If a spaceship ran out of fuel somewhere in space between Earth and Mars, does it slowly drift off to the...
Is a Middle Name a Given Name?
Does "as soon as" imply simultaneity?
What are examples of EU policies that are beneficial for one EU country, disadvantagious for another?
How should I answer custom and border protection questions if I'm a returning citizen that hasn't been in the country for almost a decade?
Why does my browser attempt to download pages from http://clhs.lisp.se instead of viewing them normally?
Character Transformation
Youtube not blocked by iptables
If a spaceship ran out of fuel somewhere in space between Earth and Mars, does it slowly drift off to the Sun?
Is differentiation as a map discontinuous?
Does the app TikTok violate trademark?
Is a PWM required for regenerative braking on a DC Motor?
What secular civic space would pioneers build for small frontier towns?
We are on WHV, my boyfriend was in a small collision, we are leaving in 2 weeks what happens if we don’t pay the damages?
Do interval ratios take overtones into account or solely the fundamental frequency?
Do wheelchair-accessible aircraft exist?
Is it impolite to ask for an in-flight catalogue with no intention of buying?
Need Improvement on Script Which Continuously Tests Website
Is there a concept of "peer review" in Rabbinical Judaism?
Can my former employer sue me if I don't give them the photos I took (taking pictures was not part of my job description)?
My Project Manager does not accept carry-over in Scrum, Is that normal?
Can someone give the intuition behind Mean Absolute Error and the Median?
Why are there two fundamental laws of logic?
Diminutive -ula
I reverse the source code, you reverse the input!
If a spaceship ran out of fuel somewhere in space between Earth and Mars, does it slowly drift off to the Sun?
What is the delta-v required to get a mass in Earth orbit into the sun using a SINGLE transfer?How would a Jupiter flyby have helped to get to the Sun? Why was it later ruled out?How much less delta-v would it take to reach the Sun using Venus and Earth flyby's compared to direct?How deep is the force well of L4 and L5 Lagrangian Points of Earth-Sun set?Alcubierre “warp” drive and gravitation/orbital considerationsHow did the Apollo astronauts train for the 1/6G lunar landing?Could magnetic “boots” be used to simulate the effects of gravity for asteroid ships?Questions about the Dynamic Solid TideIs there a way to reproduce Earth-like gravity on a spacecraft close to a more massive body such as the sun?Using DART to measure GWhat Gravity does the Sun affect items with at the distance of 1 AU?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
$begingroup$
Pretty much what the title is saying. I feel like I am missing something fundamental here and this is driving me crazy.
Does a spaceship which is out of Earth's gravity drift to the Sun eventually?
gravity
$endgroup$
migrated from astronomy.stackexchange.com 3 hours ago
This question came from our site for astronomers and astrophysicists.
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
Pretty much what the title is saying. I feel like I am missing something fundamental here and this is driving me crazy.
Does a spaceship which is out of Earth's gravity drift to the Sun eventually?
gravity
$endgroup$
migrated from astronomy.stackexchange.com 3 hours ago
This question came from our site for astronomers and astrophysicists.
2
$begingroup$
The ship is in an orbit, with a lot of speed: the speed it had from being on Earth, combined with the speed it got from burning fuel. It's not like an out of fuel boat drifting on the ocean.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
yesterday
4
$begingroup$
Think about what stops the Earth falling into the Sun. It doesn't even have engines.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
16 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@badjohn To me the key word is "eventually". The Earth will "eventually" fall into the sun.
$endgroup$
– emory
14 hours ago
$begingroup$
A very long eventually and probably rather beyond what the OP had in mind. Anyway, although something may go wrong with our orbit, I don't think that falling into the Sun is inevitable or even the most likely.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
13 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes So, we seem to agree that the craft will probably settle into a moderately stable elliptical orbit. Of course, a collision or near collision is possible but it's unlikely. It stays in this orbit for a very long time and one day the Sun expands to intersect its orbit. I think that insurer's for craft may consider the Sun to be at fault.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
7 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
Pretty much what the title is saying. I feel like I am missing something fundamental here and this is driving me crazy.
Does a spaceship which is out of Earth's gravity drift to the Sun eventually?
gravity
$endgroup$
Pretty much what the title is saying. I feel like I am missing something fundamental here and this is driving me crazy.
Does a spaceship which is out of Earth's gravity drift to the Sun eventually?
gravity
gravity
asked yesterday
anilit99
migrated from astronomy.stackexchange.com 3 hours ago
This question came from our site for astronomers and astrophysicists.
migrated from astronomy.stackexchange.com 3 hours ago
This question came from our site for astronomers and astrophysicists.
migrated from astronomy.stackexchange.com 3 hours ago
This question came from our site for astronomers and astrophysicists.
2
$begingroup$
The ship is in an orbit, with a lot of speed: the speed it had from being on Earth, combined with the speed it got from burning fuel. It's not like an out of fuel boat drifting on the ocean.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
yesterday
4
$begingroup$
Think about what stops the Earth falling into the Sun. It doesn't even have engines.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
16 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@badjohn To me the key word is "eventually". The Earth will "eventually" fall into the sun.
$endgroup$
– emory
14 hours ago
$begingroup$
A very long eventually and probably rather beyond what the OP had in mind. Anyway, although something may go wrong with our orbit, I don't think that falling into the Sun is inevitable or even the most likely.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
13 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes So, we seem to agree that the craft will probably settle into a moderately stable elliptical orbit. Of course, a collision or near collision is possible but it's unlikely. It stays in this orbit for a very long time and one day the Sun expands to intersect its orbit. I think that insurer's for craft may consider the Sun to be at fault.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
7 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
2
$begingroup$
The ship is in an orbit, with a lot of speed: the speed it had from being on Earth, combined with the speed it got from burning fuel. It's not like an out of fuel boat drifting on the ocean.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
yesterday
4
$begingroup$
Think about what stops the Earth falling into the Sun. It doesn't even have engines.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
16 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@badjohn To me the key word is "eventually". The Earth will "eventually" fall into the sun.
$endgroup$
– emory
14 hours ago
$begingroup$
A very long eventually and probably rather beyond what the OP had in mind. Anyway, although something may go wrong with our orbit, I don't think that falling into the Sun is inevitable or even the most likely.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
13 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes So, we seem to agree that the craft will probably settle into a moderately stable elliptical orbit. Of course, a collision or near collision is possible but it's unlikely. It stays in this orbit for a very long time and one day the Sun expands to intersect its orbit. I think that insurer's for craft may consider the Sun to be at fault.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
7 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
The ship is in an orbit, with a lot of speed: the speed it had from being on Earth, combined with the speed it got from burning fuel. It's not like an out of fuel boat drifting on the ocean.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
yesterday
$begingroup$
The ship is in an orbit, with a lot of speed: the speed it had from being on Earth, combined with the speed it got from burning fuel. It's not like an out of fuel boat drifting on the ocean.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
yesterday
4
4
$begingroup$
Think about what stops the Earth falling into the Sun. It doesn't even have engines.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
16 hours ago
$begingroup$
Think about what stops the Earth falling into the Sun. It doesn't even have engines.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
16 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@badjohn To me the key word is "eventually". The Earth will "eventually" fall into the sun.
$endgroup$
– emory
14 hours ago
$begingroup$
@badjohn To me the key word is "eventually". The Earth will "eventually" fall into the sun.
$endgroup$
– emory
14 hours ago
$begingroup$
A very long eventually and probably rather beyond what the OP had in mind. Anyway, although something may go wrong with our orbit, I don't think that falling into the Sun is inevitable or even the most likely.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
A very long eventually and probably rather beyond what the OP had in mind. Anyway, although something may go wrong with our orbit, I don't think that falling into the Sun is inevitable or even the most likely.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
13 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes So, we seem to agree that the craft will probably settle into a moderately stable elliptical orbit. Of course, a collision or near collision is possible but it's unlikely. It stays in this orbit for a very long time and one day the Sun expands to intersect its orbit. I think that insurer's for craft may consider the Sun to be at fault.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes So, we seem to agree that the craft will probably settle into a moderately stable elliptical orbit. Of course, a collision or near collision is possible but it's unlikely. It stays in this orbit for a very long time and one day the Sun expands to intersect its orbit. I think that insurer's for craft may consider the Sun to be at fault.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
7 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
What you're missing is some combination of the following:
- objects launched from Earth orbit are still in orbit around the Sun,
- objects in orbit don't need fuel to stay in orbit.
All the planets stay in orbit around the sun because orbits are generally long term stable.
A spacecraft flying from Earth to Mars follows a loop, like in the picture below.
Source
Most of that time, the engines aren't firing, it's just an orbit with higher eccentricity that takes some fuel to enter into, but once in that orbit, it travels that arc naturally.
Escaping Earth takes a lot of fuel, and additional fuel is used to enter the longer orbit after which, it's flying towards Mars, playing catch-up in a sense.
When close to Mars, adjustments and rockets to reduce velocity.
What would happen to the craft depends on where it runs out of fuel, but you said between Earth and Mars. It would either just enter a slightly longer than Earth orbit or, perhaps maybe crash into Mars, though I think a near miss is more likely.
What you're describing, almost happened once, voyager 1 to Jupiter, though the article's final sentence, the author writes rather poorly saying
"would have gotten almost to Jupiter, and then come back toward the
sun, which would not have been good"
That's only partly accurate. It would have almost made it to Jupiter, then stayed in a more elliptical orbit, moving closer to the sun for a while, only to fall further away again as the orbit continued.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
awesome, this nails the answer in the head ! Thanks for taking time to write this down. I can talk to my kids with more honesty now.
$endgroup$
– anilit99
18 hours ago
$begingroup$
One minor correction: It is Mars that catches up with the (slower, relative to the sun) transfer orbit.
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I'm open to being wrong, but I don't think that's true. Earth is behind Mars at the time of launch. The ship catches up to Mars in it's elongated orbit.
$endgroup$
– userLTK
4 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It is a mistake to talk about being "out of Earth's gravity" as if there a fairly sharp boundary where Earth's gravity dropped to zero. If you double your distance to an object, the force of gravity drops by 1/4. So it does eventually become negligible, but there is no sharp dividing line.
Also, it is not Earth's gravity that keeps us from falling into the Sun. Remember, we are in orbit around the Sun too. We are moving at the same speed as Earth, and that's the speed you need to be moving to have an orbit of this radius. So if the Earth disappeared but all the people remained, we would all suffocate but we would keep orbiting the Sun.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
A spaceship in space is very different from a car on a flat road. If your car runs out of fuel, the friction between the tyres and the road cause the car to slow down until it eventually stops. In space there is almost no friction (because space is close to a perfect vacuum), so little that for the rest of this answer I will pretend there is none at all.
To get out of orbit of Earth, you need to move really fast. If you run out of fuel once out of the orbit of Earth, you will continue to move really fast because there is no friction in space. Your path will be bent by the gravity of everything, but only nearby (think inside the solar system) and massive (think the Sun, Earth, Jupiter, etc.) objects will have a noticeable effect. The closer and more massive the object, the bigger the effect.
While it is possible to speed up or slow down while passing these objects, you have to be close to them, and normally it takes a precise orbit to achieve this. So basically, you'll just keep drifting really fast unless you're really unlucky and crash into something. But because space is a vacuum, there's almost nothing to crash into.
Because your path is continuously being bent, you will most likely end up in orbit around something, and because the Sun is the most massive object in the solar system (about 99.86% of the total solar system mass), you'll most likely end up in orbit around the Sun.
It's possible if your initial aim was good enough that you could crash into Mars, assuming that was your destination and you weren't just planning on sailing past it.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
the closer and more massive the object - the bigger its sphere of influence. -if your initial [velocity (not aim); speed and direction] was good enough you wouldn't need to do a e.g., 'tans-lunar injection' to achieve Orbit insertion
$endgroup$
– Mazura
5 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Normally a spacecraft would use most of its fuel just leaving the earth. Retaining some secondary fuel for maneuvers. If it runs out of fuel early during liftoff it depends on how early it ran out to know what happens. it could either fall back to earth or end up in earth's orbit.
You'd expect if it runs out just a little before planned burnout time the spacecraft would be on a course to Mars but would have an altered trajectory.
During a planned launch to Mars, the spacecraft will be in free motion moving at a high velocity to get it to Mars.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Current spacecraft designs do not consume propellant while en-route to Mars because there is no need to apply any thrust. A launch to Mars would begin with an acceleration to at least low-Earth-orbit velocity. The spacecraft might then briefly orbit Earth, or simply continue accelerating to escape Earth's gravity and attain a trajectory which is a transfer orbit. Either way, at some point still very near Earth (relative to Mars), the spacecraft will shut down its engines and coast along the transfer orbit (an orbit around the Sun which more-or-less crosses the orbits of Earth and Mars). This orbit intersects Earth's orbit at the time and place Earth was during launch, and will intersect Mars' orbit at the time and place where Mars will be upon arrival. Upon arrival, the spacecraft will have to decelerate somehow to enter an orbit around Mars and/or enter Mars' atmosphere to land there. If the spacecraft fails to decelerate into orbit, it will remain on its transfer orbit, periodically crossing the orbits of Earth and Mars.
There are ideas for very high ISP propulsion systems which could theoretically shorten the time required to get to Mars. These systems would produce a small, constant acceleration - initially in a more-or-less prograde direction, but then turn around at more-or-less the halfway point to produce a retrograde thrust to slow down enough to be captured by Mars' gravity upon arrival. If such a system failed en-route, the vehicle would almost certainly miss Mars completely and find itself in an orbit around the Sun, probably with an apoapsis beyond Mars and periapsis somewhere between Earth and Mars.
In either case, a spacecraft becoming derelict enroute to Mars would not fall into the Sun; it would remain in a solar orbit unless/until it collides with a planet, perhaps after one or more perturbing planetary close approaches.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Building on the already great answers, it takes a significant amount of effort to reach the Sun, for example it's 55 times more energy than is required to get to Mars if starting from Earth orbit: It's surprisingly hard to go to the Sun.
The Earth is traveling in its orbit at approximately 30km/s and an object leaving Earth would need to actively decelerate to lose that speed before it would fall into the Sun. A craft running out of fuel would just continue in its existing orbit.
For further reading, see in answers to:
- What is the delta-v required to get a mass in Earth orbit into the sun using a SINGLE transfer?
- How much less delta-v would it take to reach the Sun using Venus and Earth flyby's compared to direct?
- How would a Jupiter flyby have helped to get to the Sun? Why was it later ruled out?
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It depends on the last thrust it had & direction it is moving to. Cause in space velocity of moving object remains same until it come across any gravitational forces.
$endgroup$
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
2
$begingroup$
This does not address the problem fully. For instance, there are always gravitational forces acting on a spacecraft within the solar system. How does that affect the velocity?
$endgroup$
– Hohmannfan♦
10 hours ago
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38988%2fif-a-spaceship-ran-out-of-fuel-somewhere-in-space-between-earth-and-mars-does-i%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
What you're missing is some combination of the following:
- objects launched from Earth orbit are still in orbit around the Sun,
- objects in orbit don't need fuel to stay in orbit.
All the planets stay in orbit around the sun because orbits are generally long term stable.
A spacecraft flying from Earth to Mars follows a loop, like in the picture below.
Source
Most of that time, the engines aren't firing, it's just an orbit with higher eccentricity that takes some fuel to enter into, but once in that orbit, it travels that arc naturally.
Escaping Earth takes a lot of fuel, and additional fuel is used to enter the longer orbit after which, it's flying towards Mars, playing catch-up in a sense.
When close to Mars, adjustments and rockets to reduce velocity.
What would happen to the craft depends on where it runs out of fuel, but you said between Earth and Mars. It would either just enter a slightly longer than Earth orbit or, perhaps maybe crash into Mars, though I think a near miss is more likely.
What you're describing, almost happened once, voyager 1 to Jupiter, though the article's final sentence, the author writes rather poorly saying
"would have gotten almost to Jupiter, and then come back toward the
sun, which would not have been good"
That's only partly accurate. It would have almost made it to Jupiter, then stayed in a more elliptical orbit, moving closer to the sun for a while, only to fall further away again as the orbit continued.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
awesome, this nails the answer in the head ! Thanks for taking time to write this down. I can talk to my kids with more honesty now.
$endgroup$
– anilit99
18 hours ago
$begingroup$
One minor correction: It is Mars that catches up with the (slower, relative to the sun) transfer orbit.
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I'm open to being wrong, but I don't think that's true. Earth is behind Mars at the time of launch. The ship catches up to Mars in it's elongated orbit.
$endgroup$
– userLTK
4 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
What you're missing is some combination of the following:
- objects launched from Earth orbit are still in orbit around the Sun,
- objects in orbit don't need fuel to stay in orbit.
All the planets stay in orbit around the sun because orbits are generally long term stable.
A spacecraft flying from Earth to Mars follows a loop, like in the picture below.
Source
Most of that time, the engines aren't firing, it's just an orbit with higher eccentricity that takes some fuel to enter into, but once in that orbit, it travels that arc naturally.
Escaping Earth takes a lot of fuel, and additional fuel is used to enter the longer orbit after which, it's flying towards Mars, playing catch-up in a sense.
When close to Mars, adjustments and rockets to reduce velocity.
What would happen to the craft depends on where it runs out of fuel, but you said between Earth and Mars. It would either just enter a slightly longer than Earth orbit or, perhaps maybe crash into Mars, though I think a near miss is more likely.
What you're describing, almost happened once, voyager 1 to Jupiter, though the article's final sentence, the author writes rather poorly saying
"would have gotten almost to Jupiter, and then come back toward the
sun, which would not have been good"
That's only partly accurate. It would have almost made it to Jupiter, then stayed in a more elliptical orbit, moving closer to the sun for a while, only to fall further away again as the orbit continued.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
awesome, this nails the answer in the head ! Thanks for taking time to write this down. I can talk to my kids with more honesty now.
$endgroup$
– anilit99
18 hours ago
$begingroup$
One minor correction: It is Mars that catches up with the (slower, relative to the sun) transfer orbit.
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I'm open to being wrong, but I don't think that's true. Earth is behind Mars at the time of launch. The ship catches up to Mars in it's elongated orbit.
$endgroup$
– userLTK
4 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
What you're missing is some combination of the following:
- objects launched from Earth orbit are still in orbit around the Sun,
- objects in orbit don't need fuel to stay in orbit.
All the planets stay in orbit around the sun because orbits are generally long term stable.
A spacecraft flying from Earth to Mars follows a loop, like in the picture below.
Source
Most of that time, the engines aren't firing, it's just an orbit with higher eccentricity that takes some fuel to enter into, but once in that orbit, it travels that arc naturally.
Escaping Earth takes a lot of fuel, and additional fuel is used to enter the longer orbit after which, it's flying towards Mars, playing catch-up in a sense.
When close to Mars, adjustments and rockets to reduce velocity.
What would happen to the craft depends on where it runs out of fuel, but you said between Earth and Mars. It would either just enter a slightly longer than Earth orbit or, perhaps maybe crash into Mars, though I think a near miss is more likely.
What you're describing, almost happened once, voyager 1 to Jupiter, though the article's final sentence, the author writes rather poorly saying
"would have gotten almost to Jupiter, and then come back toward the
sun, which would not have been good"
That's only partly accurate. It would have almost made it to Jupiter, then stayed in a more elliptical orbit, moving closer to the sun for a while, only to fall further away again as the orbit continued.
$endgroup$
What you're missing is some combination of the following:
- objects launched from Earth orbit are still in orbit around the Sun,
- objects in orbit don't need fuel to stay in orbit.
All the planets stay in orbit around the sun because orbits are generally long term stable.
A spacecraft flying from Earth to Mars follows a loop, like in the picture below.
Source
Most of that time, the engines aren't firing, it's just an orbit with higher eccentricity that takes some fuel to enter into, but once in that orbit, it travels that arc naturally.
Escaping Earth takes a lot of fuel, and additional fuel is used to enter the longer orbit after which, it's flying towards Mars, playing catch-up in a sense.
When close to Mars, adjustments and rockets to reduce velocity.
What would happen to the craft depends on where it runs out of fuel, but you said between Earth and Mars. It would either just enter a slightly longer than Earth orbit or, perhaps maybe crash into Mars, though I think a near miss is more likely.
What you're describing, almost happened once, voyager 1 to Jupiter, though the article's final sentence, the author writes rather poorly saying
"would have gotten almost to Jupiter, and then come back toward the
sun, which would not have been good"
That's only partly accurate. It would have almost made it to Jupiter, then stayed in a more elliptical orbit, moving closer to the sun for a while, only to fall further away again as the orbit continued.
answered yesterday
userLTKuserLTK
1,1845 silver badges12 bronze badges
1,1845 silver badges12 bronze badges
3
$begingroup$
awesome, this nails the answer in the head ! Thanks for taking time to write this down. I can talk to my kids with more honesty now.
$endgroup$
– anilit99
18 hours ago
$begingroup$
One minor correction: It is Mars that catches up with the (slower, relative to the sun) transfer orbit.
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I'm open to being wrong, but I don't think that's true. Earth is behind Mars at the time of launch. The ship catches up to Mars in it's elongated orbit.
$endgroup$
– userLTK
4 hours ago
add a comment
|
3
$begingroup$
awesome, this nails the answer in the head ! Thanks for taking time to write this down. I can talk to my kids with more honesty now.
$endgroup$
– anilit99
18 hours ago
$begingroup$
One minor correction: It is Mars that catches up with the (slower, relative to the sun) transfer orbit.
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I'm open to being wrong, but I don't think that's true. Earth is behind Mars at the time of launch. The ship catches up to Mars in it's elongated orbit.
$endgroup$
– userLTK
4 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
awesome, this nails the answer in the head ! Thanks for taking time to write this down. I can talk to my kids with more honesty now.
$endgroup$
– anilit99
18 hours ago
$begingroup$
awesome, this nails the answer in the head ! Thanks for taking time to write this down. I can talk to my kids with more honesty now.
$endgroup$
– anilit99
18 hours ago
$begingroup$
One minor correction: It is Mars that catches up with the (slower, relative to the sun) transfer orbit.
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
One minor correction: It is Mars that catches up with the (slower, relative to the sun) transfer orbit.
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I'm open to being wrong, but I don't think that's true. Earth is behind Mars at the time of launch. The ship catches up to Mars in it's elongated orbit.
$endgroup$
– userLTK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I'm open to being wrong, but I don't think that's true. Earth is behind Mars at the time of launch. The ship catches up to Mars in it's elongated orbit.
$endgroup$
– userLTK
4 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It is a mistake to talk about being "out of Earth's gravity" as if there a fairly sharp boundary where Earth's gravity dropped to zero. If you double your distance to an object, the force of gravity drops by 1/4. So it does eventually become negligible, but there is no sharp dividing line.
Also, it is not Earth's gravity that keeps us from falling into the Sun. Remember, we are in orbit around the Sun too. We are moving at the same speed as Earth, and that's the speed you need to be moving to have an orbit of this radius. So if the Earth disappeared but all the people remained, we would all suffocate but we would keep orbiting the Sun.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It is a mistake to talk about being "out of Earth's gravity" as if there a fairly sharp boundary where Earth's gravity dropped to zero. If you double your distance to an object, the force of gravity drops by 1/4. So it does eventually become negligible, but there is no sharp dividing line.
Also, it is not Earth's gravity that keeps us from falling into the Sun. Remember, we are in orbit around the Sun too. We are moving at the same speed as Earth, and that's the speed you need to be moving to have an orbit of this radius. So if the Earth disappeared but all the people remained, we would all suffocate but we would keep orbiting the Sun.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It is a mistake to talk about being "out of Earth's gravity" as if there a fairly sharp boundary where Earth's gravity dropped to zero. If you double your distance to an object, the force of gravity drops by 1/4. So it does eventually become negligible, but there is no sharp dividing line.
Also, it is not Earth's gravity that keeps us from falling into the Sun. Remember, we are in orbit around the Sun too. We are moving at the same speed as Earth, and that's the speed you need to be moving to have an orbit of this radius. So if the Earth disappeared but all the people remained, we would all suffocate but we would keep orbiting the Sun.
$endgroup$
It is a mistake to talk about being "out of Earth's gravity" as if there a fairly sharp boundary where Earth's gravity dropped to zero. If you double your distance to an object, the force of gravity drops by 1/4. So it does eventually become negligible, but there is no sharp dividing line.
Also, it is not Earth's gravity that keeps us from falling into the Sun. Remember, we are in orbit around the Sun too. We are moving at the same speed as Earth, and that's the speed you need to be moving to have an orbit of this radius. So if the Earth disappeared but all the people remained, we would all suffocate but we would keep orbiting the Sun.
answered 22 hours ago
Mark FoskeyMark Foskey
2,84612 silver badges22 bronze badges
2,84612 silver badges22 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
A spaceship in space is very different from a car on a flat road. If your car runs out of fuel, the friction between the tyres and the road cause the car to slow down until it eventually stops. In space there is almost no friction (because space is close to a perfect vacuum), so little that for the rest of this answer I will pretend there is none at all.
To get out of orbit of Earth, you need to move really fast. If you run out of fuel once out of the orbit of Earth, you will continue to move really fast because there is no friction in space. Your path will be bent by the gravity of everything, but only nearby (think inside the solar system) and massive (think the Sun, Earth, Jupiter, etc.) objects will have a noticeable effect. The closer and more massive the object, the bigger the effect.
While it is possible to speed up or slow down while passing these objects, you have to be close to them, and normally it takes a precise orbit to achieve this. So basically, you'll just keep drifting really fast unless you're really unlucky and crash into something. But because space is a vacuum, there's almost nothing to crash into.
Because your path is continuously being bent, you will most likely end up in orbit around something, and because the Sun is the most massive object in the solar system (about 99.86% of the total solar system mass), you'll most likely end up in orbit around the Sun.
It's possible if your initial aim was good enough that you could crash into Mars, assuming that was your destination and you weren't just planning on sailing past it.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
the closer and more massive the object - the bigger its sphere of influence. -if your initial [velocity (not aim); speed and direction] was good enough you wouldn't need to do a e.g., 'tans-lunar injection' to achieve Orbit insertion
$endgroup$
– Mazura
5 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
A spaceship in space is very different from a car on a flat road. If your car runs out of fuel, the friction between the tyres and the road cause the car to slow down until it eventually stops. In space there is almost no friction (because space is close to a perfect vacuum), so little that for the rest of this answer I will pretend there is none at all.
To get out of orbit of Earth, you need to move really fast. If you run out of fuel once out of the orbit of Earth, you will continue to move really fast because there is no friction in space. Your path will be bent by the gravity of everything, but only nearby (think inside the solar system) and massive (think the Sun, Earth, Jupiter, etc.) objects will have a noticeable effect. The closer and more massive the object, the bigger the effect.
While it is possible to speed up or slow down while passing these objects, you have to be close to them, and normally it takes a precise orbit to achieve this. So basically, you'll just keep drifting really fast unless you're really unlucky and crash into something. But because space is a vacuum, there's almost nothing to crash into.
Because your path is continuously being bent, you will most likely end up in orbit around something, and because the Sun is the most massive object in the solar system (about 99.86% of the total solar system mass), you'll most likely end up in orbit around the Sun.
It's possible if your initial aim was good enough that you could crash into Mars, assuming that was your destination and you weren't just planning on sailing past it.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
the closer and more massive the object - the bigger its sphere of influence. -if your initial [velocity (not aim); speed and direction] was good enough you wouldn't need to do a e.g., 'tans-lunar injection' to achieve Orbit insertion
$endgroup$
– Mazura
5 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
A spaceship in space is very different from a car on a flat road. If your car runs out of fuel, the friction between the tyres and the road cause the car to slow down until it eventually stops. In space there is almost no friction (because space is close to a perfect vacuum), so little that for the rest of this answer I will pretend there is none at all.
To get out of orbit of Earth, you need to move really fast. If you run out of fuel once out of the orbit of Earth, you will continue to move really fast because there is no friction in space. Your path will be bent by the gravity of everything, but only nearby (think inside the solar system) and massive (think the Sun, Earth, Jupiter, etc.) objects will have a noticeable effect. The closer and more massive the object, the bigger the effect.
While it is possible to speed up or slow down while passing these objects, you have to be close to them, and normally it takes a precise orbit to achieve this. So basically, you'll just keep drifting really fast unless you're really unlucky and crash into something. But because space is a vacuum, there's almost nothing to crash into.
Because your path is continuously being bent, you will most likely end up in orbit around something, and because the Sun is the most massive object in the solar system (about 99.86% of the total solar system mass), you'll most likely end up in orbit around the Sun.
It's possible if your initial aim was good enough that you could crash into Mars, assuming that was your destination and you weren't just planning on sailing past it.
$endgroup$
A spaceship in space is very different from a car on a flat road. If your car runs out of fuel, the friction between the tyres and the road cause the car to slow down until it eventually stops. In space there is almost no friction (because space is close to a perfect vacuum), so little that for the rest of this answer I will pretend there is none at all.
To get out of orbit of Earth, you need to move really fast. If you run out of fuel once out of the orbit of Earth, you will continue to move really fast because there is no friction in space. Your path will be bent by the gravity of everything, but only nearby (think inside the solar system) and massive (think the Sun, Earth, Jupiter, etc.) objects will have a noticeable effect. The closer and more massive the object, the bigger the effect.
While it is possible to speed up or slow down while passing these objects, you have to be close to them, and normally it takes a precise orbit to achieve this. So basically, you'll just keep drifting really fast unless you're really unlucky and crash into something. But because space is a vacuum, there's almost nothing to crash into.
Because your path is continuously being bent, you will most likely end up in orbit around something, and because the Sun is the most massive object in the solar system (about 99.86% of the total solar system mass), you'll most likely end up in orbit around the Sun.
It's possible if your initial aim was good enough that you could crash into Mars, assuming that was your destination and you weren't just planning on sailing past it.
answered 19 hours ago
CJ DennisCJ Dennis
3193 silver badges9 bronze badges
3193 silver badges9 bronze badges
$begingroup$
the closer and more massive the object - the bigger its sphere of influence. -if your initial [velocity (not aim); speed and direction] was good enough you wouldn't need to do a e.g., 'tans-lunar injection' to achieve Orbit insertion
$endgroup$
– Mazura
5 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
the closer and more massive the object - the bigger its sphere of influence. -if your initial [velocity (not aim); speed and direction] was good enough you wouldn't need to do a e.g., 'tans-lunar injection' to achieve Orbit insertion
$endgroup$
– Mazura
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
the closer and more massive the object - the bigger its sphere of influence. -if your initial [velocity (not aim); speed and direction] was good enough you wouldn't need to do a e.g., 'tans-lunar injection' to achieve Orbit insertion
$endgroup$
– Mazura
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
the closer and more massive the object - the bigger its sphere of influence. -if your initial [velocity (not aim); speed and direction] was good enough you wouldn't need to do a e.g., 'tans-lunar injection' to achieve Orbit insertion
$endgroup$
– Mazura
5 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Normally a spacecraft would use most of its fuel just leaving the earth. Retaining some secondary fuel for maneuvers. If it runs out of fuel early during liftoff it depends on how early it ran out to know what happens. it could either fall back to earth or end up in earth's orbit.
You'd expect if it runs out just a little before planned burnout time the spacecraft would be on a course to Mars but would have an altered trajectory.
During a planned launch to Mars, the spacecraft will be in free motion moving at a high velocity to get it to Mars.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Normally a spacecraft would use most of its fuel just leaving the earth. Retaining some secondary fuel for maneuvers. If it runs out of fuel early during liftoff it depends on how early it ran out to know what happens. it could either fall back to earth or end up in earth's orbit.
You'd expect if it runs out just a little before planned burnout time the spacecraft would be on a course to Mars but would have an altered trajectory.
During a planned launch to Mars, the spacecraft will be in free motion moving at a high velocity to get it to Mars.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Normally a spacecraft would use most of its fuel just leaving the earth. Retaining some secondary fuel for maneuvers. If it runs out of fuel early during liftoff it depends on how early it ran out to know what happens. it could either fall back to earth or end up in earth's orbit.
You'd expect if it runs out just a little before planned burnout time the spacecraft would be on a course to Mars but would have an altered trajectory.
During a planned launch to Mars, the spacecraft will be in free motion moving at a high velocity to get it to Mars.
$endgroup$
Normally a spacecraft would use most of its fuel just leaving the earth. Retaining some secondary fuel for maneuvers. If it runs out of fuel early during liftoff it depends on how early it ran out to know what happens. it could either fall back to earth or end up in earth's orbit.
You'd expect if it runs out just a little before planned burnout time the spacecraft would be on a course to Mars but would have an altered trajectory.
During a planned launch to Mars, the spacecraft will be in free motion moving at a high velocity to get it to Mars.
answered yesterday
jmh
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Current spacecraft designs do not consume propellant while en-route to Mars because there is no need to apply any thrust. A launch to Mars would begin with an acceleration to at least low-Earth-orbit velocity. The spacecraft might then briefly orbit Earth, or simply continue accelerating to escape Earth's gravity and attain a trajectory which is a transfer orbit. Either way, at some point still very near Earth (relative to Mars), the spacecraft will shut down its engines and coast along the transfer orbit (an orbit around the Sun which more-or-less crosses the orbits of Earth and Mars). This orbit intersects Earth's orbit at the time and place Earth was during launch, and will intersect Mars' orbit at the time and place where Mars will be upon arrival. Upon arrival, the spacecraft will have to decelerate somehow to enter an orbit around Mars and/or enter Mars' atmosphere to land there. If the spacecraft fails to decelerate into orbit, it will remain on its transfer orbit, periodically crossing the orbits of Earth and Mars.
There are ideas for very high ISP propulsion systems which could theoretically shorten the time required to get to Mars. These systems would produce a small, constant acceleration - initially in a more-or-less prograde direction, but then turn around at more-or-less the halfway point to produce a retrograde thrust to slow down enough to be captured by Mars' gravity upon arrival. If such a system failed en-route, the vehicle would almost certainly miss Mars completely and find itself in an orbit around the Sun, probably with an apoapsis beyond Mars and periapsis somewhere between Earth and Mars.
In either case, a spacecraft becoming derelict enroute to Mars would not fall into the Sun; it would remain in a solar orbit unless/until it collides with a planet, perhaps after one or more perturbing planetary close approaches.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Current spacecraft designs do not consume propellant while en-route to Mars because there is no need to apply any thrust. A launch to Mars would begin with an acceleration to at least low-Earth-orbit velocity. The spacecraft might then briefly orbit Earth, or simply continue accelerating to escape Earth's gravity and attain a trajectory which is a transfer orbit. Either way, at some point still very near Earth (relative to Mars), the spacecraft will shut down its engines and coast along the transfer orbit (an orbit around the Sun which more-or-less crosses the orbits of Earth and Mars). This orbit intersects Earth's orbit at the time and place Earth was during launch, and will intersect Mars' orbit at the time and place where Mars will be upon arrival. Upon arrival, the spacecraft will have to decelerate somehow to enter an orbit around Mars and/or enter Mars' atmosphere to land there. If the spacecraft fails to decelerate into orbit, it will remain on its transfer orbit, periodically crossing the orbits of Earth and Mars.
There are ideas for very high ISP propulsion systems which could theoretically shorten the time required to get to Mars. These systems would produce a small, constant acceleration - initially in a more-or-less prograde direction, but then turn around at more-or-less the halfway point to produce a retrograde thrust to slow down enough to be captured by Mars' gravity upon arrival. If such a system failed en-route, the vehicle would almost certainly miss Mars completely and find itself in an orbit around the Sun, probably with an apoapsis beyond Mars and periapsis somewhere between Earth and Mars.
In either case, a spacecraft becoming derelict enroute to Mars would not fall into the Sun; it would remain in a solar orbit unless/until it collides with a planet, perhaps after one or more perturbing planetary close approaches.
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Current spacecraft designs do not consume propellant while en-route to Mars because there is no need to apply any thrust. A launch to Mars would begin with an acceleration to at least low-Earth-orbit velocity. The spacecraft might then briefly orbit Earth, or simply continue accelerating to escape Earth's gravity and attain a trajectory which is a transfer orbit. Either way, at some point still very near Earth (relative to Mars), the spacecraft will shut down its engines and coast along the transfer orbit (an orbit around the Sun which more-or-less crosses the orbits of Earth and Mars). This orbit intersects Earth's orbit at the time and place Earth was during launch, and will intersect Mars' orbit at the time and place where Mars will be upon arrival. Upon arrival, the spacecraft will have to decelerate somehow to enter an orbit around Mars and/or enter Mars' atmosphere to land there. If the spacecraft fails to decelerate into orbit, it will remain on its transfer orbit, periodically crossing the orbits of Earth and Mars.
There are ideas for very high ISP propulsion systems which could theoretically shorten the time required to get to Mars. These systems would produce a small, constant acceleration - initially in a more-or-less prograde direction, but then turn around at more-or-less the halfway point to produce a retrograde thrust to slow down enough to be captured by Mars' gravity upon arrival. If such a system failed en-route, the vehicle would almost certainly miss Mars completely and find itself in an orbit around the Sun, probably with an apoapsis beyond Mars and periapsis somewhere between Earth and Mars.
In either case, a spacecraft becoming derelict enroute to Mars would not fall into the Sun; it would remain in a solar orbit unless/until it collides with a planet, perhaps after one or more perturbing planetary close approaches.
$endgroup$
Current spacecraft designs do not consume propellant while en-route to Mars because there is no need to apply any thrust. A launch to Mars would begin with an acceleration to at least low-Earth-orbit velocity. The spacecraft might then briefly orbit Earth, or simply continue accelerating to escape Earth's gravity and attain a trajectory which is a transfer orbit. Either way, at some point still very near Earth (relative to Mars), the spacecraft will shut down its engines and coast along the transfer orbit (an orbit around the Sun which more-or-less crosses the orbits of Earth and Mars). This orbit intersects Earth's orbit at the time and place Earth was during launch, and will intersect Mars' orbit at the time and place where Mars will be upon arrival. Upon arrival, the spacecraft will have to decelerate somehow to enter an orbit around Mars and/or enter Mars' atmosphere to land there. If the spacecraft fails to decelerate into orbit, it will remain on its transfer orbit, periodically crossing the orbits of Earth and Mars.
There are ideas for very high ISP propulsion systems which could theoretically shorten the time required to get to Mars. These systems would produce a small, constant acceleration - initially in a more-or-less prograde direction, but then turn around at more-or-less the halfway point to produce a retrograde thrust to slow down enough to be captured by Mars' gravity upon arrival. If such a system failed en-route, the vehicle would almost certainly miss Mars completely and find itself in an orbit around the Sun, probably with an apoapsis beyond Mars and periapsis somewhere between Earth and Mars.
In either case, a spacecraft becoming derelict enroute to Mars would not fall into the Sun; it would remain in a solar orbit unless/until it collides with a planet, perhaps after one or more perturbing planetary close approaches.
answered 1 hour ago
Anthony XAnthony X
10.6k1 gold badge44 silver badges88 bronze badges
10.6k1 gold badge44 silver badges88 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Building on the already great answers, it takes a significant amount of effort to reach the Sun, for example it's 55 times more energy than is required to get to Mars if starting from Earth orbit: It's surprisingly hard to go to the Sun.
The Earth is traveling in its orbit at approximately 30km/s and an object leaving Earth would need to actively decelerate to lose that speed before it would fall into the Sun. A craft running out of fuel would just continue in its existing orbit.
For further reading, see in answers to:
- What is the delta-v required to get a mass in Earth orbit into the sun using a SINGLE transfer?
- How much less delta-v would it take to reach the Sun using Venus and Earth flyby's compared to direct?
- How would a Jupiter flyby have helped to get to the Sun? Why was it later ruled out?
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Building on the already great answers, it takes a significant amount of effort to reach the Sun, for example it's 55 times more energy than is required to get to Mars if starting from Earth orbit: It's surprisingly hard to go to the Sun.
The Earth is traveling in its orbit at approximately 30km/s and an object leaving Earth would need to actively decelerate to lose that speed before it would fall into the Sun. A craft running out of fuel would just continue in its existing orbit.
For further reading, see in answers to:
- What is the delta-v required to get a mass in Earth orbit into the sun using a SINGLE transfer?
- How much less delta-v would it take to reach the Sun using Venus and Earth flyby's compared to direct?
- How would a Jupiter flyby have helped to get to the Sun? Why was it later ruled out?
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Building on the already great answers, it takes a significant amount of effort to reach the Sun, for example it's 55 times more energy than is required to get to Mars if starting from Earth orbit: It's surprisingly hard to go to the Sun.
The Earth is traveling in its orbit at approximately 30km/s and an object leaving Earth would need to actively decelerate to lose that speed before it would fall into the Sun. A craft running out of fuel would just continue in its existing orbit.
For further reading, see in answers to:
- What is the delta-v required to get a mass in Earth orbit into the sun using a SINGLE transfer?
- How much less delta-v would it take to reach the Sun using Venus and Earth flyby's compared to direct?
- How would a Jupiter flyby have helped to get to the Sun? Why was it later ruled out?
$endgroup$
Building on the already great answers, it takes a significant amount of effort to reach the Sun, for example it's 55 times more energy than is required to get to Mars if starting from Earth orbit: It's surprisingly hard to go to the Sun.
The Earth is traveling in its orbit at approximately 30km/s and an object leaving Earth would need to actively decelerate to lose that speed before it would fall into the Sun. A craft running out of fuel would just continue in its existing orbit.
For further reading, see in answers to:
- What is the delta-v required to get a mass in Earth orbit into the sun using a SINGLE transfer?
- How much less delta-v would it take to reach the Sun using Venus and Earth flyby's compared to direct?
- How would a Jupiter flyby have helped to get to the Sun? Why was it later ruled out?
edited 19 mins ago
uhoh
53.9k25 gold badges212 silver badges681 bronze badges
53.9k25 gold badges212 silver badges681 bronze badges
answered 6 hours ago
TipTap
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It depends on the last thrust it had & direction it is moving to. Cause in space velocity of moving object remains same until it come across any gravitational forces.
$endgroup$
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
2
$begingroup$
This does not address the problem fully. For instance, there are always gravitational forces acting on a spacecraft within the solar system. How does that affect the velocity?
$endgroup$
– Hohmannfan♦
10 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It depends on the last thrust it had & direction it is moving to. Cause in space velocity of moving object remains same until it come across any gravitational forces.
$endgroup$
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
2
$begingroup$
This does not address the problem fully. For instance, there are always gravitational forces acting on a spacecraft within the solar system. How does that affect the velocity?
$endgroup$
– Hohmannfan♦
10 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It depends on the last thrust it had & direction it is moving to. Cause in space velocity of moving object remains same until it come across any gravitational forces.
$endgroup$
It depends on the last thrust it had & direction it is moving to. Cause in space velocity of moving object remains same until it come across any gravitational forces.
answered 15 hours ago
hawk
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
2
$begingroup$
This does not address the problem fully. For instance, there are always gravitational forces acting on a spacecraft within the solar system. How does that affect the velocity?
$endgroup$
– Hohmannfan♦
10 hours ago
add a comment
|
2
$begingroup$
This does not address the problem fully. For instance, there are always gravitational forces acting on a spacecraft within the solar system. How does that affect the velocity?
$endgroup$
– Hohmannfan♦
10 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
This does not address the problem fully. For instance, there are always gravitational forces acting on a spacecraft within the solar system. How does that affect the velocity?
$endgroup$
– Hohmannfan♦
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
This does not address the problem fully. For instance, there are always gravitational forces acting on a spacecraft within the solar system. How does that affect the velocity?
$endgroup$
– Hohmannfan♦
10 hours ago
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38988%2fif-a-spaceship-ran-out-of-fuel-somewhere-in-space-between-earth-and-mars-does-i%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
$begingroup$
The ship is in an orbit, with a lot of speed: the speed it had from being on Earth, combined with the speed it got from burning fuel. It's not like an out of fuel boat drifting on the ocean.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
yesterday
4
$begingroup$
Think about what stops the Earth falling into the Sun. It doesn't even have engines.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
16 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@badjohn To me the key word is "eventually". The Earth will "eventually" fall into the sun.
$endgroup$
– emory
14 hours ago
$begingroup$
A very long eventually and probably rather beyond what the OP had in mind. Anyway, although something may go wrong with our orbit, I don't think that falling into the Sun is inevitable or even the most likely.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
13 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@PeterCordes So, we seem to agree that the craft will probably settle into a moderately stable elliptical orbit. Of course, a collision or near collision is possible but it's unlikely. It stays in this orbit for a very long time and one day the Sun expands to intersect its orbit. I think that insurer's for craft may consider the Sun to be at fault.
$endgroup$
– badjohn
7 hours ago