Hot gas expansion rate into outer space

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the expansion of hot rocket exhaust gases in space and their impact on thrust direction. One participant argues that the expansion rate of gases after exiting the nozzle is irrelevant to the thrust produced by the rocket. Another mentions skepticism regarding moon landings, suggesting that the gases would leave a noticeable impact on the lunar surface. The conversation shifts to frustrations about perceived censorship on the forum regarding controversial topics. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the complexities of rocket propulsion and the challenges of addressing conspiracy theories in scientific discourse.
Jay Hill
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Good Morning Sirs,
it seems to be surprisingly hard to get the numbers of a mystery:

How fast expand hot rocket exhaust gases into empty space?
Of course aside from its exit velocity!
Does the expansion interfere with the impulse direction?
I.e. is the impulse omnidirectional effective within the engine nozzle exit angle of assumed 90deg.
(or even beyond that)?
Can't hardly wait!
Jay
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not sure I really understand you question fully, but the expansion rate of the gasses once they have left the exhaust nozzle is irrelevant to the thrust that they provide for the rocket so it might be an interesting fact to know for some reason but it is does not matter for any practical purpose.
 
It IS irrelevant - unless you anticipate certain things underneath your engine nozzle.
Now it's going to disable a certain moon landing skepticism around some friends of mine.
The argument here: The gases hit the moon ground (at 10ft hight) in less then 2ms
(at 15,000ft/s)- allegedly quick enough to outgun the immediate expansion of the stream
(with a force of at least 1,500kp). It would have inevitably left a distinctive impact
on the flour light dust underneath the firing descend engine cone - easily to see on the scores of images.
IMHO the expansion rate actually EXCEEDS the stream velocity and distributes the gas-pressure
evenly everywhere - with a resulting low exposure of the dust surface below.
I'd be grateful for a proof.
 
First you ask about something happening in outer space, now you are talking about the surface of the moon.

What is it you really want to know?
 
Note that moon landing hoax theories are a banned topic on PF. If this goes in that direction, this thread will quickly close or disappear.
 
Dear Sirs,
as hopeless American by heart and mind I'm utterly surprised to find here - out of all places -
a institutional THOUGHT CONTROL.
The dedicative discussion about some ridiculous "sci"-fi" movies
surely is more easy to do compared with the real and most strange phenomena
men kind encountered in the outer space - which includes to me
the Earth moon because of its nature.
Admittedly its more funny to be with BASICALLY open minded people.
Therefore: By by and God bless you!
Jay Hill
PS Why do I have to think on Bob Dylan?
I hear him sing: The Disease Of Conceit...
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
Back
Top