Rocket Launch from Mt. Everest Equator: Benefits & Efficiency

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter IMP
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Launch Rocket
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hypothetical scenario of launching a rocket from the summit of Mt. Everest if it were located on the equator. Participants explore the potential benefits and efficiency gains of such a launch compared to traditional sea-level launches, particularly focusing on atmospheric drag, altitude advantages, and payload capacity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that launching from a high altitude like Mt. Everest would reduce atmospheric drag and improve efficiency, potentially estimating a 5% increase in efficiency.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the efficiency gain depends on the target altitude of the rocket, noting the importance of understanding the relationship between air density, drag, and height.
  • A clarification is made regarding the intended launch target, specifying low Earth orbit for full-size rockets.
  • Participants discuss the advantages of launching from higher altitudes, particularly in overcoming thicker lower atmosphere and weather conditions, referencing the Pegasus project as an example of high-altitude launches.
  • There is a mention of the direction of flight for airliner-launched rockets, with one participant questioning whether launching eastward would provide additional velocity benefits.
  • A later reply notes that a previous launch was conducted westward, suggesting strategic reasons for this choice related to safety and lift considerations.
  • One participant inquires about the potential increase in payload capacity for the Space Shuttle if launched from Mt. Everest with the same fuel amount.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the efficiency gains and advantages of launching from Mt. Everest, with no consensus reached on specific efficiency percentages or payload capacities. The discussion remains open-ended with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for specific target altitudes and the complexities of calculating drag and efficiency based on varying heights, indicating that assumptions about air density and drag relationships are crucial but not fully resolved.

IMP
Messages
33
Reaction score
1
Lets say Mt. Everest was located on the equator. How much more efficient would it be to launch a rocket from the top of this mountain as compared to a sea-level Florida launch? There would be much less atmosperic drag since you would be starting out 5-miles high. You would be slightly closer to space. The "sling-shot effect" would aid the launch. The rocket motor nozzle could be slightly wider (at higher altitude, wider is better). I am curious to know how much this would help (slightly heavier payload). Would it be 5% more efficient?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The change in efficiency relies entirely on how high you are trying to go. For example, setting the end point at 10mi high is a lot different from saying you want the rocket to go 20mi high. You absolutely must know the height you are trying to get.

From there you also need to know the relation between air thickness and height, as well as the relation between drag and air thickness. Integrate one into the other to figure out how much drag happens between the starting point and the max height you are trying to get.

How high do you want the rocket to go?
 
Sorry, I should have specified that. Full size rocket (Shuttle, Ariane, etc) to low Earth orbit.
 
The main advantage is getting through the thick lower air + weather.
The Pegasus project launches satelites on boosters from under the wing of a converted airliner at around 40,000ft.
 
mgb_phys said:
The main advantage is getting through the thick lower air + weather. The Pegasus project launches satelites on boosters from under the wing of a converted airliner at around 40,000ft.
I assume the airliner is flying east which gives an additional boost to acheiving escape velocities?
 
The launch I saw was going west.
This is either to head into the jet stream and give the ageing L1011 more lift, or since they launch from California it is to point any accident away from a lot of expensive real estate and even more expensive lawyers.
 
If you launched the Shuttle from the top of Mt. Everest, how much more payload could it carry for same amount of fuel?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
13K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K