I noticed Rob Dean's suggestions for dealing with EXTREMELY HEAVY lift
vehicles with interest. Here are my suggestions:
1) Put factor 40 armor around the life-system only. I doubt that
the fuel tanks and drives need radiation protection.
2) If hulls with variable armor thickness bother you, build your
spacecraft as a 2-stage craft. The first stage is armored to level 40,
and contains engines and life-system. The second stage contains fuel and
cargo, and is armored to level 8.
In either case, you produce a craft that is a whole lot more reasonable.
As to the LALV problem, I finally figured out why it is a problem. Hard
Times made a slight change to COACC that resulted in the rocket being more
efficient than a jet. The fuel + oxidizer weighs LESS than the fuel alone
in the jet. An odd state of affairs, at best.
Without tampering with the rules too much, try this: a scramjet (with
identical characteristics to a ramjet except fuel usage) burns H2 in
atmospheric oxygen at a rate 75% of that of a high performance rocket.
Since the fuel has a very low density, this is equivalent to burning 1/6th
as much fuel as the rocket does. Eliminate the LOOONG flight to orbit.
The NASP mission profile calls for almost a straight boost into orbit from
15000m. A LALV should be required to sustain flight for THREE times as
long as an equivalent rocket, plus any loiter time in atmosphere at the end
of flight. And remember air-to-air refueling. It helps a lot!
This way, the LALV is actually an advantage over a rocket, and so worth
building.
ALternately, if using NERVA, steal an idea from Arthur Clarke. Have the
NERVA use atmosphere for propellant till it reaches the stratosphere. Then
the LALV will use NO FUEL AT ALL except that 1/10th required for orpbital
insertion. Very efficient, quite cost effective as an alternat to Grav.
Later...
- -- Via DLG Pro v0.985b
[email removed]
I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution.
--W. von Braun