That's not "overcoming", it's just working within its limits.
You can overcome the rocket equation by using non-rocket based propulsion, such as solar sails, tethers (momentum exchange or grounded e.g. space fountain), slingshot effect, electrodynamic field propulsion, or (if anyone can solve the huge number of issues even at the purely theoretical level never mind practical) spacetime metric propulsion including but not limited to Alcubierre's.
Also arguably by using the Oberth effect, but IMO that counts as boosting what you can get from rockets, not sure if it counts as "overcoming" or not…
So could you use a balloon to get to 100,000 feet and then use a solar powered ionic lifter to get to space? There are more ways to get to space than using rockets. The "tyranny of the rocket equation" only applies to rockets.
My understanding is that the Earth's gravity well extends much further then is commonly understood. The ISS at 1.3 million feet high gets 89% of Earth's gravity.
Stuff floats on the ISS because it's in free fall as a consequence of being in orbit around the Earth. Orbit is a function of speed i.e. the quick description of orbit is that you're moving so fast you miss the ground.
Starting at a higher spot doesn't get you much (OK,you get some because of a thinner atmosphere but it's not worth the price of the candle) in terms of speed. You better off putting the effort towards finding a spot close to the equator (which gives you speed from the Earth's rotation).
Most important thing to keep in mind that I know very little of this beyond beyond what I've picked up from so youtube video's and a bit Kerbal Space Program so I would take what I've said with a grain of salt.
To my simple mind bigger rockets are better because a smaller percentage of the useable mass is used for the guidance system etc and a bigger percentage can be used for the cargo.
7 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 28.6 ms ] threadYou can overcome the rocket equation by using non-rocket based propulsion, such as solar sails, tethers (momentum exchange or grounded e.g. space fountain), slingshot effect, electrodynamic field propulsion, or (if anyone can solve the huge number of issues even at the purely theoretical level never mind practical) spacetime metric propulsion including but not limited to Alcubierre's.
Also arguably by using the Oberth effect, but IMO that counts as boosting what you can get from rockets, not sure if it counts as "overcoming" or not…
http://web.archive.org/web/20230725181037/https://www.nasa.g...
More on the actual rocket equation can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsiolkovsky_rocket_equation
Stuff floats on the ISS because it's in free fall as a consequence of being in orbit around the Earth. Orbit is a function of speed i.e. the quick description of orbit is that you're moving so fast you miss the ground.
Starting at a higher spot doesn't get you much (OK,you get some because of a thinner atmosphere but it's not worth the price of the candle) in terms of speed. You better off putting the effort towards finding a spot close to the equator (which gives you speed from the Earth's rotation).
Most important thing to keep in mind that I know very little of this beyond beyond what I've picked up from so youtube video's and a bit Kerbal Space Program so I would take what I've said with a grain of salt.