You can't just make a rocket taller because you made it wider. The engine increase is directly proportional to the area of the rocket not the volume. You can make it stubby for sure, but you can't just scale it in all three dimensions unless you're creating engines with a higher thrust to area ratio as well.

@brilliant-handle

3 ай бұрын

Agreed. He needed to start the analysis with the "thrust density" of the engines you're going to use. That sets your max height. THEN expand it to 18m and figure out the weights. And of course you have to remember that no circle packing arrangement is going to completely tile the bottom cross section of the booster

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

Correct. But this was a learning exercise.

So many complex formulas in the world and yet a spreadsheet is often the correct method of getting to a answer.

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

It let's you see the changes :-)

excellent - really cool way of breaking down a complex issue - thankyou

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

You're very welcome!

Found an interesting article on Ars Technica titled Shields up: New ideas might make active shielding viable. Might be worth a read and could be a good video idea

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

Could you send a link please? Thank you!

@chadjensenster

3 ай бұрын

@@terranspaceacademy sent to your email

A really cool video would be for you to do the math on having a three-stage Starship with the same height and the same number of engines then ask the question. How many times do we have to refuel it before we go to the Moon?

@mbmurphy777

3 ай бұрын

The problem with additional stages is that they would be coming in at hypersonic speeds just like the orbital stage and therefore would need to have heat tiles for protection just like the upper stage. The reasons the super heavy is designed the way it is is to get around the need to have, multiple stages with heat tiles. also intermediate stages could not be returned to launch site and would have to land down range on a barge, etc. it would be a lot of extra infrastructure required, etc.

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

Sadly the answer is about twenty...

What do you think of John Powell's airship to orbit?

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

It's an interesting concept but I'll need to see where they are now...

Why the intermediate stage? Aside from this exercise. Just to shed some dry mass part way?

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

A three stage ship can get more mass to orbit which helps for long range missions.

Great video! Would you be able to do a deep dive into the technical aspects of Space Perspective balloon launch system? I love the idea of using Helium balloons as a high altitude launch pad for an SSTO - removes the need for all the extra 1st and 2nd stage fuel, boosters, engines etc.. I can see this method having many pros over existing Rocket Launch systems, including having plenty of time to run checks during the ascent & abort way before getting to Launch Altitude,. If the Helium was stored in tanks this would make a fully reusable Launch System with only the initial cost of the Helium - no repeat costs as its collected and stored for next launch!

@Kaizen712

3 ай бұрын

The issue is that most of the energy required for orbit is kinetic and sideways. Balloon launch (also known as rockoons) is limited in size due to how much mass the balloon can carry. Looks like Space Perspective doesn't go to orbit, just high altitude. There is a company that has proposed a balloon to orbit, JP Aerospace. I'm skeptical but I'd love to hear that they succeeded.

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

We have a lesson on SpaceRyde... The best design for this concept we've seen. Sadly shut down by trolls. kzread.info/dash/bejne/h46so82qkc6_hqw.html

@dans-designs

3 ай бұрын

@@terranspaceacademy just watched that, great work! such a shame that SpaceRyde shut down... still some great info there! thank you!

The obvious answer is solid rocket boosters all around the 1st stage.

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

Maybe :-)

@wadestewart5504

3 ай бұрын

@terranspaceacademy Saves gas for longer trips or get more fuel up to LEO fuel depots. Put 4 shuttle solid boosters around the 1st stage of SS. I mean if the goal is more cargo to space. Then for reusable missions use falcon 9's as boosters around SS.

@andrewhillis9544

3 ай бұрын

​@@terranspaceacademy It Would Be Interesting To See How Much Payload You Could Carry If You Put SLS Solid Rocket Boosters All Around The Diameter Of The Super-Heavy Core-Stage ! ! ! Having Solid Rocket Boosters All Around The Diameter Of The Core-Stage Works For The Russian Proton Rocket & Other Rockets Too So Why Not For Starship ? ? ?🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

@andrewhillis9544

3 ай бұрын

​@@terranspaceacademy Could We Make An F-1 OR M-1 Hydrolox OR Methalox Rocket Engine ? ? ?

@andrewhillis9544

3 ай бұрын

That Would Be One Helluva Beast Of A Rocket With SLS Seven Segment Solid Rocket Boosters All Around The Diameter Of The Core-Stage Of A Super-Heavy OR Ultra-Heavy Core-Stage BUT What Would This Vehicle Do To The Launch Pad And Would The Vehicle Survive Launch & Ascent ? ? ?🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

When making a building taller it's easier to think of just adding stories below the existing design. One way to get around the number of engines would be to take the existing 2 stages and put them on top a wider first stage. And if you are going to make the base wider the whole stage should be wider as the aerodynamic load is based on the total width. This means the 2nd and 3ed stages could be made shorter and wider with the same mass.

@zachansen8293

3 ай бұрын

There is a VERY good reason that rockets have their engines on the bottom. You need your center of thrust low, especially as you burn through propellant and your CG moves down

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

That reminds me of the Nexus design... Which Roy would have loved :-)

Starship Ultra heavy

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

That's it!

What drags us down is earths gravity well, if we constructed ships, in space we could bypass that. And the rest would be somewhat easier.

@Codysdab

3 ай бұрын

Well it saves about 9.4km/s of delta v and the need for super powerful engines. That's why we need fuel produced and stored in space.

@zachansen8293

3 ай бұрын

Yes, if you ignore the hard part, everything else gets easier :-\

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

Indeed. Lunar orbit is the best place to build true space ships.

@kumardigvijaymishra5945

3 ай бұрын

How would you get methane and oxidizer on lunar orbit? Unless there is atleast one asteroid with plenty of methane somehow accidentally starts circling moon, the AI powered rockets can refuel themselves whenever they want to fill up fuel tanks.

GYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

:-)

Starship heavy calculations?

@terranspaceacademy

3 ай бұрын

All calculations are heavy... at least until I've had my RockStar! :-)