From: eaglesondouglas@gmail.com   
      
   On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 7:56:35 PM UTC-4, Douglas Eagleson wrote:   
   > On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 11:14:20 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote:   
   > > In article <7a4555f4-b44b-4c97...@googlegroups.com>,   
   > > eagleso...@gmail.com says...   
   > > >   
   > > > Back in freshman physics the large lecture   
   > > > hall was filled to direct students to the correct   
   > > > curriculum. One class was the old mass thrust   
   > > > theory. If you could not follow the theory you   
   > > > were directed to a non-physics department.   
   > > >   
   > > > I still wonder to this day. I believed it was more   
   > > > complicated than stated. There was a function   
   > > > of rocket mass change with time. And a constant   
   > > > fuel mass burning giving thrust. A fuel mass velocity   
   > > > equates the theory. Assuming a constant throttle.   
   > > >   
   > > > My question was the true efficiency of fuel mass   
   > > > to thrust. The internal chamber structure is my   
   > > > question. How would a flat plate engine design   
   > > > differ from a the chamber? Begging the question,   
   > > > how do chamber designs converge to the most   
   > > > efficient?   
   > > >   
   > > > I figure that maybe the hottest engine is the most   
   > > > efficient. Making the idea that a thermal defect   
   > > > exists. This is energy radiated not effecting   
   > > > thrust. This is of course small compared   
   > > > to chemical thrust. But it does introduce the   
   > > > concept of chamber internal dynamics.   
   > > > How would a straight tube chamber differ   
   > > > from the normal cylinder with nozzle?   
   > > > And the exact location of the burn in the chamber   
   > > > be calculated?   
   > > A rocket engine's nozzle is absolutely essential for changing pressure   
   > > of the combustion products into thrust.   
   > >   
   > > Theory and equations here:   
   > >   
   > > ROCKET PROPULSION   
   > > https://tinyurl.com/w9dyedn   
   > >   
   > > Jeff   
   > > --   
   > > All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.   
   > > These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,   
   > > employer, or any organization that I am a member of.   
   > Thanks for the reference.   
   >   
   > I though I needed to not try rocket science.   
   > von Braun I believe introduced the USA to a proper   
   > delta-v function.   
   >   
   > I once offered $12K for a surplus rocket including   
   > a mothballed motor. It was a forty footer that appeared to   
   > be steered by a large gyroscope. The bay for this was   
   > empty. The motor was non-steered bolted solid.   
   >   
   > Now my interests are in solid fuel motors. The goal   
   > is to loft a pound payload 2 miles high.   
      
   opps. sorry for the typo.  The goal is fifty pounds of deadweight,   
   payload.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)