How many pounds of thrust is needed to lift a 1 pound rocket into orbit?
Most of the answers are correct. The thrust needed is one pound to get nowhere, plus a bit more to get somewhere. A crude calculation neglecting fuel burn and trajectory turnover is that orbital velocity is 26,000 ft/sec, a thrust of N+1 pounds will accelerate the rocket at 32N ft/sec2, so it needs to be kept up for about 800/N seconds. Take your pick: 2 pounds for 13 minutes, 10 pounds for a minute and a half, or whatever you like in between.
Which requires less fuel, launching a rocket from the moon or from earth? Why?
This is a "weighty" question - LOL The difference is that a rocket, (and everything else), on the Moon only weighs 1/5 as much as it does on Earth. Also, since there is essentially no atmosphere on the Moon, there is almost no air drag to slow down a rocket being launched from the Moon like there is on Earth.
How much energy do we need to launch a rocket from the moon to the Earth?
We need lunar escape speed plus a tiny bit. So about 2,400 m/s. Doing the arithmetic, about 2.88 MJ/kg.But that answer is quite wrong. The true answer is that it depends on the exhaust speed of the rocket motor, which in turn depends mainly on the chemical reaction it uses. You can computer the answer from that and the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation - Wikipedia
Why is it easier to launch a rocket on the moon than the Earth?
There are three things which make rocket launches easier on the moon. The first is the lack of an atmosphere. This removes atmospheric drag, which on Earth takes a lot of thrust to compensate for. This reduces the amount of fuel required. Second is that the Moon's gravity is 1/6 the gravity on Earth, this means you can use smaller, more efficient rocket engines, further reducing the fuel required. The last is a byproduct of the Moon's lower gravity, is that the orbital speed required for a stable orbit around the moon is easier to achieve than a stable orbit around the Earth.
Lifting a rocket off the moon or earth?
A rocket launching from earth needs enough power to overcome gravity and air resistance. The gravitational force on the moon is very much less than that on earth and therefore requires less energy to overcome,to add to that there is no air at all on the moon,so there is no frictional forces. In conclusion,on the moon it is very much easier
If we were to launch a manned mission to the moon today, would we need the thrust equivalent of the Saturn V or would technological advancements mean the payload weight is much less?
There’s no right answer.But assuming you want to basically recreate the Saturn V, we’d go with the uprated F-1A engines. The F-1 the original Saturn Vs used has a SI of 2.58 km/s and a thrust of 6.77MN.The F-1A engine was uprated to 8MN. This would mean a significant boost in payload.That combined with more modern materials, such as either carbon fiber for the tanks, or Li-AL allow like was used in the later Space Shuttle ET tanks would also increase the payload.Your CSM and LM would be a bit lighter because of the better electronics. This means more payload to the Moon.That said, we’d build something else (and are, SLS, even though I’d doubt it would fly).
How much soda and mentos would a person need to make a rocket ship go to the moon?
A two liter bottle of coke and mentos wouldn't be able to lift itself off the ground, let alone a rocket to the Moon. I would put the thrust provided by such a reaction at about 20 N, goid enough to push the soda to 10 or 15 feet, compare that to the 1st stage of the Saturn V rocket, which produced roughly 35,100 kN. That is nearly 2 million times more thrust. To produce enough thrust to get to the Moon you need reactions more typically found between combustible fuels and oxidizers, such as Oxygen and Hydrogen.
How much fuel is needed to put a rocket into space?
Note: Wait a few seconds for the answer to fully load. This contains LaTeX type mathematical formulae.There are thousands of factors influencing the amount of propellants (fuel + oxidiser) in a Rocket. Some critical details are missing, such as Payload Mass, Launch Vehicle Type, Destination Orbit etc.An analogue to this question is, How much fuel is needed to drive a car to Canada?Which car? Where’s your starting point? Where in Canada?At least partly, this question could be answered using one equation, Формула Циолковского - Tsiolkovskiy’s Rocket Equation[math]\Delta V \; = \; V_e \cdot ln \left(\frac{M_o}{M_f}\right)[/math]Here,[math]\Delta V[/math] is the required change in velocity. [math]V_e[/math] is the effective exhaust velocity[math]M_o[/math] is the total initial mass of the rocket[math]M_f[/math] is the final mass of the rocket, after the propellants are expendedThus, the required propellant mass, [math]M_p = M_o - M_f[/math][math]\Delta V[/math] is calculated first by accounting for the Orbital manoeuvres required to achieve the desired Orbit from the starting point on the ground.Effective exhaust velocity, [math]V_e[/math], is the product of Specific Impulse [math]I_{sp}[/math] and gravitational acceleration [math]g_o[/math]For a multistage rocket, the equation can be modified as:[math]\Delta V \; = \; \displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^{N} I_i \cdot ln \left( \frac{M_o + \sum_{j=1}^{N} M_{1j}}{M_o + M_{2i} - M_{1i} + \sum_{j=1}^{N} M_{1j}} \right)[/math]Where,[math]M_{1i}[/math] is the total initial mass of the i-th stage.[math]M_{2i}[/math] is the final mass of the i-th stage after the propellants have been expended.So, [math]M_{1i} - M_{2i}[/math] should give us the propellant mass for the i-th stage.
How much did the Apollo weigh, and how much thrust was needed to boost it without leaving any sand disturbed at the Moon landing site?
Howdy Sam!Let’s look at the Apollo Lunar Module:Apollo Lunar Module - WikipediaLaunch mass (extended mission): 36,200 lbs.So on the Earth, the LM weighed 36,200 lbs.It weighed 6033 lbs (give or take) on the Moon.The ascent stage, the part that actually lifted off from the moon, was 10,300 lbs.1,717 lbs (again, give or take) in lunar gravity.Here’s the stats on the Ascent Propulsion System (APS) from the article:APS propellant mass: 5,187 lb (2,353 kg)APS engine: Bell Aerospace LM Ascent Engine (LMAE) & Rocketdyne LMAE InjectorsAPS thrust: 3,500 lbf (16,000 N)APS propellants: Aerozine 50 fuel / nitrogen tetroxide oxidizerAPS pressurant: two 6.4 lb (2.9 kg) helium tanks at 3,000 pounds per square inch (21 MPa)APS specific impulse: 311 s (3,050 N·s/kg)APS delta-V: 7,280 ft/s (2,220 m/s)Thrust-to-weight ratio at liftoff: 2.124 (in lunar gravity)I’m not sure where “sand” enters into the subject. Lunar regolith is actually very much like a fine powder. Compacted dust, mostly.As for it being “undisturbed”?It wasn’t.Though the LM descent engine cut off just before the lander touched down, it did manage to raise a fair amount of dust. Not much of a “blast mark” to see. When Apollo 12 landed near the Surveyor 3, the astronauts walked out to Surveyor and didn’t see any regolith disturbed by the Surveyor’s rockets. Probably because the rockets were shut off about 15 feet (barely more than a second) before touchdown.The surveyor’s foot pads did make an impression in the lunar soil. In fact, they’re pretty sure Surveyor 3 bounced once before settling on the lunar surface.Now the Apollo ascent engine also raised some dust. That much is visible from the footage of the Apollo 15, 16, and 17 LM liftoffs. But the ascent engine was never in contact with the lunar surface. The LM launched from the platform provided by the descent stage and landing legs.Edit: As interesting as the comment-dialogue between myself and Sam has become…I think we’ll just disable further comments on this one. I believe it’s for the best.