Why don't they ignite ALL the rocket fuel? Surely that would be more powerful and therefore go faster.
>>16893334buran was superior
>>16893347Because space shuttles are a bad idea and it was cancelled?
Why don't we mix various sized particulates together in the exhaust, so that once we leave the oxygen tracks of earth, we can push off the Planck infinity divider layer track with greater energy transfer? I.E. instead of the same sized molecules venting, we have some larger, some medium, some small, and some micro....and build a pyramid of sizes to fill in more holes.
>>16893350russia has always been a dirt poor country that pretends to be relevant
>>16893383they just need to blackmail the US government, maybe with some sort of perverse sexual deviancy they invite them into, and then use that to demand billions of dollars a year in "aid", and they could probably even force us to call them "our greatest friend" while doing it
>>16893334That's called an explosion dick licker
>>16893334They do ignite it all. It just takes a few minutes.
>>16893350It's a great idea if your goal is to be able to snatch spy satellites out of orbit and bring them back to Earth. Otherwise, yeah it was an expensive boondoggle.
>>16895569why not all at the same time?
>>16896445Reactions take time to complete.
>>16896456then reduce the time? why are you incapable of coming up with any positive suggestions. it's people like you that are holding our species back. find a way to make it happen.
>>16896460Why don't you find a way to make it happen?
>>16896464lets work together
>>16893334>more powerful and therefore go faster.this what happens when you ignite rocket fuel all at the same time. it is definitely more powerful and certainly goes faster... but not for long.
>>16893383true, but their aerospace is measurably better than the USA, given their lack of certain things like RAM in the early days. The cost/performance of planes like the mig-21 and mig-29 have never been equaled.
>>16896872Russians come up with lots of interesting tech hacks. During the Cold War, India bought a large computer from the USSR. Inside the cabinet they found two points on a circuit board joined by a large coil of wire. They had no idea why it was there. When they contacted the Soviets, it turned out the wire was cut to a precise length needed to introduce a bus delay that normally would be performed by an IC but the factory didn't have on hand that day.
>>16896855if it's faster then it doesn't need to take long
>>16897511and yet it does. it is better to control the release of energy and get to where you want to instead of blowing up the launch pad and everything in a couple thousand feet in all directions. you also have to me the rocket survive the explosion.it's ok. someday you will understand.
>>16899324you need to start thinking outside the box, smuggins
>>16893347Energia was better. Buran is debatable.
>>16893334https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_aHEit-SqA
>>16893334Outside of the obvious problems of physics and material engineering just not working like that, even with an indestructible rocket with perfect control and fuel that could be instantly ignited doing so would not be the most efficient way of getting into space. The faster you go the more air resistance saps your energy, if you try to go too fast too low in the atmosphere you burn more fuel than if you just coasted up and then accelerated.
>>16893347>>16899349The biggest difference, the liquid engines being part of the orbiter versus the booster, has advantages each way. As far as I know, the Energia engines weren't reused while the Space Shuttle's were. That's a good use of resources. At the same time, if the USSR didn't collapse and they went into high production of the system, Energia and Buran each would have been more straight forward to produce than STS's external tank setup. The liquid fuel boosters were safer than STS's SRBs. Overall, the Shuttle seemed to suffer from incremental changes during its design that ruined many of the initial benefits when first proposed.
>>16899349>>16899363Energia II with the flyback boosters would have been kino
>>16899365Was that actually planned or a modern take on what it could have been like?
>>16899449It was a real proposal, but obviously never made it beyond paperhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6GG8KHDjZk
>>16899455The flyback boosters are interesting but the combo shuttle and tanker that pops out the space vehicle is next level. I always wondered by Buran didn't sit on top of Energia. With the Shuttle, being on the side of a large fuel tank probably made getting fuel to the engines easier but since Buran didn't have engines, it would have sat on top. Maybe the Soviets didn't have a tower capable of stacking like that? I don't have any interesting space videos to share, so here's the only ska-metal tribute to Energia I know about.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVWfqOSdzs4
>>16899359Why would you even mention the obvious? Did OP not find the two stars with five spikes?
>>16893334Space shuttles are fake and gay. Have you ever seen footage of a shuttle launch? They're going at like 10 mph
>>16899521Faster than you, pedestrian
>>16899326and you need an educations moron.
>>16899521>They're going at like 10 mphfor about 1 second.
>>16900253for what purpose?
