Can a Model Rocket reach space?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of building a model rocket capable of reaching space, specifically addressing the challenges and considerations involved in launching from the ground versus from a high-altitude balloon. Participants explore various definitions of "space," the technical requirements for reaching certain altitudes, and the distinctions between model rockets and larger, more advanced rockets.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that reaching space depends on thrust and burn time, noting that current model rocket engines may not provide sufficient thrust for the necessary duration.
  • There is a discussion about the impact of launching from a balloon at 30 miles, with some arguing it reduces escape velocity slightly but may not significantly aid in reaching space.
  • Participants debate the definition of "space," with some suggesting the Karman Line at ~100 km as a boundary, while others emphasize that reaching orbit requires different considerations.
  • One participant mentions that to achieve low Earth orbit, a significant amount of energy is required, and discusses the energy density of rocket fuels.
  • Some argue that launching from a high altitude could reduce atmospheric drag, while others question the overall benefit in terms of reaching orbit.
  • There are references to hobbyist rockets that have reached space, with discussions about their size and the type of engines used, indicating they may not fit the traditional model rocket definition.
  • Participants highlight the importance of launching in the direction of Earth's rotation for achieving orbit, while noting that a straight-up launch may suffice for simply reaching space.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the definitions of "model rocket" and "space," as well as the feasibility of reaching these altitudes with current technology. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the best approach or definitions.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about rocket design, definitions of space, and the technical capabilities of model rockets versus larger rockets. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of the energy requirements for reaching different altitudes.

Gbl911
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
I was wondering if there is a way to build a model rocket that has the capabilities to reach space (not go into orbit though). It would seem to be very difficult to reach space from the ground, but if you launch it from a balloon some 30 miles up, would it be possible, if not, any easier?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Getting a rocket (model or otherwise) into space is a matter of thrust and time.

The engines most model rockets have have enough thrust, but not for enough time, and engines that do have enough thrust for enough time can't (yet) be made small and light enough to be used in model rockets.

I'm not an aerospace engineer or a rocket scientist, though, so you may want to get a second opinion.
 
Thanks. Though would it have enough thrust for enough time if you launched it from a balloon?
 
First, it depends on what your definition of "model rocket" is. You could certainly design and build a rocket yourself that could reach space, though only with a substantial investment of time and money, and at that point it would cease being a "model" rocket by most definitions.

Second, placing it on a balloon and launching it from 30 miles up changes the escape velocity from 11.2 km/s to 11.1 km/s, so there really isn't a whole lot to be gained by placing it on the balloon.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dr.Physics
If OP doesn't want it to orbit, it doesn't need to reach escape velocity...
The question here is, where do you define "space"? At what altitude?
 
The OP did not exclude orbit. I think getting to "space" for the layman from Earth commonly means orbit.
 
Specific orbital energy might be a good place to start. To place any object in low Earth orbit requires the addition of 32.8 MJ/kg to the object beyond its energy at the Earth's surface, not counting any energy lost to other than the final object in orbit. Energy is either potential energy (mgh) or kinetic energy (mv2/2). As an example, the velocity for the all kinetic energy case is ~8.1 km/sec.

Energy density of carried hydrogen and oxygen fuel is 16 MJ/kg, so some 2 kg of, say, H2-O2 fuel is required per kg of orbital mass using a perfectly efficient engine, then more fuel is required to lift the fuel and the apparatus for using the fuel, so that the compounding effect is apparent.
 
Last edited:
boneh3ad said:
Second, placing it on a balloon and launching it from 30 miles up changes the escape velocity from 11.2 km/s to 11.1 km/s, so there really isn't a whole lot to be gained by placing it on the balloon.
The advantage is the avoidance of lost energy to atmospheric drag on ascent. Drag power is proportional to air density, which reduces from sea level by a factor of ~1000 at 30 miles/50km.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kingburrito666
What about the reduced time it would take to get to space from 30 miles up. And the reduced drag.
 
  • #10
I would say there are two major schools of thought:
1) Reaching orbit. Obviously a model rocket, with current technology and pricing, is out of the realm of possibility.
2) Reaching the Karman Line, ~100 km up, which is an internationally agreed upon boundary between Earth's atmosphere and "space". This can be, and has been, done. Though, I'm not sure I'd call these guys "hobbyists" at this scale... http://www.hobbyspace.com/Rocketry/Advanced/records.html

OP, if you are talking about orbit, 30 Miles isn't going to help you very much at all...It may help a bit with drag early on and reduce some fuel costs, but you're not very close to orbit at that point, and you still need to get your horizontal (tangent) velocity up high enough to orbit that's still a TON of delta V.
 
  • #11
Ok, so how exactly large would this rocket have to be to get into orbit with no other payload than itself? And at this point you wouldn't be using model rocket engines anymore.
 
  • #12
See the hobbyspace rocket examples provide to you above. They reached space, or close to it, and appear to be ~3-5M long, maybe ~0.1M diameter
 
  • #13
mheslep said:
See the hobbyspace rocket examples provide to you above. They reached space, or close to it, and appear to be ~3-5M long, maybe ~0.1M diameter
Typically, you'd look at something more like 8-10 inch diameter (~0.25m or so), but your length seems about right (probably closer to the long end). They also contain custom made high performance solid rocket motors that put out in excess of a thousand pounds of thrust for 10-15 seconds, so they're not really what you would consider "model" rockets anymore.
 
  • #14
cjl said:
...for 10-15 seconds, so they're not really what you would consider "model" rockets anymore.
Somebody reportedly got to space (Karman) from that hobbyist group, so somebody must have flown much longer.
 
  • #15
It occurs to me that the Kerbal Space video program would much more quickly satisfy curiously about the limits of low budget rocketry than, say, traveling to Nevada for a high altitude launch. Apparently JPL engineers are obsessed with the thing, and Elon Musk is a fan.

https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/



 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kingburrito666 and Dr.Physics
  • #16
boneh3ad said:
First, it depends on what your definition of "model rocket" is. You could certainly design and build a rocket yourself that could reach space, though only with a substantial investment of time and money, and at that point it would cease being a "model" rocket by most definitions.

Second, placing it on a balloon and launching it from 30 miles up changes the escape velocity from 11.2 km/s to 11.1 km/s, so there really isn't a whole lot to be gained by placing it on the balloon.

Minimal low Earth orbital velocity is only 9.4 km/s. You don't need to achieve escape velocity to put something in LEO.
 
  • #17
Here you can see a bunch of undergrads launching a rocket from a balloon. You can ascertain the dimensions of the thing, and appreciate some of the issues that need to be overcome.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kingburrito666
  • #18
mheslep said:
Somebody reportedly got to space (Karman) from that hobbyist group, so somebody must have flown much longer.
Oh, the flight is much longer. The motor only burns for 10-15 seconds, and the majority of the flight is an unpowered coast.
 
  • #19
You want to also launch in the direction of rotation of the Earth to get an added incremental benefit.
 
  • #20
djpailo said:
You want to also launch in the direction of rotation of the Earth to get an added incremental benefit.
Only if you want to achieve orbit. If you simply want to reach space (>100km altitude), straight up is the easiest way to do it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K