3005: Disposal

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 02:16, 31 October 2024 by Psychoticpotato (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
Disposal
We were disappointed that the rocket didn't make a THOOOONK noise when it went into the tube, but we're setting up big loudspeakers for future launches to add the sound effect.
Title text: We were disappointed that the rocket didn't make a THOOOONK noise when it went into the tube, but we're setting up big loudspeakers for future launches to add the sound effect.

Explanation

Ambox notice.png This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: Created by a MINESHAFT-TARGETING ROCKET - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.
If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks.

This comic is about humorous solutions to problems. Instead of trying to make a rocket that doesn’t explode upon impact, Randall’s team has decided to make a rocket disposal hole, hence the comic name.

SpaceX initially had many instances of explosion on impact, as illustrated in montage.

This comic came out about 2 weeks after SpaceX successfully caught the returning Super Heavy booster rocket using giant arms on the launch tower.

Transcript

Ambox notice.png This transcript is incomplete. Please help editing it! Thanks.
[A two-stage rocket is ascending with a plume of exhaust behind it]
[The first stage falls off and the second stage ignites]
[The first stage begins to fall, turned off]
[The first stage reignites to control trajectory and attitude]
[The first stage falls toward a large hole with a lid. A Cueball is holding the lid open]
[Cueball pushes the lid closed]
Click
[The first stage, now out of sight, explodes, Cueball shielding his ears and flinching away from the loud noise]
BOOOOM
Caption below comic:
Our rockets were good at steering, but we couldn't get them to land without exploding, so we just dug a rocket disposal hole.


comment.png add a comment! ⋅ comment.png add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ Icons-mini-action refresh blue.gif refresh comments!

Discussion

That's either a giant Cueball, or a really tiny rocket. Barmar (talk) 23:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

It's an Electron? Or maybe Falcon 1? Redacted II (talk) 00:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

It seems strange to me to see Randall drawing a rocket landing with its engine pointing upward instead of downward, when he traditionally has expressed so much interest in rocket and space physics. It's also notable that the rocket-landing problem was solved by others before SpaceX was considered to have, I bumped into a successful project on a maker site in the past couple years. 172.68.3.71 01:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

SpaceX was the first to propulsively land an orbital booster. Redacted II (talk) 01:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Re downward-pointing, there's a possible side-reference to 1133: Up Goer Five's "you will not go to space today". But I think it's more that if you have the ability to send it down a hole to explode, you have no reason to finesse the (non-)landing and might as well just thread it in under as much of the full propulsion as you can handle.
And the conceit of the rocket-tech is that they've solved the position+direction issue 'perfectly', even if they haven't solved the "how to then stop it just before/as it reaches the ground" and/or any usable ways of standing/hanging it upright once it does.
It's a 7+D problem. Attaining a precise position (x,y,z) with a precise velocity (dx,dy,dz) in at least one precise angle (verticality; plus possibly also others, if rotation is important, plus dθ and dφ at near-zero) and at least to one further limit (fuel remaining >=0). 'All' Cueball's rocket has to do is to perfect 5 or 6 dimensional properties (thread through x,y,z, being aimed in a vertically downwards (or, at a push, upwards) orientation and no excessive horizontal motion... all the rest can be fudged somewhat). And no additional weight needed for landing/catching points. 141.101.98.8 03:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

There’s a Space Category, and a Kerbal program Category and a Mars Rover Category, why not a Rocket category? I propose on creating one. All in favor? 42.book.addict (talk) 02:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)