That gives our revised time vs acceleration table, with delta-v added:

g | deta-v | time (days) |

0.1 | 2.73E+06 | 32.74 |

0.2 | 4.00E+06 | 23.15 |

0.3 | 4.90E+06 | 18.90 |

0.4 | 5.66E+06 | 16.37 |

0.5 | 6.32E+06 | 14.64 |

0.6 | 6.93E+06 | 13.36 |

0.7 | 7.48E+06 | 12.37 |

0.8 | 8.00E+06 | 11.57 |

0.9 | 8.49E+06 | 10.91 |

1.0 | 8.94E+06 | 10.35 |

2.0 | 1.26E+07 | 7.32 |

3.1 | 1.55E+07 | 5.98 |

4.1 | 1.79E+07 | 5.18 |

5.1 | 2.00E+07 | 4.63 |

Rolling out the Tsiolkovsky equation we can work out the engine exhaust velocities we need for a range of mass ratios (that is, mass at the start of the transit over mass at the end)

m0/m1 | 0.1 g | 1.0 g |

2 | 4.0E+06 | 1.3E+07 |

3 | 2.5E+06 | 8.1E+06 |

4 | 2.0E+06 | 6.5E+06 |

5 | 1.7E+06 | 5.6E+06 |

These are high. but not inconceivable, velocities. Basically, we have to master some pretty fancy fusion technologies to make it work. I'll have to do a detailed wok-through to see if I am on the right track, but so far the only outright impossibility I am talking here is still FTL.

I'm math stupid, so I have to ask this: does your computations take into account breaking to achieve relative stopping by your destination?

ReplyDeleteThis assumes a pass through, having 0 velocity at start and end, but ignoring final rendezvous. Given the delta-v we are talking, capacity to match say an earth orbit is not hard although the details of the maneuvering will be interesting.

ReplyDeleteOnce I have the map database set up, I want to develop more exact code for this. It's pretty clear, though, that reaction mass resupply is going to be a vital concern.