrera1027]

@@danjohnston9037 I think you lack too much understanding of the physics to realize of wrong your statement is

[@merion297]

That's 30 thousand g. Nothing can survive it.

[@whatup7214]

This was debunked ages ago

[@2nd3rd1st]

SpinLaunch should have just called it Suborbital Launch System, so NASA can have a redundancy SLS when the other fails... 😅

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@troymcclure1216]

they use slings and cut them away to release, want to see a video?

[@Freddan0]

Im like 50% sure this is a scam

[@cbarber5597]

cant see this working

[@Grahamaan27]

A giant bomb. If something snaps, or otherwise mechanically fails, it's enough energy to crater the entire site.

[@homo-sapiens-dubium]

so is any chemical rocket and we still got to the moon... with just a few craters ;)

[@Grahamaan27]

@@homo-sapiens-dubium the difference is chemical energy requires time to react, this is 100% kinetic energy

[@homo-sapiens-dubium]

@@Grahamaan27 you are right. Its totally different if it happens instantly or like all N1 rockets / the challenger disaster which took a few seconds for everything to explode. Also, kinetic energy doesnt produce a firework

[@LifeExperience01]

Great work, similar idea is depicted in Mahabharata epic where Bhima has capability to launch objects in into space by spinning.

[@GM-xk1nw]

Who's that, sounds like an Indian scammer.

[@LifeExperience01]

@@GM-xk1nw I don't know what is your problem boss, why are you so negative.I sorry If you get informed something previous known and you get hurt of it. But for me when I saw this video , the first thing which came in mind is that I had have heard story from my teacher about Bhima from Mahabharata while teaching Escape vellocity.

[@sn5301679]

will this also involve sharing your wife with your 4 brothers? you know, pandawas stuff..

[@auro1986]

what about wasting energy and electricity to spin that those speeds?

[@peterphan227]

This is never going to happen. It still needs a rocket to propel it all the way into space. All SpinLaunch does is eliminate the first booster stage. And the downside is that it spins at massive G's that are so high that it would crush most payloads, so it really limits what you can put into the centrifuge.

[@stancooper5436]

Yes it would crush most payloads, including the critical second stage rocket. Still there seem to be plenty of investors lining up that don't get it, so the funding rounds continue.

[@rylandtappe-inglis6325]

No.

[@Atipat12]

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏😢

[@yecto1332]

This will definitely fail

[@larzhillbot1443]

lol Yea Right

[@krithivasanchandran]

Helium baloons seems to be a much safer alternative than this bottle spinner

[@Grahamaan27]

Helium balloons to lift a payload? I guess it's theoretically possible, but the balloon would have to be a quarter mile wide and would instantly break under pressure. Any additionally reinforcing material would just add weight

[@aikendrum1518]

what famous belt was discovered by a scientist self funding a mylar balloon launched rockoon program? High altitude balloon launch is not only the cheapest and safest way to do it, I wouldnt be surprised if this is already done. Look up John Powell Aerospace. The CEO's "only way" statements are purposefully incendiary.

[@PentangleYT]

We don’t have a lot of helium

[@vcmdpropulsion126]

fatal flaw. the payload is also rotating at 400 rpm, when it comes out the tube its tumbling. just like a rock in your tire tread, if that rock leaves the tread its spinning at the same speed as the tire.

[@tadeusz6061]

It would be great technology to bring back rockets from other planets to Earth.

[@stephengantt9465]

A Use for this Type of Launch System, as well as the use of Really Large Rail-Gun Technology is in the "¡¿¡OOOoooHHhh-kay Category!?!". Where I would put Space Elevators, i.e., a "Good" Idea, for Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport. But ¡¡NOT!! on Earth, They are more of a Moon/Mars/ Mercury ( That is if We ever set "Anything Up There.)/ and Dwarf Planets, like Pluto/ Saturn & Jupiter's Moons/ Etc. Type "Launch/Orbit Systems" for "CARGO" and/or Other Non-Human Space Launch/Orbit Transport.

[@ludmilaclemente4294]

A nasa deveria fazer PPPs parceria pública privada diminuir impostos do contribuinte americana

[@mrg4388]

The thumbnail for this video is nightmarishly bad. Hire a decent graphic designer!

[@stephenwalters9891]

Saturn V uses Oxygen and Hydrogen as fuel. No 'carbon' so another bit of poor journalism

[@evanbarnes9984]

Most rockets don't use liquid hydrogen as fuel. They use other fuels with more energy potential, or which are easier to handle

[@erikmjelde4428]

Real objects that get sent to space, that can do usfull things, cant stand the G-forces induced by spinning this fast. This is a giant weapon at best.

[@zhang_han]

Where are your calculations to back this up? I don't see a problem with these G forces if the engineering and material choice is right.

[@HashtagBirdyy]

@@zhang_han a KZbinr named Thunderf00t did a video on spin launch where he breaks down some math. he seems to be extremely skeptical of a lot of new technologies though and I'm never sure if the guy is doing the math right due to my ignorance.

[@erikmjelde4428]

@@zhang_han They claim to want send up satellites presumably with antennas, circuit boards, solar panels, etc. How tough do you think these components are? All I'm saying is, good luck building a sophisticated machine that can withstand 100's if not 1000's of G's. Source: Electrical Engineer

[@zhang_han]

@@erikmjelde4428 I'm an engineer too. It's definitely doable, there's no theoretical limitations that I can see from back of the envelope calculations. That's probably why NASA is giving them a trial run.

[@erikmjelde4428]

@@zhang_han I guess we will see. I remain skeptical that the full size launcher can be built or this method can be used for practical purposes.

[@astrophysics6326]

the space industry literally went from multi-billion dollar agencies from global superpowers to a bunch of start-up nerds. and that's really cool.

[@huskiefan06]

First comment!

[@lucaslouzada44]

So much self-aggrandizing comparisons and fancy speech for a huge electromagnetic catapult…

[@harbifm766766]

scam

[@kirkdemadaler7041]

Trying something new...I mean really old, I read some of the comments and there right about satellites not surviving in my opinion, but that's satellites like we know them today. Once the launch system is working then you build the product to use it...the only reason that current satellites to do this are not available today is because there's no need but create a way and the will certainly follows. Nothing ever got done by those that say it's impossible...not even really smart people that say it's impossible, and just a short time ago Space X mission was termed impossible. Oh, the wail of the naysayers is always loud until they slink back into their caves to lick the wounds.

[@TytoAlpha]

so long gay bowser

[@mawizard6341]

This is such a completely dumb idea.

[@ElectroMusicLab]

Like 👍

[@murdelabop]

I don't know whether these founders are insane or this is a grift. If it's a grift then they've successfully gotten money out of NASA. I do know that I'm glad I'll be half a continent away from that full size unit when they test it.

[@frostygt3628]

THE BASIC PROBLEM WITH THIS METHOD IS THE STRESS IT PUT SON THE PAYLOAD. It's like using a nuclear bomb to blow something into space. Ya cheap and quick but not practical.

[@oliviaryan5277]

Investing in crypto now should be in every wise individuals list, in some months time you'll be ecstatic with the decision you made today.

[@kamilafabian3115]

Most intelligent words l've heard. Crypto is the new gold

[@Barbarakaren7418]

I Wanted to trade Crypto but got discouraged by the fluctuations in price

[@Patriciamichelle8703]

Interesting. I have a lump sum doing absolutely nothing at all in my bank account, I wanna get something started with it. You seem to be doing excellent for yourself, how do you achieve this?

[@sigurddaniela4395]

Exactly, the trick is to diversify your investment, don't panic when everyone else is and invest consistently.

[@rodrigomunoz6978]

@@sigurddaniela4395 Do you trade on your own?

[@saibadam]

This does not work. Waste of money and time

[@brianmorales1917]

Another decade of new concept for space flight..

[@epaul1967]

“IF” we sent a man to the moon…..🤣🤷‍♂️

[@abhilashsajeev.k1679]

This is a low cost way to put missiles over long distances

[@cristianjrojas]

Uninformed

[@regolith1350]

This is kind of like saying the way to reduce transport costs on earth is to create supersonic delivery bicycles that can deliver 10-pound packages really, really fast all around the world. This is completely backwards. Massive cost reduction of cargo transport around the world come from railroads and container ships ferrying absolutely enormous quantities of cargo on each trip. Efficiency & cost effectiveness come from SCALE. There’s a reason nobody is flinging tiny individual packages across inter-continental distances out of artillery cannons. It’s highly inefficient and stupid. The way to reduce the cost of getting payload to space is by building a massive, robust, reusable delivery vehicle. This is exactly what SpaceX’s Starship is.

[@aarthanarumugam6962]

I love how experts who haven't done anything meaningful in their life are out in the comment section to prove this won't work..

[@arun3151997]

I was just thinking that 😂😂

[@mitchellminer9597]

It really won't work. There are too many problems to solve, too many alternatives, and too many laws of physics. First, you can't just yeet something into orbit. You need a rocket to make it go around the earth. Throwing a rocket is complicated, and is easier done with another rocket. The general idea is to save on fuel costs, but cheaper fuel would do that. This method will waste maybe ten times the energy required for the job. The system is going to require throwing the payload, a payload cover, and some sort of spin-stopper; so that's 3 times the fuel. It's punching that all through the thickest part of the atmo at the highest speed, which requires an even harder throw. And back at the yeeter, there's probably a counterweight that took exactly that much energy that has to be released, AND the rest of the throwing arm, which energy MIGHT get recaptured and stored. That's like six times the payload energy, at least, and that's ignoring friction. That's going to cost. Getting the electricity into and out of the system is going to be complex. No grid is going to want a distant customer cranking huge motors for a couple hours, and then regenerating some of it back in. There's a lot more problems. Some are solvable, yes. But one is that there are commenters here supporting this idea just because it is shiny - those same people would likely donate money to the project, which is a good enough reason to run the project. It doesn't have to be workable to exist. It would be fun to work on, no matter what.