NASA Will Explore F-1 Upgrade For Heavy Lifter

"The powerful rocket engine developed in
the 1960s to launch the first men to the
Moon could be reprised in the 2020s as
the powerplant for strap-on boosters that
NASA hopes to use in heavy-lift human
missions to Mars. Under a new NASA
risk-reduction project, Dynetics Inc., a
relative newcomer to space launch, will
explore the idea for the U.S. agency in
partnership with Pratt & Whitney
Rocketdyne."

See:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....p22-477250.xml

In article 24b89eed-f5c4-47f2-a184-e8065f665875
@la19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com, says...

"The powerful rocket engine developed in
the 1960s to launch the first men to the
Moon could be reprised in the 2020s as
the powerplant for strap-on boosters that
NASA hopes to use in heavy-lift human
missions to Mars. Under a new NASA
risk-reduction project, Dynetics Inc., a
relative newcomer to space launch, will
explore the idea for the U.S. agency in
partnership with Pratt & Whitney
Rocketdyne."

See:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....p22-477250.xml

They mention the F-1, but I'm wondering if they're going to explore the
upgraded F-1A engine that was quite a ways along in development.

This article seems to hint at an F-1 specification of 1.8 million pounds
of thrust which is closer to the F-1A (2 million pounds thrust) than the
F-1 (1.5 million pounds thrust):

http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/sls6.html

Jeff
--
" Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it
up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. "
- tinker

On 25/07/2012 3:30 AM, wrote:
"The powerful rocket engine developed in
the 1960s to launch the first men to the
Moon could be reprised in the 2020s as
the powerplant for strap-on boosters that
NASA hopes to use in heavy-lift human
missions to Mars. Under a new NASA
risk-reduction project, Dynetics Inc., a
relative newcomer to space launch, will
explore the idea for the U.S. agency in
partnership with Pratt & Whitney
Rocketdyne."

See:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....p22-477250.xml



Isn't that sad. Not even enough imagination to come up with something
original. I wonder how long it would take a company like SpaceX to come
up with an entirely new engine as powerful as the F-1....

Oh, wait a minute, I've heard they're working on it right now. I wonder
which program will get the chop first - NASA's or SpaceX's.

On Jul 24, 10:30*am, wrote:
"The powerful rocket engine developed in
the 1960s to launch the first men to the
Moon could be reprised in the 2020s as
the powerplant for strap-on boosters that
NASA hopes to use in heavy-lift human
missions to Mars. Under a new NASA
risk-reduction project, Dynetics Inc., a
relative newcomer to space launch, will
explore the idea for the U.S. agency in
partnership with Pratt & Whitney
Rocketdyne."

See:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....l/AW_07_23_201....

Liquid fueled that could be reused was always the way to go, even back
in the Apollo era they could have been salvaged and perhaps 50% re-
utilized, instead of just being disposed of.

HTP + hydrocarbon = maximum reusable lift.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

Alan Erskine wrote:
On 25/07/2012 3:30 AM, wrote:
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....p22-477250.xml

Isn't that sad. Not even enough imagination to come up with
something original. I wonder how long it would take a company like
SpaceX to come up with an entirely new engine as powerful as the
F-1....

Oh, wait a minute, I've heard they're working on it right now. I
wonder which program will get the chop first - NASA's or SpaceX's.

Are they actually working on something with the thrust of an F-1? I
thought that SpaceX liked to base most of their "vs the F-1"
comparisons on either ISP or thrust to weight.

rick jones
--
It is not a question of half full or empty - the glass has a leak.
The real question is "Can it be patched?"
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

von braun had plans for a reusable saturn 5, but it never went anywhere

On Jul 25, 8:09*am, Alan Erskine wrote:

Isn't that sad. *Not even enough imagination to come up with something
original.

Well, the Space Shuttle _was_ pretty original. But it didn't work
well.

It posed safety risks, and it was uneconomic.

But more importantly, while it was a good design for a tugboat to LEO,
it is not really something one could modify for taking a trip to the
Moon or Mars.

For lifting a heavy payload from the Earth, neither the SSME nor the
engines on the second stage of the Saturn 5 are what you want. You
need something with more thrust.

So you either want solid rocket boosters - oops, the Challenger
disaster - or kerosene/oxygen rockets instead of hydrogen/oxygen
rockets.

Going with what works when the number of choices is small isn't a lack
of originality.

A second-generation Shuttle that goes on top of a kerosene/oxygen
stage instead of having solid rocket boosters would not be a bad idea
for servicing the ISS.

John Savard

On 27/07/2012 12:21 PM, Quadibloc wrote:
On Jul 25, 8:09 am, Alan Erskine wrote:

Isn't that sad. Not even enough imagination to come up with something
original.

Well, the Space Shuttle _was_ pretty original. But it didn't work
well.


I wasn't talking about the shuttle, it was original. I was talking
about these idiots from Dynetics.

On 26/07/2012 3:39 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
Alan Erskine wrote:
On 25/07/2012 3:30 AM, wrote:
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....p22-477250.xml

Isn't that sad. Not even enough imagination to come up with
something original. I wonder how long it would take a company like
SpaceX to come up with an entirely new engine as powerful as the
F-1....

Oh, wait a minute, I've heard they're working on it right now. I
wonder which program will get the chop first - NASA's or SpaceX's.

Are they actually working on something with the thrust of an F-1? I
thought that SpaceX liked to base most of their "vs the F-1"
comparisons on either ISP or thrust to weight.

rick jones


There have been rumours for several years of a larger engine, but
nothing conclusive. In fact, Musk has stated it was simply a 'paper'
project.

Nonetheless, can you think of any company or organisation better suited
to doing something original?

On Jul 25, 1:06*pm, bob haller wrote:
von braun had plans for a reusable saturn 5, but it never went anywhere

Those Zionist Nazis had all sorts of advanced fly-by-rocket stuff,
that our local Oligarch Skull and Bones never allowed to happen. The
Zionists always had the very best schooling that money and their upper
caste connections could buy, and our operation Paperclip was the
primary reason for our guys going into that war against Hitler.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”