I started writing this as a "help guide" for my Design A Starship for the Sublight Universe tool. But it's grown and metastasized into a topic that needs its own discussion.
I am assuming that if you are reading this, you have had at least a high school education. And that probably included at least an introduction to basic physics. If it has been a while for you, or if the words Newton's Laws of Motion sound like a legal doctrine, take a minute out and review them.
While we are going to be building on Newton's laws, the math we are going to use is a little beyond Newton's equations. The problem with rocket science is that we are causing something to accelerate at the same time we are making it lighter. That old F=ma... not much help. To really make sense of the process we have to fast forward a few hundred years in Physics to the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation. Which looks a bit like this:
ΔV | deltaV | The difference in speed between your rocket before the burn and after |
ve | effective exhaust velocity | A fudge factor that describes how fast your propulsion technology can excite the propellent |
m0 | wet mass | The mass of the spacecraft and all of its propellent. |
mf | dry mass | The mass of the spacecraft at the end of the burn. |
How much DeltaV you need depends on how fast you want to get there. For the moment we are ignoring the difference in orbital speeds between things close to the sun and farther away because they are tiny compared to what it takes to get there. At least with a fusion powered spacecraft. Here as a handy little table to help you visualize the distances between places in the solar system and how much deltaV would be required to get there in 1 day, 7 days, 14 days, 28 days, and 60 days
Point A | Point B | Distance AU | 1 Day DeltaV | 7 Day DeltaV | 14 Day DeltaV | 28 Day DeltaV | 60 Day DeltaV | |
Main Belt Asteroids | Mars | nearest | 0.28 | 484808 | 69258 | 34629 | 17314 | 8080 |
Earth | Mars | nearest | 0.4 | 692582 | 98940 | 49470 | 24735 | 11543 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Earth | nearest | 0.68 | 1177390 | 168198 | 84099 | 42049 | 19623 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Venus | nearest | 0.942 | 1631032 | 233004 | 116502 | 58251 | 27183 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Mercury | nearest | 1.353 | 2342661 | 334665 | 167332 | 83666 | 39044 |
Earth | Venus | farthest | 1.828 | 3165103 | 452157 | 226078 | 113039 | 52751 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Jupiter | nearest | 3.29 | 5696494 | 813784 | 406892 | 203446 | 94941 |
Earth | Jupiter | nearest | 3.97 | 6873884 | 981983 | 490991 | 245495 | 114564 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Mercury | farthest | 5.416 | 9377572 | 1339653 | 669826 | 334913 | 156292 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Earth | farthest | 6.05 | 10475315 | 1496473 | 748236 | 374118 | 174588 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Mars | farthest | 6.61 | 11444931 | 1634990 | 817495 | 408747 | 190748 |
Earth | Saturn | nearest | 8.07 | 13972859 | 1996122 | 998061 | 499030 | 232880 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Jupiter | farthest | 10.41 | 18024469 | 2574924 | 1287462 | 643731 | 300407 |
Earth | Saturn | farthest | 11.22 | 19426949 | 2775278 | 1387639 | 693819 | 323782 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Saturn | farthest | 15.07 | 26093059 | 3727579 | 1863789 | 931894 | 434884 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Uranus | nearest | 16.74 | 28984593 | 4140656 | 2070328 | 1035164 | 483076 |
Earth | Uranus | farthest | 21.2 | 36706892 | 5243841 | 2621920 | 1310960 | 611781 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Uranus | farthest | 25.05 | 43373002 | 6196143 | 3098071 | 1549035 | 722883 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Pluto | nearest | 28.04 | 48550059 | 6935722 | 3467861 | 1733930 | 809167 |
Earth | Pluto | nearest | 28.72 | 49727450 | 7103921 | 3551960 | 1775980 | 828790 |
Earth | Neptune | farthest | 31.5 | 54540901 | 7791557 | 3895778 | 1947889 | 909015 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Neptune | farthest | 35.35 | 61207011 | 8743858 | 4371929 | 2185964 | 1020116 |
Earth | Pluto | farthest | 50.4 | 87265441 | 12466491 | 6233245 | 3116622 | 1454424 |
Main Belt Asteroids | Pluto | farthest | 54.25 | 93931551 | 13418793 | 6709396 | 3354698 | 1565525 |
Once you know the DeltaV you can figure out just how much propellent you are going to need. Here is a handy table of DeltaV and the relationship between m0 and mf. To keep things easy, we are keeping mf constant at 1.0. So if you have an idea for a space ship, you can just multiply it's mass by the number in this table to see how much propellent would be required to get it up to that deltaV. (Assuming your space craft's mass and the propellent's mass are in the same units.) We are also using a ve for a fictitious fusion propulsion system with a value of 2000000.0 (m/s). Our propellent is basically shooting out at 0.006666666666666667 the speed of light.
I list 3 different figures in the table below:
DeltaV | M0 flat out | M0 one way | M0 round trip |
1000 | 1.0005 | 1.001 | 1.002 |
3000 | 1.0015 | 1.003 | 1.006 |
5000 | 1.0025 | 1.005 | 1.0101 |
10000 | 1.005 | 1.0101 | 1.0202 |
25000 | 1.0126 | 1.0253 | 1.0513 |
50000 | 1.0253 | 1.0513 | 1.1052 |
100000 | 1.0513 | 1.1052 | 1.2214 |
500000 | 1.284 | 1.6487 | 2.7183 |
1000000 | 1.6487 | 2.7183 | 7.3891 |
1565525 | 2.1875 | 4.7852 | 22.898 |
2000000 | 2.7183 | 7.3891 | 54.5982 |
4000000 | 7.3891 | 54.5982 | 2980.958 |
10000000 | 148.4132 | 22026.4658 | 485165195.4098 |
93931551 | 2.4944634104437785e+20 | 6.222347706042806e+40 | 3.871761097489618e+81 |
For low DeltaV we don't need much propellent at all. 3000 m/s is the DeltaV to boost from low Earth Orbit to the Moon. 10000 m/s is the DeltaV to boost from the surface of the Earth into Low earth orbit. You can read more on those figures here. Keep in mind, the Wikipedia pages is using km/s. An there are 1000 m/s in one km/s.
All of these examples are for a 7 day trip across 2 astronomical units of space, at a cruising speed of 247351 m/s (0.143 au/day). Even though the vessels are all travelling at the same speed, you can see that depending on the the mission or the cargo, the wet mass can vary considerably.
Ferry MissionsFerry missions fly from one place in the Solar System to another. In this case we are flying from one space port to another that is 2 AU away. This is a pleasure cruise taking its passengers on a 7 day getaway. The ship will be resupplied at the next spaceport, so it does carry any propellent or provisions for a return trip.
For math purposes, it is easiest to start with our destination and work backwards.
Stage | Delta V | Wet Mass | Dry Mass |
Decelerate to Destination | 247351 | 1.132 | 1.0 |
Cruise to Destination | 0 | 1.132 | 1.132 |
Accellerate to Destination | 247351 | 1.281 | 1.132 |
So for our simplest mission, we need to bring along 0.281 kg of propellent per kg of ship.
ReconLet us assume we are dispatching a spy craft to travel to a remote part of the Solar system and clandestinely monitor something. The ship will not be maneuvering at all on station. (At least with the main engines.) So 0% of our DeltaV reserved for the mission. Our cruising speed to get to our patrol station would be 0.25 of whatever we decide our deltav should be. We can then work out how long we want our Spacers out on patrol. Let's say 60 days. Next we need to work out how far away they will be patrolling. Let us assume we are in the Asteroid belt, and the areas we need to patrol is 2 AU away. We want to take 7 days to arrive, so our cruising speed is 0.143 au/day.
We are going to work backwards from our return trip. In the last stage of our journey:
Stage | Delta V | Wet Mass | Dry Mass |
Decelerate to Home | 247351 | 1.132 | 1.0 |
Cruise to Home | 0 | 1.132 | 1.132 |
Accellerate to Home | 247351 | 1.281 | 1.132 |
Mission | 0.0 | 1.281 | 1.281 |
Decelerate to Station | 247351 | 1.449 | 1.281 |
Cruise to Station | 0 | 1.449 | 1.449 |
Accelerate to Station | 247351 | 1.64 | 1.449 |
The human mind would intuitively think "ok, I'm traveling twice the distance at the same speed, twice the fuel". But then the math says "no." We need 0.64 kg of propellent per kg of ship for this mission, not 0.562
We need to think of our return flight, with propellent, as the cargo for the first flight. In fact, you can see the entire home-bound leg of the trip is exactly the same as for a one-way flight.
Long Range PatrolLet us assume we are dispatching a patrol craft to perform pirate interdiction. We want to leave plenty of propellent in the tank to chase down the pirates. So let us say we want 50% of our DeltaV reserved for the mission.
Stage | Delta V | Wet Mass | Dry Mass |
Decelerate to Home | 247351 | 1.132 | 1.0 |
Cruise to Home | 0 | 1.132 | 1.132 |
Accellerate to Home | 247351 | 1.281 | 1.132 |
Mission | 989404 | 2.1 | 1.281 |
Decelerate to Station | 247351 | 2.377 | 2.1 |
Cruise to Station | 0 | 2.377 | 2.377 |
Accelerate to Station | 247351 | 2.69 | 2.377 |
Our patrol craft needs to launch with 1.69 kg of propellent for every 1.0 kg of ship (and crew, warheads, etc.). We do spend 0.819 of it flying around and doing our Errol Flynn impression. And our return flight still only uses .281. But the cost of carrying all of that mission fuel meant our outbound flight cost extra. 0.59 vs 0.359 for our recon flight.
DeliveryLet us assume we are dispatching a supply craft to travel to a remote part of the Solar system. Like our recon mission, they are flying out and back again. But the twist for this mission is that they are dropping off a load of supplies, and flying back with empty cargo holds. The cargo is 90% of the dry mass of the ship on launch.
Stage | Delta V | Wet Mass | Dry Mass |
Decelerate to Home | 247351 | 0.113 | 0.1 |
Cruise to Home | 0 | 0.113 | 0.113 |
Accellerate to Home | 247351 | 0.128 | 0.113 |
Mission | 0 | 1.028 | 0.113 |
Decelerate to Station | 247351 | 1.163 | 1.028 |
Cruise to Station | 0 | 1.163 | 1.163 |
Accelerate to Station | 247351 | 1.317 | 1.163 |
We need 0.317 kg of propellent per kg of ship. Less than the recon mission. Still more than the one-way trip. The savings comes from only having to lob 10% of the original mass back again.
Resource CollectionLet us assume we are dispatching a mining craft to travel to a remote part of the Solar system. This is the opposite of our cargo mission. The vessel is going to pick up mass during the mission phase. To make the math easy, we'll say its the same 90% ratio we used for the cargo example. I.E. the vessel itself only has a mass of 0.1, but it will arrive home with a mass of 1.0. The 0.9 extra is whatever resource it is collecting from the mission area.
Stage | Delta V | Wet Mass | Dry Mass |
Decelerate to Home | 247351 | 1.132 | 1.0 |
Cruise to Home | 0 | 1.132 | 1.132 |
Accellerate to Home | 247351 | 1.281 | 1.132 |
Mission | 0 | 0.381 | 1.281 |
Decelerate to Station | 247351 | 0.431 | 0.381 |
Cruise to Station | 0 | 0.431 | 0.431 |
Accelerate to Station | 247351 | 0.487 | 0.431 |
We need 0.387 kg of propellent per kg of ship. This is a little more than dropping off cargo, but less than carrying that mass for the entire trip.
Rocket Science is ... weird. But we now know if you are going to run a service, you will spend a lot less in propellent if you drop something off, instead of picking something up. Both are cheaper than flying somewhere and neither picking something up, or dropping off. Only a military can afford to fly somewhere, fly some more for grins, and then fly home again. But the cheapest way to travel, by far, is between spaceports.
You can also see the power of the fusion engine to make traveling around the solar system relatively low cost. Let's look at our ferry missionm, with a propellent:vehicle ratio of 0.281. By comparison, a Boeing 747-8 has a max takeoff weight of 442250 kg. Of that, 191420 kg is fuel. That's gives us a propellent:vehicle ratio of 0.43. Oh yes, and a 747 burns Kerosene, our fusion ship "burns" water. Or lunar dust. Or whatever you can ionize into a plasma.
If you are curious, the ratio for the Space Shuttle at launch has a mass of 2,040,000 kg, and lands with a mass of 104,328 kg. That's a propellent:vehicle ratio of 19.55. The key difference is that the ve for the shuttle's propulsion system is only 4400 m/s (when operating in a vacuum). That's tiny compared to our fusion engines, and thus to develop the incredible speeds it needs to reach orbit it needs to use a lot of mass to get there. And that sucker ran on rubberized solid fuel and cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen.