>>12541377Consider a cube with one rocket engine below that can lift (itself and) two cubes above it.
>1 cube fuel>1 cube engine>2 cubes thrustIf you double the width and height of the cubey rocket you end up with:
>8 cubes fuel>4 cube engines>8 cubes thrustIf you double it once more to four cubes:
>64 cubes fuel>16 cubes engine>32 cubes thrustAt the second iteration you are already tied and it wont lift off. The third just demonstrates how ridiculous it can get (that one will have to stay still until it burns more than half its fuel before it takes off). Your rocket can't grow in height at the same rate it grows in width because the available room for engines is insufficient. The area for those scales in second power, the mass they must lift in third.
The solution is alternative fuel tank shapes maximizing thrust area. Sphere is among the first, but it too will run out of space quickly. Eventually even a flying saucer won't cut it because the associated structural support will eat into the "column" the rocket engine lifts above it.
While still on this, that is the reason why upscaled starship drawings are retarded.
