Тёмный

Why Do Rockets Need Stages? The Quest to Build a Single Stage to Orbit (SSTO) 

Fraser Cain
Подписаться 437 тыс.
Просмотров 104 тыс.
50% 1

Science fiction has promised us a rocket that blasts off into space without stages. How close is reality to the science fiction dream of a single stage to orbit?
Support us at: / universetoday
More stories at: www.universetoday.com/
Follow us on Twitter: @universetoday
Like us on Facebook: / universetoday
Google+ - plus.google.com/+universetoday/
Instagram - / universetoday
Team: Fraser Cain - @fcain / frasercain@gmail.com
Karla Thompson - @karlaii
Chad Weber - weber.chad@gmail.com
Now, don’t get me wrong, Science Fiction is awesome. Like almost everyone working in the field of space and astronomy, I was deeply influenced by science fiction. For me, it was Star Trek and Star Wars. I had a toy phaser that made this awesome really loud phaser sound, and I played with it non-stop until it disappeared one day. And I was sure I’d left it in the middle of my floor, like I did with all my toys, but I found it a few years later, hidden up in a closet that I couldn’t reach. And I always wondered how it got there.
Anyway, back to science fiction. For all of its inspiration, science fiction has put a few ideas into our brains which aren’t entirely helpful. You know, warp drives, artificial gravity, teleportation, and rockets that take off, fly to space, visit other planets orbiting stars, land again.
The Millennium Falcon, Firefly, and Enterprise Shuttles are all examples of single stage to orbit to orbit spacecraft, or SSTOs.
Consider the rockets that exist in reality, you know, the Atlases, Falcons and Deltas. They take off from a launch pad, fly for a bit until the fuel is used up in a stage of the rocket, then they jettison that stage and thrust with the next stage. The mighty Saturn V was so powerful that it had three stages, as it made it’s way to orbit.
As we discussed in a previous video, SpaceX is working to make the first stage, and maybe even the second stage reusable, which is a vast improvement over just letting everything burn up, but there are no rockets that actually fly to orbit and back in a single stage.
In fact, using the technology we have today, it’s probably not a good idea.
Has anyone ever worked on a single stage to orbit? What technological advances will need to happen to make this work?
As I said earlier, a single stage to orbit rocket would be something like the Millennium Falcon. It carries fuel, and then uses that fuel to fly into orbit, and from world to world. Once it runs out of fuel, it gets filled up again, and then it’s off again, making the Kessel Run and avoiding Imperial Blockades.
This concept of a rocket matches our personal experience with every other vehicle we’ve ever been in. You drive your car around and refuel it, same with boats, airplanes and every other form of Earth-based transportation.
But flying into space requires the expenditure of energy that defies comprehension. Let me give you an example. A Falcon 9 rocket can lift about 22,800 kilograms into low-Earth orbit. That’s about the same as a fully loaded cement truck - which is a lot.
The entire fueled Falcon 9 weighs just over 540,000 kg, of which more than 510,000 kgs of it are fuel, with a little extra mass for the engines, fuel tanks, etc. Imagine if you drove a car that was essentially 95% fuel.
The problem is specific impulse; the maximum amount of thrust that a specific kind of engine and fuel type can achieve. I’m not going to go into all the details, but the most efficient chemical rockets we have, fueled by liquid hydrogen and oxygen, can just barely deliver enough thrust to get you to orbit. They have a maximum specific impulse of about 450 seconds.
Because the amount of fuel it takes to launch a rocket is so high, modern rockets use a staging system. Once a stage has emptied out all its fuel, it detaches and returns to Earth so that the second stage can keep going without having to drag along the extra weight of the empty fuel tanks.
You might be surprised to know that many modern rockets are actually capable of reaching orbit with a single stage. The problem is that they wouldn’t be able to carry any significant payload.
At the end of the day, considering the chemical rockets we have today, the multi-staged profile is the most efficient and cost-effective strategy for carrying the most payload to space for the lowest cost possible.
Has anyone tried developing SSTOs in the past? Definitely. Probably the most widely publicized was NASA’s X-33/VentureStar program, developed by Lockheed Martin in the 1990s.
The purpose of the X-33 was to test out a range of new technologies for NASA, including composite fuel tanks, autonomous flight, and a new lifting body design.

Наука

Опубликовано:

 

2 май 2017

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 555   
@rockets-dont-makegood-toas7728
easy, make a huge rocket with 7 stages to get a tiny command pod with only one kerbal to low orbit, get there without staging, then realize you can go no where else because you forgot solar panels and good antennas.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Oh, I've sent a lot of Kerbals to their doom, to endlessly orbit around in space.
@rockets-dont-makegood-toas7728
Fraser Cain yep, mostly trying to replicate past feats, even with the same craft XD
@die1mayer
@die1mayer 6 лет назад
lost in space is how i learned the rendezvous mechanics
@LordBitememan
@LordBitememan 7 лет назад
Ogres are like rockets. . . they have layers. . . err. . . stages. Ogres aren't like rockets.
@martinvranovsky7085
@martinvranovsky7085 7 лет назад
Perhaps they are like asparagus-staged rockets?
@dustinking2965
@dustinking2965 7 лет назад
You don't want to stand close to them when they go off.
@mikenorman4001
@mikenorman4001 7 лет назад
The discussion at 4:49 is incorrect and misleading. Conventional rockets can definitely be throttled. In addition, for a constant throttle setting, a conventional rocket will produce less thrust at sea level than at altitude, assuming that the nozzle is designed for proper expansion at altitude, which they usually are. In fact, expansion correction is the issue at hand. Because aerospike engines have a free boundary, the atmosphere itself acts like a nozzle wall, for the purposes of expansion, basically reflecting the flow back against the aerospike wall. (Technically, aerospike engines are a subtype of spike engines generally, in that aerospikes truncate the "spike" and fill the flat part, which would otherwise result in drag, with lower velocity, higher pressure gas, the "aero" part of "aerospike. But this is a digression.) Because of this variable reflection, the nozzle stays closer to "proper" expansion and performs better. In summary, the section about aerospike engines starting at 4:49 contains two errors. One, conventional rockets are throttleable, despite your claim. Two, expansion correction, not throttleabliity, is the primary benefit of spike and aerospike engines, as you claim.
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Yeah, even as I was writing it, I wanted to clarify it. The Falcon engines are can be throttled, which is why it can even land again. Sorry for being unclear in the video.
@Markle2k
@Markle2k 6 лет назад
I didn't make it through the discussion of "specific impulse" before I started scrolling through the comments looking for a retraction/Doh! by Fraser who should know better, and certainly does. Specific Impulse is about propellant mass efficiency for gaining delta v, not total thrust. The highest specific impulse engines we have are very, very low thrust (ion engines and the like). The best specific impulse engines we have in the 100+ kilonewton class are not always the best engine choice for clearing Max Q. You burn a lot of hydrogen just trying to clear the lower stratosphere before you can start really working on your gravity turn and gaining orbital velocity. It's the old "lifeguard on the beach" problem in reverse order.
@SECONDQUEST
@SECONDQUEST 6 лет назад
Fraser Cain I agree with Mike, it seems very inaccurate to say those things. SSMEs are widely known to be able to be throttled.
@Myrddnn
@Myrddnn 4 года назад
@@SECONDQUEST in his defense, the newer engines like the Merlin are some of the few with the ability to throttle, though that is becoming the norm lately. Anyone who followed the early space program knows that some of those engines not only could not be throttled, they were lit on the ground and could not be restarted if they flamed out.
@atimholt
@atimholt 6 лет назад
I love hearing about metallic hydrogen. Make it with deuterium/tritium, you’ve also got a great laser-fusion fuel for interplanetary travel.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
If we can actually get this stuff working, it'll change everything.
@Peter_Scheen
@Peter_Scheen 6 лет назад
My cat sat in front of the tv. It attacked your hand continuously. Nice presentation. Thanks.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Hah, educational cat toy. I'm honored.
@nickwashburn723
@nickwashburn723 7 лет назад
You got my sub, great videos man, you have a knack for explaining things in an interesting way. Keep up the great work, the world needs more people like you!
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Thanks a lot, welcome aboard!
@IlicSorrentino
@IlicSorrentino 7 лет назад
Science fiction is the way to dream the future in a scientific way... no dreams, no kids interested in science, no scientists. I think scifi has contributed for my growth as a rational human adult more than most of the literature and philosophy. Ah and thanks for the explanation... you have clarified many doubts. Thank you, grazie
@250txc
@250txc 5 лет назад
How about LSD or shrooms? Comic books are AOK but we need mind expanders; Opium? Nah, this is not the way to go here
@A_Spec
@A_Spec 7 лет назад
What happened to the (if they build it) hull of the x-33? It doesn't appear on any museum lists.
@The_Recon
@The_Recon 7 лет назад
Regarding 5:15, the fuel tank was developed after they abandoned the project, below information from Wiki. "After the cancellation in 2001, engineers were able to make a working liquid oxygen tank out of carbon fiber composite.[citation needed] On September 7, 2004, Northrop Grumman and NASA engineers unveiled a liquid hydrogen tank made of carbon fiber composite material that had demonstrated the ability for repeated fuelings and simulated launch cycles.[8] Northrop Grumman concluded that these successful tests have enabled the development and refinement of new manufacturing processes that will allow the company to build large composite tanks without an autoclave; and design and engineering development of conformal fuel tanks appropriate for use on a single-stage-to-orbit vehicle.[13]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_X-33
@hellfirelordofevil
@hellfirelordofevil 7 лет назад
In atmosphere tests have proven that, even if a nuclear powered rocket were to explode during take off, the debris would pose no risk
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
I did look at some of that research, and you're right the theoretical fallout zone shouldn't be too bad, even the reactor even breaks up; however, the political issues would be enormous. NASA had a limited supply of RTGs because of environmental concerns and political issues. It looks like it's a technology best used in space.
@Ktulu789
@Ktulu789 3 года назад
@@frasercain but even if they used nuclear technology up in space, how do you get it up there without risks of explosions in the journey up there?
@DamianReloaded
@DamianReloaded 7 лет назад
Even though it's not an Earth launching system, I find the idea of the VASIMR rocket being able to make it to Mars in 39 days very exciting. Maybe at some point we could also use a version of the Japanese SS-520 rocket to put individual people in orbit to take them to a spaceship/station. ^_^
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
VASIMR is a great concept, and NASA is taking it more and more seriously.
@stardolphin2
@stardolphin2 6 лет назад
But remember, VASIMR is a specific kind of electric rocket (as are its other plasma brethren, and ion engines). Can you make a nuclear-electric source for its serious demands, that's not so massive (including waste heat radiators) as to offset the engine's advantages?
@SailorBarsoom
@SailorBarsoom 6 лет назад
I've become fond of proposals to leave the first stage on the ground, meaning is can be a big, heavy, and unaerodynamic as anyone could shudder at, since it doesn't have to fly. Things like a maglev launch assist, or laser launch assist, that sort of thing. Of course I'm also fond of ideas to have one stage already in space, like skyhooks of various types.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Totally agree. Maglevs would be really interesting, in concert with reusable rockets and skyhooks. There would be a lot of moving parts, but if you could get them all working together...
@JTheoryScience
@JTheoryScience 6 лет назад
i almost got to sleep this time but you keep dragging me back in.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Sorry, I'll make a set of more boring videos which will help you sleep. Actually, if you want that, you should listen to Astronomy Cast, we have lots of people tell us they use the show to fall asleep to.
@marquisejr7185
@marquisejr7185 6 лет назад
I'm most excited about the Skylon.
@nqinadlamini
@nqinadlamini 7 лет назад
I have a theory about your missing ray gun: Your older self (say 10 years from now) went back in time and played a prank (or possible saved you from a train accident that would have injured you......I know, I know. Bear with me hear).
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
It all makes sense.
@Spaceboi318
@Spaceboi318 7 лет назад
Awesome video, subscribed
@Lastindependentthinker
@Lastindependentthinker 7 лет назад
Alan Bond of Reaction Engines used to work for Rolls Royce. Then he was working on the HOTOL project in the 1980's, but things didn't balance out with the vehicle so it was back to the drawing board. Then the Ministry of Defence? in the U.K tied him up a bit because his engine technologies fell foal of the could be used to deliver a weapon grey area. But, last time I heard Airbus or EASA? were interested in the SABRE Engine technologies to build the Son of Concorde. They are playing the long game.
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
I would really love to see a SABRE engine properly tested. I wonder if they're in talks with SpaceX?
@Jay0neDE
@Jay0neDE 7 лет назад
video right next to this in my recommended feed: Speedbuild: Super Heavy Payload Cargo SSTO - 440 tons to orbit - KSP 1.2.2 how fitting :)
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
That sounds like a cool KSP build.
@deckuofm
@deckuofm 5 лет назад
An idea to send a scram jet plane to the orbit. 01) Another plane pulls the scram jet plane to supersonic speed going up. 02) Planes disconnect. 03) Laser beam from earth shines into the scram jet nozzle. 04) This gives heat in the combustion chamber instead of fuel. 05) The scram jet plane reaches about 30 km altitude. 06) The scram jet plane turns horizontally. 07) Another laser beam from earth shines into a mirror on an air balloon. 08) The beam reflects from the mirror into the jet nozzle. 09) Because air is transparent the beam penetrates thousands of kilometers. 10) The scram jet plane accelerates until reaches the orbital speed in the atmosphere. Problems: 01) Sufficient heat resistance of the scram jet plane. 02) Possible damage of the balloon by the laser beam. 03) Difficulty to direct the laser beam because the balloon location is not stable. 04) Sufficient power of the laser. Advantages over Elon Mask project with a returning rocket. 01) Smaller launching site. Plane runway is sufficient. 02) Less troubles with fuel. 03) Greater safety and stability of the plane. 04) Simpler design. 05) Less weight of the craft per launched mass. 06) Possible recovery of the ozone layer by the laser beam (printer example)
@nicholasn.2883
@nicholasn.2883 4 года назад
I’ve been binge watching the expanse show, and now I am omega hyped for anything rocket related. I’ve got like 6 days of summer left, and I’m going to come out the other end of this a human rocket, figuratively speaking. It’s been a couple of years so far. I am going to keep tabs on that one jet/rocket SSTO
@frasercain
@frasercain 4 года назад
Yup, I can't wait for Season 4... And did you hear that Season 5 was announced?
@nicholasn.2883
@nicholasn.2883 4 года назад
Fraser Cain No, and I am even more hyped.
@phoule76
@phoule76 7 лет назад
awesome video! I hadn't heard of the Skylon before; the concept sure makes sense.
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
The Skylon is a great idea, but right now they don't have much except a prototype engine.
@3gunslingers
@3gunslingers 7 лет назад
Well, but the prototype engine is about 80% of the whole project. The biggest technological problem was to cool down air from 1000 °C to −150 °C in about 1/100 of a second. This obstacle is finally overcome, now it's just "regular" rocket/airplane development.
@tesstickle7267
@tesstickle7267 6 лет назад
Keyboard runner yeah engine is the main thing tbh...of course you'd want a special body to allow space flight but i guess the engine can be used in normal flight and aircraft...dam fuel efficient anyway lol
@marvinkitfox3386
@marvinkitfox3386 6 лет назад
Pity they don't have a prototype engine yet. ALL they have is a SCALE test model of their inlet cooler. . Lovely potential, but to make any claim of the mass, efficiency or reliability of the engine that would result from this approach is utter nonsense. . Its like Gottlieb Daimler inventing the turbo in 1885, and using that as the basis to predict that it will allow a 1200hp motorcar to achieve 80 miles per gallon. Way, *way* too much extrapolation from too few data.
@3gunslingers
@3gunslingers 6 лет назад
Marvin No, it's the other way around. In this equation the precooler is Daimlers very first working engine. The precooler is the absolute core of the whole engine. Every other part is already available in on form or the other. If the precooler is feasible, the sabre engine is feasible.
@BensLab
@BensLab 7 лет назад
Stellar video old fella! What's your take on smaller craft propelled by laser beams etc? How about an episode on these? Could you look at 3d printing and it's applications in space and planetary colonisation: self assembling spacecraft/colonies etc?
@Tehom1
@Tehom1 7 лет назад
0:25 Your toy phaser was cooler than mine. 0:32 ... which I guess had some negative consequences.
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
I had the Remco one: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aRp-Sz31tzc.html
@christheother9088
@christheother9088 7 лет назад
It would have been more fitting to find it in an air duct.
@AvailableUsernameTed
@AvailableUsernameTed 6 лет назад
You know it was beemed into that closet.
@gaaraadams
@gaaraadams 6 лет назад
awesome video :) thanks
@Azivegu
@Azivegu 7 лет назад
About that phaser, not going to say it was aliens, but it was aliens
@mrgreyman3358
@mrgreyman3358 6 лет назад
aliens/parents. yep, not hearing any difference there.
@6aston6ames
@6aston6ames 5 лет назад
Some brother may be?
@antifusion
@antifusion 6 лет назад
1 year later we demand #JusticeForFraser'sPhazer
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
I was going to buy one on eBay. :-)
@sirprize8572
@sirprize8572 6 лет назад
I'm a bit late but one minor correction at 3:15, specific impulse is the maximum fuel efficiency (not necessarily maximum thrust) you can achieve with a given engine/fuel combination. It represents how long a rocket engine could burn given an amount of fuel whose weight is equal to the amount of thrust the rocket puts out per second. So for instance if a rocket has a specific impulse of 420 seconds, puts out 1,000,000 lbs of thrust, and has 1,000,000 lbs of fuel, then the engine will be able to burn for 420 seconds before it runs out of fuel. Of course, it would never get off the launch pad (to beat gravity, your thrust must be greater than the weight of the vehicle), but that's another issue entirely.
@ToninFightsEntropy
@ToninFightsEntropy 6 лет назад
Oh god, the thing with the phaser.. used to happen to me a lot. Though my mum would tell me the toys never existed in the first place, then when I found them years later on top of the wardrobe, she told me she'd never seen them before in her life and that somebody else must have left them here.. yeah that wasn't traumatising at all. If I were to bring it up now, she'd call me paranoid and tell me it never happened and that I never found a bag of toys on top of the cupboard, then my dad would probably tell me that I've got a crazy imagination, that I'm making it up, and that I need professional help.. yeah I might do now, thanks a bunch for that, haha.
@jamieguest5425
@jamieguest5425 7 лет назад
You're just AWESOME!
@donsample1002
@donsample1002 7 лет назад
Many people think that the X33 was designed to fail. NASA asked for proposals for SSTO designs, and they picked the one that needed the most new technologies to work.
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Yup, it's not that an SSTO isn't possible, just that one with chemical rockets isn't that cost effective over a reusable rocket.
@AnonP2X3YZ
@AnonP2X3YZ 7 лет назад
this was a great video
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it.
@lawneymalbrough4309
@lawneymalbrough4309 6 лет назад
Another advantage science fiction has is gravity control and inertial dampers. If you can control gravity you can make your ship lighter then it can get up into space with less energy. Also if you can control enertia you've got a new kind of drive system. Impulse engines. Engines that impart inertia and therefore movement. Perhaps we'd would call them enertial engines.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Science fiction has all kinds of advantages. Sadly, we're stuck with this regular old Universe and its laws of physics.
@JohnLudlow
@JohnLudlow 7 лет назад
I'm most excited about Skylon, partly because it's British and partly because I think it's what the future looks like (though SpaceX will probably dominate the next few years of development).
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
I wonder if Skylon is in talks with SpaceX to license them the engine design.
@JohnLudlow
@JohnLudlow 7 лет назад
That'd be interesting - it would certainly help pay for the development. However, I think if SpaceX were to use it they would need to alter their rocket designs because the SABRE engine needs an intake. The Skylon spaceplane is designed to take off from a runway, so they'd also need to determine if vertical takeoff was a workable option with the SABRE. But it might be worth investigating.
@aleksandersuur9475
@aleksandersuur9475 7 лет назад
SABRE engine idea predates space age and it has been worked on for a long-long time, so far nuthing. The principle of operation seems solid, but the engineering challenges in getting it to work are not exactly trivial. Hopefully they get it working, but its unlikely to happen any time soon. I would make no bets on how far an actual demo engine might be, let alone when any kind of space plane could be based on it.
@JohnLudlow
@JohnLudlow 7 лет назад
The true space age began in the 50's :) HOTOL (the precursor to Skylon) was a British government funded British Aerospace project. It faced two major problems, both of which have been solved. One was the fact that its airframe's weight distribution was very unstable (which Reaction Engines solved by redesigning the airframe) and the other was that to survive the high air temperatures caused by its very high speed the engine had to be made out of some very expensive materials (which they solved by designing a way of cooling the air before it enters the engine). A third problem (maybe, depending on how you view such things) was being tied to government funding during a recession. It's now funded by both investors and government grants, so that's better. And there's more interest than there was back in the 80's because it means cheaper spaceflight. And partnership with other companies is not out of the question. But certainly, it has taken a looooong time! I think RE have had to start from scratch.
@aleksandersuur9475
@aleksandersuur9475 7 лет назад
Indeed we can consider Sputnik at 1957 as the start of the space age, few years before that the basic idea for Sabre like engine was proposed, followed by development project LACE in the Americas, the project didn't get very far obviously. RE has better chances than ever to actually get it working, but it remains to be seen if better is good enough. Developing novel propulsion methods has proven to be prone to failure and getting excited about a spaceplane that requires an engine that doesn't exist is just putting cart before the horse.
@flip550
@flip550 7 лет назад
i have a question for your Q&A, you say once all the stars have used up their fuel, and the universe is dark, there'll be no energy left for any species to use, but what about gravity, more specificqlly tidal energy as long as there's a moon orbiting, and an ocean is still some kind of liquid, wouldnt tidal generators be an option, live under artificial light and grow with hydroponics/aquaponics with grow lamps?
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Eventually even the tidal forces would get used up. Moons would escape or crash into their planets.
@gavinjenkins899
@gavinjenkins899 7 лет назад
The very tidal force themselves cause the main planet to deform which steals momentum from the moon, and lowers its orbit. Tides would eventually cause the moon to get so low that it starts getting atmospheric friction, then dramatically slows down and crashes into the earth. Then no more tides.
@3gunslingers
@3gunslingers 7 лет назад
Gavin the tidal forces actually accelerate the moon. That's why the moon is receding by about 3,8cm per year. The energy comes from the earths rotation. This is why our days become longer over the millennia.
@cheaterman49
@cheaterman49 6 лет назад
I'm very excited about the SABRE that you indirectly mentioned for the Skylon SSTO. I'm also very excited about the NERVA that you mentioned as well, mainly because it seems like it's really the one that's the most easily in our technological reach (first developed 50 years ago or something?), and if we have a reliable delivery system with almost null odds of failure that can deliver the NERVA without using it then it becomes a very practical option for interplanetary travel much like in KSP :-). And finally, I'm not sure you mentioned this one, I'm also very excited about plasma engines in general and VASIMR in particular which IMHO is the most promising of the three as a more generalistic tech (doesn't need to transport air-breathing parts through space like Skylon, and doesn't have the relatively low thrust of a NERVA or even lower thrust of ion engines). Sorry for the block of text and thanks a lot for the video!
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
I'm excited about the technology too, but unless we unlock something like metallic hydrogen, we're really not going to come up with a better approach than fully reusable stages, like what SpaceX is going to do with the BFR. That'll be able to lift immense payloads for only the price of fuel.
@Behemoth29
@Behemoth29 7 лет назад
5:10 Composite fuel tank, you say? With SpaceX having developed the ITS fuel tank out of carbon composites, does that mean that something like the X-33 would be feasible now?
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
It doesn't sound like the composite fuel tank was impossible, just that that was the final reason they gave for ending the project. Materials science has progressed significantly.
@Behemoth29
@Behemoth29 7 лет назад
Oh well, at least we got the linear aerospike out of it. That thing is my spirit animal.
@Patchuchan
@Patchuchan 7 лет назад
Northrop Grumman successfully tested a compost liquid hydrogen tank soon after the X-33 was canceled back in 2002.
@marvinkitfox3386
@marvinkitfox3386 6 лет назад
The problem with the X-33 composite hydrogen tank was 1) Composites + liquid hydrogen = difficult. VERY! A composite tank with LOX, or even Methane, is a *lot* easier. 2) The X-33 needed a non-spherical, non-cylindrical tank. Making strong composite with funny shape is much harder than simple pressure-vessel-shapes. 3) They were using 1995-type composite tech. The field has matured a lot since then.
@AmbientMorality
@AmbientMorality 6 лет назад
Worth noting that SpaceX's prototype ITS tank blew up unexpectedly during cryogenic testing, so I'm not convinced the difficulties of composite tanks have been resolved yet.
@incompetencelogistics8924
@incompetencelogistics8924 7 лет назад
Most KSP youtubers will be in the industry for a LOOOOONG time here
@sergio_botero
@sergio_botero 7 лет назад
I would bet that in a near future, one of the best ways to send small loads to space will be the combination of a mother ship like the White Knight, and an space plane like a smaller version of the Skylon.
@petersmythe6462
@petersmythe6462 6 лет назад
Realistically, SSTOs are not hard with scifi tech like compact nuclear reactors and torch engines. Even reasonably doable tech like Scramjet-like nuclear airbreathing rockets could make SSTO trivial. With huge payloads to boot. I think I looked at the problem awhile ago and with such nuclear rockets, even allowing generous bulk for payload and engine construction, carrying the fuel to SSTE from Jupiter would not be out of the question.
@cm1701a
@cm1701a 7 лет назад
Thanks. I was familiar with Nerva and the high Specific Impulse of Nuclear- but I hadn't known about the latest Harvard work in Metallic Hydrogen. Amazing Isp! - BTW- No time for it in the video, I know- but I believe in the early 2000s they'd solved the composite tank problem- just too late for the perhaps overly ambitious x-33
@ethansommer2882
@ethansommer2882 6 лет назад
Good video! For the Skylon, instead of trying to build a super fancy engine that can condense oxygen, why don't they instead just get a mid-air refuel that takes place right before the phase when they fire up the rockets to leave Earth?
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Just a lot of moving parts. The SpaceX technique seems like one of the simpliest. But if Skylon can get going, it'll make a lot of sense.
@caseygecko
@caseygecko 6 лет назад
it looks as though spacex's bfr upper stage could possibly be used as an ssto, if it carried less payload. however, in this case you're downgrading payload capacity from 150 tons, which means you're still getting a decent amount into orbit
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Although it's theoretically possible, the big breakthrough will be using a reusable booster and reusable upper stage. No SSTO would ever be able to compete with that.
@caseygecko
@caseygecko 6 лет назад
Fraser Cain absolutely yeah.
@lonelypizza9394
@lonelypizza9394 7 лет назад
What is your thought on how it would feel like to live outside any galaxy in the universe. Like how would you perceive time, gravity and how you would observe the universe as a whole? Thanks for the show btw.
@Ezio_Auditore_Assassin
@Ezio_Auditore_Assassin 3 года назад
The Atlas rocket in Mercury project is 1.5 staged rocket to orbit. This proves that even using 60's technology, a 1.5 staged spaceship to orbit is not difficult. I always hope somebody can use modern technology like aerospike engine and methane fuel and some kind of heat shield tile, to remake a reusable SSTO which is like the level of Atlas Mercury.
@michaelginever732
@michaelginever732 7 лет назад
the weight of fuel the system has to carry can be decreased either by having greater energy density (like the metalic hydrogen idea) or by having some sort of the ground based energy involved. So the idea of not having a 1st stage and sending the second stage up to an appreciable speed using an electromagnetic ground based propulsion system like a rail gun might be a way to achieve that. It has surprised me that no one has explored that possibility.
@jodyclemons4235
@jodyclemons4235 2 года назад
I would love to hear more about Warp Drive
@mattcrunk8558
@mattcrunk8558 6 лет назад
ssto is a lovely fantasy to pursue, and one day we may have materials energy dense enough to allow an ssto. I suspect if this happens and the cost of the reactor that uses that material is too high to justify utilizing multiple of them. However I have a feeling that even then, the differences in requirements of spaceships and launch vehicles will always be different enough to warrant having some kind of intermediate transfer vessel.
@halamkajohn
@halamkajohn 6 лет назад
here is part of the answer. f=ma : force = mass x acceleration . speed is feet / second . acceleration is the change of speed / second. so feet / s^2 is acceleration. an object dropped at sea level will accelerate at 32.2 ft/s^2 . A 32.2 pound weight has a mass of 1 slug. f=ma . To get to the speed of the rocket when all the cooled propellant is used: Force = m(dot) v . = ma ; a=f/m a=m(dot) v / ( mo -m(t) ) integrate ( add up using calculus 1): shortest ans. mass ratio = e ^ ( DV/12000) . e is on calculators.
@akilghosh
@akilghosh 7 лет назад
There are no single stage rockets that flew to orbit and back?? Fraser Cain probably haven't read Tintin's explorer's on the moon 😂😂😂
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Oh, I did. In fact, doesn't my logo look kind of familiar?
@15Redstones
@15Redstones 6 лет назад
Akhil Ghosh that one rocket actually did a suborbital earth-to-moon flight.
@jeremyruhland6645
@jeremyruhland6645 7 лет назад
Can you link me to the source for the NERA logo animation at 7:51? I've never seen it up close before, only in blurry photographs of the reactors.
@elijahschott9978
@elijahschott9978 6 лет назад
The key word "Technology," all technology began with a dream, this dream sparked young minds, these young minds became engineers, physicists and garage tinkerers. Time and innovation turns Sifi into cell phones, EM drive...
@brantwedel
@brantwedel 6 лет назад
10:50 "I'll keep watching the whole space" _head explodes: that's alot of space to watch_
@nedz4471
@nedz4471 5 лет назад
Area space Corp is doing work with linear aerospike engines
@davidroddini1512
@davidroddini1512 7 лет назад
Fraser, in a recent Q&A you said the total mass of the universe is the same now as in the early universe and the only thing increasing is the amount of dark energy. Later in the same answer you used e=mc2 to justify it still being constant even when matter is converted to energy or vice versa. Since the amount of dark energy is increasing wouldn't e=mc2 then mean the total "mass" (matter + matter equivalent of the energy) is actually increasing?
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Dark energy isn't regular energy. We don't even really know what it is, except it's accelerating the expansion of the Universe.
@astrophonix
@astrophonix 7 лет назад
Could you please consider doing a video on Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion? I read it can both serve as an electromagnetic sail and as an active shield against cosmic rays, and I'd love to hear your take on it.
@jamesburleson1916
@jamesburleson1916 7 лет назад
A few things, there are several types of NTRs, only one of which, the solid core NTR, has been tested. The most efficient NTR is the open core NTR which allows the fissile materials to become a plasma, which is contained by magnetic fields and cooled by the fuel. Obviously you get some leakage so this is not something you would want to use on earth. Then there's the 'nuclear lightbulb' which also has the fissile materials as a plasma, but contained by quartz globes. This one is the best for putting payloads in orbit with a NTR because has the TWR to do so in a reasonable fashion. Another thing, the scientists only think they have created metallic hydrogen, it has not been proven and it's meta-stability is only theorized. Also using metallic hydrogen as a fuel would be very difficult as it releases so much energy that things tend to kind of turn to plasma.
@geektome4781
@geektome4781 6 лет назад
Nice Catalyst at 0:44.
@deusexaethera
@deusexaethera 5 лет назад
SSTOs are more convenient, but even if we develop fusion rockets or something with a similarly high specific impulse, MSTOs will still be more energy-efficient. The less rocket you carry into orbit, the more payload you can carry into orbit instead.
@DARisse-ji1yw
@DARisse-ji1yw 6 лет назад
Special case perhaps, but the Apollo LEM launch was a single (manned) stage to orbit......
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Great point, the BFR will do the same thing. :-)
@ET_AYY_LMAO
@ET_AYY_LMAO 6 лет назад
SSTOs make sense in some scifi universes, even with current tech. Just not on earth, but Mars and most moons would be pretty easy to make SSTOs for.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Yeah, staged rockets still make the most sense. I think the BFR is the best version, where both the first stage and upper stage are both reusable.
@ET_AYY_LMAO
@ET_AYY_LMAO 6 лет назад
Yes we all have a hard on to see BFR fly = ) Can't wait, I just hope it doesn't turn out to be a pipedream like hyperloop!
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
We know rockets work, so the question is just if a rocket this big can work. It doesn't seem that crazy. Now the hyperloop, that's a whole other level...
@DrayseSchneider
@DrayseSchneider 7 лет назад
I just asked Isaac Arthur if he'd cover spaceplanes like the Skylon only to find out in the same day that you've already discussed it. That's probably a good indicator that I should watch your videos more regularly. 😊
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
+Steven Schneider stay tuned, our next collaboration drops on Thursday
@KuraIthys
@KuraIthys 6 лет назад
And really, in the long term it's very likely the best thing to get the most payload into (earth) orbit at the lowest possible price isn't a rocket at all. It's something like a space elevator, skyhook, orbital ring, or some similar construction... However, the SSTO and rockets still hold relevance for dealing with planets that have less infrastructure, even if you could get off earth without any rockets at all at some point.
@IlicSorrentino
@IlicSorrentino 7 лет назад
Space elevator or magnetic star tram are also affascinating...
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Absolutely, I really like the rail gun method of space travel. :-)
@jameswhitman5765
@jameswhitman5765 7 лет назад
I've been tossing around an idea about heating hydrogen fuel into a plasma then as it is being released firing high power lasers at the plasma raising the temperature enough to fuse it. my concerns are can you use the energy from the reaction to maintain it and if you can, what kind of lasers would be needed to ignite the plasma?
@KennethScharf
@KennethScharf 6 лет назад
Actually, the Mercury Atlas was almost a SSTO. It had a single fuel tank, and three engines. Halfway up, when about half of the fuel was used up, two of the engines were dropped. This made the Atlas a "stage and a half". Depending on the payload, the Atlas might have been able to reach orbit as a true single stage.
@oldered5663
@oldered5663 7 лет назад
Hey Fraser, I got an idea to make a "nuclear rocket" safe or even safer than a conventional rocket. How about instead of having the nuclear reactor ON the rocket, instead you use a rocket that heats up the fuel like a nuclear rocket but you "beam" the power in from a remote location using a laser beam or a microwave beam. From launch pad to mid-atmosphere it uses a power station on the ground to beam power to rocket, then half way up it switches to a beam from an orbiting power satellite. You would have to beam a lot of power to the rocket, however, for the initial "startup" of the reaction chamber you could use an electrical umbilical on the launch pad to pre-heat the engine core before switching to the beamed power source. You could use cryogenic liquid nitrogen as the fuel since it is relatively stable as a semi-inert gas and a lot cheaper than using Xenon or other inert gas. Technically the heavier/denser the cryogenic gas the smaller you could build the craft and/or more payload since fuel storage space would be smaller / less mass. You combine the high ISP of the Nuclear Rocket with the safety of not having a nuclear core On the rocket itself. Hurdles: A lightweight antenna for receiving the power on the rocket and having a shape that will not incur wind drag for the 1st half of the rocket's journey. A Rocket Chamber that can use electricity to heat up the gasses hot enough to get the high ISPs out of them.
@oldered5663
@oldered5663 7 лет назад
You could even supplement power to the rocket mid flight by using a special 747 with mini power station and a Maser ( microwave laser ) that pumps microwave power to it mid flight in case the ground station gets too far away from it before switching to satellite beamed power, of maybe a few airplanes beaming power to it mid flight before you get the space power satellite established for it. You could also use the plane to supply it with power for a "space X" type landing on a barge if need be.
@atl5305
@atl5305 6 лет назад
Could you please do a video on high altitude-based launch systems? Why are we not using a high-altitude launch system? If roughly 2/3 of the fuel needed to get to space is spent just getting us from the ground to the upper atmosphere, shouldn't we focus on launch systems that float up as high as we can get them and launch our rockets from there? You would be above all of the weather and would only need 1/3 of the fuel.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
There are a few techniques that do this, but they require a lot of moving parts. Check out the Pegasus rocket: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Bla3RsVia9A.html
@ThePeterDislikeShow
@ThePeterDislikeShow 5 лет назад
I wonder. If we move a few large asteroids into orbit first, could we then use the orbiting asteroids for gravity assists on later missions?
@frasercain
@frasercain 5 лет назад
Definitely. I love this idea.
@davidperry4013
@davidperry4013 4 года назад
To make an ssto work, it needs to take off like a plane. First a turbojet, then a ramjet, next a scramjet, and finally aerospike rocket engines. Then either drop off and/or pickup crew from the ISS, do a service call on the James Webb space telescope, or explore Mars.
@AvyScottandFlower
@AvyScottandFlower 7 лет назад
Ravens... So long as it isn't a bear attacking Fraser, it's all right :)
@mfanto1
@mfanto1 6 лет назад
how long did a space shuttle service take between launches from memory I think it wasn't cheap either
@Hannibal5812
@Hannibal5812 7 лет назад
Hi, Thank you for our videos it's always interesting. Could you make a subject about MHD engine someday ?
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Interesting idea, I'll look into it. :-)
@ferky123
@ferky123 6 лет назад
If we could ever construct a space elevator then you wouldn't need to worry about single stage to orbit.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Yeah, but right now the materials to build a space elevator on Earth are just outside our grasp.
@jasimine_b
@jasimine_b 7 лет назад
hey fraser, i really like your way of presenting all this awesome "edutainment"! there's many interesting channels, but curious droid and you totally do it for me, narration-wise... :D i really hope you'll have your ssto-millennium-falcon flight eventually (in your lifetime, that is...)! i mean, who knows how old we'll all get when they develop that crispr-cas9-thing to the next level... :D and, if you care for any more feedback - i think these vids could profit from juuust a liiittle more "meat" to them, i mean the tsiolkovsky rocket equation (or at least its mα/mΩ term) is quite easily explained and would let people really understand, what the problem is today and how the Isp comes into play... but maybe equations would alienate too many folks, i wouldn't know. anyhow, keep it up and thank you!
@chinjeremy6825
@chinjeremy6825 7 лет назад
Hi Fraser, a curious question. What if the Moon actually spins/rotates (just like Earth) and orbits the Earth at a faster rate than it is doing right now, will it have any impact on us (Earthlings)? Cheers!
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
If the Moon spun, I can't think of any problems it was cause Earth. if it was going at a faster rate, that would mean that it was closer to us. If the Moon orbited the Earth faster than a single day, then it would drift towards us, not away from us, and that would be bad.
@michaelspence2508
@michaelspence2508 7 лет назад
a fusion based nuclear rocket would be a lot safer. Later on, an antimatter catalyzed version of project Orion would also be nice to have, though by then we'd probably have an orbital ring
@AmbientMorality
@AmbientMorality 6 лет назад
I mean, yes, probably, but let's invent fusion on the ground first of all.
@KuraIthys
@KuraIthys 6 лет назад
I don't think using a project orion derived design inside an atmosphere seems like such a great idea. It's a good design for space travel, but probably not such a great idea as a launch system...
@faroncobb6040
@faroncobb6040 6 лет назад
Just happened to see this, and I'm definitely going to file it away for future consideration. Antimatter catalyzed fusion bombs should be able to get rid of pretty much all the problems with using an Orion drive for Earth to orbit, which is where it would have been most useful. You would just want to be very, very careful with your antimatter containment.
@petersmythe6462
@petersmythe6462 6 лет назад
We could build a big booster SSTO today. the problem is that it would not come back and it would have a payload fraction that would make normal rockets look great.
@CD-Freedom
@CD-Freedom 5 лет назад
0:20 I so get you on the phaser, I once had a game boy that was charging on the floor, then when I came back it was gone and I found it like a year later under my bed.
@frasercain
@frasercain 5 лет назад
Hah, sneaky parents.
@prawnmikus
@prawnmikus 7 лет назад
How about fusion rockets? I know we're not there yet, but perhaps one day we'll have the materials and understanding to make a fusion reactor with an exhaust port.
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
If we can get fusion to work reliably, then yes, they'd make a fantastic rocket engine.
@mathiaslist6705
@mathiaslist6705 Год назад
3:41 showing the SpaceShuttle there and mentioning hydrogen ... it's actually going up because of those tiny boosters on both sides which work with solid rocket fuel
@brendansully12
@brendansully12 7 лет назад
Great!
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Thanks!
@jscotthatcher380
@jscotthatcher380 7 лет назад
thanks for reminding me of my terrible childhood in the very beginning. : P
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Did you ever find your "missing" phaser?
@jscotthatcher380
@jscotthatcher380 7 лет назад
found my use to be noisy spacecraft. never found another power source though. 😄
@gerulfdosinger9869
@gerulfdosinger9869 7 лет назад
Hey Frasier! I have a question about Black-Holes and their temperature! Since no energy can escape from beyond the Event-Horizon wouldn't that mean, that from a Black-Hole's formation on the "space" beyond the Event-Horizon would gradually heat up to an almost infinitely high temperature? And would this in turn mean that Hawking-Radiation cools the BH down again? It would be cool if you could answer this in one of your future Q&As or maybe just write a short answer here.
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Unfortunately, we have no way to know what the temperature would be inside a black hole's event horizon. Temperature means photons, but what if all the photons are converted into black hole mass?
@gerulfdosinger9869
@gerulfdosinger9869 7 лет назад
Thanks for your answer! And, btw, for me it still feels pretty crazy to "talk" to someone from across the globe who usually only speaks to me via RU-vid. :D Modern times. ;)
@OscarMarquez
@OscarMarquez 7 лет назад
Maybe a mix mass driver + laser pulse to go up and then plasma engine to keep going
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
If we can keep the actual energy and launch system here on Earth, that would be ideal. I'm a huge proponent of rail gun systems.
@josephinhiding3595
@josephinhiding3595 7 лет назад
Not sure the magnetic flux would be so good on organisms but sounds like a good way to get metal, fuel, etc into orbit. Lots of technological obstacles to overcome as well as high altitude work/engineering. If it was a linear accelerator with the out end at the top of mount everest :D. An airless launch site, such as the moon, might be more feasible. See Moon is a Harsh Mistress by R.A.Heinlein.
@davecarsley8773
@davecarsley8773 7 лет назад
I have a couple possible Q&A questions. Maybe I'll post them in two separate comments below (or, I believe, as it is with RU-vid, _above_) in case you decide you'd like to answer one.....
@clxwncrxwn
@clxwncrxwn 6 лет назад
I think a magnetic rail launch system would be efficient ( so there is no friction between the rail booster and track), instead of needing a huge burst of energy, spread it out, the rocket would be on a rail car with booster rockets, and once the rail booster picked up enough speed curve the the last bit of rail vertical. It could cost less fuel.
@brocpage4204
@brocpage4204 7 лет назад
Hey Fraser, are you heading down to the states for the eclipse in August?
@frasercain
@frasercain 7 лет назад
Yup, I'll be near St. Louis.
@sol2544
@sol2544 6 лет назад
You're wrong about the aerospike. It's not special because it throttles (lots of normal rocket engines throttle) it's special because it can change the exit pressure of the exhaust, which makes it able to be efficient in the atmosphere, and then change that pressure to also be efficient in a vacuum. This is different because while yes, rockets today stage to get rid of dead weight, and to handle dangerous g forces by using weaker engines on less weight each stage, typically each stage of a modern rocket is tailored to be efficient either in vacuum or in atmosphere
@Neur0n911
@Neur0n911 6 лет назад
I really like the idea of the VASIMR rocket. If only we had a power density small and light enough to power one in space.
@alrightythen214
@alrightythen214 7 лет назад
hehe I caught your Toy Story reference. Wait a minute..I just lit a rocket...rockets explode!
@faceofsarcasm4947
@faceofsarcasm4947 6 лет назад
You do not need any new technology to build an SSTO. You can use an external fuel tank and six RS-25 to put 60,000 lbs into LEO. External tank: 26,000kg, Fuel: 760,000kg, Engines: 3,500kg each, 21,000kg total, payload: 60,000 lbs, or 27,500kg. ln(834,500/74,500)*9.81*425s equals 10073 m/s of DeltaV. 9400m/s of DeltaV is required to get to orbit and it would only cost $200 million per flight, lowering the cost to $2,500 per pound. And yes, it worked in Real Scale Kerbal Space Program.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
But is that a more efficient strategy than something like SpaceX with a reusable first stage? How do you get those RS-25s and the external tank back to Earth?
@faceofsarcasm4947
@faceofsarcasm4947 6 лет назад
You could have the RS-25s on a separate assembly that could detach from the external tank once the vehicle is in orbit and use small separator engines to put the assembly on a sub-orbital trajectory. The assembly would also contain parachutes to safely descend the engines down to the ground. As for the external tank, you could convert it into a wet workshop by purging the excess fuel and place a padding on the inside. The external tank has about one quarter the volume of the International Space Station, so it would make a great place for larger experiments. However, you could simply lower the payload's mass and use the remaining fuel in the SSTO to put the whole vehicle on a sub-orbital trajectory and refit the vehicle with parachutes. SpaceX can put 50,000 lbs to LEO on a $62 million launch vehicle, so it is not as efficient, but it is still a functional SSTO.
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
Isn't that essentially the Vulcan system from United Launch Alliance?
@faceofsarcasm4947
@faceofsarcasm4947 6 лет назад
Having the engines separated on an assembly capable of returning to Earth? Yes. Yes it is. But the Vulcan launch vehicle is not a single stage to orbit, unlike the launch vehicle I described, which is a single stage to orbit.
@WalterBoring
@WalterBoring 5 лет назад
The reason for rocket stages isn't about fuel, but about the efficiency of the rocket engine itself. As you get higher in the atmosphere the single stage becomes less and less efficient in it's thrust, because the external air pressures are less and less and the cone of the rocket engine is less and less efficient.
@frasercain
@frasercain 5 лет назад
Great point. Although, having to carry all that empty fuel tank doesn't help either.
@kerby-qy3pr
@kerby-qy3pr 6 лет назад
Do you watch ksp? Cause there are many SSTOs that people make like Matt Lowne,Marcus House,Bradley Whistance,Shadowzone,and many more im forgetting right now...
@frasercain
@frasercain 6 лет назад
For sure, I mention KSP in lots of videos. I don't really have time to watch a lot of videos, though.
@kerby-qy3pr
@kerby-qy3pr 6 лет назад
Fraser Cain swag
@bjarnes.4423
@bjarnes.4423 7 лет назад
What about a near future fusion rocket (So once we will be able to use fusion efficiently)?
@tesstickle7267
@tesstickle7267 6 лет назад
tell you one thing that skylon reaction engine is LOUD lol think it sounds louder because it's not flying away (tests!)
@cpypcy
@cpypcy 6 лет назад
Fusion engines ftw! :D
@gaydolfhitler6310
@gaydolfhitler6310 6 лет назад
I thought this was a stupid question until i thought about it
@utahraptorfast
@utahraptorfast 7 лет назад
i think in the future (provided we advance technologically and not collapse in global civil war) we might produce Metalic hydrogen at decent prices, it'll still be to valuable to waste in the first stage and will only be used as a second stage to complete the orbit while allready in the vacuum of space or to make a transfer burn. but my bets are mostly on the use of Metalic hydrogen isotopes (tritium and deuterium) in fusion reactors as they can also be made as a bose condensate (which makes giving it large amounts of kinetic energy easier) and are incredibly dense which benefits fusion reactions
@backwoodsjunkie08
@backwoodsjunkie08 5 лет назад
lol!! I have 3 kids and I don't know how many times I've hide loud annoying toys from them
@frasercain
@frasercain 5 лет назад
Just make sure you bring them back carefully, to avoid the future feeling of betrayal. ;-)
@Pile_of_carbon
@Pile_of_carbon 6 лет назад
Chuck Norris can roundhouse kick hydrogen so hard it goes into metallic form. Yup, I'm bringing those jokes back. =P
Далее
skibidi toilet 74
07:02
Просмотров 16 млн
Can We Create Artificial Gravity?
6:34
Просмотров 3,2 млн
HOTOL - Anatomy of a spaceplane engine
22:19
Просмотров 10 тыс.
How Fast Are Spaceships In 'The Expanse'?
13:24
Просмотров 1 млн
Топ-3 суперкрутых ПК из CompShop
1:00