4 ms·
Seems more practical to use conventional transport to go to and from the rig, such as a helicopter. A crash with a rocket is both more likely and more devastat
by nwah1 6y ago
Seems more practical to use conventional transport to go to and from the rig, such as a helicopter.
A crash with a rocket is both more likely and more devastating, and thus should happen away from population centers. Even if the return trip is less noisy.
Also rockets pollute, which is another reason to keep them far away from people.
- inetknght 6y ago> Also rockets pollute, which is another reason to keep them far away from people. Some rocket engines use oxygen & hydrogen fuels which, after combustion, turn into water. I'm not sure I'd count water as pollution.
- Azrael3000 6y agoThe last point you make is only partially true. The Starship is using Methane and Oxygen and produces mostly CO2 and Water as output. Since they plan to produce propellant using the Sabatier process using renewable energy you get a nearly closed cycle. There's a fantastic video by EverydayAstronaut on Youtube about this topic.
- penagwin 6y ago> Also rockets pollute, which is another reason to keep them far away from people. The falcon rocket's use RP-1 which is kerosene, so the exhaust is just H20, and C02 - Granted C02 isn't great, but it isn't too toxic.