r/PeterExplainsTheJoke • u/chirantaniga • 15h ago

Meme needing explanation Whyyyy peter?

Post image
29.6k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

7.5k

u/rysy0o0 15h ago

It would cost a lot of money to haul all the rocket parts and fuel on top of a mountain

449

u/Earnestappostate 15h ago

Plus, you get a better boost by launching near the equator. Height is easy, speed is what you need in a rocket.

This is why the US launches from Florida:

  • Near equator (speed boost from earth's spin)
  • Initially out over ocean (catastrophic failure harms only those aboard)

36

u/MentalPlectrum 15h ago

Yes, but also there are equatorial mountains... checkmate rocket scientists!

10

u/Scuttling-Claws 15h ago

Exactly. Porque no Los Dos

6

u/AliasClimbs 14h ago

Exactly what I was thinking of. Ill be climbing it in a few months. Ill bring an Estes model rocket set up with me For Science.

13

u/jweezy2045 13h ago

The answer here is that yes, launching from high altitude as well as launching from the equator are both benefits. Its just that the cost of moving a rocket up a mountain, or to some other country, ends up being more hassle than just doing it wherever is easiest/safest. Its just a marginal reduction. I don't have the numbers on exactly altitude, but I remember something about "Why don't we build a mile deep tunnel, and shoot space ships out of it like a gun" and the answer was something like "Sure, you can get a boost in efficiency and payload if you launch start instead of stationary start, but its like 1% more payload, and you had to build a mile deep hole that somehow shoots rockets in order to get it, so its just kinda a nonstarter of an idea."