Added: 5 months ago
From: SpaceRenaissance
Views: 2,270
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (19)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Such a simple and ingenious idea. The real question is why where Nasa not doing things like this decades ago? I couldn't believe it when I heard that every space shuttle flight cost more than 600 million dollars.

  • @matthewakian2 600mil for a shuttle launch, apparently a saturn5 popped 115 tons into leo at 1/3rd the cost 35 years ago. Something does not add up...

  • @BringBack500s I read that it is because of the labor. It's basically a shuttle and a rocket together. The Space Shuttle may end up as the most inefficient and expensive spacecraft in history.

  • A nice way to not leave our shit in space, but it adds more fuel to be reusable.

  • As a work of Art, this video coupled as it is to "Uprising" by Muse, is just a work of pure genius. It REALLY makes a statement of intention, for humanity too.

    I would recommend Muse to take up this video and use it -- people will get the message. Brilliant, just brilliant!

  • @Jcheezzzz Couldn't agree more.

  • Awesome...But I wanna know how much payload they lose making it reusable....hopefully not too much :s

  • He said it works on paper. Lets hope they can make it work in reality.

  • kwl concept!! 

  • Very cool. But please tell me that the reusable stages don't have to fire rockets all the way down. A parachute or even wings would save a lot on that.

  • @SailorBarsoom

    I second this comment...though I reckon this si just a 'concept art' video....still awesome but :D

  • @SailorBarsoom True, but mayve the idea is to allow this kind of thing to happen on planets where there is no air/much less air than on earth, where parachutes and wings would be useless. But yeah I am sure a parachute is part of the plan when it comes to landing on earth.

  • @SailorBarsoom True, but maybe the idea is to allow this kind of thing to happen on planets where there is no air/much less air than on earth, where parachutes and wings would be useless. But yeah I am sure a parachute is part of the plan when it comes to landing on earth.

  • @SailorBarsoom

    A parachute wiegh == 1/10 from a returned mass weight (much more for wings).

    + Plus the inevitable damage during parachute landing.

    VTVL much more good.

  • @ColonelPercyFawcett

    A parachute masses more than all the fuel that has to be burned to do what's shown in the video? If that's the case then yeah, the long burn is a better way to go. It just seems strange.

    "+ Plus the inevitable damage during parachute landing."

    I was assuming that you WOULD use the rockets for the last ten to a hundred metres.

  • @SailorBarsoom

    parachute landing == you have no control of a landing point.

    Plus for "using rocket on last metters for prevert dammages" you need same additional landing construction on LV (launch vehicle), as in case of VTVL (Vertical takeoff, vertical landing).

    In any case, you need not more then 10% mass fuel (from returning weight) to landing RLV (reusable launch vehicle) by VTVL scheme. And - now Falcon use some additional fuel mass as "ballast mass".

  • Comment removed

  • @SailorBarsoom Yep ) I hope too).

  • @SailorBarsoom

    So, VTVL RLV without a parachute can control a landing position, need same, or less additional weight (and less aditional details), and need same langing construction as the your scheme.

  • Wow, brilliant! Just go out and do it now!

  • Reusability looks great, but is it really possible to land the first and second stage without parashutes? Great video!

  • Reusability looks great, but is it really possible to land the first and second stage without parashutes? Great video!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more