why are we still designing rockets with the same shape (cylinder/nose cone)? Do we still not have the technology to send up boxier/flatter objects with thrusters on like the 4 corners, making for more stable landing and re take off?
In: Physics
Ever heard the phrase “flies like a brick”?
Turns out, having an aerodynamic shape lets you use much less fuel and thrust than trying to fly a literal airbrake at Mach 10. Much less being measured in the “hundred tons of fuel” category.
As for stability: cubes tumble like absolute cunts. A pointed tube mostly stays on course by itself. In vacuum, none of it matters, especially since when the fairing is blown off the payload, what is under it is rarely rocket-shaped anyways.
Latest Answers