Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

tahanson43206 · 2022-04-12 11:47:23

We did not have a topic for this technology.

It appears to have progressed to the point it might make sense to follow developments.

From my perspective, this is a technology that is pushing the envelope in a number of areas of engineering.

The investors who've been funding this initiative deserve a nod of appreciation.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … 06ea974dc8

NewMars members are invited to provide updates as they become available.

Earlier reports of this technology are included in other topics, if anyone might have time to collect the links and post them here.

Update 2022/05/26: Thanks to Mars_B4_Moon for suggestions for additions to the topic title.

(th)

Calliban · 2022-04-12 15:05:00

Do you remember the rocket sled launch? Sleds ride sliding contacts on steel rails. They have achieved velocities of Mach 8.5 - almost 3km/s. They slide along the rails because no wheel could remain intact under the centrifugal forces that they would experience at high mach speeds. I suspect spin launch will suffer the same problems.

SpaceNut · 2022-04-12 18:54:30

not finding the topic at this moment?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … 1c6754a7f8

tahanson43206 · 2022-04-12 19:43:15

For SpaceNut re #3

Thanks for your follow up! I tried just using the Google search for "nasa to test catapult" and a number of citations showed up... eg...

https://www.independent.co.uk/space/nas … 56530.html

Space
Nasa to test catapult that flings objects into space at 5,000mph
SpinLaunch accelerator system will ‘eliminate the cost, time, and complexity’ of reaching space

Anthony Cuthbertson
8 hours ago
Comments

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-04-12 19:45:55

For Calliban ... Re rocket sleds and similar

I agree that the rotating arm concept of Spin Launch seems ** really ** "out there".

Still, they are not planning to slide anything ... They must be using ** really ** well made bearings in their central hub, but I expect the swing arm will be perfectly balanced as it winds up to release the payload to the vertical launch tube.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2022-04-12 20:01:17

Well I found the posts....and it was in the electromagnetic launch with microwave propulsion which did cover the sled and other aspects of getting a small payload to orbit.

We mentioned this in the topic SpinLaunch conducts first successful test of giant 'suborbital accelerator' satellite sling

The device works on the same principle as a sling: placed in a vacuum chamber on a rotating arm that's accelerated by a small rocket to hypersonic speed, it lets go of the payload at just the right moment, sending it soaring upward on its accumulated momentum.
Yaney said the first test involved a one-third scale suborbital accelerator running at just 20% capacity. Still, the device towers some 300 feet above the New Mexico desert, meaning the final SpinLaunch system is anticipated to be some 900 feet tall.
Everyday Astronaut, a single rocket launch can pump out tons of noxious pollutants, including carbon dioxide, carbon soot, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, chlorine, alumina and sulfuric compounds. Moreover, it costs up to $5,000 per pound to lift an object into space on a rocket.
However, even if the system is capable of putting a small satellite into orbit, it's unlikely to ever supplant a rocket launch, the SpinLaunch's payload is measured in pounds; by comparison, SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket can lift more than 15 tons on a reusable flight and 22.8 tons on an expendable flight, lifting as many as 143 small satellites at once.
At its largest, SpinLaunch expects its payloads to be no more than 440 pounds (200 kilograms). The company gave no estimate as to the cost per launch.

SpaceNut · 2022-04-12 20:02:03

kbd512 wrote:

SpaceNut,
SpinLaunch could deliver our steel cannon balls to orbit. A robotic tug in orbit could then collect them for transfer to an interplanetary cargo frigate headed to Mars. Something like this is ultimately the correct path for low cost space flight, not for passengers, but for the millions of tons of raw materials required to build-out civilization on another planet.

tahanson43206 wrote:

For kbd512 re #191, and for SpaceNut re #190
Nice Work! Thanks!
Part of the carbon composite heat shield would be consumed on the way up through the first 20 miles, just as would be true for a "traditional" surface based launcher. The balance would be consumed in the arrival at Mars.
The challenge of precision guidance remains. Perhaps ** that ** is included in the SpinLaunch package. The SpinLaunch package would necessarily need to include a solid fuel rocket for horizontal velocity to achieve orbit, and ** that ** would include a guidance subsystem. That guidance subsystem could be designed to guide the package on it's flight through the atmosphere of Mars. It might use X-Y ailerons for the purpose.
All-in-all, this seems quite promising.
(th)

Calliban · 2022-04-13 02:49:41

Such a device may work particularly well on the moon, where escape velocity is 2.38km/s. If a spinning device can be made more compact than a mass driver, it offers a competitive advantage.

tahanson43206 · 2022-04-13 04:24:31

For Calliban re #8

The presence of high quality vacuum on the Moon is another distinct advantage for a Spin Launch system.

Congratulations on this insight!

It occurs to me that a system designed for Mars might greatly reduce the cost of launching propellant from the surface, and thus greatly improve the prospects for GW Johnson's space tug concept.

Nice!

At some point you'll (hopefully) have time to study the technical details, and comment upon them.

Some ** very ** high quality engineering has already gone into the small scale demo that has been tested.

Whether the demo can scale up to the full size proposed is (of course) to be determined.

Oh! Of course! The huge comet! A permanent harvest facility installed on that comet would be able to ship small quantities of mass to Earth or Mars or the Moon as rapidly as solar power can charge the batteries.

(th)

Calliban · 2022-04-13 08:41:16

I like the idea of mounting these devices on asteroids and comets. If you wanted to establish a water mine on Ceres, say, a device like this could deliver the ice to a convenient position outside of the gravity well. You can then use low thrust propulsion to take the payload exactly where it needs to go.

Another application for this device would be an engine for a space craft. If they can accelerate payloads to several km/s, then they can function as electric thrusters. The advantage is that your reaction mass does not need to be a pure chemical of any kind. A bag of rock or crushed regolith will transfer momentum just as well as anything else. This is something that can be gathered. It doesn't need to be manufactured at high energy cost.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-04-13 08:42:52)

tahanson43206 · 2022-04-13 08:55:47

For Calliban re #10

Reminder ... I'm hoping you will reveal your reasoning for selecting L5 ... again, just curious... I'm sure you had a reason

Regarding propulsion of celestial objects ....

Please keep developing this idea!

for propulsion, how small could you make the machine?

The Cyclotron is just one of many designs for particle accelerators.

I bring this up because it could (theoretically) accelerate protons or other ions to great velocity, and release them to the void. There may be an upper limit to the velocity that a cyclotron can deliver, but I have long thought that it would be ** great ** to be able to take advantage of Special Relativity to convert pure energy into thrust with minimal expenditure of irreplaceable mass.

However, if a rubble pile is to be moved, I agree that the Spin Launch mechanism sure does look like a strong candidate.

The "normal/traditional" science fiction solution to this problem is a linear mass accelerator, but the Spin Launch technique is ** so ** much more compact.

Edit: Open space is already filled with fast moving particles, and not a few objects of greater than ion size. It would be a shame for a fast moving relativistic particle to slam into one of RobertDyck's unprotected Large Ships.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2022-04-13 20:06:01

Well while the reason for it to be made and used in those locations its still got the same baseline issue of tonnage from where to build it, tonnage delivered pre-built and even if we can deliver either what is to be used to power it for use?

These are the same hurdles which the large ship prime has even if it leads to a cheaper fuel source in the end.

tahanson43206 · 2022-04-14 05:55:51

For SpaceNut re #12 ... good points about the mass of the system.
However, that mass should be compared to alternatives, such as a mass driver, which currently exists ONLY on the Gerald R Ford.

A consideration is that the implementation on the Moon, or any moon, or an asteroid, does NOT require the massive outer vacuum case, so the mass of the system for those locations would be less. On the other hand, the system still needs an outer covering to keep dust out of the high precision gears.

It will definitely be interesting to see how this concept develops.

If anyone has time to perform the computations, i'd be interested to see if the existing test system could go to work right now on the Moon.

A useful destination for throws is L1, which is also the likely location for the hub of a space elevator, which is already achievable on the Moon, with existing technology and materials.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2022-04-24 11:19:04

GW Johnson wrote:

Doesn't matter whether you look at spin launch, mass drivers, or anything else, as long as you look at anything below escape speed, your effective elliptical transfer orbit has a periapsis speed equal to the launch speed, and a PERIAPSIS ALTITUDE EQUAL TO ZERO!
Your apoapsis speed and altitude depend upon what precisely your zero-altitude launch speed tangent to the surface actually was. Simple as that. But this DOES NOT AFFECT your periapsis speed and altitude!
If your periapsis altitude is ZERO, you WILL smack the surface at periapsis speed, precisely one orbital period after launch! There is NO WAY AROUND that outcome, other than an apoapsis "burn" of some kind, to raise your periapsis altitude! That's just basic orbital mechanics.
Most of these odd concepts for spin launch, or light gas gun launch, or mass drivers, or pretty much anything but a simple rocket, require the payload to endure 100's, to 1000's, to 10,000's of gees. That puts VERY severe limits on what will survive the launch, with which to make that apoapsis "burn" that keeps you from smacking the surface again, in only one elliptical orbit period.
For solid propellants, I do know of some designs capable of surviving 1000's to 10,000's of launch gees, but these notions are quite restricted in what you can really do. I know of NOTHING in the liquid propellants that can survive that kind of abuse.
GW

SpaceNut · 2022-04-24 11:20:19

Calliban wrote:

On the moon, a spin launch or mass driver would be used for launching payloads to escape velocity. There is no point trying to put anything into orbit this way. The payloads are likely to be compressed slugs of regolith, contained within a bag of some kind. The target would be a receiver facility with some kind of bag at one of the Lagrangian points, probably L2 as TH indicated earlier. Ideally, the payload would be launched with just the right velocity to arrive at the L2 point within a circular error probability no greater than a few tens of metres, with as close to zero velocity as possible.
On Earth, I think the sensible use of any device of that kind is to boost a rocket projectile to a high enough speed to eliminate the need for a lower stage. The lower stage is much larger in mass than the upper stage and eliminating it should remove a substantial capital and operating cost, along with the need for recovery ships and refurbishment. For Starship, a linear accelerator, such as a rocket sled, imparting an initial velocity of 1-3km/s, may be sufficient to achieve this goal. The rocket sled could be propelled by a pressure fed rocket, a ramjet, maybe even compressed air. The track would have a high capital cost. For the investment to be worthwhile, the launch rate must be quite high. Assuming a exit velocity of 1km/s and a peak acceleration of 10g, track length would be 5km. For a 2km/s exit velocity, track length would be 20km. So capital cost is proportional to the square of takeoff speed.
Spin Launch may come into its own on the moon and other low Ve bodies, due to its relatively compact arrangement. Rocket sleds cannot use wheels because at speeds of kilometres per second, centrifugal force would fragment them. I suspect that spin launch from Earth will face the same problems.

tahanson43206 · 2022-05-26 06:11:26

Mars_B4_Moon wrote:

I could not find any topic with SpinLaunch or Vacuum Launches or Centrifuge Launched Satellite, it be subjected to a lot of G's
Rockets not needed?
' SpinLaunch has successfully tested a new way of getting into space. It says it can use a vacuum centrifuge to fire satellites weighing up to 200kg into orbit '
https://www.freethink.com/space/spinlaunch-video

For Mars_B4_Moon ... thanks for this update!

I have amended the topic title to include the name without a space.

(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-10-11 05:06:06

Watch as SpinLaunch’s rocket-flinging slingshot hurls Nasa payload 25,000ft above Earth’s surface using huge arm
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/20021453/ … ating-arm/

Calliban · 2022-10-11 05:54:02

Impressive tech. I am amazed that it actually worked.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpinLaunch

The company's goal is to launch payloads at 2km/s, essentially eliminating the booster stage and allowing the presumably solid propellant booster to ignite at 200,000' in a vacuum.

The problem with this concept is that peak acceleration is 10,000g. Only dumb payloads can survive that. But there will eventually be a market for dumb payloads launched cheaply. If we want to send water, metals and food into space in large quantities, we don't neccesarily need a man rated rocket to do that. I think building a rocket with guidance system and maneuvring thrusters that can survive 10,000g acceleration will be difficult. But assuming it can be done, the Starship can return the empty rockets to Earth after they are intercepted in orbit.

On the moon, this machine could deliver bulk regolith payloads to either L1 or L2 without need for any booster or bursting disc. Spin launch will find it's greatest calling on the lunar surface, providing materials to space manufacturing industries in high Earth orbit.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-10-11 05:58:12)

Void · 2022-10-11 08:10:05

I have been very much a skeptic, but I seem to be very wrong.

As per Calliban's thinking on the Moon, add this:

Breakthough Plasma thruster willl canabalize zombie satellites for fuel
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Breakthou … 1e&pc=U531

These thrusters seem all to be geared towards small sats, so maybe a large scale is out of reach, at least for now.

Done

Last edited by Void (2022-10-11 08:31:18)

tahanson43206 · 2022-10-11 08:31:42

Here is a link to a source document from Wikipedia article cited by Calliban in Post #18

https://newatlas.com/space/satellite-sp … st-flight/

this link points to an article with pictures and text reporting on the test flight. The report includes details of the NASA sponsored payload devices, as well as other electronics included in the flight.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2023-03-01 15:29:09

https://www.yahoo.com/news/spaceflight- … 00662.html

SpinLaunch update

Gizmodo
Spaceflight Pioneer SpinLaunch Aims for Liftoff—No Rocket Fuel Required
George Dvorsky
Wed, March 1, 2023 at 9:00 AM EST
SpinLaunch's orbital mass accelerator is designed to launch rockets using centrifugal force.
SpinLaunch is a winner of the 2023 Gizmodo Science Fair for seeking to build a groundbreaking centrifugal launch system that can deliver small satellites to orbit cheaper, faster, and with reduced environmental harm.
The Question
Is it possible to launch rockets into the upper atmosphere without fuel?

The Results
The first tests of the company’s suborbital 108-foot (33-meter) accelerator at Spaceport America in the New Mexico desert have been promising, attracting the attention of investors, members of the aerospace industry, the Department of Defense, Homeland Security, and NASA. Kinetic energy serves as the system’s veritable first stage engine for getting objects off the ground. An arm rotates rapidly inside a vacuum-sealed centrifuge chamber, spinning the launch vehicle to supersonic speeds before flinging it to the skies above.
The New Mexico facility, dubbed A-33, is a one-third scale model of the orbital version SpinLaunch is hoping to build, but it has performed well, hurling 10-foot-long (3-meter) projectiles to altitudes reaching 25,000 feet (7,620 meters). To date, 10 tests have occurred at A-33 since October 2021, including one on September 27, 2022, in which SpinLaunch hurled a Test Launch Vehicle packed with demonstration payloads for NASA, Airbus, Cornell University, and satellite manufacturer Outpost Space. The payloads survived the tremendous speeds and forces involved, in what was an encouraging viability trial for the system.
The company, founded by Jonathan Yaney in 2014, originally built a 40-foot (12-meter) non-flight facility in Sunnyvale, California, setting the stage for the A-33 suborbital facility. When SpinLaunch vice-president of technology David Wrenn joined the company in 2015, key questions remained unanswered about the concept and its feasibility.
He wondered, “can you build a large-diameter vacuum chamber at low cost, can you achieve hypersonic velocities rotating inside that system that hasn’t been previously achieved by even the fastest flywheel systems built by governments, and can you precisely and reliably release a launch vehicle off the end of that rotating tether?” Wrenn told Gizmodo. The latter challenge is “no small feat,” he added, saying it requires sub-millisecond accuracy. “We answered those three questions with the 12-meter accelerator that we originally built in Sunnyvale.”
“A big part of the challenge is proving that what we want to do is realistic, but there’s also the challenge of actually building a company that can do it, and that’s where most of the work goes into,” said Maxim Clarke, a senior systems engineer at SpinLaunch. ”We’re building a company that builds this giant accelerator machine with little to no engineering heritage that went into it.“
Why SpinLaunch Did It
Should all go well, the A-33 mass accelerator will lead to an orbital launch facility with an arm that spins at 5,000 miles per hour (8,000 kilometers per hour). Once the full-scale system comes online, SpinLaunch engineers will target altitudes between 31 and 44 miles (50 and 70 km), at which point the launch vehicle’s propulsion stage will kick in to complete the journey to low Earth orbit. The finalized system should be able to launch satellites weighing 440 pounds (200 kilograms) to low Earth orbit.
Illustration: Vicky Leta
SpinLaunch says the system will result in a 10-fold reduction in launch costs and a 70% reduction in the use of fuel compared to chemical rockets. What’s more, the system should be able to perform around five launches each day. And that’s for a single accelerator.
It’s never been cheaper to launch satellites to space, and that in turn has resulted in new ways of using space, including the introduction of internet satellite constellations and systems capable of continuously monitoring Earth at high resolutions. “SpinLaunch is part of that cost reduction curve,” said Wrenn. “Fundamentally, SpinLaunch is about providing inexpensive, sustainable, rapid access to space, so that all these really great applications that have an impact on humanity can come to fruition with a lower barrier to entry.”
Jan Helbing, SpinLaunch vice-president of product marketing, said the company is poised to launch business cases that didn’t previously exist. “Our customers don’t even know they’re customers yet, and when you truly change the dynamics of getting into space, you introduce a market that nobody has talked about or addressed.”
Why They’re a Winner
SpinLaunch is seeking to take an old idea and make it real, thereby changing the way we access space. The company has yet to perform an orbital launch, but it’s a potential paradigm changer in terms of how launch providers can operate. The ground-based, electric-powered mass accelerator also stands to lower launch costs and offer a more environmentally friendly way of reaching space. Rockets, as we’re learning, can be very dirty and not-so-good to the upper atmosphere. A number of key hurdles remain, such as proving that technologically sensitive payloads can survive the g-forces involved during spin and launch and that the propulsion stage will work as planned.
What’s Next
The company is planning to run more demonstration flights with A-33, followed by the construction of a full-scale orbital mass accelerator. Ambitiously, the team is hoping to perform its first orbital launch, and potentially start building satellite constellations, in 2026. Given that SpinLaunch will have rapid access to space, it’s seeking to pair that with inexpensive space systems that go along with this launch capability.
“A meaningful portion of our engineering is allocated towards building SpinLaunch-compatible spacecraft components, entire integrated satellite buses, and turnkey solutions for customers that we’re in conversation with,” Wrenn said. “But it all starts with low cost access to space.”
The Team
The SpinLaunch team consists of roughly 200 employees and is led by CEO and founder Jonathan Yaney. Key contributors include Maxim Clarke, senior systems engineer; Ryan Hampton, vice president of special projects; Scott Laffler, general field superintendent; Mark Sipperley, director of launch engineering; and David Wrenn, vice president of technology
See the full list of Gizmodo Science Fair winners
More from Gizmodo

(th)

kbd512 · 2023-03-01 18:04:04

Calliban,

I posted about a company testing microelectronics to 100,000g in another thread. Current state-of-the-art seems to be about 50,000g to 60,000g. Beyond that, there isn't much data and very specialized electronics are required. These are potted assemblies wherein the completed circuit board is first set into a mold, a plastic is injected around it to immobilize it so the electronics can't move during the acceleration. I don't know what the reliability of these units is like, though. I do know that cannon launched guided projectiles see quite a few g during launch.

tahanson43206 · 2023-04-26 09:37:35

This is a follow up to the Spinlaunch topic, after re-reading from the top, and inspired by Calliban's recent advocacy for flywheel energy storage systems.

The comment I would like to offer today is that the existing Spinlaunch concept, as realized with working hardware able to launch to 25,000 feet, presumes a vacuum chamber for the swing arm to move through while building up momentum for the payload.

There is an alternative design concept that I'll post here for the record:

The rotating mechanism does NOT need a vacuum chamber, if the arm is replaced with a solid flywheel as suggested by Calliban in another topic.

Such a device could be run in standard atmosphere on Earth. Parasitic drag could be reduced by preparing the surface so that it has as little interaction with freely moving gas molecules as possible. The energy required to overcome parasitic drag can come from the budget allocated to evacuation of the swing arm chamber.

In order for this to work with maximum effectiveness, the payloads need to be mounted evenly around the perimeter of the flywheel, and they need to be released in succession as the optimum launch angle arrives during rotation, so that balance of the flywheel is preserved.

Shock to the bearings will occur as the payloads are released, but if the payloads are all released in one rotation of the flywheel, then the system should be able to recover from the transient impulses caused by release of each payload.

There is a possibility that the speed of sound in the material of the flywheel may be less than the speed of propagation of the imbalance condition.

This situation could be modeled in modern CFD systems.

(th)

kbd512 · 2023-04-26 10:38:03

tahanson43206,

To reduce flywheel imbalance, I think we'd want to release a second payload mounted 180 degrees out from the first one.

tahanson43206 · 2023-04-26 14:42:47

For kbd512 re #24

Thanks for picking up on this idea!

To release the payload mounted 180 degrees opposite the one just released, you'd have to wait for 1/2 cycle. During that time the flywheel would be out of balance.

Modern computer modeling tools should be able to simulate the situation, and find the best solution.

I don't know enough about the current design of the SpinLaunch system. It may be that there is no counter balance as the payload spins up, so the bearings would have to endure stress for as many cycles as spinup takes. If there are two payloads equally balanced, then imbalance would only occur when one is released, and the imbalanced condition would only last for the milliseconds it takes for the 180 degrees out payload to arrive at the launch point.

In any case, thanks again for thinking (and posting) in this topic!

(th)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2022-04-12 11:47:23

Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#2 2022-04-12 15:05:00

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#3 2022-04-12 18:54:30

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#4 2022-04-12 19:43:15

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#5 2022-04-12 19:45:55

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#6 2022-04-12 20:01:17

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#7 2022-04-12 20:02:03

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#8 2022-04-13 02:49:41

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#9 2022-04-13 04:24:31

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#10 2022-04-13 08:41:16

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#11 2022-04-13 08:55:47

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#12 2022-04-13 20:06:01

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#13 2022-04-14 05:55:51

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#14 2022-04-24 11:19:04

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#15 2022-04-24 11:20:19

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#16 2022-05-26 06:11:26

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#17 2022-10-11 05:06:06

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#18 2022-10-11 05:54:02

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#19 2022-10-11 08:10:05

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#20 2022-10-11 08:31:42

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#21 2023-03-01 15:29:09

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#22 2023-03-01 18:04:04

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#23 2023-04-26 09:37:35

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#24 2023-04-26 10:38:03

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

#25 2023-04-26 14:42:47

Re: Spin Launch SpinLaunch Vacuum Launches Centrifuge Launched Mass

Board footer