It would be nice to see a team up with Bigelow and build the vehicle in
orbit.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:23 PM, John Dom <johndom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
C. Garcia wrote on 280916:
… had a couple of problems… No N-1 ever made it to orbit btw. All endedas 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
