Can a rocket refuel on Mars from water?












10












$begingroup$


Can a rocket run only on hydrogen and oxygen? Could a rocket, rover, and electrolysis machine be sent to either of Mars' poles to excavate ice to make hydrogen and oxygen to refuel an unmanned rocket?



What would be the benefit of not hauling the return fuel?
Could the travel time be shortened if fuel was waiting on Mars?



Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?



https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/112136/what-is-the-ideal-temperature-to-crack-water










share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
    $endgroup$
    – Jon of All Trades
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
    $endgroup$
    – jamesqf
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
    $endgroup$
    – Skyler
    6 hours ago
















10












$begingroup$


Can a rocket run only on hydrogen and oxygen? Could a rocket, rover, and electrolysis machine be sent to either of Mars' poles to excavate ice to make hydrogen and oxygen to refuel an unmanned rocket?



What would be the benefit of not hauling the return fuel?
Could the travel time be shortened if fuel was waiting on Mars?



Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?



https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/112136/what-is-the-ideal-temperature-to-crack-water










share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
    $endgroup$
    – Jon of All Trades
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
    $endgroup$
    – jamesqf
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
    $endgroup$
    – Skyler
    6 hours ago














10












10








10





$begingroup$


Can a rocket run only on hydrogen and oxygen? Could a rocket, rover, and electrolysis machine be sent to either of Mars' poles to excavate ice to make hydrogen and oxygen to refuel an unmanned rocket?



What would be the benefit of not hauling the return fuel?
Could the travel time be shortened if fuel was waiting on Mars?



Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?



https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/112136/what-is-the-ideal-temperature-to-crack-water










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




Can a rocket run only on hydrogen and oxygen? Could a rocket, rover, and electrolysis machine be sent to either of Mars' poles to excavate ice to make hydrogen and oxygen to refuel an unmanned rocket?



What would be the benefit of not hauling the return fuel?
Could the travel time be shortened if fuel was waiting on Mars?



Can a machine process and run on $CO_2$ and $H_2O$ for an $O_2$ by product?



https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/112136/what-is-the-ideal-temperature-to-crack-water







mars launch fuel isru design-alternative






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 10 hours ago







Muze

















asked 12 hours ago









MuzeMuze

1,3511266




1,3511266








  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
    $endgroup$
    – Jon of All Trades
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
    $endgroup$
    – jamesqf
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
    $endgroup$
    – Skyler
    6 hours ago














  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
    $endgroup$
    – Jon of All Trades
    10 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
    $endgroup$
    – jamesqf
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
    $endgroup$
    – Skyler
    6 hours ago








5




5




$begingroup$
Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
$endgroup$
– Jon of All Trades
10 hours ago




$begingroup$
Note that a number of launch systems, including the space shuttle, used hydrolox fuel (hydrogen + liquid oxygen). That's just water split into its components.
$endgroup$
– Jon of All Trades
10 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago




$begingroup$
The most obvious benefit is that you don't have the cost of launching the fuel from Earth.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
7 hours ago












$begingroup$
This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
$endgroup$
– Skyler
6 hours ago




$begingroup$
This is not a full answer, but several spacecraft have run on hydrogen and oxygen, for example the third stage of the Saturn V.
$endgroup$
– Skyler
6 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















15












$begingroup$

It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.



Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.



The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
    $endgroup$
    – MSalters
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
    $endgroup$
    – PearsonArtPhoto
    2 hours ago



















2












$begingroup$

Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization



Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct



The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction



This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.



This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.



There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$














    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    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/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35280%2fcan-a-rocket-refuel-on-mars-from-water%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    15












    $begingroup$

    It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.



    Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.



    The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
      $endgroup$
      – MSalters
      9 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
      $endgroup$
      – PearsonArtPhoto
      2 hours ago
















    15












    $begingroup$

    It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.



    Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.



    The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
      $endgroup$
      – MSalters
      9 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
      $endgroup$
      – PearsonArtPhoto
      2 hours ago














    15












    15








    15





    $begingroup$

    It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.



    Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.



    The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    It absolutely could! First of all, water can be split in to hydrogen and oxygen, which can be enough to launch a rocket. Hydrogen requires a very low temperature, and the rocket engine doesn't have as much thrust as other options out there, but it is the same fuel that ran the Space Shuttle main engine, among others.



    Water and carbon dioxide, easily available in the atmosphere of Mars, can be used to make Methane and Oxygen, which is a fantastic rocket fuel. This is the central premise of the book "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin, and features critically in SpaceX's plans to colonize Mars. This is easier to store, and gives a higher thrust compared to hydrogen/ oxygen. It does take a lot of power to do so, however, and that might be an issue.



    The main benefit is it requires a whole lot less cargo to be carried to Mars. If you can refuel a rocket on Mars, you can make a mission there reasonably priced, compared to the HUGE price that it would take to do one without in-situ resource utilization.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 2 hours ago

























    answered 12 hours ago









    PearsonArtPhotoPearsonArtPhoto

    84.2k16243465




    84.2k16243465








    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
      $endgroup$
      – MSalters
      9 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
      $endgroup$
      – PearsonArtPhoto
      2 hours ago














    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
      $endgroup$
      – MSalters
      9 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
      $endgroup$
      – PearsonArtPhoto
      2 hours ago








    4




    4




    $begingroup$
    Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
    $endgroup$
    – MSalters
    9 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Technically this doesn't answer the question. Methane isn't hydrogen, and it's far more complex to make on Mars. It requires more, not less mass to produce it. However, the benefit is that storing it is a lot easier.
    $endgroup$
    – MSalters
    9 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
    $endgroup$
    – PearsonArtPhoto
    2 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Fair enough, added a bit about that as well.
    $endgroup$
    – PearsonArtPhoto
    2 hours ago











    2












    $begingroup$

    Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization



    Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct



    The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction



    This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.



    This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.



    There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$


















      2












      $begingroup$

      Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.



      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization



      Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.



      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct



      The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.



      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction



      This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.



      This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.



      There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      $endgroup$
















        2












        2








        2





        $begingroup$

        Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.



        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization



        Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.



        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct



        The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.



        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction



        This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.



        This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.



        There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






        $endgroup$



        Have a look at the wikipedia article for "In situ resource utilization". This is exactly what you're talking about, creating fuel on another planetary body.



        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_resource_utilization



        Note that this is a fundamental part of "Mars Direct", one of the most popular ideas for a manned mission to Mars.



        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct



        The way this would work is actually you would take liquid hydrogen with you, and combine this with carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere to make Methane (CH4) and Oxygen (O2). This is known as the Sabatier Reaction.



        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction



        This can be done, as Robert Zubrin demonstrated in 1993, building an example system that ran at 94% efficiency for $47,000. The advantage of this is that Hydrogen makes up only 5% by weight of methane, so using 6 tonnes of hydrogen you can create more than 100 tonnes of fuel in the end.



        This makes the mission much easier to handle, as the more fuel you need to carry with you to get there, the heavier your craft needs to be.



        There are also engines known as a "Microwave Electro-Thermal (MET) thrusters". (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3166116_The_microwave_electro-thermal_MET_thruster_using_water_vapor_propellant). These are primarily aimed for in vacuum engines, but as others have pointed out, Hydrolox fuel has been used throughout history for in-atmosphere engines too.







        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer






        New contributor




        Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        answered 3 hours ago









        Freddie RFreddie R

        1213




        1213




        New contributor




        Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.





        New contributor





        Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






        Freddie R is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35280%2fcan-a-rocket-refuel-on-mars-from-water%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            What other Star Trek series did the main TNG cast show up in?

            Berlina muro

            Berlina aerponto