Why Are All NASA Launch Sites Near The Sea?

nokia69

GreatDefector wrote: »

I assume your talking about the booster rockets. They do fall into the sea shortly after takeoff. NASA send out a crew to recover them and they're re-used for other launches

No point wasting them, they only work for a short period to boost main craft until its ready to go solo

No conspiracy

I'm not sure if recovering the boosters was a good idea it may have been cheeper just to build new ones each time

video below of an SRB fallen into the sea

the video below shows the falcon 9 almost landing on a drone ship

FISMA.

darrenw5O94 wrote: »

All the NASA launch sites are along the coastline. Are theses 'Rockets' just falling into the ocean 10 mins after takeoff or are they actually going into space?

Launch sites are located as close to the equator as possible. Hence NASA sites in Fl, TX, Ca.

(1) Points at the equator have a higher tangential speed than more northern or southern points. Thus, less fuel is required to get objects in to orbit.

(2) Objects weigh less at the equator. Again, fuel savings.

Rockets will take off in the direction of the Earth's rotation to make use of relative velocity. Again, fuel savings.

Lift off occurs from Fl as the rocket can get roughly 2/3 the way in to space before it is back over land. Should something go wrong on lift-off, the ocean is a far better debris field than populated areas.

After a final burn and returning to Earth, the space shuttle was effectively a glider. When the space shuttle was in our atmosphere, it HAD to land. There was no way for the space shuttle to power up, like an airplane, and circle around. So your best bet is to get a landing strip on a coast.

That's why landing preference started in the West and progressed East. If the site in the West was problematic, like say Edward's AFB in Ca, the shuttle could glide on to White Sands, NM and so on.

After 10 minutes, you are most definitely in space.

nokia69

FISMA. wrote: »

Launch sites are located as close to the equator as possible. Hence NASA sites in Fl, TX, Ca.

(1) Points at the equator have a higher tangential speed than more northern or southern points. Thus, less fuel is required to get objects in to orbit.

(2) Objects weigh less at the equator. Again, fuel savings.

Rockets will take off in the direction of the Earth's rotation to make use of relative velocity. Again, fuel savings.

its not to save fuel that they launch at the equator its for the payload boost, fuel makes up a tiny % of launch cost

Jawgap

Early rockets were very unreliable - if they are going to fail / fall / explode - it's to have that happen over water.

Rockets are also big, especially the Saturn 5 birds, and need lots of fuel - easier to deliver that by sea either by barge or boat, rather than road or air.

Launch sites tend to be close to the equator to lessen the amount of energy (and fuel) required to achieve orbit.

H3llR4iser

ScumLord wrote: »

They don't fall into the sea. I've seen the rocket fly over Ireland. I watched it take off on the internet, then went outside and watched it zip over my town a little while later. The speed of it crossing the sky was incredible.

How does GPS work if we can't put satellites in space? What are all the satellites we can see in the nights sky? How do people communicate across the planet on mobiles phones that don't have access to telephone masts?

Or that you can quite often take a look at the ISS with a pair of binoculars...what do they say about that, it's NASA drawing the picture on your lens? :D:D

Jawgap

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Or that you can quite often take a look at the ISS with a pair of binoculars...what do they say about that, it's NASA drawing the picture on your lens? :D:D

If you know where and when to look you can also see Iridium flares - they're cause by reflections from the Iridium sattelites.