Comments on: Exploring the Moon by Rocket Ship

By: Riverside

Riverside — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 07:19:29 +0000

Or a fast orbit, which provides enough pull against the planets gravity.

By: JMyint

JMyint — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:05:45 +0000

There is nothing wrong with the teeter-totter diagram. It is correct in that the effect of gravity is proportional to mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance. An astronaut in orbit is subject to almost the same pull of gravity as someone on the ground. They appear to be weightless because they, their spacecraft, and everything inside the craft is in a state of free fall.

By: Eliyahu

Eliyahu — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:03:18 +0000

I’ve seen 18-wheelers with larger fuel tanks than the ones in that rocket… Did he plan to travel to the moon by highway?

By: Toronto

Toronto — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:25:42 +0000

I find it interesting that Berlin was the main European site. Those poor Zepplin pilots would have to be careful near either city.

And did anyone notice the teeter-totter diagram? Whoops!

By: jayessell

jayessell — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:08:05 +0000

Good article.
He was a contemporary of Goddard?
KIP, the picture is from the magazine’s staff artist.
If that was the equivalent of an Apollo ‘Command Module’ he’s pretty close.
(Booster rockets already jettisoned not shown.)
No mention of how to land and take-off from the moon, or enter Earth’s atmosphere.
Powered deaccelleration, despite the cost in fuel, was considered preferable to
burning up like a meteor.

PS: The mail rocket illustration is missing a decimal point.
I think it meant to say 4000 miles per hour.
Ha! Lots of rockets from Berlin in these articles!

By: K!P

K!P — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:22:30 +0000

is it me or does the tekst steering and bracking rockets seem reversed?