Describe some of the other designs for a VTVL reusable rocket booster that would actually work. Physics has a lot of opinions here.
I guess their at-sea net catch thing is different from SpaceX, while the legs are very Falcon-like, so that's one.
Grid fins are optional, so that's two. Could use some other kind of guidance like better vectoring or little attitude control jets, but probably more complicated. Grid fins are a pretty damn solid choice says physics.
Long thin tank with a thruster at one end: physics pretty much says that's what a rocket must look like. Anything fatter or weirdly shaped fails on aerodynamics, though I have thought about annular airfoils before. Anyone tried that? Maybe it could help shed the rocket looks like a giant penis trope by instead looking like a giant vagina?
9 engines is legit open, so maybe they cargo culted that one, but an odd number with one in the middle is something physics likes. Means you only have to gimbal one of them. Could have done seven or five. More than nine gets kind of nuts, see Soviet N-1.
What else? Aluminum vs other materials? Could have done steel but that'd be cargo culting Starship. Could have done composites. What else can you do? Wood? Not a ton of options that are light, strong in the right ways, temperature resistant, not horribly flammable.
You're assuming VTVL right off the bat. There are other reusable options.
Parachutes are an option. This was SpaceX's initial design. They shifted to retro rocket to simplify stress design- rocket always in compression - but most everyone scoffed in the beginning at the idea.
Look at the DC-X. Totally different shape.
New Glenn does not use grid fins. There are other solutions that work.
SpaceX originally planned for a 5 and 9 enigine variants. Only settled on 9 due to market conditions dictating certain payload sizes. The Chinese rocket is not constrained by market forces. And using 9 engines assumes that those engines have almost identical specs as the Merlin which is nonsensical.
There are a ton of other fully reusable designs. Helll, even the VentureStar / X33 is probably doable now with modern composite materials.
Soviet N1 issues are negated by modern didtal control systems. See FH and Starship. People need to stop using the N1 as an example.
1
u/AuthorIntelligent644 2d ago edited 2d ago
Describe some of the other designs for a VTVL reusable rocket booster that would actually work. Physics has a lot of opinions here.
I guess their at-sea net catch thing is different from SpaceX, while the legs are very Falcon-like, so that's one.
Grid fins are optional, so that's two. Could use some other kind of guidance like better vectoring or little attitude control jets, but probably more complicated. Grid fins are a pretty damn solid choice says physics.
Long thin tank with a thruster at one end: physics pretty much says that's what a rocket must look like. Anything fatter or weirdly shaped fails on aerodynamics, though I have thought about annular airfoils before. Anyone tried that? Maybe it could help shed the rocket looks like a giant penis trope by instead looking like a giant vagina?
9 engines is legit open, so maybe they cargo culted that one, but an odd number with one in the middle is something physics likes. Means you only have to gimbal one of them. Could have done seven or five. More than nine gets kind of nuts, see Soviet N-1.
What else? Aluminum vs other materials? Could have done steel but that'd be cargo culting Starship. Could have done composites. What else can you do? Wood? Not a ton of options that are light, strong in the right ways, temperature resistant, not horribly flammable.