Why do rockets do not glide back?
Why do not the rockets after stage separation, glide back to Earth with wings?
Is retro propulsion a better idea than gliding rockets back to 'Earth'? The way Energia-II was supposed to perform...
Energia-II, all stages (including payload fairing) are planned to be recovered.
stages recovery booster-flyback energia
edited 15 mins ago
Organic Marble
53.2k3141228
asked 14 hours ago
Red Orbiter 10.1
493
add a comment |
Why do not the rockets after stage separation, glide back to Earth with wings?
Is retro propulsion a better idea than gliding rockets back to 'Earth'? The way Energia-II was supposed to perform...
Energia-II, all stages (including payload fairing) are planned to be recovered.
stages recovery booster-flyback energia
edited 15 mins ago
Organic Marble
53.2k3141228
asked 14 hours ago
Red Orbiter 10.1
493
Why not parachute?
– laptop2d
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Why do not the rockets after stage separation, glide back to Earth with wings?
Is retro propulsion a better idea than gliding rockets back to 'Earth'? The way Energia-II was supposed to perform...
Energia-II, all stages (including payload fairing) are planned to be recovered.
stages recovery booster-flyback energia
edited 15 mins ago
Organic Marble
53.2k3141228
asked 14 hours ago
Red Orbiter 10.1
493
Why do not the rockets after stage separation, glide back to Earth with wings?
Is retro propulsion a better idea than gliding rockets back to 'Earth'? The way Energia-II was supposed to perform...
Energia-II, all stages (including payload fairing) are planned to be recovered.
stages recovery booster-flyback energia
stages recovery booster-flyback energia
edited 15 mins ago
Organic Marble
53.2k3141228
asked 14 hours ago
Red Orbiter 10.1
493
edited 15 mins ago
Organic Marble
53.2k3141228
asked 14 hours ago
Red Orbiter 10.1
493
edited 15 mins ago
Organic Marble
53.2k3141228
edited 15 mins ago
Organic Marble
53.2k3141228
edited 15 mins ago
Organic Marble
53.2k3141228
53.2k3141228
asked 14 hours ago
Red Orbiter 10.1
493
asked 14 hours ago
Red Orbiter 10.1
493
asked 14 hours ago
Red Orbiter 10.1
493
493
Why not parachute?
– laptop2d
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Why not parachute?
– laptop2d
1 hour ago
Why not parachute?
– laptop2d
1 hour ago
Why not parachute?
– laptop2d
1 hour ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
As with most things space, it all comes down to tradeoffs. The most efficient rocket is one that is purely expendable and has no mass that does not contribute to getting the payload towards orbit.
If the aim is to reuse the rocket, you need a mechanism to achieve control in the upper atmosphere, a method to control descent rate and a method to achieve a landing that does not destroy the hardware (or just tough hardware). And do all of this without increasing the risk of the launch itself failing due to hardware for the return.
Wings are a partial option, they work well for achieving a controllable descent rate, but they do not do much useful at high altitude and need additional supporting hardware (wheels/runway/airbags etc) to achieve a soft touchdown and a fair bit of flight control smarts.
Using the existing rocket engine is less efficient than using wings, but it is something that is already there on the rocket and gives you a system with extra capability in expendable mode.
So the final decision involves a lot of trade offs that often have much to do with seemingly minor details and less on perfection of a single aspect. For example SpaceX has ambitions on the moon and mars, and both of those require mastering powered descent rather than wings.
Related questions/answers
SpaceX decision making
Wings during ascent
Plans to have wings on SRBs
edited 57 mins ago
edc65
1032
answered 13 hours ago
GremlinWranger
1,620114
1
You probably mean "descent rate" instead of "descent rate"
– Kakturus
7 hours ago
19
@Kakturus you probably meant "decent rate" the second time. 😆 I had to read that a dozen times before I figured out what happened here.
– MikeTheLiar
6 hours ago
7
@Kakturus That's how you send a human brain into an infinite loop...
– Volker Siegel
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Wings are heavy. They also add mass to the rocket's structure, because it is loaded horizontally when flying with wings rather than vertically as it is at launch. At the time Energia was developed, control systems were not developed enough for a vertically landing rocket. However, now that we have that ability (as Blue Origin and SpaceX have demonstrated), there is less of a weight penalty to carry a bit of extra fuel for a powered landing than to add wings.
answered 5 hours ago
Skyler
1913
New contributor
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Wings won't work on the moon, and won't work nearly as well on mars. SpaceX is getting some practice in with the landings (note that recovering boosters is still in beta according to SpaceX) on the Falcon 9 before they build the BFR that will need to be able to land with no atmosphere.
answered 3 hours ago
Sdarb
18615
The question is not about the Moon or Mars.
– Organic Marble
3 hours ago
there's only one reusable orbital rocket right now, and I have heard this described as the reasoning that that rocket's builders are using.
– Sdarb
2 hours ago
@OrganicMarble, the question is about why existing rockets are designed the way they are. Expections about travel to the moon and Mars are relevant to the design choices that have been made.
– prl
47 mins ago
Both sentences in the question say "back to Earth."
– Organic Marble
38 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33259%2fwhy-do-rockets-do-not-glide-back%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
As with most things space, it all comes down to tradeoffs. The most efficient rocket is one that is purely expendable and has no mass that does not contribute to getting the payload towards orbit.
If the aim is to reuse the rocket, you need a mechanism to achieve control in the upper atmosphere, a method to control descent rate and a method to achieve a landing that does not destroy the hardware (or just tough hardware). And do all of this without increasing the risk of the launch itself failing due to hardware for the return.
Wings are a partial option, they work well for achieving a controllable descent rate, but they do not do much useful at high altitude and need additional supporting hardware (wheels/runway/airbags etc) to achieve a soft touchdown and a fair bit of flight control smarts.
Using the existing rocket engine is less efficient than using wings, but it is something that is already there on the rocket and gives you a system with extra capability in expendable mode.
So the final decision involves a lot of trade offs that often have much to do with seemingly minor details and less on perfection of a single aspect. For example SpaceX has ambitions on the moon and mars, and both of those require mastering powered descent rather than wings.
Related questions/answers
SpaceX decision making
Wings during ascent
Plans to have wings on SRBs
edited 57 mins ago
edc65
1032
answered 13 hours ago
GremlinWranger
1,620114
1
You probably mean "descent rate" instead of "descent rate"
– Kakturus
7 hours ago
19
@Kakturus you probably meant "decent rate" the second time. 😆 I had to read that a dozen times before I figured out what happened here.
– MikeTheLiar
6 hours ago
7
@Kakturus That's how you send a human brain into an infinite loop...
– Volker Siegel
4 hours ago
add a comment |
As with most things space, it all comes down to tradeoffs. The most efficient rocket is one that is purely expendable and has no mass that does not contribute to getting the payload towards orbit.
If the aim is to reuse the rocket, you need a mechanism to achieve control in the upper atmosphere, a method to control descent rate and a method to achieve a landing that does not destroy the hardware (or just tough hardware). And do all of this without increasing the risk of the launch itself failing due to hardware for the return.
Wings are a partial option, they work well for achieving a controllable descent rate, but they do not do much useful at high altitude and need additional supporting hardware (wheels/runway/airbags etc) to achieve a soft touchdown and a fair bit of flight control smarts.
Using the existing rocket engine is less efficient than using wings, but it is something that is already there on the rocket and gives you a system with extra capability in expendable mode.
So the final decision involves a lot of trade offs that often have much to do with seemingly minor details and less on perfection of a single aspect. For example SpaceX has ambitions on the moon and mars, and both of those require mastering powered descent rather than wings.
Related questions/answers
SpaceX decision making
Wings during ascent
Plans to have wings on SRBs
edited 57 mins ago
edc65
1032
answered 13 hours ago
GremlinWranger
1,620114
1
You probably mean "descent rate" instead of "descent rate"
– Kakturus
7 hours ago
19
@Kakturus you probably meant "decent rate" the second time. 😆 I had to read that a dozen times before I figured out what happened here.
– MikeTheLiar
6 hours ago
7
@Kakturus That's how you send a human brain into an infinite loop...
– Volker Siegel
4 hours ago
add a comment |
As with most things space, it all comes down to tradeoffs. The most efficient rocket is one that is purely expendable and has no mass that does not contribute to getting the payload towards orbit.
If the aim is to reuse the rocket, you need a mechanism to achieve control in the upper atmosphere, a method to control descent rate and a method to achieve a landing that does not destroy the hardware (or just tough hardware). And do all of this without increasing the risk of the launch itself failing due to hardware for the return.
Wings are a partial option, they work well for achieving a controllable descent rate, but they do not do much useful at high altitude and need additional supporting hardware (wheels/runway/airbags etc) to achieve a soft touchdown and a fair bit of flight control smarts.
Using the existing rocket engine is less efficient than using wings, but it is something that is already there on the rocket and gives you a system with extra capability in expendable mode.
So the final decision involves a lot of trade offs that often have much to do with seemingly minor details and less on perfection of a single aspect. For example SpaceX has ambitions on the moon and mars, and both of those require mastering powered descent rather than wings.
Related questions/answers
SpaceX decision making
Wings during ascent
Plans to have wings on SRBs
edited 57 mins ago
edc65
1032
answered 13 hours ago
GremlinWranger
1,620114
As with most things space, it all comes down to tradeoffs. The most efficient rocket is one that is purely expendable and has no mass that does not contribute to getting the payload towards orbit.
If the aim is to reuse the rocket, you need a mechanism to achieve control in the upper atmosphere, a method to control descent rate and a method to achieve a landing that does not destroy the hardware (or just tough hardware). And do all of this without increasing the risk of the launch itself failing due to hardware for the return.
Wings are a partial option, they work well for achieving a controllable descent rate, but they do not do much useful at high altitude and need additional supporting hardware (wheels/runway/airbags etc) to achieve a soft touchdown and a fair bit of flight control smarts.
Using the existing rocket engine is less efficient than using wings, but it is something that is already there on the rocket and gives you a system with extra capability in expendable mode.
So the final decision involves a lot of trade offs that often have much to do with seemingly minor details and less on perfection of a single aspect. For example SpaceX has ambitions on the moon and mars, and both of those require mastering powered descent rather than wings.
Related questions/answers
SpaceX decision making
Wings during ascent
Plans to have wings on SRBs
edited 57 mins ago
edc65
1032
answered 13 hours ago
GremlinWranger
1,620114
edited 57 mins ago
edc65
1032
edited 57 mins ago
edc65
1032
edited 57 mins ago
edc65
1032
1032
answered 13 hours ago
GremlinWranger
1,620114
answered 13 hours ago
GremlinWranger
1,620114
answered 13 hours ago
GremlinWranger
1,620114
1,620114
1
You probably mean "descent rate" instead of "descent rate"
– Kakturus
7 hours ago
19
@Kakturus you probably meant "decent rate" the second time. 😆 I had to read that a dozen times before I figured out what happened here.
– MikeTheLiar
6 hours ago
7
@Kakturus That's how you send a human brain into an infinite loop...
– Volker Siegel
4 hours ago
add a comment |
1
You probably mean "descent rate" instead of "descent rate"
– Kakturus
7 hours ago
19
@Kakturus you probably meant "decent rate" the second time. 😆 I had to read that a dozen times before I figured out what happened here.
– MikeTheLiar
6 hours ago
7
@Kakturus That's how you send a human brain into an infinite loop...
– Volker Siegel
4 hours ago
1
1
You probably mean "descent rate" instead of "descent rate"
– Kakturus
7 hours ago
You probably mean "descent rate" instead of "descent rate"
– Kakturus
7 hours ago
19
19
@Kakturus you probably meant "decent rate" the second time. 😆 I had to read that a dozen times before I figured out what happened here.
– MikeTheLiar
6 hours ago
@Kakturus you probably meant "decent rate" the second time. 😆 I had to read that a dozen times before I figured out what happened here.
– MikeTheLiar
6 hours ago
7
7
@Kakturus That's how you send a human brain into an infinite loop...
– Volker Siegel
4 hours ago
@Kakturus That's how you send a human brain into an infinite loop...
– Volker Siegel
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Wings are heavy. They also add mass to the rocket's structure, because it is loaded horizontally when flying with wings rather than vertically as it is at launch. At the time Energia was developed, control systems were not developed enough for a vertically landing rocket. However, now that we have that ability (as Blue Origin and SpaceX have demonstrated), there is less of a weight penalty to carry a bit of extra fuel for a powered landing than to add wings.
answered 5 hours ago
Skyler
1913
New contributor
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Wings are heavy. They also add mass to the rocket's structure, because it is loaded horizontally when flying with wings rather than vertically as it is at launch. At the time Energia was developed, control systems were not developed enough for a vertically landing rocket. However, now that we have that ability (as Blue Origin and SpaceX have demonstrated), there is less of a weight penalty to carry a bit of extra fuel for a powered landing than to add wings.
answered 5 hours ago
Skyler
1913
New contributor
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Wings are heavy. They also add mass to the rocket's structure, because it is loaded horizontally when flying with wings rather than vertically as it is at launch. At the time Energia was developed, control systems were not developed enough for a vertically landing rocket. However, now that we have that ability (as Blue Origin and SpaceX have demonstrated), there is less of a weight penalty to carry a bit of extra fuel for a powered landing than to add wings.
answered 5 hours ago
Skyler
1913
New contributor
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Wings are heavy. They also add mass to the rocket's structure, because it is loaded horizontally when flying with wings rather than vertically as it is at launch. At the time Energia was developed, control systems were not developed enough for a vertically landing rocket. However, now that we have that ability (as Blue Origin and SpaceX have demonstrated), there is less of a weight penalty to carry a bit of extra fuel for a powered landing than to add wings.
answered 5 hours ago
Skyler
1913
New contributor
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 5 hours ago
Skyler
1913
New contributor
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 5 hours ago
Skyler
1913
answered 5 hours ago
Skyler
1913
1913
New contributor
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Skyler is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Wings won't work on the moon, and won't work nearly as well on mars. SpaceX is getting some practice in with the landings (note that recovering boosters is still in beta according to SpaceX) on the Falcon 9 before they build the BFR that will need to be able to land with no atmosphere.
answered 3 hours ago
Sdarb
18615
The question is not about the Moon or Mars.
– Organic Marble
3 hours ago
there's only one reusable orbital rocket right now, and I have heard this described as the reasoning that that rocket's builders are using.
– Sdarb
2 hours ago
@OrganicMarble, the question is about why existing rockets are designed the way they are. Expections about travel to the moon and Mars are relevant to the design choices that have been made.
– prl
47 mins ago
Both sentences in the question say "back to Earth."
– Organic Marble
38 mins ago
add a comment |
Wings won't work on the moon, and won't work nearly as well on mars. SpaceX is getting some practice in with the landings (note that recovering boosters is still in beta according to SpaceX) on the Falcon 9 before they build the BFR that will need to be able to land with no atmosphere.
answered 3 hours ago
Sdarb
18615
The question is not about the Moon or Mars.
– Organic Marble
3 hours ago
there's only one reusable orbital rocket right now, and I have heard this described as the reasoning that that rocket's builders are using.
– Sdarb
2 hours ago
@OrganicMarble, the question is about why existing rockets are designed the way they are. Expections about travel to the moon and Mars are relevant to the design choices that have been made.
– prl
47 mins ago
Both sentences in the question say "back to Earth."
– Organic Marble
38 mins ago
add a comment |
Wings won't work on the moon, and won't work nearly as well on mars. SpaceX is getting some practice in with the landings (note that recovering boosters is still in beta according to SpaceX) on the Falcon 9 before they build the BFR that will need to be able to land with no atmosphere.
answered 3 hours ago
Sdarb
18615
Wings won't work on the moon, and won't work nearly as well on mars. SpaceX is getting some practice in with the landings (note that recovering boosters is still in beta according to SpaceX) on the Falcon 9 before they build the BFR that will need to be able to land with no atmosphere.
answered 3 hours ago
Sdarb
18615
answered 3 hours ago
Sdarb
18615
answered 3 hours ago
Sdarb
18615
answered 3 hours ago
Sdarb
18615
18615
The question is not about the Moon or Mars.
– Organic Marble
3 hours ago
there's only one reusable orbital rocket right now, and I have heard this described as the reasoning that that rocket's builders are using.
– Sdarb
2 hours ago
@OrganicMarble, the question is about why existing rockets are designed the way they are. Expections about travel to the moon and Mars are relevant to the design choices that have been made.
– prl
47 mins ago
Both sentences in the question say "back to Earth."
– Organic Marble
38 mins ago
add a comment |
The question is not about the Moon or Mars.
– Organic Marble
3 hours ago
there's only one reusable orbital rocket right now, and I have heard this described as the reasoning that that rocket's builders are using.
– Sdarb
2 hours ago
@OrganicMarble, the question is about why existing rockets are designed the way they are. Expections about travel to the moon and Mars are relevant to the design choices that have been made.
– prl
47 mins ago
Both sentences in the question say "back to Earth."
– Organic Marble
38 mins ago
The question is not about the Moon or Mars.
– Organic Marble
3 hours ago
The question is not about the Moon or Mars.
– Organic Marble
3 hours ago
there's only one reusable orbital rocket right now, and I have heard this described as the reasoning that that rocket's builders are using.
– Sdarb
2 hours ago
there's only one reusable orbital rocket right now, and I have heard this described as the reasoning that that rocket's builders are using.
– Sdarb
2 hours ago
@OrganicMarble, the question is about why existing rockets are designed the way they are. Expections about travel to the moon and Mars are relevant to the design choices that have been made.
– prl
47 mins ago
@OrganicMarble, the question is about why existing rockets are designed the way they are. Expections about travel to the moon and Mars are relevant to the design choices that have been made.
– prl
47 mins ago
Both sentences in the question say "back to Earth."
– Organic Marble
38 mins ago
Both sentences in the question say "back to Earth."
– Organic Marble
38 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33259%2fwhy-do-rockets-do-not-glide-back%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Why not parachute?
– laptop2d
1 hour ago