Difference between revisions of "Talk:3005: Disposal"
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:And the conceit of the rocket-tech is that they've solved the position+direction issue 'perfectly', even if they haven't solved the "how to then stop it just before/as it reaches the ground" and/or any usable ways of standing/hanging it upright once it does. | :And the conceit of the rocket-tech is that they've solved the position+direction issue 'perfectly', even if they haven't solved the "how to then stop it just before/as it reaches the ground" and/or any usable ways of standing/hanging it upright once it does. | ||
:It's a 7+D problem. Attaining a precise position (x,y,z) with a precise velocity (dx,dy,dz) in at least one precise angle (verticality; plus possibly also others, if rotation is important, plus dθ and dφ at near-zero) and at least to one further limit (fuel remaining >=0). 'All' Cueball's rocket has to do is to perfect 5 or 6 dimensional properties (thread through x,y,z, being aimed in a vertically downwards (or, at a push, upwards) orientation and no ''excessive'' horizontal motion... all the rest can be fudged somewhat). And no additional weight needed for landing/catching points. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.8|141.101.98.8]] 03:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC) | :It's a 7+D problem. Attaining a precise position (x,y,z) with a precise velocity (dx,dy,dz) in at least one precise angle (verticality; plus possibly also others, if rotation is important, plus dθ and dφ at near-zero) and at least to one further limit (fuel remaining >=0). 'All' Cueball's rocket has to do is to perfect 5 or 6 dimensional properties (thread through x,y,z, being aimed in a vertically downwards (or, at a push, upwards) orientation and no ''excessive'' horizontal motion... all the rest can be fudged somewhat). And no additional weight needed for landing/catching points. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.8|141.101.98.8]] 03:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
| + | :The extra energy from impacting at high speed ensures the rocket is thoroughly disassembled for maximum packing efficiency. [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 06:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
There’s a Space Category, and a Kerbal program Category and a Mars Rover Category, why not a Rocket category? I propose on creating one. All in favor? [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 02:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC) | There’s a Space Category, and a Kerbal program Category and a Mars Rover Category, why not a Rocket category? I propose on creating one. All in favor? [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 02:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 06:24, 31 October 2024
That's either a giant Cueball, or a really tiny rocket. Barmar (talk) 23:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's an Electron? Or maybe Falcon 1? Redacted II (talk) 00:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
It seems strange to me to see Randall drawing a rocket landing with its engine pointing upward instead of downward, when he traditionally has expressed so much interest in rocket and space physics. It's also notable that the rocket-landing problem was solved by others before SpaceX was considered to have, I bumped into a successful project on a maker site in the past couple years. 172.68.3.71 01:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- SpaceX was the first to propulsively land an orbital booster. Redacted II (talk) 01:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Re downward-pointing, there's a possible side-reference to 1133: Up Goer Five's "you will not go to space today". But I think it's more that if you have the ability to send it down a hole to explode, you have no reason to finesse the (non-)landing and might as well just thread it in under as much of the full propulsion as you can handle.
- And the conceit of the rocket-tech is that they've solved the position+direction issue 'perfectly', even if they haven't solved the "how to then stop it just before/as it reaches the ground" and/or any usable ways of standing/hanging it upright once it does.
- It's a 7+D problem. Attaining a precise position (x,y,z) with a precise velocity (dx,dy,dz) in at least one precise angle (verticality; plus possibly also others, if rotation is important, plus dθ and dφ at near-zero) and at least to one further limit (fuel remaining >=0). 'All' Cueball's rocket has to do is to perfect 5 or 6 dimensional properties (thread through x,y,z, being aimed in a vertically downwards (or, at a push, upwards) orientation and no excessive horizontal motion... all the rest can be fudged somewhat). And no additional weight needed for landing/catching points. 141.101.98.8 03:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- The extra energy from impacting at high speed ensures the rocket is thoroughly disassembled for maximum packing efficiency. RegularSizedGuy (talk) 06:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
There’s a Space Category, and a Kerbal program Category and a Mars Rover Category, why not a Rocket category? I propose on creating one. All in favor? 42.book.addict (talk) 02:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
