The Crazy Way Scientists Launch Rockets From Balloons
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 бер 2017
- Large chemical rockets are needed to launch payloads into space from the ground, but could rockoons, rocket balloons, be a more efficient alternative?
Pluto Could Be Made A Planet Again, Along With 102 Other Celestial Bodies - • Pluto Could Be Made A ...
Sign Up For The Seeker Newsletter Here - bit.ly/1UO1PxI
Read More:
Rockoon
www.astronautix.com/r/rockoon....
"The Rockoon (balloon-launched rocket) consisted of a small high-performance sounding rocket launched from a balloon above most of the atmosphere. The Rockoon low-cost technique was conceived during an Aerobee firing cruse of the Norton Sound in March 1949. Rockoons were first launched from icebreaker Eastwind off Greenland by an ONR group under James A. Van Allen."
Bloostar - How We Do It
www.zero2infinity.space/bloost...
"The balloon lifts the rocket through the densest parts of the atmosphere. Instead of fighting gravity, we use it to our advantage. The rocket only ignites in almost-vacuum conditions, where there is virtually no drag and rockets work at full efficiency. We can also accommodate a larger payload than usual. This is the environmentally friendly way to put satellites into precise orbits!"
Development of the First Sounding Rockets
history.nasa.gov/SP-4401/ch4.htm
"Rockoons have been mentioned several times in the preceding pages, particularly in connection with the Deacon rocket. The Deacons were used on most rockoons, but a rockoon is actually the combination of any balloon with any rocket. The rockoon concept seems to have been originated by Lt. M. L. (Lee) Lewis during a conversation with S. F. Singer and George Halvorson during the Aerobee firing cruise of the U.S.S. Norton Sound in March 1949. The basic idea is to lift a small sounding rocket high above the dense atmosphere with a large balloon in the Skyhook class."
____________________
Seeker inspires us to see the world through the lens of science and evokes a sense of curiosity, optimism and adventure.
Watch More Seeker on our website www.seeker.com/shows/
Subscribe now! ua-cam.com/users/subscription_c...
Seeker on Twitter / seeker
Trace Dominguez on Twitter / tracedominguez
Seeker on Facebook / seekermedia
Seeker on Google+ plus.google.com/u/0/+dnews
Seeker www.seeker.com/
Sign Up For The Seeker Newsletter Here: bit.ly/1UO1PxI
Special thanks to Amy Shira Teitel for hosting and writing this episode of Seeker!
Check Amy out on Twitter: / astvintagespace - Наука та технологія
And here I thought I was the very first to think of this method! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Me too
I think everyone who thinks of it thinks they've hit on a brand new method. And we all meet here on UA-cam seeing how very wrong we were!
Me too 😅😅
12:40 AM the idea hit me and i immediately found this..lol
Mee too
When they need a live passenger, I'd volunteer as tribute.
Yeah no more incident cause of rocket fuel exploding.this ways is safest.why nasa didnt just use this method
Raccoon on a rockoon
I always thought the balloon approach would be good.I'm glad to hear it is being tried!
The problem with balloons is they can only carry about 5000lbs(2300kg), the rockets would have to have a small payload. Hydrogen/oxygen powered rocket motors are non-toxic, they produce water.
Well, not exactly. Have in mind that 30km. is not considered high altitude as far as high altitude balloon go and I think you're quoting some such kind of info. Possible payloads must be much higher now. I can't say for sure how heavy, but have some firm data from a now old project done around the turn of the century with 1990 technology and it was absolutely feasible to get 4500kg. up to 32km. and the limiting factor was the size of the manufacturing facility. Extrapolating from that data it is very probable that one can assist a 7000kg. rocket to something like 27km. By the way this is for a single balloon, one can imagine some kind of a multiple balloon system, right?
Isn't that relative to the size of balloon? What was the payload of an average Zeppelin?
It had a total lift capacity of 87,000 kg (192,000 lb) with a usable payload of 15,000 kg (33,000 lb)@@MatthewBendyna
This does not address the delta v problem. Sure you can get fairly high, but you still need to get moving sideways at high velocity or your rocket will just end up losing all the altitude it gained from a balloon flight, not to mention the rocket will still have to be of substantial size for even a modest payload, requiring an absolutely massive balloon. This could work for smaller rockets, but not for the usual payload.
This is only for sounding (suborbital) rockets.
I was watching the NASA channel and they are thinking about using balloons to slow down the first Mars capsule.It showed on t.v. a ship launching the capsule,then deploying some kind of balloons,after the balloons would slow down the capsule,the capsule would shoot off the balloons, then use parachutes to enter into the atmosphere of Mars,then a balloon landing for the artronaughts capsule to land safely on the surface of Mars.
Not necessarily,companies are working on using smaller balloons,but stacked on top of each other in a stack.The problem is the lack of Helium that is available on Earth.There is already plans on mining the moon,and even Mars for Helium 3 gas.
The balloons are only for tiny rockets for suborbital flight...Theres never even been a balloon large enough to lift a rocket with the delta v to reach orbital velocity anyway
Wonder how big of a balloon you'd need for 10+ tonnes of cargo...
Still pretty cheap compared to the actual rockets
Abou same size of Hindenburg which useful lift was 10 tons but its own construction was pretty heavy too.
Nope. Initial gas volume is comparable to the Hindenburg's and even a great amount less, but in order to allow for expansion the actual balloon volume must be approximate a hundred times larger.
as big as Rosie O Donald
Hindenburg.
I can't be the only one who understood Raccoon, right?!
Doggo the Great Correct!
Doggo the Great That fuckin name. I love it
Wolf-Jester Ah, the Homie Edward Snowden AKA Khan Ulfr Kuntz is always watching the interwebs
I know raccoon existing coz Metal gear soild
Amy should have worn HEAVY MASCARA for this vid.
very uplifting, thanks James Van Allen, Earth misses you
Congrats on the Tom Scott fill-in video, Amy! I ended up discovering that you have made a personal channel this year as well, very cool seeing behind the scenes of Vintage Space and also your boyfriend should start his own UA-cam channel, a very good, natural narrator hehe.
Nice video! I enjoy many aspects of it, not to mention the part where you used miles primarily :).
Bring back the bad puns!!!!!
no
lol
Yes, science + entertainment = DNews.
#BringBakeBadPuns
+Chris Ng
oh shit I wrote "Bake" instead of "Back"
so how much weight can one of these balloons lift? could it have lifted the shuttle for instance?
Can you guys bring back Seeker daily with unbiased news, we will love you forever
When will there be a Seeker Plus?
But you just save ~2000 m/s of Delta V right ? You still need ~7700 m/s to get to orbital velocity. Launching from ground costs you ~9500 m/s
yeah I agree I just like lots of fire
you need 2000 m vertically & against the pressure of the atmospheric air applied on your rocket .. compare them with 7700 m horizontally (no earth gravity) in the space with no atmospheric pressure .. 7700 m in the space with no energy loss
I think the video could have mentioned this, and why it's "more efficient". I can think of 2 reasons, the rocket avoids the drag in the lower atmosphere, and the optimal shape of the rocket nozzle or nozzles depends on the pressure. I'd have appreciated some numbers; I suppose that's not their format, but some percent would have fit IMO.
Can someone please explain me how the balloon has the power to lift the rocket? There is always the problem of gravity. It must be a gigantic balloon considering the pressure it would be under. Still, I did not fully understand this method but if a lot of space organizations don't use it or prefer the regular launch way, then I feel like it it's not as good as Seeker might be trying to make it out to be.
the rocket is heavy because
-it need a very gigantic amount of power to fight against the earth gravity , the atmospheric pressure & the air resistance ..... look to the volume of the rocket in the video how small it is
- it carry a heavy protective capsule to protect it from the air
- rockets must keep its momentum fast to work unlike balloon
- the balloon not only depend on the difference in destiny between helium & air ... but also the heat we apply inside the balloon ... this type of balloon is more simple than the balloons that used because it will use to go upward only (like the rocket) unlike the ordinary balloons that need to be balanced by heavy wights
- the space ships are not heavy as you think .. it must be light to be able to be carried to the space
Amateur Ham Radio were the first to hypothesize the existence of the Van Allen belts when they found out some signals were going all the way around the Earth - and that required a second plate to the ground plate that would be in the higher atmosphere. Knowing about the wavelengths used and the fact that these had to be changed from day to night gave them the idea.
I've wondered about this for a long time.
Seeker still exists, Yay!
wow! this idea is cool! why no one thought of it much early!!
We should build a maglev at a 45 degree angle exiting the peak of the tallest mountain on the equator. This location has more kinetic energy than anywhere else on earth. It is also above 1/2 the atmosphere. The maglev would launch a ramjet/scramjet powered craft at supersonic speed. This would enable a rocket to be launched at Mach 5+ and well over 100,000 feet without the use of any stored onboard oxygen getting it there. It would also make the first stage the maglev. The economics of this are very favorable in that small rockets to orbit are now the cheapest method to space. Think of this is packets on the internet or pods in a hyper-loop. It’s the opposite of a Saturn V
My favorite, non-traditional way of getting into space would have to be the Skylon spacecraft. Wikipedia has a great write-up of it.
Jules Verne's and later Gerald Bull's way of a giant canon is my favorite way of launching cargo into space. My variation is to use steam power to launch a capsule into orbit. Using a small nuke to super heat water into steam launching a projectile into space. It was done by accident during an underground test in the late 1950s. Done on purpose it would lower the cost of launching dense loads of material into space for very little cost. A hardened bunker with a pressure relief plug, the capsule, could be launched easily and the bunker/combustion chamber is a re use able. Some good engineers could do this. Studies have been done on using steam as a launch mechanism for lunar missions. Steam is extremely powerful and is something that we should be exploring more.
Can they use a zeppelin or blimp based launch system? If they do that, they can even launch several modules of the same space faring vehicles to be assembled in orbit before leaving for extraplanetary exploration in a more controlled and timely manner.
The Style and the way videos are presented are far more engaging than NowThis videos....
Favourite way to get into space? Cannon.
I'm really upset....for a second I thought this was an original idea of mine
Rockets aren't "environmentally disastrous" at all. In the Saturn 5, the kerosene burned with oxygen in exactly the same way that it would in a diesel engine, and the amount used in all 13 Saturn V launches was negligible compared with what's used in transportation. Jets alone use nearly 30 times as much kerosene EVERY SINGLE DAY as Saturn 5s used, and that was spread over about 4 years. Get some perspective.
In that case they should use hydrogen rocket technology to propel planes. I think that was the solution tried by the company Avro Canada, though the passenger cabin would have been limited in space (though perfect for soldiers), before the US bought the patents to bury the invention. They were called aerockets : they could be used both at moderate altitude and at orbital altitude. What costed most was not the distance but the speed.
BRING BACK SEEKER DAILY!!!
I didn't see a link to your personal channel in the description.
0:35 I have a functional toy rocket that looks EXACTLY like that.(except for the balloon)
When I was at Space School in 1998 at Brunel University And we had to launch 🚀 Model Rockets I had Idea 💡 of trying to Launch rocket from weather type Balloon 🚀 🎈
My favourite way to space would be an elevator...or an escalator
Anurag M D trampoline!
I understand, that you can get an Object higher with less Energy, but would´t you still need allot of fuel to get it in an orbit?
lol I'm so glad there's a follow-up video about the Van Allen belt(s). I need to form an argument to counter my coworkers absurd beliefs that "electronics can't handle it" not even the primitive electronics of the Apollo era. There's a reason why "radiation hardened" IC's are often based on older chips.
Yes, I love Rockoons and I love her!
I'm going to try getting into space with a giant catapult. Weeeeeee! 😂
I have NEVER even thought about this. But this sounds like a ingenious solution. BUT how massive of a balloon would you need to send something like a Space X Falcon to 20,000 m?
a paylod of 22,8t needs around 22800 cubic meters (not having calculated the weight of the envelope) which would resemble a cube with a length of 28 meters. But since the gas expands drastically in high altitudes, either the envelope must be designed to withstand higher pressure from within, or it needs to be almost empty. So at least a 100 meters in sidelength
Happy to see you again Amy.
Actually i think about it after the chandrayan 2 launch and i thought that I'm the only one who think about it then i suddenly feel like a scientist who invent something . But after saw your video my dreams breaks up
that was a good video, keep it up guys and girls, with love from india
That is such a good idea.
A small amount of helium HELL, party balloons use a small amount of helium.
james van allen made a time machine and a mind reading device, and stole my ideas.
the easiest and most energy efficient way to get to space is to realize you're already in it, riding 12000km wide rock.
The ONLY thing that NASA has ever successfully sent to space is your IMAGINATION 😁😆😁😆😁😆
Yea, but what if you want to go to another rock
What's about using giant sling shots to accomplish initial lift off?
appreciate your background music....
They didn't lose that data still going strong 😂
That gives an entirely another meaning to rocket raccoon !!!!
Would an O motor be enough or smaller be enough?
I’m thinking about the comment she made about the sun heating the helium to fill the rest of the balloon. While yes, the sun dies impart a small amount of energy heating the helium, it should be obvious that 99.99% of the expansion is due to the lower atmospheric pressure at higher altitudes. In fact, my guess would be that the highest temperature the helium reaches is close to the ground because of rapidly decreasing temperature as you gain altitude. I’m not sure about the extremely high altitudes though. I do know that E.V.A space suits have to deal with large temperature differentials due to the heating of the sun and there being no air to transfer the heat, thereby relying solely on heat radiation as a means to dissipate the heat.
I think the main problem is the structural integrity of the balloon🎈. The more expansion is allowed to happen, the higher you go. Just wont get any higher if the ballon pops.💥 Solution Origami balloons.?
this would be amazing
I can't imagine this method working for large and heavy cargo...
Now somewhere in the black mining hills of Dakota there lived a young boy name of Rocky Rockoon-a...
How's the research into a space elevator going?
Anyone know the altitude at which the whole earth is shown?
No one's gonna make a balloon the size of the empire state building to launch astronauts into space.
When will we harness the power of those flying saucers? Those things are so environment friendly.
One of the problems with these launches is that it was only capable of carrying 150Kg while most satellites are a couple thousand kilograms. To be able to carry one of these large satellite along with a rocket stage to complete its orbit, they require a really big balloon and a lot of helium. Another problem is that there was a helium shortage last year (I don’t know if it is still going on) so the price of helium will increase which will increase the cost of each flight as well. But that is my opinion.
unpopular opinion: use hydrogen instead of helium, it is not the hindenburg
These balloons seem good but really restricted in terms of payload. I doubt we'll ever see them float full blown shuttles or satellites.
BUT as payloads get smaller (and lighter) you will be able to do more and more with this method or with launches from planes. And if I'm right that launching this way from near the equator will be even better, that could be a factor too.
No one launches satellites with rockets period ONLY balloons!!! SHE LIES and probably DOESN’T KNOW IT!!! Search balloon satellite launch
@@brandonmccullough6381 thank you! SO glad someone else on here knows that!!!
I swear to god i had this exact idea like 5 years ago! Knew "they" should and would do it! :)
was done in 1952......
Vintage space????!!!! *Mind blown*
BRILLIANT!!
We need a space elevator!!
So what's the max lift weight of a balloon?
At the beginning of the video, the film has a bug crawling on the left side? What is that
Zepplins! On Steroids!
So this means we can't watch those iconic "5,4,3,2,1 ignition" moments. Feels kinda sad
I am using a Rockoon to get daredevil Mad Mike Hughes up to the Karmon Line. This is so he can determine if the Earth is flat or a globe. A television show will tell the story next year. It is called "Home made astronauts."
I'd like to see them lift a Saturn 5 rocket with a balloon! Anyone got a spare country for the space required to make this thing?
old technology can be really good. a smaller simpler example is the headphone Jack.
that's super old. but since it's so good, that we get mad when apple doesn't include it.
I just like to hold my bladder until it's critical mass, then I fly off like a water rocket.
I cannot take the word 'rockoon' seriously. Sounds like a pretty good way of getting light fragile payloads into orbit, though. Now, someone just needs to bankroll a space gun for the opposite kind of cargo.
why can we just use large calibre guns to shoot things into low earth orbit. if I'm not mistaken the Paris gun was the first object to ever launch something into the stratosphere, so why not just upscale something like that
Firing a fuel tank and rocket motor from a big gun sounds a little dangerous, maybe someone has done it in Kerbal Space Program
You are right. But the device would have to be massive. The best way to do that honestly is with a rail gun. Preferably, if not required to be, magnetic. Think of a maglev train but the end of the track points up. One you get to about as high as your gonna get, activate the rocket. Uses less fuel than traditional rockets but you are still fighting with gravity and shaking things inside the rocket. But you're not wrong. What you are talking about has been designed before, except as a missile launcher. So yes, the idea is sound. And yes, we have the tech. But it is horribly expensive to build a device like this.
We actually kinda can. What you're describing is called a mass driver, something that works like a rail gun to sling things into orbit. The problem on Earth is that our thick atmosphere will create a ton of resistance, so the momentum alone isn't enough to get into orbit. There are designs for configurations where we'd accelerate a hybrid rocket/scramjet vehicle up to high speed so that when it exits the mass driver, it's fast enough to continue on its own until it gets out into space and can start to use its rocket engine. The problem isn't even the cost. Even though it'd be expensive, it'd still be cheaper than the $1.5 trillion F-35 program. As usual, there's just no desire to go and build such a thing.
Building one on the moon or Mars would be very effective, especially the moon. A thin atmosphere or no atmosphere means you can just chuck objects into orbits anywhere in the solar system (given enough energy) all day long, using nothing but solar power.
Matthew Olenik tnx for the reply I learned something :D
You have to figure out how to build satellites that can withstand the hundreds or thousands of Gs that the projectile would experience.
Seeker- can you do an update please? I’m curious why this method isn’t used more. What are the limitations/disadvantages vs a pure rocket or pure balloon?
Well, i am not a rocket scientist, but i think it has to do with just how much variables launch like this adds and heavy limitations on the weight you can reasonably expect it to lift. Baloons are really dependant on the wind direction, which complicates the trajectory calculations, and since wind is not exactly predictable and it can drift reaaaaly far while it's reaching the desired height it can be really dangerous to launch theese(imagine a few tons of failed baloon launch falling on your house, woud you be happy about it?). The weight limitation also adds rather big complications since rocket still needs to be quite big, and you still need to carry an actuall payload too. As far as i know the only payload delivered by this method weigh only 100kg and are launched only into the low orbit, which on the first glance sounds like a lot, but it's actually isn't. Just to give you a sense of scale 100kg is a upper limit of "nano" satelite by nasa clasification, which is the second to smallest weight class "piko".
I got the same idea after watching weather balloon videos.
So how would we get anything beyond a small rocket into the air, much less space, if it's carried by a balloon? It seems kind of flimsy and like it wouldn't be able to carry any large amount of weight necessary for something like a satellite or materials for a potential colony. Certainly not people to inhabit that future colony. So what would we do about that? Would we just use a bigger balloon, or groups of balloons? Like maybe a zeppelin or something?
We've sent manned capsules to the edge of space with balloons before. Large space projects and deep space projects would still need to be launched by heavy rockets. However, there are hundreds of low earth orbit science packages waiting to have rides into space piggy backed on large unrelated payloads. Most of these small science, research and commercial satellites have been reduced to the size of shoeboxes weighing a few kilos, or much, much smaller. Google, pico, micro and cube satellites. It's fun to think and dream big of industrial use of space, but in the here and now, there is a commercial and practical opportunity to launch 2 kilos into space for less then $10k, anytime you want. If what you want is low earth orbit.
we need to send some people who believe the Earth is Flat up in one
Bring SEEKER DAILY back.....please
Did i just watched a Vintage Space video or what?
I'm not sure how it could work, but I hope scientists will soon find a a cheaper and less consuming way to go to space, it doesn't really matter if it's not fancy or if it's old-style.
The problem is that rockets need hydrogen to work which is a rare earth gas,same with Heleum.The only way we can get Heleum back is to find a way to recycle nuclear waste,or create an artifical sun on earth.
Or just get Helium from space, there's plenty of it there :D
The further you are away from the earth the effect of gravity lessens so you need less thrust to achieve orbital velocity .Seems like a very cheap way to launch things into space. You could have as many balloons as you like. Another application would be to use balloons to support a space elevator?
Weird footage when it appears we see the globe. Seems like we’d see more defined, whole continents
Even it will reduce air pollution done by rocket on earth
Its a cheapest way of launching a rocket into space using a balloon. When it reach the outer atmosphere, then the rocket is release saving enough fuel. Or instead using rocket fuel maybe used the solar sail or kite.
I was thinking of some kind of sub orbital space plane. Or a space shuttle.
I find digging is the best way to get to space.
I had the idea of using balloons (like a rockoon) to carry an aircraft up to the stratosphere and travel at hypersonic speeds. The balloons filled with hydrogen to be pulled into the aircraft to be used as fuel .
The balloons come out of the wings out of the back and behind the cockpit of the aircraft to create a balanced lift. Completely fill the balloons. As the loss of atmospheric pressure makes the balloons expand pump in the hydrogen equivalently into a storage tank.
Leave a small amount of hydrogen in the balloon and burn them up. Not junk
When at altitude fire up the hydrogen rockets to blast to hypersonic speed. I'm not sure how much oxygen is at the that altitude. Onboard oxygen might be needed for the rocket burn.
There is going to be a company offering "rockoon" launches, and their spokesanimal will be a raccoon. It has to happen eventually.
With the worldwide helium shortage this doesn't seem like a very viable long term solution. Once helium escapes the atmosphere its gone for good.
Dan Y I was just thinking about that; I don't even think it's a good idea right now, no matter how much cheaper it is... Helium is important for medicine, so balloons, voice distortions and other fun things should not even be considered... One day Helium will be gone.
use hydrogen instead
What's scarier to think, we are all alone in the universe. Or were not alone.
I don't know if I believe this is possible, the size of the balloon needed to lift a rocket would be massive. for example, the Saturn 5 rocket weighed 2,950 metric tons. I don't know what gas would be used in the balloon and any properties with it. I think this would be a job for Thunderf00t.
You're forgetting that the Saturn 5 was mostly lifting the fuel required to get it up in the stratosphere. This was also the problem with the Shuttle since you were compounding the fuel needed to get the space truck into orbit with the fuel needed to get that fuel off the pad.
this is true
i always imagined giant railguns to be the answer.
seems like this method could only be effectively used for very light low earth orbit satillites, you're not going to get a gps satellite into geostationary orbit with this
good to see you amy ;)
Shoot me to the moon via cannon
The guardians of the galaxy predicted this. Racoons in space!
its nice to see amy and trace are the host of seeker... where's jules and the the other jule ?
The animation at the end of the video is awesome!! Love the new 'Seeker' style!
Van Allen was a boss lol.
Gerald bull builded a cannon in the early 80's . Why we don't use cannon?