Subscribe now

Letter: Letters : Floating high

Published 13 July 1996

From John Smith

Colchester, Essex

The latest problem with Europe’s Ariane programme confirms my belief that we
need to look more widely at methods of putting a payload into orbit. Do we have
to use huge, expensive, noisy, dirty rockets, or could there be a better
way?

At the moment, ideas such as skyhooks, space elevators or laser-powered
ramjets belong firmly in the science-fiction camp. One day they may be
practical, but not yet.

Still, there may be other methods. How high can a balloon go? How low will a
light-sail operate? Is there an overlap between the two zones, or could
there be
with a little technological refining? If so, this could be the basis of a
cheap,
quiet, nonpolluting way into space. The launch would probably be polar rather
than equatorial, with the denser air giving more lift to the balloon, the lower
Sun giving a better angle of attack for the light-sail, and longer hours of
daylight giving a more constant “fuel” supply.

On the ground, huge savings could be made. Everything happens more
slowly, so
there is no need for a large launch team, each monitoring a different aspect of
the launch in order to make split-second decisions. Explosion isn’t a danger,
and noise isn’t a problem, so you don’t have to clear a large area around the
site.

Could it be made practical? I don’t know, but I’d love to find out.
There may
be other alternatives to rockets. Is anyone looking for them, or are all the
experts so committed to rocket technology that nothing else can be
considered?

Issue no. 2038 published 13 July 1996

Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox. We'll also keep you up to date with New Scientist events and special offers.

Sign up
Piano Exit Overlay Banner Mobile Piano Exit Overlay Banner Desktop