Can a rocket refuel on Mars from water?Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by...
Why is consensus so controversial in Britain?
Why "Having chlorophyll without photosynthesis is actually very dangerous" and "like living with a bomb"?
A reference to a well-known characterization of scattered compact spaces
Why is it a bad idea to hire a hitman to eliminate most corrupt politicians?
Alternative to sending password over mail?
AES: Why is it a good practice to use only the first 16bytes of a hash for encryption?
Etiquette around loan refinance - decision is going to cost first broker a lot of money
Infinite Abelian subgroup of infinite non Abelian group example
Brothers & sisters
What do you call someone who asks many questions?
How can I prevent hyper evolved versions of regular creatures from wiping out their cousins?
90's TV series where a boy goes to another dimension through portal near power lines
What reasons are there for a Capitalist to oppose a 100% inheritance tax?
Assassin's bullet with mercury
Has there ever been an airliner design involving reducing generator load by installing solar panels?
How to take photos in burst mode, without vibration?
Neighboring nodes in the network
Is "remove commented out code" correct English?
Is there a hemisphere-neutral way of specifying a season?
How to show the equivalence between the regularized regression and their constraint formulas using KKT
Anagram holiday
Is it possible to run Internet Explorer on OS X El Capitan?
Python: return float 1.0 as int 1 but float 1.5 as float 1.5
Is it possible to create light that imparts a greater proportion of its energy as momentum rather than heat?
Can a rocket refuel on Mars from water?
Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?Methane internal combustion engines for rovers on Mars and Moon. Feasibility?Where should a lunar polar ISRU mission land?Horizontal space launch from a rampBack to oribt from Mars - how many km^2 yr of solar power to make enough propellant?Making propellants on Mars: Why not just LH2/LOX instead of methane?Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?What's the scientific evidence of water for return trip methalox on Mars?Is there any economical way to move the water from the Martian poles to the people?Martian Carbon Dioxide Turbine Oxygen GeneratorCould a rocket launch off water horizontally in stages us using water and air for lift to save fuel?
$begingroup$
Can a rocket run only on hydrogen and oxygen? Could a rocket, rover, and electrolysis machine be sent to either of Mars' poles to excavate ice to make hydrogen and oxygen to refuel an unmanned rocket?
What would be the benefit of not hauling the return fuel?
Could the travel time be shortened if fuel was waiting on Mars?
Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?
https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/112136/what-is-the-ideal-temperature-to-crack-water
mars launch fuel isru design-alternative
asked 14 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3611266
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Can a rocket run only on hydrogen and oxygen? Could a rocket, rover, and electrolysis machine be sent to either of Mars' poles to excavate ice to make hydrogen and oxygen to refuel an unmanned rocket?
What would be the benefit of not hauling the return fuel?
Could the travel time be shortened if fuel was waiting on Mars?
Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?
https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/112136/what-is-the-ideal-temperature-to-crack-water
mars launch fuel isru design-alternative
asked 14 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3611266
$endgroup$
5
$begingroup$
Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
$endgroup$
– Jon of All Trades
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
$endgroup$
– Skyler
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Can a rocket run only on hydrogen and oxygen? Could a rocket, rover, and electrolysis machine be sent to either of Mars' poles to excavate ice to make hydrogen and oxygen to refuel an unmanned rocket?
What would be the benefit of not hauling the return fuel?
Could the travel time be shortened if fuel was waiting on Mars?
Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?
https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/112136/what-is-the-ideal-temperature-to-crack-water
mars launch fuel isru design-alternative
asked 14 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3611266
$endgroup$
Can a rocket run only on hydrogen and oxygen? Could a rocket, rover, and electrolysis machine be sent to either of Mars' poles to excavate ice to make hydrogen and oxygen to refuel an unmanned rocket?
What would be the benefit of not hauling the return fuel?
Could the travel time be shortened if fuel was waiting on Mars?
Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?
https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/112136/what-is-the-ideal-temperature-to-crack-water
mars launch fuel isru design-alternative
mars launch fuel isru design-alternative
asked 14 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3611266
asked 14 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3611266
edited 12 hours ago
Muze
asked 14 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3611266
asked 14 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3611266
asked 14 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3611266
1,3611266
5
$begingroup$
Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
$endgroup$
– Jon of All Trades
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
$endgroup$
– Skyler
8 hours ago
add a comment |
5
$begingroup$
Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
$endgroup$
– Jon of All Trades
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
$endgroup$
– Skyler
8 hours ago
5
5
$begingroup$
Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
$endgroup$
– Jon of All Trades
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
$endgroup$
– Jon of All Trades
11 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
$endgroup$
– Skyler
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
$endgroup$
– Skyler
8 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.
Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.
The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.
answered 13 hours ago
PearsonArtPhoto♦PearsonArtPhoto
84.2k16243465
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization
Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct
The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction
This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.
This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.
There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.
answered 5 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1413
New contributor
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35280%2fcan-a-rocket-refuel-on-mars-from-water%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.
Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.
The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.
answered 13 hours ago
PearsonArtPhoto♦PearsonArtPhoto
84.2k16243465
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.
Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.
The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.
answered 13 hours ago
PearsonArtPhoto♦PearsonArtPhoto
84.2k16243465
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.
Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.
The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.
answered 13 hours ago
PearsonArtPhoto♦PearsonArtPhoto
84.2k16243465
$endgroup$
It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.
Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.
The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.
answered 13 hours ago
PearsonArtPhoto♦PearsonArtPhoto
84.2k16243465
edited 4 hours ago
answered 13 hours ago
PearsonArtPhoto♦PearsonArtPhoto
84.2k16243465
answered 13 hours ago
PearsonArtPhoto♦PearsonArtPhoto
84.2k16243465
answered 13 hours ago
PearsonArtPhoto♦PearsonArtPhoto
84.2k16243465
84.2k16243465
4
$begingroup$
Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
4 hours ago
4
4
$begingroup$
Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
$endgroup$
– MSalters
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization
Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct
The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction
This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.
This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.
There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.
answered 5 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1413
New contributor
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization
Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct
The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction
This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.
This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.
There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.
answered 5 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1413
New contributor
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization
Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct
The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction
This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.
This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.
There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.
answered 5 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1413
New contributor
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization
Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct
The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction
This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.
This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.
There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.
answered 5 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1413
New contributor
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 5 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1413
New contributor
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 5 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1413
answered 5 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1413
1413
New contributor
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35280%2fcan-a-rocket-refuel-on-mars-from-water%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
5
$begingroup$
Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
$endgroup$
– Jon of All Trades
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
$endgroup$
– Skyler
8 hours ago