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?
Did Shadowfax go to Valinor?
How to show the equivalence between the regularized regression and their constraint formulas using KKT
Alternative to sending password over mail?
Does casting Light, or a similar spell, have any effect when the caster is swallowed by a monster?
Why is it a bad idea to hire a hitman to eliminate most corrupt politicians?
Is "remove commented out code" correct English?
Is it unprofessional to ask if a job posting on GlassDoor is real?
How do conventional missiles fly?
I Accidentally Deleted a Stock Terminal Theme
Took a trip to a parallel universe, need help deciphering
Forgetting the musical notes while performing in concert
Why doesn't H₄O²⁺ exist?
Brothers & sisters
Assassin's bullet with mercury
Why is Collection not simply treated as Collection<?>
How do I write bicross product symbols in latex?
How to draw the figure with four pentagons?
Is it inappropriate for a student to attend their mentor's dissertation defense?
Has there ever been an airliner design involving reducing generator load by installing solar panels?
Why is the ratio of two extensive quantities always intensive?
SSH "lag" in LAN on some machines, mixed distros
What is going on with Captain Marvel's blood colour?
Were any external disk drives stacked vertically?
Can I make "comment-region" comment empty lines?
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
$endgroup$
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
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
6 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
5 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
$endgroup$
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
edited 9 hours ago
Muze
asked 10 hours ago
MuzeMuze
1,3511266
1,3511266
4
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
6 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
5 hours ago
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
6 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
5 hours ago
4
4
$begingroup$
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
8 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
8 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
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
6 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
5 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
5 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.
$endgroup$
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
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
57 mins 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.
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.
$endgroup$
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
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
57 mins 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.
$endgroup$
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
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
57 mins 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.
$endgroup$
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.
edited 57 mins ago
answered 10 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
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
57 mins 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
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
57 mins 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
7 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
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
57 mins ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
$endgroup$
– PearsonArtPhoto♦
57 mins 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
answered 2 hours ago
Freddie RFreddie R
1213
1213
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
4
$begingroup$
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
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
6 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
5 hours ago