It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why does NASA not launch rockets from weather balloon tethered platforms?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

5mph, plus weaker gravitational pull, plus very low drag, plus wicked awesome rocket launching railgun.
whats not to like?




posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 12:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I have a dumb question.

So as a very weird comparison can we use a persons arm trying to lift a weight (dumbbell curl)? Even if you start out taking the weight a few inches higher than your waist, it's still going to be the same struggle at the end? You might burn a few less (fewer? Wine) calories and exert a tiny bit less, but the brunt of it is still the problem and that little "cheat" isn't much of one at all.

Also, doesn't it help to have more time or distance to get up to speed? Is it easier to propel something that's already going 100 mph than something that's stationary but higher? I'm thinking cars. So let's say you're trying to get the fastest time in 1 mile of track in a straight line. You have one car start closer, but the other car gets to start at the same place already going x amount of speed, I would think the car with more useable track to get up to speed would do better.

Or like throwing a punch?

I am not a smart man.

Be kind.

Pls. Be kind.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 12:54 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen
An 18 hour ride.
Storms.
A broken balloon...



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

2 hours,
ooh, scary storms.
1000 balloon army of redundancy



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 01:04 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen
Ok. You win. Balloons are the way to get to space.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dashen
Ok. You win. Balloons are the way to get to space.


holy crap, it must be the altitude sickness, but i agree.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Domo1
Seems that you understand the concept quite well.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Just bore a giant hole in the Earth and put a nuke at the bottom.

Pretty simple stuff, people.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 01:55 AM
link   
If you've ever watched shuttle launches live you'll understand how important it is that mechanical and weather conditions need to be optimal for nasa to allow the launch.
It is very common for launches to be halted, and temporarily delayed within the final minute of countdown because of issues that can change within seconds for either of these factors.
Suggesting it would be 'safer' to try and launch the shuttle by balloons, and then launch it AGAIN once it has reached a certain height? How is that safer?
And what if there is a mechanical issue that requires a technician to manually repair a component on the shuttle?




posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 02:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Domo1
Seems that you understand the concept quite well.



I can't tell if you're mocking me or not.

Man, I'm embarrassed about my ability to understand this kind of thing, and I always have to make it into something I know about to get it.

One last analogy. Pushing a needle into a vein to take blood. So regardless of how deep the needle is, you're going to have to use the same force to puncture the vein. So it doesn't really matter how deep in the skin you start, because it takes x amount of force/pressure/whatever to get into the vein. SO the first layer doesn't matter, because the resistance you're worried about is piercing the wall of the vein... So irregardless (heh sorry) of the depth of the needle in the skin, the thing that matters is the force trying to get into the vein?

Something needs X amount of force to escape the amount of force the earth puts on it? So it's not about height really, it's about avoiding pull? You'll get the same pull, so you have to reach the same amount of speed, because the amount of speed to get away from Earth doesn't really change?



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Domo1



I can't tell if you're mocking me or not.

I'm not.

You understand the concept. The problem is not getting high, the problem is getting fast. A few miles of free "high" are not going to make enough of a difference to make a balloon launch to orbit practical.

That said, if you are not trying to get to orbit. It makes some sense. The Aerobee mentioned in the OP was not trying to get to orbit. It couldn't go fast enough to do so. No matter how high the balloon took it. Not enough juice.

edit on 1/19/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 02:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Things are clicking.

You get a lot of flack, but you're actually a pretty awesome teacher.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 02:50 AM
link   
I would think stability would be one of the factors involved. A bunch of bobbing around balloons would not be that stable. Sure speed has a lot to do with achieving orbit. So how would you launch from balloons without having any initial speed to achieve orbit. A launch from tethered balloons would melt them as well.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 03:21 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

It would have a counter effect you wouldn't have the room to achieve thr velocity. Speed is the key you must reach escape velocity.what your proposing is like having a dragster start halfway down the track. You would notice his time would be only slightly shorter. The reason he didn't have time to reach his full speed. On a track not so bad but when your trying to escape thr eartgs gravity it be a disaster.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 03:23 AM
link   
[Quote]originally posted by: Ceeker63
I would think stability would be one of the factors involved. A bunch of bobbing around balloons would not be that stable. Sure, speed has a lot to do with achieving orbit. So how would you launch from balloons without having any initial speed to achieve orbit. A launch from tethered balloons would melt them as well.

The thrust needed I suspect would launch their platform straight down. Imagine the pounds per square inch on the launch platform. Even at cape canavral they constantly have to repair the launch site.
edit on 1/19/16 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Phage,
Are you saying that launching from earth gives enough room to gain speed almost like a vertical run way, kind of?



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 07:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Are you saying that rockets reach speeds of 17,000 mph inside the atmosphere? Wow, I didn't know that...I didn't think the human body could handle that. Interesting



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Actually, Phage, you kinda missed the whole point of the Rockoon concept.

You might want to look up the Cheap Access To Space (C.A.T.S.) prize conducted in the late 1990's. An effort to develop the First non-governmental, "amateur" rocket launch to reach space.

The primary advantage presented by the Rockoon configuration is that it affords a significantly reduced need for fuel, and the mass that fuel represents.

With any ground-based launch, the majority of the onboard fuel is expended overcoming intertIa and climbing against the significant drag imposed by the atmosphere at low altitude.

A Rockoon, launched Above up to 90% of the bulk of the atmosphere, reduces the effects of drag, and conserves that bulk of fuel to apply to countering intertIa and achieving the velocity required for orbit, or altitude.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

"A bunch of balloons" don't actually "bob" at altitude.

The aerodynamics of the balloons cause the air flowing around them to stabilize the the entire balloon array far more than you might imagine.

Check out the work done over the past decade by JP Aerospace.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Bhadhidar

Why would they check out actual work by rocket scientists?
They seems to have it all figured out already



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join