Suborbital home made rockets

Recently started a thread about "Mad" Mike Hughes , a flat earth believer, who was killed in crash of his homemade rocket

Got me thinking - would it be feasible for a person/small group to build a rocket capable of going on suborbital trip into lower reaches of space

One group in Denmark of all places has for the past several years been attempting to build such a rocket

Called COPENHAGEN SUBORBITALS are currently in process of building a rocket called SPICA to reach past Von Karman line (100 KM)

copenhagensuborbitals.com...

One idea would be to use pre existing design - Couple of years back was a Canadian Group call Canadian Arrow who proposed resurrecting the V2
for suborbital space tourism - carrying 3 three people

Also possible is the US REDSTONE which launched the first US satellites (Explorer) and first US astronauts in Space (Shepard/Grissom)

But this might be too much as Redstone is over 70 feet

These designs have been proven and the drawing and blueprints are available

All these designs are fueled by mixture of Liquid Oxygen and 75 % ethyl alcohol - which is cheap. readily available and relativity non toxic

What are you thoughts ??????

I recall the German firm OTRAG from the 1970's, using mostly off-the-shelf industrial gear to make rockets. The had a vast leasehold in Zaire for a while, and ended in Libya, IIRC.

Link: www.jcrocket.com...

Plus, the usual wiki articles, etc...

I am not sure what the purpose would be for a suborbital rocket. Is this something to do simply because they can? I

originally posted by: Metallicus
I am not sure what the purpose would be for a suborbital rocket. Is this something to do simply because they can? I

recreational nukes ?

Neighborhood nuclear superiority? Like in "Elephant Parts"?

a reply to: Lazarus Short

ORTAG was brainchild of Lutz Kaiser - object was to create cheap modular rockets which could be join together to launch payloads Cheap and nasty was the watchword with everything "off the shelf"

Each rocket was built from section of pipe using simple blow down system where pipes were filled 2/3 full of fuel , remainder being compressed gas to furnish pressure to feed propellants into combustion chamber

Fuel was diesel oil with red fuming nitric acid as oxidizer

Propellant valves were common ball valves operated by windshield wiper motor from Volkswagen

Politics got involved as pressure from US shut him down do to Libyan connection

a reply to: Metallicus

There are number of proposals for Space Tourists being taken into space

Most prominent is Virgin Galactic by Sir Richard Branson - have launched several test flights and are close to actually
flying people into space

There is a reason for the term "Rocket Science". Anything on the scale you are talking about is in the realm of professionals only that work for large corporations with the money for proper research, development and regulation.

The danger of not only killing yourself along with anyone working with you should be obvious, but you can put the general public at risk as well.

If rocketry interests you, join a local hobby group and become familiar with the scales that the public is allowed to work with.

originally posted by: Metallicus
I am not sure what the purpose would be for a suborbital rocket. Is this something to do simply because they can? I

I still don't understand why people think jumping out of perfectly good planes, tethered to a piece of cloth to carry them back down to the ground, is a good idea.

But people pay to do it...

Personally, a well reputed publicly run company offering a trip as high as high can be without being too high, would be neat.

Heck, people get in helicopters just to see things from up there... and that's peanuts compared to space.

a reply to: firerescue

CSXT successfully launched a civilian designed and built rocket to an altitude of 72 miles, 10 miles beyond the official altitude at which “space” starts.

This launch followed, by several years, an international competition, known as the C.A.T.S. (Cheap Access To Space) Prize. The CATS Prize opened the door to true civilian space participation.

However, if your intent is to carry humans on suborbital flights, your rocket will need to be “man-rated”, a far more difficult (and Expensive!) undertaking.

a reply to: charlyv

Want planning on doing this myself as don't have the money and landlord would be royally pissed if trying building one in living room

Was trying to put this out for consideration

originally posted by: charlyv
There is a reason for the term "Rocket Science". Anything on the scale you are talking about is in the realm of professionals only that work for large corporations with the money for proper research, development and regulation.

The danger of not only killing yourself along with anyone working with you should be obvious, but you can put the general public at risk as well.

If rocketry interests you, join a local hobby group and become familiar with the scales that the public is allowed to work with.

interesting premise but intellectually flawed.

first in any new or even current endeavor there is an element of risk to include death.
"professionals , large corporations with money for proper research " and especially "regulations" do not innovation make

In fact if you leave it up to what your suggesting many things we enjoy now would not have been created.

for example the computer you now are using to comment on this the industry was founded/foundation by a couple of guys in a garage that later became APPLE .
another brilliant maverick created its competition bill gates.

but I bet you are saying "this is not the same as going into space"

well if you want to try that logic before there was spaceships there were airplanes.
Who again made the first powered flight that really is the grand daddy of the modern space age?

orville and wilber wright.

they were not "professionals, big corporations or required regulations" but two bicycle repair/makers who put their minds together and made a "home made" powered aircraft.


hell even the father of modern rocketry was Goddard who was fooling around with rockets, power sources (very dangerous) and designs as "home made".

hell even von braum was "home made" until the nazi hired him (later the US) and all his research was "home made".

in short yes there is danger but if someone is willing to take the chance and work at it why not let them?

the cold hard truth is why more are not as our early pioneers in aircraft and space vehicles did is because of the very thing you claim

" There is a reason for the term "Rocket Science". Anything on the scale you are talking about is in the realm of professionals only that work for large corporations with the money for proper research, development and regulation"

not helped by it

scrounger

a reply to: firerescue

If all you want is suborbital a plane with solid rocket boosters would probably do.

Here is a crazy idea. Buy a MIG-29 two-seater, attach a booster between its engines. Maybe enlarge/strengthen the airbrake, or replace the landing drogue chute with a smaller supersonic version to slow down and stabilize the descent. And you've got yourself a suborbital jet.

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: firerescue

If all you want is suborbital a plane with solid rocket boosters would probably do.

Here is a crazy idea. Buy a MIG-29 two-seater, attach a booster between its engines. Maybe enlarge/strengthen the airbrake, or replace the landing drogue chute with a smaller supersonic version to slow down and stabilize the descent. And you've got yourself a suborbital jet.

excellent concept worth investigating.

its thinking like this that creates new industry and money making potential

its this kind of thinking that has created the tech we enjoy today.

but I bet some government agency gonna try to put the stop to something so simple unless they get their palms greased and it doesnt interfere with their companies.

scrounger

originally posted by: [post=24974226]

but I bet some government agency gonna try to put the stop to something so simple unless they get their palms greased and it doesnt interfere with their companies.

scrounger

When my team was working on our CATS entry, the only difficulty/interference we encountered from the government was their concern over the safety of the population within our potential flight path, under “worst case scenarios”.

The primary issue was that, since what we were proposing to do had never been attempted before (in the government’s mind), it was exceedingly difficult to define just what they would deign as a “worst case scenario”; they had no precedent, and therefore no infrastructure upon which to evaluate the potential effectiveness of our preparations.

In fact, back then it wasn’t even clear which department had jurisdiction over our operations: the FAA’s jurisdiction typically ended below 100,000FT, and NASA didn’t really concern itself with anything suborbital. Lots of bureaucratic back and forth over that issue, as I recall.

So, in this instance, “corporate” influences were, at least back then, not an issue.

a reply to: moebius

NASA had the X 15 hypersonic rocket plane which made numerous flight In 1950 -1960's , including several which
qualified for astronaut status

Also was modified F104 fighter (NF104) which incorporated an auxiliary rocket motor and reaction control jets
for maneuvering at extreme altitude

Was rated for over 120,000 ft

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
In fact, back then it wasn’t even clear which department had jurisdiction over our operations: the FAA’s jurisdiction typically ended below 100,000FT, and NASA didn’t really concern itself with anything suborbital. Lots of bureaucratic back and forth over that issue, as I recall.

I was curious to see how Copenhagen suborbitals got around the red tape. They have an interesting solution, do everything in international waters:

copenhagensuborbitals.com...
"Copenhagen Suborbitals is the only space organisation that launches rockets from a sailing platform in international waters, since it’s virtually impossible to get permission to do it from the ground in any country...

We fly our rockets from the military firing practice area ES D 139 in the Baltic Sea, 20 km east of of the Danish island of Bornholm. It spans 70×35 km, and are opened to us by the Royal Danish Navy for the launch time window. The Danish and Swedish authorities are very helpful , and close the airspace above for airtraffic in the hours of the actual launch. Our mission base is the seaside town Nexø on the east coast of Bornholm, which we affectionately call “Spaceport Nexø”."

The plan is to also have the astronaut parachute down into the sea after making a brief jaunt into space above the Karman line. It sounds like they have minimized the risk to civilians on the ground by doing it at sea, and closed the airspace above the launch, which is good because rocketry on this scale (Their rocket assembly is about 13 meters tall!) is risky.

For a long time I've had the fantasy of blasting a private rocket off to Venus filled with genetically engineered bacteria that would float in the atmosphere, eat sulfur, and poop out water. Just to see what would happen. Then in a million years when the next wave of humans rises up from the ashes of our own civilization, they'll find a world that has been "contaminated" (and partially terraformed) by lifeforms from Earth and wonder how the hell it happened. But just for fun I'd stick a little code into the DNA that would tell the whole story -- if they could figure it out.

I'd pick Venus because very few people care all that much about it, compared to Mars, for instance.

But even though Venus is right there in plain view in the sky, shooting a rocket at it and actually hitting it would be basically impossible. Actually, creating the GMO bacteria would be relatively simple in comparison. But that's not going to happen, either. Also the money. Very expensive. If I could find a way to make enough money to contaminate Venus, I could probably find something more fun to spend it on.

originally posted by: scrounger

originally posted by: charlyv
There is a reason for the term "Rocket Science". Anything on the scale you are talking about is in the realm of professionals only that work for large corporations with the money for proper research, development and regulation.

The danger of not only killing yourself along with anyone working with you should be obvious, but you can put the general public at risk as well.

If rocketry interests you, join a local hobby group and become familiar with the scales that the public is allowed to work with.

interesting premise but intellectually flawed.

first in any new or even current endeavor there is an element of risk to include death.
"professionals , large corporations with money for proper research " and especially "regulations" do not innovation make

In fact if you leave it up to what your suggesting many things we enjoy now would not have been created.

for example the computer you now are using to comment on this the industry was founded/foundation by a couple of guys in a garage that later became APPLE .
another brilliant maverick created its competition bill gates.

but I bet you are saying "this is not the same as going into space"

well if you want to try that logic before there was spaceships there were airplanes.
Who again made the first powered flight that really is the grand daddy of the modern space age?

orville and wilber wright.

they were not "professionals, big corporations or required regulations" but two bicycle repair/makers who put their minds together and made a "home made" powered aircraft.


hell even the father of modern rocketry was Goddard who was fooling around with rockets, power sources (very dangerous) and designs as "home made".

hell even von braum was "home made" until the nazi hired him (later the US) and all his research was "home made".

in short yes there is danger but if someone is willing to take the chance and work at it why not let them?

the cold hard truth is why more are not as our early pioneers in aircraft and space vehicles did is because of the very thing you claim

" There is a reason for the term "Rocket Science". Anything on the scale you are talking about is in the realm of professionals only that work for large corporations with the money for proper research, development and regulation"

not helped by it

scrounger

The early days of innovation are not included in this scenario. Rocketry is a mature science in this regard, and as such, only those with scientific credentials need apply. We do not need explosive loving nubes trying to compete with those that understand chemistry.

So, my premise is not "intellectually flawed". It takes past experience and public examples into focus. The latest of these endeavors shows exactly what I am talking about.

I understand that discovery is one thing, but mimicry without scientific foundation is another.
For everything that a true entrepreneur develops and nurtures, there is some nutjob out there that wants to jumpstart the science ... without the scientific foundation or credentials, just like the pyrotechnic psycho's that exist out there on YT.

We have provided the technological mechanisms that make dangerous activities possible by some very careless and incompetent people. It has caused major problems everywhere you look.