Ye Olde Rocket Forum

Go Back   Ye Olde Rocket Forum > Weather-Cocked > FreeForAll
User Name
Password
Auctions Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 02-06-2020, 07:18 AM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 11,610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl
Wow, that is a monster. With that cluster arrangement, I hope it does not turn out to be the N1, Ver. 2.0


Earl

I wonder if SpaceX will static fire the full 35-37 motor 1st stage. The N1 wasn't static tested and they didn't realize they were bad plumbers until after the carnage.
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-06-2020, 08:34 AM
aeppel_cpm aeppel_cpm is offline
Ciderwright
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Burlington, WI
Posts: 633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl
Wow, that is a monster. With that cluster arrangement, I hope it does not turn out to be the N1, Ver. 2.0


This has me looking for the 'like' button.
__________________
Charles McGonegal
Ciderwright
AEppelTreow Winery & Distillery
Ad Astra Tabernamque!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-06-2020, 08:46 AM
Earl's Avatar
Earl Earl is offline
Apollo Nut
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,893
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbzep
I wonder if SpaceX will static fire the full 35-37 motor 1st stage. The N1 wasn't static tested and they didn't realize they were bad plumbers until after the carnage.


Good question. That just seems like such an insanely high number of engines to attempt to get to run smoothly and harmoniously for, I would assume, a 1.5 to 2.0 minute burn. Maybe I'm being overly cautious (it' not my company, afterall), but just 'seems' like they are begging for a failure mode with THAT much plumbing, pipes, pumps, etc. to have to deal with.

As we used to say on the range before one the super-big projects was about to go, "this will be interesting".

Earl
__________________
Earl L. Cagle, Jr.
NAR# 29523
TRA# 962
SAM# 73
Owner/Producer
Point 39 Productions

Rocket-Brained Since 1970
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-06-2020, 12:22 PM
5x7's Avatar
5x7 5x7 is offline
Sometimes collector
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,786
Default

Cool or Really Cool
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-06-2020, 12:33 PM
Jerry Irvine's Avatar
Jerry Irvine Jerry Irvine is offline
Freeform rocketry advocate.
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Claremont, CA "The intellectual capitol of the world."-WSJ
Posts: 3,780
Default

Don't forget he is going to make well over 1000 Starships within the first 4 revisions. They do a static test on every rocket, so yes. I personally know his Version 1.0 propulsion guy (now retired). They love wasting propellant because from their POV they have rockets that are "gas and go".

Must rock to be Elon.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-06-2020, 01:25 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 11,610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Irvine
They do a static test on every rocket, so yes.

They always have in the past, but this booster will be a beast. The Saturn's five F1's were fired on a stand first. It will be interesting to see a 1st stage with 37 Raptors tested together for the first time on a very public launch pad just weeks before launch instead of in the back woods (at Marshall) on a test stand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YTaG91KD5s



.
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-06-2020, 02:37 PM
aeppel_cpm aeppel_cpm is offline
Ciderwright
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Burlington, WI
Posts: 633
Default

When it comes to engine count, a falcon heavy is 27 merlins. So they've done 3/4 of the Starship raptor count several times.
__________________
Charles McGonegal
Ciderwright
AEppelTreow Winery & Distillery
Ad Astra Tabernamque!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-06-2020, 03:40 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 11,610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeppel_cpm
When it comes to engine count, a falcon heavy is 27 merlins. So they've done 3/4 of the Starship raptor count several times.

There's a bit of difference. Falcon heavy has 9 Merlins per completely separate booster. The "super booster" will have a much greater total thrust on a single thrust structure, plumbing from two tanks flowing much more fuel than the three independent boosters, LCH4 vs room temp RP-1, new Raptor engines that haven't been clustered at all and have only been singly static fired once or twice, potentially much more intense vibration and sound levels than the FH, etc. Basically, the Falcon Heavy is old proven hardware and technology x 3.
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-06-2020, 08:18 PM
mwtoelle's Avatar
mwtoelle mwtoelle is offline
Flying since 1977
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbzep
They always have in the past, but this booster will be a beast. The Saturn's five F1's were fired on a stand first. It will be interesting to see a 1st stage with 37 Raptors tested together for the first time on a very public launch pad just weeks before launch instead of in the back woods (at Marshall) on a test stand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YTaG91KD5s



.

There was 1960s static test of five F-1 engines at Marshall back in the 1960's on an overcast day that shook things al the way down to Birmingham. My mother recalls rattling dishes in the cupboards of the house in Huntsville that day. After that, no static tests were conducted during overcast days.
__________________
'Til next time,

Mike Toelle

NAR 31692 L1

SAM 0373
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-08-2020, 06:37 AM
Flash's Avatar
Flash Flash is offline
Semi-Pro Rocketeer TRA 10484 L2
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 428
Lightbulb

I’m sure there are some major differences between the N1 and Starship comparison.

1: N1 could not monitor or control their motors durning flight, they were acting more like solid motor boosters, go or blow. Starship has computer controlled Raptor engines, each engine should shut down before a total failure which would protect the Rocket. So in other words, they have individual control of each engine which is far safer than pass designs.

2: N1 was to suffer just one failure it would lead to a total future as we had seen with each of that rocket’s flights. Starship should be able to still complete its mission if they lose a engine. They can even throttle their engines up and down as needed which is a plus.

I use to believe in the less engine theory, guess Saturn V lead me that way as compared to N1. Now I believe that more engines are most likely better if managed properly due to the fact that one engine failure on a less engine rocket could more likely end the mission as compared to a more engine Rocket in today’s world.

I still agree that it’s harder to handle more engines as compared to less.

A good question is, will each of Starships engines have good shielding between each engine that will protect the engine beside it if there was to be a total failure?

Just my 2 cents.
__________________
=======================
If the Sky is the Limit, then,
why is there Footsteps on the Moon?
=======================
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:52 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ye Olde Rocket Shoppe © 1998-2024