2 ms·
Hm, if fuel is so cheap then why not bring enough fuel with you to decelerate before de-orbiting? Then you don't have to worry about reentry heat.
by TheEzEzz 16y ago
Hm, if fuel is so cheap then why not bring enough fuel with you to decelerate before de-orbiting? Then you don't have to worry about reentry heat.
- jbri 16y agoBecause if you want to take fuel with you, that's a lot of extra mass you have to lift. Which requires bigger engines and even more fuel.
- TheEzEzz 16y ago53 metric tons worth of fuel? The fuel requirements to decelerate are much lower than the requirements to reach orbit, for multiple reasons. You aren't fighting against gravity, your weight is greatly reduced (having burnt the fuel to get to orbit), and you also don't need to fully decelerate, only decelerate sufficiently to avoid burn-up upon reentry. The original comment said that fuel was very cheap, and the primary expense was constructing the launch vehicle. Suppose it required five times as much fuel to be able to launch a rocket with sufficient additional fuel to be able to decelerate out of orbit. Wouldn't this still be much more economical if it meant the ability to easily reuse the launch vehicle after reentry?