Question Nobody done this before, what laws can there be?

[Artlav]

The contraption stood in the middle of a field, held upright by wooden beams. A railroad oil tank with rocket engine on one end and a cluster of windows on the other, the cans of air welded to the sides as RCS thrusters.
That engine below was the magnificent part of it, a drive that can push matter away at it's own energy expense, giving an independent control of thrust and specific impulse. It's a field, but roasting the neighbourhood is still a bad idea.
Everything was ready, the weather was fine, the sun was about to rise.
Time to dive into the sky.


That's the setting.
Let's say the thing successfully rose into a high orbit, and only thing for communications in it were a CB radio.
And, surely, nobody warned or notified anybody, just that crazy inventor took that scrapheap rocket into space without a second thought.

Now, what would follow?
Would anyone try to communicate (and at the right bands) with that UFO many tracking stations should be able to detect?
What would happen on return, like if he lands, oblivious, to the same field a few days later?

In the 50's he'll say "Nobody done this before, what laws can there be?"
But we are in 2011.

(Why not ask for permissions? Who's going to license THAT for a space flight and after how much bureaucracy?)

 

[jangofett287]

I know, lets try it and see!!!:rofl:
I volunteer (being the one who suggested it) to sit on top of our many tonnes of stuff liable to explode! XD :lol::rofl:

 

[RisingFury]

You started a similar thread a while back...

http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=4523&highlight=backyard+orbit

 

[Artlav]

You started a similar thread a while back...

Sure, and some things have changed since then, commercial spaceflight and people on this forum included. So, i start afresh.

 

[Star Voyager]

This movie did a good job of acknowledging these issues:

 

[Ghostrider]

In the '50s anyone pulling this would have become an instant celebrity, a hero in the eyes of many and received offers to work with either government and private industries.

But this is the 21st Century: everybody would panic ("ZOMG! TEH TERR-OW-RISTS!!!"), the landing site would be carpet-bombed to keep TEH CHILDREN safe and everybody in a 1000-km radius would commit suicide to avoid risk being killed.

Then the UN would ban oxygen for its role in the rogue rocket engine's function and mankind would be forced to breath nitrogen or risk severe retaliation.

Just kidding, but we're almost there with the hysteria...

 

[PeterRoss]

It's only one thing I can say for sure: they won't allow you to dock with ISS without test flight.

 

[jangofett287]

Thinking about this scenario, you HAVE to admit, if someone was to attempt this, there would be no better qualified bunch of amateurs than us. I mean, there would have had to have been a group of people, there is no way one man could do this alone.

Back on topic:
I think there would be alot of frantic telephone calls between nations:
"Did you launch that, Who launched that?"
I'm not certain if ICBMs can target an airborne target, but I may be wrong, if they can't you'll be fine, if they can, pray.

 

[Wishbone]

The first thing to happen would be missile warning going off, most likely the American one (since it's got more coverage). Second, the hot line would be activated. Third, there will be no Armageddon. Fourth, the hapless inventor will have his elbows broken, his kneecups split, and ... sorry wrong century.

 

[Hlynkacg]

In all likelyhood he'd be shot down while trying to land.

 

[Columbia42]

I'd like to think we're more evolved than that and that more caution and common sense would be used when dealing with something like this.

 

[Wishbone]

Can't agree with Hlynka, there is currently no technology to do that, but we can be certain that not longer than 3-4 hours after descent he'd be arrested.

 

[Star Voyager]

This looks like the technology to me:

 

[steph]

And how would you land an oil tanker with an engine on one end?. Perhaps you survive reentry by braking with the engine, but how would you actually land it? Or are you planning a Gagarin-style bail-out?

 

[Hlynkacg]

SM3 missiles are capable of targeting terminal phase ICBMs (which our hypothetical re-entry vehicle will resemble) and as Starvoyager pointed out, Anti-Sattelite weapons have existed since the 80s.

Call me a cynic if you want but I think that any un-identified spacecraft coming down over an inhabited area is likely to be a target for every Air-Defense site or Warship in range.

 

[T.Neo]

Both the acceleration and deceleration profile of a manned spacecraft would be pretty different to that of an ICBM. Since railroad oil tanks are not known to make the best reentry vehicles, we can only assume the super-engine is efficient enough to allow both acceleration to and from orbit. In that case, its reentry would look very different to that of an ICBM, and different from a conventional reentry of a manned vehicle.

Since shooting down a platform revealed to be holding a benign eccentric scientist only wanting to help humanity might be bad press, I doubt they would shoot first and ask questions later... since the thing is broadcasting in space first, along with other potential web-based information spreading (such as for example ustreaming the launch, or something), one would imagine it wouldn't be completely unknown.

In addition, either launching and landing in the same country, or launching and landing in a benign country (the kind that wouldn't build ICBMs, or at the very least, isn't known for building ICBMs) might be a good idea. Launching from North Korea and trying to land in Oregon... that would probably be suicidal.

 

[jthill]

You'd probably be a lot safer if you painted a big ol' Coke logo on the side...

 

[Star Voyager]

Or Playboy. I can't think of anyone firing on any vessel with the Playboy bunny on the side :thumbup:!

 

[Eli13]

Hey I know that ship, it landed in my backyard last night :rofl: