Could rockets launched from the ground use wings in the stages?












3














Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?



Could the stages reduce splashdown impact forces by using a spinning seedpod-like design (as shown in the image below)?



Seed pods twirling to the ground
Video of seed pods twirling to the ground
Source: Keith Blenman blogpost



SpaceX BFR
![SpaceX BFR
Source: SpaceX via Wikimedia, public domain



X-37B
X-37B cut-away drawing and photo
Source: xairforces.net



Baikal flyback booster with second stage

The flyback wing is stowed above and parallel to the fuselage
Baikal flyback booster with second stage
Source: Russian Foundation for Advanced Studies (FPI) via russianspaceweb



After what point are wings not useful on the number of rocket stages, size or weight?










share|improve this question




















  • 2




    Kindly attribute all images and quotes. Thanks!
    – Alex Hajnal
    18 hours ago






  • 1




    X-37 is under a fairing during the atmospheric portion of ascent, getting no lift from its wings; it does a gliding reentry and landing like the space shuttle.
    – Russell Borogove
    17 hours ago






  • 1




    I believe that's the X-37's orbital module (propulsion, consumables, etc.). It's odd that it would have wings too; I suspect the reason for having them (like much surrounding the X-37) is classified. Also, can you please provide image citations?
    – Alex Hajnal
    17 hours ago






  • 2




    @AlexHajnal The X-37 is one piece, not separate modules; the forward surfaces are wings, the aft are a V-tail.
    – Russell Borogove
    17 hours ago








  • 2




    Von Braun's Mars ship was all about the wings: i.imgur.com/D67k1.jpg
    – Organic Marble
    13 hours ago
















3














Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?



Could the stages reduce splashdown impact forces by using a spinning seedpod-like design (as shown in the image below)?



Seed pods twirling to the ground
Video of seed pods twirling to the ground
Source: Keith Blenman blogpost



SpaceX BFR
![SpaceX BFR
Source: SpaceX via Wikimedia, public domain



X-37B
X-37B cut-away drawing and photo
Source: xairforces.net



Baikal flyback booster with second stage

The flyback wing is stowed above and parallel to the fuselage
Baikal flyback booster with second stage
Source: Russian Foundation for Advanced Studies (FPI) via russianspaceweb



After what point are wings not useful on the number of rocket stages, size or weight?










share|improve this question




















  • 2




    Kindly attribute all images and quotes. Thanks!
    – Alex Hajnal
    18 hours ago






  • 1




    X-37 is under a fairing during the atmospheric portion of ascent, getting no lift from its wings; it does a gliding reentry and landing like the space shuttle.
    – Russell Borogove
    17 hours ago






  • 1




    I believe that's the X-37's orbital module (propulsion, consumables, etc.). It's odd that it would have wings too; I suspect the reason for having them (like much surrounding the X-37) is classified. Also, can you please provide image citations?
    – Alex Hajnal
    17 hours ago






  • 2




    @AlexHajnal The X-37 is one piece, not separate modules; the forward surfaces are wings, the aft are a V-tail.
    – Russell Borogove
    17 hours ago








  • 2




    Von Braun's Mars ship was all about the wings: i.imgur.com/D67k1.jpg
    – Organic Marble
    13 hours ago














3












3








3







Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?



Could the stages reduce splashdown impact forces by using a spinning seedpod-like design (as shown in the image below)?



Seed pods twirling to the ground
Video of seed pods twirling to the ground
Source: Keith Blenman blogpost



SpaceX BFR
![SpaceX BFR
Source: SpaceX via Wikimedia, public domain



X-37B
X-37B cut-away drawing and photo
Source: xairforces.net



Baikal flyback booster with second stage

The flyback wing is stowed above and parallel to the fuselage
Baikal flyback booster with second stage
Source: Russian Foundation for Advanced Studies (FPI) via russianspaceweb



After what point are wings not useful on the number of rocket stages, size or weight?










share|improve this question















Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?



Could the stages reduce splashdown impact forces by using a spinning seedpod-like design (as shown in the image below)?



Seed pods twirling to the ground
Video of seed pods twirling to the ground
Source: Keith Blenman blogpost



SpaceX BFR
![SpaceX BFR
Source: SpaceX via Wikimedia, public domain



X-37B
X-37B cut-away drawing and photo
Source: xairforces.net



Baikal flyback booster with second stage

The flyback wing is stowed above and parallel to the fuselage
Baikal flyback booster with second stage
Source: Russian Foundation for Advanced Studies (FPI) via russianspaceweb



After what point are wings not useful on the number of rocket stages, size or weight?







rockets artificial-satellite engine-design aerodynamics stages






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 57 mins ago

























asked 18 hours ago









Muze

1,8461055




1,8461055








  • 2




    Kindly attribute all images and quotes. Thanks!
    – Alex Hajnal
    18 hours ago






  • 1




    X-37 is under a fairing during the atmospheric portion of ascent, getting no lift from its wings; it does a gliding reentry and landing like the space shuttle.
    – Russell Borogove
    17 hours ago






  • 1




    I believe that's the X-37's orbital module (propulsion, consumables, etc.). It's odd that it would have wings too; I suspect the reason for having them (like much surrounding the X-37) is classified. Also, can you please provide image citations?
    – Alex Hajnal
    17 hours ago






  • 2




    @AlexHajnal The X-37 is one piece, not separate modules; the forward surfaces are wings, the aft are a V-tail.
    – Russell Borogove
    17 hours ago








  • 2




    Von Braun's Mars ship was all about the wings: i.imgur.com/D67k1.jpg
    – Organic Marble
    13 hours ago














  • 2




    Kindly attribute all images and quotes. Thanks!
    – Alex Hajnal
    18 hours ago






  • 1




    X-37 is under a fairing during the atmospheric portion of ascent, getting no lift from its wings; it does a gliding reentry and landing like the space shuttle.
    – Russell Borogove
    17 hours ago






  • 1




    I believe that's the X-37's orbital module (propulsion, consumables, etc.). It's odd that it would have wings too; I suspect the reason for having them (like much surrounding the X-37) is classified. Also, can you please provide image citations?
    – Alex Hajnal
    17 hours ago






  • 2




    @AlexHajnal The X-37 is one piece, not separate modules; the forward surfaces are wings, the aft are a V-tail.
    – Russell Borogove
    17 hours ago








  • 2




    Von Braun's Mars ship was all about the wings: i.imgur.com/D67k1.jpg
    – Organic Marble
    13 hours ago








2




2




Kindly attribute all images and quotes. Thanks!
– Alex Hajnal
18 hours ago




Kindly attribute all images and quotes. Thanks!
– Alex Hajnal
18 hours ago




1




1




X-37 is under a fairing during the atmospheric portion of ascent, getting no lift from its wings; it does a gliding reentry and landing like the space shuttle.
– Russell Borogove
17 hours ago




X-37 is under a fairing during the atmospheric portion of ascent, getting no lift from its wings; it does a gliding reentry and landing like the space shuttle.
– Russell Borogove
17 hours ago




1




1




I believe that's the X-37's orbital module (propulsion, consumables, etc.). It's odd that it would have wings too; I suspect the reason for having them (like much surrounding the X-37) is classified. Also, can you please provide image citations?
– Alex Hajnal
17 hours ago




I believe that's the X-37's orbital module (propulsion, consumables, etc.). It's odd that it would have wings too; I suspect the reason for having them (like much surrounding the X-37) is classified. Also, can you please provide image citations?
– Alex Hajnal
17 hours ago




2




2




@AlexHajnal The X-37 is one piece, not separate modules; the forward surfaces are wings, the aft are a V-tail.
– Russell Borogove
17 hours ago






@AlexHajnal The X-37 is one piece, not separate modules; the forward surfaces are wings, the aft are a V-tail.
– Russell Borogove
17 hours ago






2




2




Von Braun's Mars ship was all about the wings: i.imgur.com/D67k1.jpg
– Organic Marble
13 hours ago




Von Braun's Mars ship was all about the wings: i.imgur.com/D67k1.jpg
– Organic Marble
13 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















12















Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?




Wings on the first stage can be useful; the Pegasus air-launched rocket has wings on its first stage that provide some lift.



In most cases wings aren't worth using on orbital launchers; they add drag and weight that usually isn't compensated for by lift. Wings on upper stages are very unlikely to be beneficial.






share|improve this answer

















  • 1




    If you look at it properly, the first stage of the Pegasus is the L1011, which has wings and flies back to land and be reused. Likewise for the carrier aircraft of the (suborbital) Spaceship One and Two.
    – jamesqf
    12 hours ago










  • To elaborate: Per Wikipedia the purpose of the wings and control surfaces on Pegasus is primarily attitude control. In addition, the first (rocket) stage is not recovered. From the linked article: "The 45-degree delta wing (of carbon composite construction and double-wedge airfoil) aids pitch-up and provides some lift. The tail fins provide steering for first-stage flight, as the Orion 50S motor does not have a thrust-vectoring nozzle."
    – Alex Hajnal
    5 hours ago












  • Skylon (which, I know, is still just conceptual design) uses wings and air-breathing engines to get to Mach 5 or so with relatively llittle fuel. This is the only example I know where wings play an important role in ascent of a rocket concept.
    – Steve Linton
    3 hours ago



















6














Though it seems noöne has spun an entire rocket stage to slow it, something has similar has been tried. The long-defunct Rotary Rocket company was developing the Roton™ reüsable single-state-to-orbit launcher that would use helicopter-like blades to slow and land. A bit more info on it can be found on Wikipedia.



Roton booster
Alan Radecki via Wikimedia Commons, GFDL / CC BY-SA 3.0



Not present in the photo above, the rotor blades were attached to the dome at the top and folded flush against the fuselage during ascent. Prior to reëntry the blades would fold back to a low-drag configuration. After reëntry, the blades would move to a horizontal orientation and be spun up (I believe) using thrusters on the blade tips (the cap and blades would spin and the fuselage would stay stationary). The craft would then fly as a helicopter (under autorotation) to a controlled landing.



There are some much better images here (under "Photo Gallery" and "Image Gallery") but they don't appear to be licensed for reüse.






share|improve this answer



















  • 8




    Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above the u in the word reüse doesn't help anybody pronounce it correctly and only reïnforces an impression that the poster may be a bit of a pretentious hypercorrectiïst™. But that's just a hypothesis...
    – leftaroundabout
    15 hours ago












  • @leftaroundabout Both forms are equally valid in English. If feel that the diæresis (to use an alternate spelling) plays a useful role and thus I often use it. I prefer to reserve hyphenation for certain compound words and the like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    15 hours ago






  • 2




    It's not useful at all. "Reuse" is a completely normal English word, which nobody has any difficulty in parsing to mean "use again". The diaresis just looks strange and interrupts the flow while the reader thinks, "What's that doing there?" It's at best archaic and, these days, verging on plain wrong.
    – David Richerby
    8 hours ago








  • 1




    The "reüse" thing is pure distracting nonsense. See here, here, and here. You won't find a diaeresis anywhere. Similarly "reëntry."
    – T.J. Crowder
    7 hours ago








  • 2




    I fully support Alex's right to his diæreses. Yes, they look a bit affected; but that is surely his choice? I rather like them myself.
    – TonyK
    5 hours ago



















3














The rocket passes through the dense layers of the atmosphere in the first tens of seconds after launch. Further, these wings are ineffective. Baikal (on render) is a reusable rocket plane. Most of the time being in dense layers of the atmosphere.






share|improve this answer





















  • Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
    – Muze
    11 hours ago



















2














Vertically launched rockets need thrust (force in the direction of motion), not lift (force perpendicular to it). Wings can only provide lift and drag (force against the direction of motion), and a vertically launched rocket needs neither of those things. What an orbital rocket does need is speed so the less drag the better.






share|improve this answer























  • Just expanded your argument a bit. Feel free to roll back if you like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    7 hours ago










  • All this answer does for me is make me ponder the wisdom of a horizontally launched rocket, not convince me that wings are unwise. After all, wouldn't it be really great if our (horizontally-aimed) thruster could do double-duty of speeding us up to orbital speeds and giving us a source of lift to gain altitude at the same time?
    – Daniel Wagner
    51 mins ago











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
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33152%2fcould-rockets-launched-from-the-ground-use-wings-in-the-stages%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes








4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









12















Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?




Wings on the first stage can be useful; the Pegasus air-launched rocket has wings on its first stage that provide some lift.



In most cases wings aren't worth using on orbital launchers; they add drag and weight that usually isn't compensated for by lift. Wings on upper stages are very unlikely to be beneficial.






share|improve this answer

















  • 1




    If you look at it properly, the first stage of the Pegasus is the L1011, which has wings and flies back to land and be reused. Likewise for the carrier aircraft of the (suborbital) Spaceship One and Two.
    – jamesqf
    12 hours ago










  • To elaborate: Per Wikipedia the purpose of the wings and control surfaces on Pegasus is primarily attitude control. In addition, the first (rocket) stage is not recovered. From the linked article: "The 45-degree delta wing (of carbon composite construction and double-wedge airfoil) aids pitch-up and provides some lift. The tail fins provide steering for first-stage flight, as the Orion 50S motor does not have a thrust-vectoring nozzle."
    – Alex Hajnal
    5 hours ago












  • Skylon (which, I know, is still just conceptual design) uses wings and air-breathing engines to get to Mach 5 or so with relatively llittle fuel. This is the only example I know where wings play an important role in ascent of a rocket concept.
    – Steve Linton
    3 hours ago
















12















Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?




Wings on the first stage can be useful; the Pegasus air-launched rocket has wings on its first stage that provide some lift.



In most cases wings aren't worth using on orbital launchers; they add drag and weight that usually isn't compensated for by lift. Wings on upper stages are very unlikely to be beneficial.






share|improve this answer

















  • 1




    If you look at it properly, the first stage of the Pegasus is the L1011, which has wings and flies back to land and be reused. Likewise for the carrier aircraft of the (suborbital) Spaceship One and Two.
    – jamesqf
    12 hours ago










  • To elaborate: Per Wikipedia the purpose of the wings and control surfaces on Pegasus is primarily attitude control. In addition, the first (rocket) stage is not recovered. From the linked article: "The 45-degree delta wing (of carbon composite construction and double-wedge airfoil) aids pitch-up and provides some lift. The tail fins provide steering for first-stage flight, as the Orion 50S motor does not have a thrust-vectoring nozzle."
    – Alex Hajnal
    5 hours ago












  • Skylon (which, I know, is still just conceptual design) uses wings and air-breathing engines to get to Mach 5 or so with relatively llittle fuel. This is the only example I know where wings play an important role in ascent of a rocket concept.
    – Steve Linton
    3 hours ago














12












12








12







Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?




Wings on the first stage can be useful; the Pegasus air-launched rocket has wings on its first stage that provide some lift.



In most cases wings aren't worth using on orbital launchers; they add drag and weight that usually isn't compensated for by lift. Wings on upper stages are very unlikely to be beneficial.






share|improve this answer













Could a slower or smaller rocket take advantage of lift if all the stages had wings?




Wings on the first stage can be useful; the Pegasus air-launched rocket has wings on its first stage that provide some lift.



In most cases wings aren't worth using on orbital launchers; they add drag and weight that usually isn't compensated for by lift. Wings on upper stages are very unlikely to be beneficial.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 18 hours ago









Russell Borogove

82.1k2273356




82.1k2273356








  • 1




    If you look at it properly, the first stage of the Pegasus is the L1011, which has wings and flies back to land and be reused. Likewise for the carrier aircraft of the (suborbital) Spaceship One and Two.
    – jamesqf
    12 hours ago










  • To elaborate: Per Wikipedia the purpose of the wings and control surfaces on Pegasus is primarily attitude control. In addition, the first (rocket) stage is not recovered. From the linked article: "The 45-degree delta wing (of carbon composite construction and double-wedge airfoil) aids pitch-up and provides some lift. The tail fins provide steering for first-stage flight, as the Orion 50S motor does not have a thrust-vectoring nozzle."
    – Alex Hajnal
    5 hours ago












  • Skylon (which, I know, is still just conceptual design) uses wings and air-breathing engines to get to Mach 5 or so with relatively llittle fuel. This is the only example I know where wings play an important role in ascent of a rocket concept.
    – Steve Linton
    3 hours ago














  • 1




    If you look at it properly, the first stage of the Pegasus is the L1011, which has wings and flies back to land and be reused. Likewise for the carrier aircraft of the (suborbital) Spaceship One and Two.
    – jamesqf
    12 hours ago










  • To elaborate: Per Wikipedia the purpose of the wings and control surfaces on Pegasus is primarily attitude control. In addition, the first (rocket) stage is not recovered. From the linked article: "The 45-degree delta wing (of carbon composite construction and double-wedge airfoil) aids pitch-up and provides some lift. The tail fins provide steering for first-stage flight, as the Orion 50S motor does not have a thrust-vectoring nozzle."
    – Alex Hajnal
    5 hours ago












  • Skylon (which, I know, is still just conceptual design) uses wings and air-breathing engines to get to Mach 5 or so with relatively llittle fuel. This is the only example I know where wings play an important role in ascent of a rocket concept.
    – Steve Linton
    3 hours ago








1




1




If you look at it properly, the first stage of the Pegasus is the L1011, which has wings and flies back to land and be reused. Likewise for the carrier aircraft of the (suborbital) Spaceship One and Two.
– jamesqf
12 hours ago




If you look at it properly, the first stage of the Pegasus is the L1011, which has wings and flies back to land and be reused. Likewise for the carrier aircraft of the (suborbital) Spaceship One and Two.
– jamesqf
12 hours ago












To elaborate: Per Wikipedia the purpose of the wings and control surfaces on Pegasus is primarily attitude control. In addition, the first (rocket) stage is not recovered. From the linked article: "The 45-degree delta wing (of carbon composite construction and double-wedge airfoil) aids pitch-up and provides some lift. The tail fins provide steering for first-stage flight, as the Orion 50S motor does not have a thrust-vectoring nozzle."
– Alex Hajnal
5 hours ago






To elaborate: Per Wikipedia the purpose of the wings and control surfaces on Pegasus is primarily attitude control. In addition, the first (rocket) stage is not recovered. From the linked article: "The 45-degree delta wing (of carbon composite construction and double-wedge airfoil) aids pitch-up and provides some lift. The tail fins provide steering for first-stage flight, as the Orion 50S motor does not have a thrust-vectoring nozzle."
– Alex Hajnal
5 hours ago














Skylon (which, I know, is still just conceptual design) uses wings and air-breathing engines to get to Mach 5 or so with relatively llittle fuel. This is the only example I know where wings play an important role in ascent of a rocket concept.
– Steve Linton
3 hours ago




Skylon (which, I know, is still just conceptual design) uses wings and air-breathing engines to get to Mach 5 or so with relatively llittle fuel. This is the only example I know where wings play an important role in ascent of a rocket concept.
– Steve Linton
3 hours ago











6














Though it seems noöne has spun an entire rocket stage to slow it, something has similar has been tried. The long-defunct Rotary Rocket company was developing the Roton™ reüsable single-state-to-orbit launcher that would use helicopter-like blades to slow and land. A bit more info on it can be found on Wikipedia.



Roton booster
Alan Radecki via Wikimedia Commons, GFDL / CC BY-SA 3.0



Not present in the photo above, the rotor blades were attached to the dome at the top and folded flush against the fuselage during ascent. Prior to reëntry the blades would fold back to a low-drag configuration. After reëntry, the blades would move to a horizontal orientation and be spun up (I believe) using thrusters on the blade tips (the cap and blades would spin and the fuselage would stay stationary). The craft would then fly as a helicopter (under autorotation) to a controlled landing.



There are some much better images here (under "Photo Gallery" and "Image Gallery") but they don't appear to be licensed for reüse.






share|improve this answer



















  • 8




    Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above the u in the word reüse doesn't help anybody pronounce it correctly and only reïnforces an impression that the poster may be a bit of a pretentious hypercorrectiïst™. But that's just a hypothesis...
    – leftaroundabout
    15 hours ago












  • @leftaroundabout Both forms are equally valid in English. If feel that the diæresis (to use an alternate spelling) plays a useful role and thus I often use it. I prefer to reserve hyphenation for certain compound words and the like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    15 hours ago






  • 2




    It's not useful at all. "Reuse" is a completely normal English word, which nobody has any difficulty in parsing to mean "use again". The diaresis just looks strange and interrupts the flow while the reader thinks, "What's that doing there?" It's at best archaic and, these days, verging on plain wrong.
    – David Richerby
    8 hours ago








  • 1




    The "reüse" thing is pure distracting nonsense. See here, here, and here. You won't find a diaeresis anywhere. Similarly "reëntry."
    – T.J. Crowder
    7 hours ago








  • 2




    I fully support Alex's right to his diæreses. Yes, they look a bit affected; but that is surely his choice? I rather like them myself.
    – TonyK
    5 hours ago
















6














Though it seems noöne has spun an entire rocket stage to slow it, something has similar has been tried. The long-defunct Rotary Rocket company was developing the Roton™ reüsable single-state-to-orbit launcher that would use helicopter-like blades to slow and land. A bit more info on it can be found on Wikipedia.



Roton booster
Alan Radecki via Wikimedia Commons, GFDL / CC BY-SA 3.0



Not present in the photo above, the rotor blades were attached to the dome at the top and folded flush against the fuselage during ascent. Prior to reëntry the blades would fold back to a low-drag configuration. After reëntry, the blades would move to a horizontal orientation and be spun up (I believe) using thrusters on the blade tips (the cap and blades would spin and the fuselage would stay stationary). The craft would then fly as a helicopter (under autorotation) to a controlled landing.



There are some much better images here (under "Photo Gallery" and "Image Gallery") but they don't appear to be licensed for reüse.






share|improve this answer



















  • 8




    Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above the u in the word reüse doesn't help anybody pronounce it correctly and only reïnforces an impression that the poster may be a bit of a pretentious hypercorrectiïst™. But that's just a hypothesis...
    – leftaroundabout
    15 hours ago












  • @leftaroundabout Both forms are equally valid in English. If feel that the diæresis (to use an alternate spelling) plays a useful role and thus I often use it. I prefer to reserve hyphenation for certain compound words and the like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    15 hours ago






  • 2




    It's not useful at all. "Reuse" is a completely normal English word, which nobody has any difficulty in parsing to mean "use again". The diaresis just looks strange and interrupts the flow while the reader thinks, "What's that doing there?" It's at best archaic and, these days, verging on plain wrong.
    – David Richerby
    8 hours ago








  • 1




    The "reüse" thing is pure distracting nonsense. See here, here, and here. You won't find a diaeresis anywhere. Similarly "reëntry."
    – T.J. Crowder
    7 hours ago








  • 2




    I fully support Alex's right to his diæreses. Yes, they look a bit affected; but that is surely his choice? I rather like them myself.
    – TonyK
    5 hours ago














6












6








6






Though it seems noöne has spun an entire rocket stage to slow it, something has similar has been tried. The long-defunct Rotary Rocket company was developing the Roton™ reüsable single-state-to-orbit launcher that would use helicopter-like blades to slow and land. A bit more info on it can be found on Wikipedia.



Roton booster
Alan Radecki via Wikimedia Commons, GFDL / CC BY-SA 3.0



Not present in the photo above, the rotor blades were attached to the dome at the top and folded flush against the fuselage during ascent. Prior to reëntry the blades would fold back to a low-drag configuration. After reëntry, the blades would move to a horizontal orientation and be spun up (I believe) using thrusters on the blade tips (the cap and blades would spin and the fuselage would stay stationary). The craft would then fly as a helicopter (under autorotation) to a controlled landing.



There are some much better images here (under "Photo Gallery" and "Image Gallery") but they don't appear to be licensed for reüse.






share|improve this answer














Though it seems noöne has spun an entire rocket stage to slow it, something has similar has been tried. The long-defunct Rotary Rocket company was developing the Roton™ reüsable single-state-to-orbit launcher that would use helicopter-like blades to slow and land. A bit more info on it can be found on Wikipedia.



Roton booster
Alan Radecki via Wikimedia Commons, GFDL / CC BY-SA 3.0



Not present in the photo above, the rotor blades were attached to the dome at the top and folded flush against the fuselage during ascent. Prior to reëntry the blades would fold back to a low-drag configuration. After reëntry, the blades would move to a horizontal orientation and be spun up (I believe) using thrusters on the blade tips (the cap and blades would spin and the fuselage would stay stationary). The craft would then fly as a helicopter (under autorotation) to a controlled landing.



There are some much better images here (under "Photo Gallery" and "Image Gallery") but they don't appear to be licensed for reüse.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 10 hours ago

























answered 17 hours ago









Alex Hajnal

1,106317




1,106317








  • 8




    Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above the u in the word reüse doesn't help anybody pronounce it correctly and only reïnforces an impression that the poster may be a bit of a pretentious hypercorrectiïst™. But that's just a hypothesis...
    – leftaroundabout
    15 hours ago












  • @leftaroundabout Both forms are equally valid in English. If feel that the diæresis (to use an alternate spelling) plays a useful role and thus I often use it. I prefer to reserve hyphenation for certain compound words and the like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    15 hours ago






  • 2




    It's not useful at all. "Reuse" is a completely normal English word, which nobody has any difficulty in parsing to mean "use again". The diaresis just looks strange and interrupts the flow while the reader thinks, "What's that doing there?" It's at best archaic and, these days, verging on plain wrong.
    – David Richerby
    8 hours ago








  • 1




    The "reüse" thing is pure distracting nonsense. See here, here, and here. You won't find a diaeresis anywhere. Similarly "reëntry."
    – T.J. Crowder
    7 hours ago








  • 2




    I fully support Alex's right to his diæreses. Yes, they look a bit affected; but that is surely his choice? I rather like them myself.
    – TonyK
    5 hours ago














  • 8




    Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above the u in the word reüse doesn't help anybody pronounce it correctly and only reïnforces an impression that the poster may be a bit of a pretentious hypercorrectiïst™. But that's just a hypothesis...
    – leftaroundabout
    15 hours ago












  • @leftaroundabout Both forms are equally valid in English. If feel that the diæresis (to use an alternate spelling) plays a useful role and thus I often use it. I prefer to reserve hyphenation for certain compound words and the like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    15 hours ago






  • 2




    It's not useful at all. "Reuse" is a completely normal English word, which nobody has any difficulty in parsing to mean "use again". The diaresis just looks strange and interrupts the flow while the reader thinks, "What's that doing there?" It's at best archaic and, these days, verging on plain wrong.
    – David Richerby
    8 hours ago








  • 1




    The "reüse" thing is pure distracting nonsense. See here, here, and here. You won't find a diaeresis anywhere. Similarly "reëntry."
    – T.J. Crowder
    7 hours ago








  • 2




    I fully support Alex's right to his diæreses. Yes, they look a bit affected; but that is surely his choice? I rather like them myself.
    – TonyK
    5 hours ago








8




8




Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above the u in the word reüse doesn't help anybody pronounce it correctly and only reïnforces an impression that the poster may be a bit of a pretentious hypercorrectiïst™. But that's just a hypothesis...
– leftaroundabout
15 hours ago






Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above the u in the word reüse doesn't help anybody pronounce it correctly and only reïnforces an impression that the poster may be a bit of a pretentious hypercorrectiïst™. But that's just a hypothesis...
– leftaroundabout
15 hours ago














@leftaroundabout Both forms are equally valid in English. If feel that the diæresis (to use an alternate spelling) plays a useful role and thus I often use it. I prefer to reserve hyphenation for certain compound words and the like.
– Alex Hajnal
15 hours ago




@leftaroundabout Both forms are equally valid in English. If feel that the diæresis (to use an alternate spelling) plays a useful role and thus I often use it. I prefer to reserve hyphenation for certain compound words and the like.
– Alex Hajnal
15 hours ago




2




2




It's not useful at all. "Reuse" is a completely normal English word, which nobody has any difficulty in parsing to mean "use again". The diaresis just looks strange and interrupts the flow while the reader thinks, "What's that doing there?" It's at best archaic and, these days, verging on plain wrong.
– David Richerby
8 hours ago






It's not useful at all. "Reuse" is a completely normal English word, which nobody has any difficulty in parsing to mean "use again". The diaresis just looks strange and interrupts the flow while the reader thinks, "What's that doing there?" It's at best archaic and, these days, verging on plain wrong.
– David Richerby
8 hours ago






1




1




The "reüse" thing is pure distracting nonsense. See here, here, and here. You won't find a diaeresis anywhere. Similarly "reëntry."
– T.J. Crowder
7 hours ago






The "reüse" thing is pure distracting nonsense. See here, here, and here. You won't find a diaeresis anywhere. Similarly "reëntry."
– T.J. Crowder
7 hours ago






2




2




I fully support Alex's right to his diæreses. Yes, they look a bit affected; but that is surely his choice? I rather like them myself.
– TonyK
5 hours ago




I fully support Alex's right to his diæreses. Yes, they look a bit affected; but that is surely his choice? I rather like them myself.
– TonyK
5 hours ago











3














The rocket passes through the dense layers of the atmosphere in the first tens of seconds after launch. Further, these wings are ineffective. Baikal (on render) is a reusable rocket plane. Most of the time being in dense layers of the atmosphere.






share|improve this answer





















  • Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
    – Muze
    11 hours ago
















3














The rocket passes through the dense layers of the atmosphere in the first tens of seconds after launch. Further, these wings are ineffective. Baikal (on render) is a reusable rocket plane. Most of the time being in dense layers of the atmosphere.






share|improve this answer





















  • Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
    – Muze
    11 hours ago














3












3








3






The rocket passes through the dense layers of the atmosphere in the first tens of seconds after launch. Further, these wings are ineffective. Baikal (on render) is a reusable rocket plane. Most of the time being in dense layers of the atmosphere.






share|improve this answer












The rocket passes through the dense layers of the atmosphere in the first tens of seconds after launch. Further, these wings are ineffective. Baikal (on render) is a reusable rocket plane. Most of the time being in dense layers of the atmosphere.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 12 hours ago









A. Rumlin

4493




4493












  • Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
    – Muze
    11 hours ago


















  • Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
    – Muze
    11 hours ago
















Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
– Muze
11 hours ago




Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
– Muze
11 hours ago











2














Vertically launched rockets need thrust (force in the direction of motion), not lift (force perpendicular to it). Wings can only provide lift and drag (force against the direction of motion), and a vertically launched rocket needs neither of those things. What an orbital rocket does need is speed so the less drag the better.






share|improve this answer























  • Just expanded your argument a bit. Feel free to roll back if you like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    7 hours ago










  • All this answer does for me is make me ponder the wisdom of a horizontally launched rocket, not convince me that wings are unwise. After all, wouldn't it be really great if our (horizontally-aimed) thruster could do double-duty of speeding us up to orbital speeds and giving us a source of lift to gain altitude at the same time?
    – Daniel Wagner
    51 mins ago
















2














Vertically launched rockets need thrust (force in the direction of motion), not lift (force perpendicular to it). Wings can only provide lift and drag (force against the direction of motion), and a vertically launched rocket needs neither of those things. What an orbital rocket does need is speed so the less drag the better.






share|improve this answer























  • Just expanded your argument a bit. Feel free to roll back if you like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    7 hours ago










  • All this answer does for me is make me ponder the wisdom of a horizontally launched rocket, not convince me that wings are unwise. After all, wouldn't it be really great if our (horizontally-aimed) thruster could do double-duty of speeding us up to orbital speeds and giving us a source of lift to gain altitude at the same time?
    – Daniel Wagner
    51 mins ago














2












2








2






Vertically launched rockets need thrust (force in the direction of motion), not lift (force perpendicular to it). Wings can only provide lift and drag (force against the direction of motion), and a vertically launched rocket needs neither of those things. What an orbital rocket does need is speed so the less drag the better.






share|improve this answer














Vertically launched rockets need thrust (force in the direction of motion), not lift (force perpendicular to it). Wings can only provide lift and drag (force against the direction of motion), and a vertically launched rocket needs neither of those things. What an orbital rocket does need is speed so the less drag the better.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 7 hours ago









Alex Hajnal

1,106317




1,106317










answered 8 hours ago









David Richerby

733916




733916












  • Just expanded your argument a bit. Feel free to roll back if you like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    7 hours ago










  • All this answer does for me is make me ponder the wisdom of a horizontally launched rocket, not convince me that wings are unwise. After all, wouldn't it be really great if our (horizontally-aimed) thruster could do double-duty of speeding us up to orbital speeds and giving us a source of lift to gain altitude at the same time?
    – Daniel Wagner
    51 mins ago


















  • Just expanded your argument a bit. Feel free to roll back if you like.
    – Alex Hajnal
    7 hours ago










  • All this answer does for me is make me ponder the wisdom of a horizontally launched rocket, not convince me that wings are unwise. After all, wouldn't it be really great if our (horizontally-aimed) thruster could do double-duty of speeding us up to orbital speeds and giving us a source of lift to gain altitude at the same time?
    – Daniel Wagner
    51 mins ago
















Just expanded your argument a bit. Feel free to roll back if you like.
– Alex Hajnal
7 hours ago




Just expanded your argument a bit. Feel free to roll back if you like.
– Alex Hajnal
7 hours ago












All this answer does for me is make me ponder the wisdom of a horizontally launched rocket, not convince me that wings are unwise. After all, wouldn't it be really great if our (horizontally-aimed) thruster could do double-duty of speeding us up to orbital speeds and giving us a source of lift to gain altitude at the same time?
– Daniel Wagner
51 mins ago




All this answer does for me is make me ponder the wisdom of a horizontally launched rocket, not convince me that wings are unwise. After all, wouldn't it be really great if our (horizontally-aimed) thruster could do double-duty of speeding us up to orbital speeds and giving us a source of lift to gain altitude at the same time?
– Daniel Wagner
51 mins ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































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.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33152%2fcould-rockets-launched-from-the-ground-use-wings-in-the-stages%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







Popular posts from this blog

Accessing regular linux commands in Huawei's Dopra Linux

Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down

Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal Exception in Interrupt