??? An intriguing idea for launching a spacecraft that does not require a multi-stage design....

Congratulations, you just added a shit ton of unnecessary friction.

What?? The height and speed in the video in negligible compared to the energies required for orbit and the amount of infrastructure required to do that would be immense. At that point just build a space elevator.

Fireball XL-5..!!!

What do you mean when you say not multi-stage? I see two stages right here.

"So this will be quicker and more effective than a rocket, you say?"

Just like from the movie When Worlds Collide (1951)

Bro your first stage is just on rails

No multi-stage rocket. My guy reinvented the slingshot.

centrifugal force...

Let gravity do the heavy lifting

Gravity after watching this post

A lot of "big brains" in the comments are missing the point. Assuming you launch at 700 mph, the Starship would need 25% less fuel to orbit. And you power the sled from earth using disposible rockets, rail gun tech, steam, electric motors, even a couple of raptors mounted on the maglev sled, whatever you prefer. The key is, 1/4 of the energy used to get the ship off the pad and up to speed of sound comes from earthly sources, and doesn't have to be held in the rocket's fuel tanks. The ship may still require staging, but the idea of saving 1000 tons would certainly appeal to @elonmusk And obviously, it's reusable AF. Bonus idea: Put it in a tunnel and drop the air pressure close to vacuum to double your launch speed.

Wow I thought this was the train scene from Firefly for a second... did anyone else see that??

why does it look like a shuttlecock??

In fact, what you have here are two stages, it just that the ground launcher device is a poor first stage. I will say that more time and money have been wasted on single-stage-to-orbit in the United States than any other single concept. Tsiolkovsky's equations are a harsh mistress: it doesn't work on launch to Earth orbit.

Evel Knievel

I’ve always wondered why instead of waste so much energy launching rockets from a standstill Why not accelerate them first using an electromagnetic launch rail, building up significant kinetic energy electrically before the rocket engines even ignite?

On Earth it's not worth it. Gravity well is too prohibitive. But on the moon it would be aces.

That is what Evil Knievel needed at Snake River.

Fireball XL5… if you know, you know!

As developed in Slough….

Yep... And it was taken straight from George Pal's movie "When Worlds Collide." We've known the whole "lift is a bitch" equation is really, really ugly when you're pointed at 90° straight outta the gravity well. Greenland was important for *Leagues* of horizontal rocket track.

This idea was actually used in the 1951 movie, "When World's Collide."

The rocket sled isn't a stage?

Road runner coyote acme type shit

cannot the wagon stop at the end of the rail rather than jump off like a GTA stunt scene and crash somewhere in the mountains? so much technology for such a goofy ending

The ramp is useless. But on the moon without air friction and lower g, it is better. This had been shown in a SF movie : when world collide (1951)

Isnt the sled a stage?

At the speeds necessary to leave orbit it would most likely smash straight into that mountain. Like curving a gun barrel.

Air balloons?

Fuel goes out on the run way, there we got a rocket to explode on enemy territory :)

The maintenance of such a track would be insane. Using all that fuel at ground level is incredibly inefficient, even if the track was frictionless. The launch angle is fixed, which would limit flight paths and general usefulness of an already expensive and inefficient design.

What's the point of spending all that energy to accelerate sideways in the thick lower atmosphere. You want to get above the atmosphere as quickly as possible and then accelerate sideways.