>>13861046I'm not the retard saying they
But from a payload economics standpoint it makes no sense. By launching at between 2-3 km/sec they need about 6 km/sec delta V
since they're using a pressure-fed liquid engine according to their website, they probably won't be using cryogenic or high energy fuels. Let's generously call their specific impulse 350 seconds
Using the rocket equation to find the ratio of initial to final mass, e^(6000/350*9.8) = 5.75
Compared to concepts that can actually get up to near orbital velocity this is hugely inefficient
>hurr durr but it would burn upLiterally studied and solved by the ram accelerator project. Put an ice-shielded nosecone ablator on your craft. You'll be fine. I'd rather have an ablator take away 10% of the craft's mass than have to make the payload over 5 times smaller
None of it matters though because this is an exit scam. It's literally happened before
>>13860979 same family, same backers. Google will buy Spinlaunch (maybe with Airbus money as well) to deploy their own satellite network but quietly mothball the project after discovering some fatal flaw Yaney "forgot" to disclose before the sale
