[AR] Re: thinking big once more
- From: "John Dom" <johndom@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 18:23:20 +0200
C. Garcia wrote on 280916:
… had a couple of problems… No N-1 ever made it to orbit btw. All ended as
fireworks displays. I agree they should have fixed the N-1 and kept them
flying like they did with R-7. Politics.
Elon’s explanation about the number of engines being so large was evasive. “We
felt comfortable with 9 engines so why not 42”?
Indeed why not 150 ;-)? A bit further he states, the transports to a colony on
Mars would become much larger still.
I still have not found the time to listen to the last half hour of his
presentation and I hope he’ll come up with who he believes is going to invest
in/pay for such a colossus project.
But he can proves futile all the false memes/arguments spread (incl. on AR) to
explain why NASA &/or private enterprise have been sitting on their hands for 6
decades with building heavy launchers. Who needs them? was typed for AR so
often, the future is small launchers (??). Elon’s presentation could have been
made in 1970 and we could have been dining on Mars in 2016.
Just dreaming, I’d prefer the Mars ships to be built in Earth orbit like, say,
the Star Trek ships or the ones in the von Braun Mars movie (fifties). Many
times the size of the ISS.
Even using F-1 engines you would need about 20.
Right, meaning Elon maybe should go for future engines already with a single
engine thrust equalling say 4 to 5 F1’s.
jd
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On ;
Behalf Of Charlie Garcia
Sent: woensdag 28 september 2016 17:17
To: (AR) ocket List
Subject: [AR] Re: thinking big once more
Even using F-1 engines you would need about 20. ITS is really big. The N-1 had
a couple of problems, but trying to assemble the rocket in the desert using
virgin engines didn't help their success rate. SpaceX has barge transport to
both potential ITS sites, and has engines that can be tested.
A bigger engine is also not helpful to SpaceX as an entity. Raptor as it is can
be used in many places on the vehicle. SpaceX is already firing 27 engines
simultaneously, erroneously or not they believe that clusters are viable
strategies.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 10:35 AM John Dom <johndom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://spacenews.com/spacex-unveils-mars-mission-plans/
what/who convinced Elon that to go for 42 engines in stage 1 makes sense?
Reusable en plus! Could it be developing F1 size motors is beyond the SpaceX
budget or capability?
Will SpaceX go for Korolev’s N-1 rocket, the disaster design? N-1 had “only” 30
engines in stage 1, not reusable.
Instead of going for 40 H-1 (the Saturn 1B engine) the number required for the
35000 kN Apollo thrust, NASA chose the hard way of developing F-1 of which only
5 sufficed in the first stage.
jd
Other related posts:
