It’s a good point: I’d assumed that the plan was to make the payload of basically the same material as the tether/structure, and have it destructively tear-off at the right moment (maybe by having a watching supervisor structure lasering a weak point)
But I think pouching the payload (presumably forming the structure around the payload) just translates the problem into holding a 8kg steel block to the ceiling with 1cm square of paper formed into a harness, and expecting it to hold for weeks.
Either way - hopefully it will be addressed in a follow-up
Ah, but that’s the thing it’s not compression it’s tension. Try hanging the same steel cube from the ceiling with a scrap of paper and things get decidedly more difficult.
And even if you can find some magic superglue left in the tube to hold it there, it has to hang there for weeks: A cubist sword of Damocles.
You can certainly make the tethers longer, but that re-introduces other problems with the tensile strength that the current proposed shape is intended to mitigate.
I’m very skeptical about Spinlaunch, but even if you can pour enough epoxy over something to allow it to survive 10k Gs for a few minutes, I am not sure you can scale it to 100k+ Gs for weeks, for a postage stamp sized payload that has to be almost perfectly flat - that just seems like a completely different problem domain.
I think the idea bears further investigation, but the omission from the paper feels a bit odd.
I think the idea is very interesting, but please correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t the payload experiencing a sustained acceleration of hundreds of thousands of Gs, if not millions?
I am not sure that anything useful could survive that kind of sustained crushing acceleration. By comparison a rifle bullet being shot is around 100k Gs for millisecond , this would go on for weeks or months.
You might be interested in making a donation to “The Human Fund” - their slogan is “Money for people”. Kruger Industrial Smoothing are a major donor. Ask about the Festivus special.
From memory, the primary advantage of the 386SX was the ability to use a cheaper 16-bit motherboard layout and components. The lack of a 32bit bus mattered less when most software was written with 286 compatibility in mind, and the ISA bus was only 16-bits wide, which limited the utility of the 32-bit bus for fast graphics transfers.
The reduced 24-bit address bus was never a significant bottleneck during its commercial lifetime, as little consumer software at the time would require more than 4mb of RAM, and by the time it did the 486SX (32bit busses with no maths coprocessor) was the new value champion.
So basically you are fine living in a imperialist, totalitarian dictatorship, where the slightest descent is punished by years in prison, because the boot on your neck is Russian made?
The rest of the world having to clean up the mess left by the Soviet Union (paying for the cleanup and decommissioning of nuclear submarines, Chernobyl, rebuilding eastern Europe) may have a lot to do with the anti-Soviet attitude.
Have you ever wondered if maybe that (and by extension your attitude to it) is part of the problem?