MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2504881281 · doi:10.1515/9783110919806.214

GUN LAUNCH SYSTEM FOR SMALL SATELLITES: A FRESH LOOK

2005· book-chapter· en· W2504881281 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Launch and Propulsion Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPayload (computing)LaunchedRocket (weapon)Small armsAerospace engineeringAeronauticsEngineeringOrbit (dynamics)Electrical engineeringComputer scienceComputer securityBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of launching small satellites to low earth orbits by means of standard gun is called to be fully implemented, for the first time since it was formulated. For this purpose, it is proposed to use the original Gun Launch System (GLS) being developed by several Ukrainian high-tech companies. This system is able to deliver the payloads weighing up to 5-7 kg to the altitudes of up to 100 kilometres. It is shown that the system, after proper modernisation, will be ideally suited for launching nanoand picosatellites, and have multiple advantages as compared to the conventional launch systems, as well as alternative NanoSat launchers being developed elsewhere. The program of the existing GLS improvement, testing and adaptation to launching satellites in question has been elaborated. 1. BRIEF PRE-HISTORY The idea of launching small satellites to low earth orbits by means of standard gun was born back in the middle of the XX century. It was the HARP orbital program jointly financed by the Canadian and US governments in 1964-1967, that could be considered as a forerunner of the proposed approach. The ultimate goal of the HARP program was Martlet 4 – a full-bore, multi-stage, gun-launchable rocket. The original Martlet 4 parameters called for a vehicle with three solid stages able to launch a payload between 25 and 50 pounds into low earth orbit from the 16 inch L86 gun on the Barbados flight range with an all up shot weight on the order of 2000 pounds. Development trials for the Martlet 4 began in the fall of 1966 with tests proceeding into early 1967. The majority of the early work was conducted on the Highwater, Quebec test range where the structural integrity of the Martlet 4 first stage motor during gun-launching was proven. Due to a series of obstacles, different in nature, the HARP was cancelled in the middle of 1967. It was not able to successfully gun-launch a satellite, although it proved the feasibility of a low-cost, gun-launched satellite system [1]. 2. THE PROPOSED SYSTEM Today there are good chances to prove viability and multiple advantages of the GLS as compared to the conventional launch systems, proceeding from the latest achievements in the field of micro-miniaturisation, nanotechnology, instrumentation and control of the satellites, as well as from advanced launcher technologies. As a first step on this way, it is proposed to make demonstrations to the expert community of how the original GLS being developed by several Ukrainian high-tech companies works. The core of the system is a reusable sub-orbital launch vehicle (RSLV) equipped with the solid/combustion ram-jet engine, control and recovery systems (see figure below). Its length is 120 to 150 centimetres, diameter – 150 or 203 millimetres (NATO Standard gun calibre adaptation is foreseen), weight – 30 kilograms. The rocket projectile initial speed is 965 meters per second.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.168 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it