My gut feel is that this is a pretty grossly inefficient system by nature. Inducing current in seawater just to give magnetic traction something to push off against seems semi absurd.
I understand. They're the only orbital game in town, and will be until <INSERT_PET_FUTURISTIC_THINGY>. I guess what I'm, saying, it's more that "efficient" isn't a word that pops up in your head when you imagine "rocket". It's like a demure Dodge Hellcat owner, or a contemplative WWE star.
What? VLSI, VHDL, Multics, Hypertext, GaAs semiconductors, autonomous navigation, GPS, and packet switched networking were a few things they funded. Totally absurd, right? For every successful tech, they probably explored scores that didn't pan out. Basic, high risk research has huge payoffs across society even if you don't like who's funding it or why.
So true. I read once that fundamental physics research on quantum tunnelling in Japan resulted in antennas that immediately reduced satellite dish sizes from meters across to the size of a dinner plate. Now you can connect with a modern smart phone.
Purely-electric devices tend to have this property that if you maximize or minimize something with no clear theoretical limitation, your efficiency grows all the way to 1.
On the case of this, my gut feeling tells me that making the magnet really, really big will do it.
My gut feel is that this is a pretty grossly inefficient system by nature. Inducing current in seawater just to give magnetic traction something to push off against seems semi absurd.