What limitations are keeping this from reality? This being a

The Apollo missions did that in the 60s.

>>7741692
>personal craft capable of independent vertical liftoff.
His questions was really specific.

>>7741682
we don't have magic fairy dust propulsion

iirc he refuels a couple of times in the series
but the engine is so rampantly powerful and fuel efficient that it's completely outside of any technology we currently have

>>7741682
>money

>>7741682
We lack sufficient material of adequate energy density.

>>7741719
>>7741708
It can't use a mini orion drive?

>>7741725
no
:^)

>>7741725
maybe with another 50 years of technological advancement
Then an confined pulse fission engine would be possible.
Not that it's any cleaner than external nuclear pulse

So the politics are still the same

File: skylon_orbit_1l_1717952c.jpg (38KB, 460x288px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 460x288px

>>7741708
>magic fairy dust propulsion
>completely outside of any technology we currently have

>>7741768
yeah let's just ignore the whole "ground to orbit in 10 seconds or less" thing that can be seen multiple times in the series

>>7741818
and of course you have to ignore the "personal craft" and "vertical takeoff" aspect too
you kinda end up stripping away most of the things OP has specified in his question

File: em_nogozone.jpg (25KB, 349x418px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 349x418px

>>7741682
>What limitations are keeping this from reality?

Maybe nothing is keeping this from reality.
Maybe the reality is merely classified.
And maybe not for you.
Maybe?

- The Breakaway Civilization -

>>7741705
>His questions was really specific

And how does that not answer it?

>>7741682
we haven't given the right scientists and engineers the right amount of money at the right time, yet. that's it. and you can say that for most things that don't exist yet. i guarantee we will have robot waifus by 2030. you just need to give the right guys the right amount of money. engineers know HOW to do all of it. they just don't have the dosh to make it worth doing/even be able to do it.

>>7741927
This definitely isn't true. Everything we do as engineers is built based on the technology of 100s of years of other engineers work. It's not a matter of not having collected the right people together and paid them enough, it's about the technology of a million other things that they put into that ship not being available yet.

>>7741872
Apollo craft were launched using Titan missles. OP wants to just use the craft itself, without help from anything else.

>>7741682
>What limitations are keeping this from reality?

This, >>7741898

>>7741682
Vertical liftoff and landing is a thing but currently it sucks. It has to be implemented as an entirely different system separate from the system that makes the craft fly which means you're adding on a fuckload of weight just for the novelty of vertical take off and landing (VTOL).

That shit is the main reason the new F-35 sucks so much. Each branch of the military had it's own needs and desires with regards to a new plane but the government couldn't afford that many contracts. Instead they went for a one size fits all plane containing features everyone wanted. The Marines are crazy over VTOL so it was added in. As a result the plane is too heavy and slow to outmaneuver the planes it's supposed to replace.

VTOL is retarded unless you absolutely have to have it for some reason. As long as you have that in your design plan I guarantee you won't be able to enter orbit, at least not until people make some serious fucking breakthroughs in the technology.

>>7741682
Not gonna happen unless the meme drive becomes reality

>>7742004
>Apollo craft were launched using Titan missles.

Saturn V rockets.

>OP wants to just use the craft itself, without help from anything else.

So call the rocket part of the craft.

Apollo satisfies the conditions of the OP while also illustrating the problems with what he's really asking about, from that Chinese cartoon.

>>7741818
Ground to orbit in 10 seconds would produce so many Gs you would be turned into a fiery pink mist inside the ship.

Fuel capacity.

>>7741682
Space radiations.
Lead is good for protection but too heavy to lift

>>7742584
Not if you have inertia dampers <;^)

>>7742028

You know that there are three versions of the F35, and only one has VTOL, right?

Surely you're also aware that maneuverability doesn't mean shit when you get hit by a missile from beyond visual range by a plane you can't detect, right?

>>7742680
The design still suffered from having to accommodate the VTOL stuff in the other versions. They are still just different versions, not different planes.

Good sensors and VTOL have nothing to do with each other.

File: Ulam.png (49KB, 146x149px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 146x149px

>>7741725

Fuel capacity and ability to enter and reenter the atmosphere without structure damage multiple times without huge inspections.

>>7741866

this desu

>>7741682
>What limitations are keeping this from reality?

Physics

>>7742691
>The design still suffered from having to accommodate the VTOL stuff in the other versions.
not realy
But it was a big waste of money simply because the marines want to operate fucking stovl aircraft off their mini-carriers
Then again, all the other allies also needed a stovl aircraft for THEIR carriers, so thats part of the reason behind it.

>>7742004

Gemini spacecraft were launched via Titan II missiles.

>>7742703
this desu senpai

>>7741682
Everyone keeps talking about Earth-to-space, but could near-future craft like this be possible for Moon-to-space? What about Mars-to-space? Those places are alot easier to escape from than the Earth.

Nothing is. As soon as the EM drive is sufficiently demonstrated to major investors, the technology will develop such that we can achieve an acceleration of around 12 ms^-2 for a 20 ton vehicle with only a small amount of energy. I see this happening in around 10-18 years so just watch out for it.

>>7742041
looks like it's not happening.

>>7742680
>Surely you're also aware that maneuverability doesn't mean shit when you get hit by a missile from beyond visual range by a plane you can't detect, right?
Now watch as the F-35 fails to do this because anti-missile tech advances to the point where you have lasers shooting down any and every missile they throw at you.

File: Launch_ring.jpg (33KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x450px

>>7743051
Probably.

Something like sled could be used on the moon.

>>7741682
>What limitations
die juden

>>7742680
The plane is designed around VTOL capabilities, so even the non-VTOL models suffer from compromises because of it.

>>7742567
>So call the rocket part of the craft.
OP means a SSTO

Graphene electron propulsion. You shoot photons at a sheet of graphene, and a jet of electrons gets shot in the direction the laser came from. The vehicle would be enormous, though.

>>7743114

fuck that looks fun

>>7741866
Maybe you're an idiot.

>>7744616

>That would kill you.

>>7741682
due to the large amounts of fuel needed to propel a craft at an insane speed upwards for a prolonged amounts of time a craft such as that would need less fuel due to weight but more fuel due to jet-flame size, basically it wouldn't have enough fuel storage. A plasma thruster is the only option and that:
a: does not work that well in a normal atmosphere,
b: needs an atmosphere.
c: probably not currently possible, may not ever be possible due to power requirements, the best plasma thing is currently plasma cutters.

>>7742612
we don't have those, at least not anything that works to that degree.

>>7745775
>not knowing how to greentext

>>7741682
Fundamental physics.

>>7742703
>>7742926
You guys are using です wrong.. and it's triggering me.

So ships from the likes of Interstellar would work, right? But we could never have anything that is like what Star Citizen has (i.e. 'jet-style' craft)?

>>7741682
>What limitations are keeping this from reality?

Uh, many.

>personal craft

99,999998% of people are not even remotely smart enough to drive a car properly according to simple rules which are meant to safeguard everyone's lives. Air travel is safer because you don't have random retards piloting planes. You want to give them a space goddamn ship?

>capable of independent vertical liftoff

We don't have a infinite thrust generator yet. Actually, we don't have an infinite matter generator yet. It'll be possible the day we make a Star Trek replicator thingy that somehow converts energy into matter.

Aircraft engines breathe air. You can't accelerate an aircraft in space. That's why rocket engines package all their fuel into their own sealed self-contained tanks. They burn that shit, and that burning propels a bunch of matter in the directon opposite to where you want to go.

Rockets take off using literal fucktons of expensive as shit fuel, which are quite finite, and budgeted according to specific mission requirements and supplied & paid for by large governmental organizations whose original purposes were just to waste as much money as possible in order to inflate the geopolitical penis of their countries. It's only recently that a private company got into this game.

Normal maggots know fuck all about what a mission even is. They don't have any business in space. All they'd do is fuck in zero gravity to see what it feels like -- if the guy can even get his dick hard.

>vertical

We also need to either vector the thrust or erect your spaceship, both of which involves some convoluted as shit mechanisms. Shit isn't like Star Wars where the Milennium Falcon fires its thrusters backwards and somehow asceneds upwards.

>able to travel out of earth's orbit and back

That flimsy looking artist's spaceship looks like it'll be destroyed by the goddamn atmosphere. It looks like it's fucking engines are exposed. Gotta be xboxhueg, ugly & have some serious shielding.