Could rockets launched from the ground use wings in the stages?
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
Source: Keith Blenman blogpost
SpaceX BFR
Source: SpaceX via Wikimedia, public domain
X-37B
Source: xairforces.net
Baikal flyback booster with second stage
The flyback wing is stowed above and parallel to the fuselage
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
|
show 8 more comments
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
Source: Keith Blenman blogpost
SpaceX BFR
Source: SpaceX via Wikimedia, public domain
X-37B
Source: xairforces.net
Baikal flyback booster with second stage
The flyback wing is stowed above and parallel to the fuselage
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
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
|
show 8 more comments
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
Source: Keith Blenman blogpost
SpaceX BFR
Source: SpaceX via Wikimedia, public domain
X-37B
Source: xairforces.net
Baikal flyback booster with second stage
The flyback wing is stowed above and parallel to the fuselage
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
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
Source: Keith Blenman blogpost
SpaceX BFR
Source: SpaceX via Wikimedia, public domain
X-37B
Source: xairforces.net
Baikal flyback booster with second stage
The flyback wing is stowed above and parallel to the fuselage
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
rockets artificial-satellite engine-design aerodynamics stages
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
|
show 8 more comments
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
|
show 8 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
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.
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
add a comment |
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.
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.
8
Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above theu
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
|
show 2 more comments
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.
Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
– Muze
11 hours ago
add a comment |
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.
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
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
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.
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
add a comment |
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.
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
add a comment |
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.
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.
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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.
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.
8
Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above theu
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
|
show 2 more comments
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.
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.
8
Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above theu
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
|
show 2 more comments
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.
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.
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.
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.
edited 10 hours ago
answered 17 hours ago
Alex Hajnal
1,106317
1,106317
8
Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above theu
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
|
show 2 more comments
8
Naïvely speaking, I would think that the diæresis above theu
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
|
show 2 more comments
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.
Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
– Muze
11 hours ago
add a comment |
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.
Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
– Muze
11 hours ago
add a comment |
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.
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.
answered 12 hours ago
A. Rumlin
4493
4493
Yes like the lower rocket stages +1
– Muze
11 hours ago
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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.
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
add a comment |
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.
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
add a comment |
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.
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.
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
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