Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Possibly not able to carry enough chemical fuel to lift the fuel into space and return and do a controlled landing without refueling? That seems more plausible.

Fuel is heavy, and most of it is spent on... lifting fuel.




But the way the rocket works is creating a continuous explosion behind it. The propellant explodes, pushing the rocket. It's not just the rocket equation, but the explosion from a central point BEHIND the rocket that pushes it further.

Having a nuclear explosion for example behind the rocket would surely be enough to push it into space... even on Jupiter.


"But the way the rocket works is creating a continuous explosion behind it."

Not quite, it's all about mass flow.


Sure, which is why I said chemical fuel. New propellants change the equation.


Yes, this is what I was referring to. Though there's probably another percentage that makes most rocket fuel also insufficient for anything more than LEO.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: