This claim asserts that during a launch season, the size of the daily launch window, when combined with strategies for altering the flight trajectory of launched spacecraft and rapidly resetting the system, can accommodate four back-to-back launches.

This claim supports another claim, which is that Some of the Spacecraft That Are Launched During a Mars Transfer Season Can Be Aggregated on the Way to Mars.

Spacecraft are launched by transferring kinetic energy from flywheels within the variable-pitch screws to the adaptive nut, which, in turn, pushes the spacecraft down the evacuated tube. In a related claim, the maximum, initial, and final flywheel spin rates were calculated to be ${\omega}_{max}=2,305 \space rad/s$, ${\omega}_1=1,447 \space rad/s$, and ${\omega}_2=1,060 \space rad/s$, respectively. One way to restore the flywheels to their $\omega_1$ angular velocity is to simply provide power to the electric motors between launches. The amount of energy needed was 11.5 MJ per screw, or 3,561 GJ (equivalent to 989 MWh) for all of the screws. Therefore, it would take a 989 MW power plant one hour to recharge the system. A 5 GW power plant could recharge the system in 12 minutes.

If the adaptive nut is regeneratively braked, part of its kinetic energy can be recovered and returned to the flywheels, reducing the amount of power that must be supplied from external sources. Another strategy for reducing the time between back-to-back launches involves accelerating the flywheels to a much higher speed prior to the first launch. This extra initial speed combined with reboosts using recovered energy could reduce the reset time to minutes without requiring a 5 GW powerplant. However, when the flywheels are spun at higher speeds, more heat s generated when the brakes are applied, so more engineering analysis is required to verify whether the powerplant requirements can be alleviated using the flywheel overspeed strategy.

Back-to-back launches will use four adaptive nuts and four launch sleds, setting them aside after each launch. These components are then returned to the start of the launcher after the sequence of four back-to-back launches is complete.

Heat from braking the flywheels should dissipate throughout the screws and screws rapidly, so that the temperature at the braking interface will only rise by a few degrees each launch.

We have assumed that it will be possible to replace the exit airlock's burst disk and to pump the airlock back down to a vacuum in minutes.

If the time between back-to-back launches can be reduced to around 5 minutes, then the Earth's spin will cause the trajectories to differ by

$$\theta = 360 * 5/(24*60) = 1.25 \degree$$

To place all four spacecraft on a similar trajectories, course corrections of $3/2*1.25=1.875\degree$ will be needed for the first and fourth space craft, and $1/2*2.5=3.75\degree$ will be needed for the second and third spacecraft. As $tan(3.75\degree)=0.0327$, the first and fourth spacecraft will need to $0.0327*11123=364 \space m/s$ of lateral delta-v to course correct. This is equivalent to accelerating at 36.4 m/s for 10 seconds, which is roughly the amount of time that the spacecraft will spend exiting the atmosphere.

The current thinking is that the spacecraft can alter its trajectory sufficiently during endoatmospheric flight without significantly increasing the mass of its thermal protection systems. However, if this maneuver proves to be too challenging to supply the entirety of the needed 364 m/s of delta-v, then the shortfall could be made up by providing extra fuel and executing a short burn of the main rocket engine or by equipping the spacecraft with an ion thruster.

A full analytical validation of this claim will require digital-twin simulations of back-to-back launch cycles; this work remains to be done.