Artemis splash down

[colnerov]

I never knew that.

Makes me wonder how a jet plane moves down the runway - surely as soon as the thrust is increased with the plane standing still it would blow all the air out the way and there would be nothing left to thrust against ?

Yes but, it's sucking more in the front again.

 

[Onoff]

Yes but, it's sucking more in the front again.

So what about a firework rocket?

 

[Pigeon_Droppings2]

Was it the New York times that famously published an apology in 1969?...having previously claimed that rockets couldn't work in the vacuum of space because they would have nothing to push against?

 

[fizzy]

So what about a firework rocket?

Its the mass of the propellant and the speed it's ejected at.

 

[badabec]

From f=ma, the force is constant and the acceleration is due to reduction in mass (the fuel burning).
No idea what that has to do with the splashdown but still interesting.

 

[badabec]

I never knew that.

Makes me wonder how a jet plane moves down the runway - surely as soon as the thrust is increased with the plane standing still it would blow all the air out the way and there would be nothing left to thrust against ?

But what if the plane was on a treadmill?

 

[addjunkie]

But what if the plane was on a treadmill?

It would be a big treadmill…

 

[Seadog]

most rocket engines still push against stuff but with space its different nothing to stop it or slow it other than gravity or a black hole

The exhaust gas has mass.

 

[redlig]

But what if the plane was on a treadmill?

Oh No!! Don't start that red herring again.

 

[Maxakarudy]

isaac newton has a lesson for you. for each action there is a equal and opposite reaction.

chucking burning rocket fuel out the ass of the rocket motor causes the rocket itself to move away in the opposite direction. isaac says its absolutely not necessary for the exhaust to hit anything to create thrust.

Newtons laws state that stored energies try to equalise when exposed to each other, hot to cold, pressure to non pressure (vacuum).
In the case of a rocket (the pressurised fuel cell) cannot overcome the suggested infinite vacuum of space, until pressures equalise thrust cannot occur.

 

[qwakers]

No. Just no. There is no such thing as thrust as you are stating. Are you a flat earther by any chance...

 

[Bullet2012]

 

[Pigeon_Droppings2]

Newtons laws state that stored energies try to equalise

Newtons 4th law perhaps?...sounds more like the 2nd law of thermodynamics?

 

[Maxakarudy]

Newtons 4th law perhaps?...sounds more like the 2nd law of thermodynamics?

Correct, but edited you my comment ...Newtons laws state that stored energies try to equalise when exposed to each other

 

[Maxakarudy]

No. Just no. There is no such thing as thrust as you are stating. Are you a flat earther by any chance...

Yes unapologetically a FE
What wrong with my explanation, all you've done is said I'm wrong without a counter arguement.
For your benefit.
How thrust is created (Newton’s 3rd Law)For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

• Rockets: Burn fuel and expel hot gases backward at high speed → the rocket is pushed forward with equal force.
• Jet engines (airplanes): Suck in air, compress it, mix with fuel, burn it, and expel the hot exhaust backward → plane is pushed forward.
• Propellers: Spin and push air or water backward → vehicle moves forward.

The above situations occur in atmospheric environment not in a negative vacuum environment, in a negative environment you have too equalise pressure before
a positive thrust pressure can occur, give an example how this is not correct.

 

[qwakers]

Easy. Rockets work in space. This is empirical evidence that you are wrong. But as it is impossible to argue with a flat earther, I am out and you are blocked.

 

[Bullet2012]

Boat propellers actually work by pulling themselves forward through liquid,

 

[Farside]

I never knew that.

Makes me wonder how a jet plane moves down the runway - surely as soon as the thrust is increased with the plane standing still it would blow all the air out the way and there would be nothing left to thrust against ?

Pah, use a conveyer belt and/or a giant ballista.
'Sobvious, really.

 

[Blobber]

I've just worked out who @dobbslc has blocked!

 

[gaz1]

Yes unapologetically a FE
What wrong with my explanation, all you've done is said I'm wrong without a counter arguement.
For your benefit.
How thrust is created (Newton’s 3rd Law)For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

• Rockets: Burn fuel and expel hot gases backward at high speed → the rocket is pushed forward with equal force.
• Jet engines (airplanes): Suck in air, compress it, mix with fuel, burn it, and expel the hot exhaust backward → plane is pushed forward.
• Propellers: Spin and push air or water backward → vehicle moves forward.

The above situations occur in atmospheric environment not in a negative vacuum environment, in a negative environment you have too equalise pressure before
a positive thrust pressure can occur, give an example how this is not correct.

rockets is the only one that creates forward motion in space ( vacuum space )
you need more fuel to escape gravity of a planet

shuttles, space rockets and nuclear rockets use the same method

whilst the moon has less gravity than the earth its better to create a base there and build space ships there through mining and also using some astoroids from the belt

mars has different gravity and so do many other planets

what we need is another form of rocket fuel that has more combustion form for faster space travel

solid fuel is no good for space travel

britains rocket fuel black arrow

(1969-1971), used a unique combination of High-Test Peroxide (HTP)—a highly concentrated form of hydrogen peroxide (\(85HTP + \(15%water )as the oxidizer and kerosene (paraffin) as the fuel. The third stage, Waxwing, was solid fuel.

and yes i looked it up