Most interesting (English) comment:
spyderpig
7 years ago
For whatever it's worth, I built all the tip rockets utilized by RotaryRocket. In addition to the 4 used in the modified Sikorsky S-58 rotor blades, there is a group of 3 identical thrusters in the rear for "rudder" control, not counter-torque. I considered the high-speed taxi tests a waste of precious resources and a needless risk as there would never be a requirement for that flight regime. Smooth translational flight was impossible due to tip thrust lead/lag lockout. "experts"..right...sure..
(
brb man-child cuck corporate supplicant fuck, Thu 27 Aug 2020, 16:16,
Reply)
Read that they found that in order to go into orbit they found they'd need a larger rocket so they'd need to put more rockets on the rotors meaning they'd then need a larger rocket
Rotonception
(, Thu 27 Aug 2020, 17:16, Reply)
I don't think the rotorocket was ever proposed as a launch vehicle, if that's what you mean.
Of course if the capsule now includes heavy new experimental shit that means you need to spend more delta-v chucking it up in space in the first place, which is just ye olde rocket equation. And of course it introduces loads of new stuff that can go wrong compared to an economic and reliable Soyuz capsule.
(
brb man-child cuck corporate supplicant fuck, Thu 27 Aug 2020, 18:40,
Reply)
Roton was a fascinating concept - and it was proposed as a Single Stage to Orbit launch vehicle.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_Rocket
I'm still not sold on what problems with normal rockets it was supposed to solve. It added a huge amount of complexity and mass for the rotors, where a better solution might just have been to add the equivalent mass of rocket fuel.
(
evil_andy Stick stick stick stick sticky sticky stick stick, Thu 27 Aug 2020, 20:49,
Reply)