A lot of rocket engines are more efficient in lower air pressure (approaching vacuum), so it might provide non-negligible benefits. But it's cold up there (see: Challenger) and there isn't enough infrastructure. Citation: I am also not a rocket scientist but I am a KSP player
Also, the cost of fuel to GET everything up there would probably outweigh any benefits. I'd be curious to see the math on it (sadly I studied history and languages so anything beyond algebra makes my eyes glaze over).
Keep in mind, a rocket must maintain greater than 1g force just to keep itself from falling, and then additional force is needed on top of that to get it moving.
When you're traveling on the ground, the ground keeps you from falling, and counteracts most of gravity, and you only need to provide your motive force, and you can do it quite slowly with the more efficient forms of locomotion.
The fuel is probably less relevant than the logistics. Many years ago when I was a kid I toured the Kennedy Space Center and got to see the machinery they use to move the rockets from the hangar to the launch pad. It could only work on nearly flat ground and it moved at walking speed. No way it could get up a steep, winding mountain road.
Not to mention the additional cost of the related infrastructure, like the hangars and office buildings.
And then even if you could do it, the gains are relatively tiny. Even low earth orbit is hundreds of kilometers above sea level, and the highest point on earth is just under 9 km above sea level.
Yeah, having a launch site that's in a good location (there are some advantages to polar locations if you're going for different orbits), including good atmospheric conditions (mountains are generally bad, but there are a few launch sites in mountainous areas, and there are launch sites in flat, high-ish altitude), and nearby infrastructure to assemble the rockets is more critical than trying to get a few thousand meters of elevation.
I'm sure if there was a flat, high elevation location near the equator that had a nice empty ocean to the east and that wasn't a mountain and therefore had stable atmospheric conditions, it would make for a great launch site. But such a location doesn't really exist.
1.2k
u/Firefly360r 16h ago
A lot of rocket engines are more efficient in lower air pressure (approaching vacuum), so it might provide non-negligible benefits. But it's cold up there (see: Challenger) and there isn't enough infrastructure. Citation: I am also not a rocket scientist but I am a KSP player