They don't have an endless supply of 1 atm gas pushing on the underside or a
significant pressure differential like the ping pong ball cannon.
The mdot of their fuel flow will be sooo low (not to deplete their near vacuum
supply) that it will supply meaningless pressure differential to the total
pressure->force balance.
There is no way to eliminate dynamic drag on the frontal areas of the
structure and the higher up you go, the harder it is to perform any aerodynamic
trickery as you head into molecular flow territory.
If you're burning a fuel+oxidizer combination to provide some KE to the
vehicle, you'll need to ensure (pretty much) the entire surface of the vehicle
is thermally tolerant of some pretty high temperatures which will likely add a
mass issue.
Troy
The foundational misunderstanding behind it seems to be that they think
"terminal buoyant velocity" for it is extremely fast.
They cite supersonic ping ball cannons as the proof of concept that shows they
can build a scramjet.
http://www.carpeastra.co.uk/showpage.php?pageName=04_proof
Also, "The above proof shows that the theoretical maximum Isp of burning H2
in air when the launch vehicle is displacing its own weight in air should be
approximately 80,000 seconds at around Mach 5 and under the same
conditions"
On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 10:08 PM Troy Prideaux
<troy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Not much mention on how they deal with aero drag.
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Jones
(Redacted sender "randome" for DMARC)
Sent: Wednesday, 8 May 2019 2:41 PM
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: RAROSS
Not just vaporware, but lighter than air vaporware! Profit!
On 2019-05-07 7:22 PM, Ben Brockert wrote:
Self-licking rockoon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpwog0UguJA
http://www.carpeastra.co.uk/showpage.php?pageName=03_concepts
