Stoner Posted December 22, 2015 Report Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) Edited December 24, 2015 by pASabreFan Quote
Stoner Posted December 23, 2015 Author Report Posted December 23, 2015 :unsure: You don't listen to me anymore! --IKP Quote
woods-racer Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 :unsure: You don't listen to me anymore! --IKP :unsure: squared Quote
Stoner Posted December 23, 2015 Author Report Posted December 23, 2015 (edited) He said a while back he was in Florida working on a rocket launch. I assume this is what he's been working on. (And he lives in California, home of SpaceX.) Edited December 23, 2015 by pASabreFan Quote
woods-racer Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 Wow. You're good pA. And IKP, congratulation! Quote
IKnowPhysics Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 I assume this is what he's been working on. Naw. Quote
WildCard Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 Nice move using Bartolo :lol: Quote
Stoner Posted December 23, 2015 Author Report Posted December 23, 2015 Naw. So what are you saying? You didn't ride that rocket down like Major Kong in Dr. Strangelove? Quote
Doohicksie Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 Yeah, something akin to that. Quote
3putt Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 He said product launch not rocket launch. Quote
IKnowPhysics Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 But if by 'product,' you mean 'rocket,' then yes. So what are you saying? You didn't ride that rocket down like Major Kong in Dr. Strangelove? Not unless Wing Attack Plan R is issued. Then I take a hammer to the CRM114 and it's rodeo time. Quote
Sabres Fan in NS Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 He said a while back he was in Florida working on a rocket launch. I assume this is what he's been working on. (And he lives in California, home of SpaceX.) Umm? The video you linked, unless I have it all wrong, which is probable considering my track record, shows a reverse rocket launch ... a rocket landing. Maybe it was shown in high-tech reverse? Quote
Doohicksie Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 No, that was real. Space X succeeded in landing a rocket on the ground after a flight. Quote
darksabre Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 Yup. Re-usable rockets. So darn cool.One of my old roommates from college works on this stuff with SpaceX, along with a handful of other engineers I went to school with. It's so cool. Quote
pi2000 Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 Why don't they just put wheels on it and land it like an airplane? Quote
Taro T Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 (edited) Why don't they just put wheels on it and land it like an airplane? Couple of reasons off the bat: 1. It takes an extremely long runway to bring something going that fast back down to stopped (assuming a catastrophic end of flight is unacceptable); even if you get that distance reduced, you limit where you can land the rocket by needing to taxi down; 2. Landing gear (especially rugged enough to handle the speeds & temps this would be exposed to) is relatively speaking extremely heavy. Edited December 23, 2015 by Taro T Quote
Sabres Fan in NS Posted December 23, 2015 Report Posted December 23, 2015 Why don't they just put wheels on it and land it like an airplane? I know, we could call it the Space Shuttle. :P Quote
MattPie Posted December 24, 2015 Report Posted December 24, 2015 I know, we could call it the Space Shuttle. :P That's a good point, but realistically people wouldn't be working on this if the Shuttle was a more cost effective way to do it. :) Quote
Doohicksie Posted December 24, 2015 Report Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) The Space Shuttle employed two completely different sets of systems to take off and to land. Carrying those big ol' glider wings means you have to lift thousands of extra pounds into orbit for the sake of being able to land safely later on. The extra weight means a corresponding decrease of payload. This system only has one set of hardware to take off and to land. The only "extra" weight has to do with the extra fuel needed to accomplish that bad-ass landing. If the weight of the extra fuel is less than the weight of wings and other systems needed to glide to a landing, this system is more efficient than the shuttle. *I used to be a rocket scientist. Edited December 24, 2015 by The Big Johnson Quote
woods-racer Posted December 24, 2015 Report Posted December 24, 2015 And here I thought you stayed at a Holiday Inn last night. :P Quote
Neo Posted December 24, 2015 Report Posted December 24, 2015 The Space Shuttle employed two completely different sets of systems to take off and to land. Carrying those big ol' glider wings means you have to lift thousands of extra pounds into orbit for the sake of being able to land safely later on. The extra weight means a corresponding decrease of payload. This system only has one set of hardware to take off and to land. The only "extra" weight has to do with the extra fuel needed to accomplish that bad-ass landing. If the weight of the extra fuel is less than the weight of wings and other systems needed to glide to a landing, this system is more efficient than the shuttle. *I used to be a rocket scientist. Nice. You could author Rocket Science for Dummies! Quote
wjag Posted December 24, 2015 Report Posted December 24, 2015 The Space Shuttle employed two completely different sets of systems to take off and to land. Carrying those big ol' glider wings means you have to lift thousands of extra pounds into orbit for the sake of being able to land safely later on. The extra weight means a corresponding decrease of payload. This system only has one set of hardware to take off and to land. The only "extra" weight has to do with the extra fuel needed to accomplish that bad-ass landing. If the weight of the extra fuel is less than the weight of wings and other systems needed to glide to a landing, this system is more efficient than the shuttle. *I used to be a rocket scientist. Of course the down side to landing with fuel is an explosion. Quote
North Buffalo Posted December 24, 2015 Report Posted December 24, 2015 To quote Senator John Glenn two weeks before going back into space on the space shuttle... "Isn't science neat!" Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.