3.4.26 · D4Rocket Flight Mechanics

Exercises — Terminal landing — propulsive descent, suicide burn

3,305 words15 min readBack to topic

Level 1 — Recognition

Problem 1.1

A lander is falling. Its engine, on its own, would push it upward at . Local gravity is . What is the net braking acceleration the vehicle actually feels once the engine is lit?

Recall Solution

Gravity does not switch off when the engine fires — it keeps pulling down the whole time. So the useful deceleration is only the leftover push above what gravity steals: Answer: .

Problem 1.2

Two landers, A and B, both approaching Mars (). A has , B has . Which one is physically able to perform a suicide burn, and which one cannot stop at all?

Recall Solution

A suicide burn only works if the net acceleration points upward (positive), i.e. if .

  • Lander A: can brake.
  • Lander B: → net acceleration is still downward; the engine cannot even hold it up, let alone slow it. Cannot stop. Answer: A can, B cannot.

Level 2 — Application

Problem 2.1

A booster is falling straight down at . Engine gives ; . At what altitude must it ignite so velocity and altitude hit zero together?

Recall Solution

Net braking: . Burn altitude: Answer: ignite at .

Problem 2.2

Same booster, same engine, but now it is falling twice as fast, . Predict first whether the required altitude doubles, then compute.

Recall Solution

Forecast: height grows as , so doubling should quadruple the height → expect , not . Verify: Answer: — four times, not two.

Problem 2.3

A lander must ignite no higher than (any higher and it clips a ridge). Its engine gives . What is the maximum falling speed it may have at ignition?

Recall Solution

Read the problem carefully: the ridge sets the largest allowed burn altitude, so the ceiling is the burn altitude at the fastest permitted speed. We therefore set and solve for . Rearrange the burn formula for : Substitute and : Answer: — faster than this and 600 m of runway is not enough to stop in time.


Level 3 — Analysis

Problem 3.1

A rocket falls from rest through a total height . Engine gives , . Find the altitude above the ground at which the suicide burn ignites.

The figure below is your map for this problem — refer to it as we go. The vertical axis (white arrow, labelled "altitude h") is height above ground, up positive. The amber at the top marks the start point (, at rest). The long cyan arrow is Phase 1, the free fall where speed grows. The amber dashed line is the ignition altitude we are solving for, marked with an amber . Below it the amber arrow is Phase 2, the braking burn down to the cyan ground line at , .

Figure — Terminal landing — propulsive descent, suicide burn
Recall Solution

Look at the figure: the fall splits into the two arrows, and each gives one equation.

  1. Fall speed as a function of drop (the cyan Phase-1 arrow). Falling freely from rest through a drop of — the length of the cyan arrow — the speed reached at the amber ignition line is (from with , ):
  2. Burn requirement (the amber Phase-2 arrow). To stop from over the remaining height — the length of the amber arrow down to the ground line:

Substitute (1) into (2). The term goes on top: Put numbers: . That is exactly where the amber dashed line sits in the figure. Check the ignition speed (the value beside the amber ● dot): . Answer: ignite at , falling at .

Problem 3.2

For a fall from rest, show that the ignition altitude is a fixed fraction of the total drop height, and find that fraction in terms of and .

Recall Solution

From Problem 3.1's substituted equation: Let . Then , so The ignition fraction is simply . Higher thrust → smaller fraction → you wait longer (fire lower). Check 3.1: , and ✓. Answer: .


Level 4 — Synthesis

Problem 4.1

A lander has dry-plus-payload mass that gives at ignition (). It falls at . The engine's exhaust velocity gives it a specific-impulse-based mass-flow such that it burns of its mass per second of full thrust (from Thrust and Specific Impulse). (a) Find the burn altitude with the constant-mass formula. (b) Estimate the burn duration using the constant- approximation. (c) Estimate the propellant fraction consumed.

Recall Solution

(a) . (b) With constant deceleration, time to kill speed is : (c) At per second for (linear first estimate): This exceeds — a red flag. It means the constant-mass model breaks down: you cannot burn that long at this flow without running dry. In reality mass drops, rises, so grows, the burn is shorter than 12.86 s, and less propellant is used. See Problem 5.1 for the honest exact treatment. Answers: (a) , (b) (over-estimate), (c) linear estimate — signals the constant-mass model is invalid here.

Problem 4.2

Two candidate engines for the same , descent: Engine X gives , Engine Y gives . Which lets you ignite lower, and by what factor is Y's burn altitude smaller than X's?

Recall Solution

.

  • X: , .
  • Y: , . Ratio . Engine Y ignites lower (safer margin) and needs only one-third the altitude. Note doubling from 20→40 did not halve the height — it tripled the net braking (10→30), so the height fell by a factor of 3. Answer: Y ignites lower; .

Level 5 — Mastery

Problem 5.1

Exact-ish check on the mass-varying burn. A lander enters its burn at speed with thrust producing an initial ; . Because propellant leaves, the true deceleration grows through the burn. Compare the constant-mass burn altitude against a two-segment estimate that uses for the first half of the speed loss and for the second half (mimicking mass dropping so thrust-accel rises). Which needs less altitude, and does that match the physics?

Recall Solution

Constant-mass baseline: , Two-segment estimate. Split the speed drop into two halves at . For each segment use rearranged as (here = faster speed entering the segment, = slower speed leaving it).

  • Segment 1: slow from to , mass still high so , :
  • Segment 2: slow from to , mass has dropped so , :
  • Total burn altitude: add the two segment heights:

Conclusion: the mass-varying estimate needs less altitude ( vs constant-mass). This matches the physics: as fuel burns, rises, net braking strengthens, and the vehicle stops in less distance. So the constant-mass formula is a conservative over-estimate of the runway you need — which is good, because over-estimating your braking room errs on the safe side. Answer: mass-varying constant-mass; the growing thrust-acceleration shortens the runway.

Problem 5.2

A booster falls from rest on Earth () and must reach zero speed at the ground. Its engine gives (exactly ). Total drop . (a) Find the ignition altitude fraction and altitude. (b) Find the ignition speed. (c) Compare the ignition speed to the ground-impact speed the vehicle would have had with no burn, and comment.

Recall Solution

(a) From Problem 3.2, ignition fraction . So (b) Ignition speed after falling through : Cross-check with burn formula: ✓. (c) With no burn the impact speed after the full would be So the vehicle ignites at (already very fast) and, in the last kilometre, bleeds off all of that plus the extra it would have gained — the burn works hardest right at the end. That "let it fall almost the whole way, then slam the brakes once" is exactly the fuel-optimal logic of the suicide burn. Answers: (a) fraction , ; (b) ; (c) no-burn impact .


Recall One-line summary of the whole page

(valid only for ); from rest, ignite at fraction of the drop; height scales as ; forgetting is dangerous, ignoring mass loss is conservative.

Connections

  • 3.4.26 Terminal landing — propulsive descent, suicide burn (Hinglish) — the parent note these exercises drill
  • Kinematics — Equations of Motion — the engine behind every problem
  • Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation — the exact mass-loss treatment invoked in L4/L5
  • Thrust and Specific Impulse — source of (with = thrust force) and the mass-flow in Problem 4.1
  • Powered Descent Guidance — real-time recomputation of in flight