xkcd #3291: Launchpad

Title text:

It does come at the cost of some launchpad expansions and increased fuel requirements, but that all comes out of the facility's budget.

Transcript:

Transcript will show once it’s been added to explainxkcd.com

Source: https://xkcd.com/3291/

explainxkcd for #3291

It does come at the cost of some launchpad expansions and increased fuel requirements, but that all comes out of the facility's budget.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 123 points 4 weeks ago (15 children)

From the "Futurama solves global warming" school of thought.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 4 weeks ago (11 children)

    I thought of Futurama too, but instead how the Ships engines move the Universe around IT

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

    It came to me in a dream, and then I forgot it in another dream.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 4 weeks ago (4 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 37 points 4 weeks ago (4 children)

    You laugh, but China made a big-budget action movie about this very concept.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 4 weeks ago
    [–] 20 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

    The end with lots of fire coming out should point towards the ground.

    If it points towards space, that's a big problem, and we will not go to space this day :/

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 4 weeks ago (21 children)

    This reminds me there was a project about 10-15(?) years ago where they were trying to rig the F15 with an attachment to launch satellites in quick need situations. The F15A shot down a satellite in 1985, so it makes sense it could put one up there as well. Think they ended up terminating the program because it became cheaper to launch them in mass.

    Aka they probably just took it out of the public eye

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 weeks ago (20 children)

    no they cancelled it because thats impossible lol. you can shoot a satellite with a suborbital object but thats a loooong way from the projectile being orbital. shooting a satellite that way is more analogous to laying down a spike strip for a car. almost all the velocity of the impact is coming from the satellite not the projectile.

    theres a reason even the smallest orbital rockets are the size of a building, its all the propellant required to get there. theres just no way to get that into an F15, to say nothing of the limitations of an airbreathing engine. the skylon was an attempt at a single stage to orbit vehicle using an air breathing engine and it was so complicated and impractical they never even got past the engine precooler design.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 weeks ago* (12 children)

    no they cancelled it because thats impossible lol. you can shoot a satellite with a suborbital object but thats a loooong way from the projectile being orbital.

    Nah, it's not that long a way. You just need to adjust your goals, add an extra stage, accept a much smaller payload.

    If you can get a payload to space, you could put a payload 1/4 its mass into orbit with an additional stage.

    I mean, the anti-sat F-15 test was pretty wild. But is arguably less wild than other airlaunch systems like the Pegasus or spaceship one. Saying that airlaunch is impossible is silly, because it's happening.

    These systems get cancelled because they're expensive and complicated and reusable rockets are cheaper and easier.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 weeks ago (6 children)

    They are saying a missile that went faster than, and tracked a target at orbital speed and velocity, can't be reached.... Obviously it can, or they'd miss everytime. Yet they shot it down using a rocket deploying a payload 41 years ago. Same shit, different payload.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 14 points 4 weeks ago (6 children)

    I still say we should mount rockets into a rollercoaster rail🎢 that way stage one can be spent on the ground doing a horizontal launch and then the rail would have to change the angle to be more horizontal

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

    This was actually tested in 2001 and found to be effective method to launch a crew into space

    https://youtu.be/mt_kSlBBEXs?t=139

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 weeks ago

    Just do it in the winter, otherwise it might get too hot...

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 4 weeks ago

    STOP GIVING ELON IDEAS

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago

    Kerbal launch cannon go brrrr

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

    Wrong approach, if they are going to the moon they need to attach engines to the moon and bring it closer

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

    This kills the planet. ☹️

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›