Astronomers Find Cosmic 'Superhighways' for Fast Travel Through Solar System
sciencealert.com
sciencealert.com
It's more accurate to say that these are "cheap" paths rather than fast ones since the primary saving will be fuel. These paths will be too slow for humans to use and any dramatic improvement in human travel through the solar system will require a technological breakthrough like a high-powered torch drive [1] or laser-powered solar sails [2]. Otherwise, we'll still be stuck with multi-year trips to anything beyond Luna [3]
[1] http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/torchships.php
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDR4AHYRmlk
[3] See the Impulse vs Brachistochrone table at http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/appmissiontable...
(Scale difference: Uranus is 7800 times further than the moon [0], so if wading to ankle depth is 1m from the shore, then the metaphorical island is 7.8 km away — pretty close of the distance between the closest parts of Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight [1]).
[0] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Distance%20to%20Uranus%...
If you think about it, your car wouldn't get very far either without being able to refuel. If you wanted to travel across the country, the fuel tank would have to be dramatically larger, and then you'd have something very much like the rocket equation's exponential mass to ∆v relationship (except here it would be mass to distance traveled) as you have to carry more fuel just because the other fuel is weighing you down. As a result, eventually your fuel tank would be close to the entire mass of your car, and you might actually even require a two-stage vehicle, with your car detaching from a large tanker halfway across the country to finish the trip.
And good luck getting back.
Using these paths for the beginning and end of journeys may make a lot of sense, even if they make no sense at all in the middle.
Endings too. You cannot just slow down. No brakes in space. And if your engine is low thrust, you'll need a while to slow down too, unless your goal is kinetic impact unto your target.
If you engineer to survive it, aero- and even litho-braking are alternatives where you can “just” slow down, without using onboard reaction mass.
I suppose the novelty here is that someone identified a subset of 'fast' paths along the Interplanetary Transport Network.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interplanetary_Transport_Netwo...
> This network can transport objects from Jupiter to Neptune in a matter of decades, rather than the much longer timescales, on the order of hundreds of thousands to millions of years, normally found in the Solar System.
By "objects" they mean asteroids and particles. "A matter of decades" is still a ridiculously long time by human spaceflight standards.
That's true when you are just exploring. When you start more long term projects, such as colonization, things are different.
Say you want to colonize something that is 30 years away using the cheap but slow network. What you do is 30 years before you want to start the colony you start sending regular loads of supplies via the slow cheap network.
Once those are near starting to arrive at the destination, you send your colonists the expensive but fast way.
You can also do this to speed up exploration. Suppose we know we are going to want to send a manned exploration mission to someplace eventually, but we've got other more important targets to occupy us for the next few decades.
Send fuel and other supplies to that place by the cheap and slow method. Then when it finally comes time to send a round trip manned mission, you only need to include enough fuel and other supplies for a one way trip. They can use the fuel and supplies that were sent the slow way for their return trip.
This way your exploration rockets only need to carry half the mass of fuel and supplies that they would otherwise need. This will allow higher acceleration and thus shorter travel time.
I hope the rocket scientists are not caught as off guard as us computer people have been by ransomware and the like (note that viruses have been doing evil things for over 30 year and we still don't have a handle on it)
Not just half, but can be much more than that, because it's exponential.
If a one way trip takes X amount of fuel and supplies (let's assume it is the same for an outgoing one way trip and an incoming one way trip, for simplicity), then a two way trip has to carry an extra X outgoing to use for the return trip.
Since X is going to be many times the mass of the ship and crew and non-consumables, having an extra X as cargo massively ups the fuel requirements for the outgoing trip.
No FTL claims here (whew).
a G-spot, if you will
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interplanetary_Transport_Net...
Obligatory "Contact" quote:
> Ellie Arroway : They all travel here through that transit system that you built?
> Alien : We didn't build it, we don't know who did. They were gone long before we ever got here. Maybe some day they'll come back.
Corresponding clip from the movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRPUO6gGSh8
The transportation system in action in the movie: https://youtu.be/Z8axMaBL4uo?t=117
These people work without huge telescopes or excessive equipment and we should celebrate major contributions when they come from smaller teams like this.