Escaping earth's atmosphere with a balloon

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of using a weather balloon to assist in escaping Earth's atmosphere, particularly in conjunction with a rocket for a small payload. Participants explore the implications of altitude, speed, and energy requirements for reaching space.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Nick questions whether a weather balloon could help in escaping the atmosphere and how the weight of a rocket would affect the balloon's performance.
  • Some participants argue that while a weather balloon can reach high altitudes, the primary challenge lies in achieving the necessary speed for orbital insertion, which is significantly greater than the energy gained from altitude alone.
  • There is a discussion about the atmospheric drag and its impact on rocket launches, suggesting that launching nearly straight up until the atmosphere thins is more fuel-efficient.
  • One participant mentions the buoyancy equation and the challenges of lifting heavy payloads with a balloon, emphasizing the impracticality of using a balloon for substantial weights.
  • Another participant clarifies that gaining speed for orbit is independent of altitude, indicating that altitude and speed requirements are separate considerations.
  • Questions arise regarding specific technical terms and units, such as "kgf" and its relevance to dynamic pressure in the context of rocket launches.
  • A reference to the concept of "rockoons" is provided as a potential method for combining balloons and rockets.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the practicality and effectiveness of using a weather balloon in conjunction with a rocket for reaching space. There is no consensus on the feasibility of this approach, and various technical challenges are highlighted.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the significant energy requirements for achieving orbital speed compared to the energy gained from altitude. The discussion also touches on the complexities of atmospheric drag and buoyancy, which are not fully resolved.

Dead Fish
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

So my question is, could you use a weather balloon to assist with escaping the atmosphere and attaching a rocket to take it the rest of the way, and we're talking a really small payload obviously.

Would the weight of the fuel/rocket weigh down the balloon enough to significantly reduce its impact?

Or simply am I (literally) miles off and the altitude a weather balloon reaches will help in no way?
On average a weather balloon can surpass the boundary of space (100km), so it's done most of the work?

Thanks,
Nick
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Dead Fish said:
Or simply am I (literally) miles off and the altitude a weather balloon reaches will help in no way?
On average a weather balloon can surpass the boundary of space (100km), so it's done most of the work?

The bulk of the work is not gaining the altitude, but getting enough speed to get in an orbit around the earth, and not fall back immediately.
If we can believe wikipedia, the altitude record for unmanned balloons is 53 km. Getting 1 kg to 53 km takes mgh = 1 * 9.8 * 53000 = 5.19 * 10^5 J.

Minimum Orbital speed is 7.5 km/s = 75000 m/s. The kinetic energy needed is (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2) * 1 * (7500)^2 = 2.81 * 10^7 J. If you start on the equator and use the 450 m/s rotational speed of the earth, you still need (1/2) * (7050)^2 = 2.48 * 10^7. Still about 50 times more energy needed than the boost you can get from getting to 53 km.
 
willem2 said:
Still about 50 times more energy needed than the boost you can get from getting to 53 km.

I'm not sure I understand what you're comparing here?

It would make sense that the problem you have now is you have to reach the speeds required to go from the 53 km to outer space?
And you're suggesting that this is still a significant amount of the work left to do?

Wouldn't the thinner atmosphere and weaker gravity make it far easier to reach those speeds?
 
Hi Dead Fish,

willem2 is referring to the speed required to get in orbit, which is usually what you want to achieve with spacecraft .
While this speed is dependent on the strength of gravity and gravity falls with the square of distance, the difference between 6378km(Earth radius) and 6431km (radius + 53km) is minuscle, and the speed required doesn't differ much.

However, the atmospheric drag is significant.
If not for the atmosphere, rockets could be in principle launched into orbits barely high enough to clear any mountaintops in their way. With atmosphere, it is more fuel-efficient to go nearly straight up until the air gets thinner, before starting to accelerate sideways.

Have a look at this infographic for the Zenit3SL rocket launch profile:
http://www.spaceflight101.com/uploads/6/4/0/6/6406961/2349991_orig.gif?537
The record height a balloon could get you (53km as of today), could potentially allow you to reduce the first stage by a good bit, as most of it is used just to propel the rest of the rocket above the atmosphere.

However, what's left is still a humongous weight in fuel and metal, and lifting it up with a balloon to any height, let alone the record 53km is beyond daunting.
Buoyancy equation states that ##F_B=(\rho _{air} - \rho _{gas})*g*V##, so at sea level you get enough lift from 1 cubic metre of helium to move 1 kg of payload. This goes down quickly as air density decreases. At 6km you'd need twice the amount to stay afloat.
The size of a balloon needed just to lift a couple hundred tonnes of payload off the ground is about the same as Hindenburg, and this is not taking into account the weight of the balloon itself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dead Fish said:
I'm not sure I understand what you're comparing here?

It would make sense that the problem you have now is you have to reach the speeds required to go from the 53 km to outer space?
You don't gain speed because you need speed to get into outer space, you gain speed because you want to be in orbit once you reach space. So gaining altitude has no impact on that requirement; they are completely separate things.
 
Bandersnatch said:
http://www.spaceflight101.com/uploads/6/4/0/6/6406961/2349991_orig.gif?537
What is Q [kgf/m2] here ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was wondering what kind of unit is "kgf". Now I see it means "kilogram force", lol.
 
Dead Fish said:
could you use a weather balloon to assist with escaping the atmosphere and attaching a rocket to take it the rest of the way

Yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockoon
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
9K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K