Who has the most powerfull rocket?

"Rajesh Khanna" wrote in message m...
Thanks.

Who designed the Saturn V, which company designed it. I know that space
shuttle engine was designed by Rockwell.


NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center was responsible for the
design. Many companies and organizations contributed to the
design by performing contracted design studies for Marshall.
Dr. Heinz-Hermann Koelle, head of Marshall's Future Projects
Office, was in charge of the preliminary Saturn design process.
Some consider him more responsible than anyone else for the
Saturn V design. Dr. Koelle reported directly to
Dr. Wernher von Braun.

Rocketdyne developed the F-1 and J-2 engines. Boeing built
the first stage, in cooperation with Marshall. North American
Aviation (NAA) built the second stage. Douglas built the third
stage. IBM built the Instrument Unit that controlled the
Saturn V vehicle. NAA built the Apollo command and service
modules. Grumman built the lunar modules. There were many
other contracts.

- Ed Kyle

On 26 Dec 2003 10:20:02 -0800, (ed kyle) wrote:

"Rajesh Khanna" wrote in message m...
Thanks.

Who designed the Saturn V, which company designed it. I know that space
shuttle engine was designed by Rockwell.


NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center was responsible for the
design. Many companies and organizations contributed to the
design by performing contracted design studies for Marshall.
Dr. Heinz-Hermann Koelle, head of Marshall's Future Projects
Office, was in charge of the preliminary Saturn design process.
Some consider him more responsible than anyone else for the
Saturn V design. Dr. Koelle reported directly to
Dr. Wernher von Braun.

Rocketdyne developed the F-1 and J-2 engines. Boeing built
the first stage, in cooperation with Marshall. North American
Aviation (NAA) built the second stage. Douglas built the third
stage. IBM built the Instrument Unit that controlled the
Saturn V vehicle. NAA built the Apollo command and service
modules. Grumman built the lunar modules. There were many
other contracts.

Everyone had a piece of the pie as Americans say. Votes for rocket
contracts. Was the shuttle built in this way? As America will have
to have a replacement for the shuttle before they loose another one it
could be a flip for American engineering companys all over
America...and maybe in parts of Canada as well.


Christopher
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Kites rise highest against
the wind - not with it."
Winston Churchill

(Christopher) wrote in message ...
On 26 Dec 2003 10:20:02 -0800, (ed kyle) wrote:


Rocketdyne developed the F-1 and J-2 engines. Boeing built
the first stage, in cooperation with Marshall. North American
Aviation (NAA) built the second stage. Douglas built the third
stage. IBM built the Instrument Unit that controlled the
Saturn V vehicle. NAA built the Apollo command and service
modules. Grumman built the lunar modules. There were many
other contracts.

Everyone had a piece of the pie as Americans say. Votes for rocket
contracts.

Not really. The big parts were assembled in California, Louisiana,
Alabama, and New York. Texas and Florida also played a significant
role, of course. Companies in U.S. Midwestern states were left
only with bits and pieces (McDonnell of St. Louis built Mercury and
Gemini capsules, but were shut out of Apollo). The same is pretty
much true for the shuttle program. Never made any sense to me.
Chicago is closer to Kennedy Space Center than California!

- Ed Kyle

(ed kyle) wrote in
om:

(Christopher) wrote in message
...
On 26 Dec 2003 10:20:02 -0800, (ed kyle) wrote:


Rocketdyne developed the F-1 and J-2 engines. Boeing built
the first stage, in cooperation with Marshall. North American
Aviation (NAA) built the second stage. Douglas built the third
stage. IBM built the Instrument Unit that controlled the
Saturn V vehicle. NAA built the Apollo command and service
modules. Grumman built the lunar modules. There were many
other contracts.

Everyone had a piece of the pie as Americans say. Votes for rocket
contracts.

Not really. The big parts were assembled in California, Louisiana,
Alabama, and New York. Texas and Florida also played a significant
role, of course. Companies in U.S. Midwestern states were left
only with bits and pieces (McDonnell of St. Louis built Mercury and
Gemini capsules, but were shut out of Apollo). The same is pretty
much true for the shuttle program. Never made any sense to me.
Chicago is closer to Kennedy Space Center than California!

For that matter, Titusville is closer to Cape Canaveral than northern
Alabama. Boeing could have chosen an existing unused facility to
construct Delta IV in Titusville and simply trucked to the pad for
all eastern launches. At present the CBC is barged all the way
around the Florida peninsula and via the Panama Canal.

Looks like Atlas V is small enough to be shipped via C-5 or An-124.
Boeing's planning to super-size some existing 747s to airship
7E7 subassemblies; I don't know if those would be long enough to
accomodate a Delta IV CBC.

--Damon

"ed kyle" wrote in message
m...
"Rajesh Khanna" wrote in message
...
Hello All:
Who has the most powerfull rocket engine? In terms of Lifting
capability?


I thought I had posted a response, but two days have passed and
I don't see it here, so here goes again.

For liquid propulsion, the answer is the Glushko/Energomash
RD-171, which, at 740 metric tons of sea-level, and 806 tons
of vacuum, thrust, is the most powerful liquid propellant
rocket engine ever flown. It powers the Zenit first stage,
which is now most often flown for Sea Launch.

- Ed Kyle

Joann Evans writes:

Rajesh Khanna wrote:

Who has the most powerfull rocket engine? In terms of Lifting capability?

If I'm understanding you correctly, I think that would still be the
Saturn-5 first stage F-1 engines:

Uh, that would be the answer to: "Who _HAD_ the most powerful rocket?"
The Saturn V is now a lawn ornament --- not a rocket.


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'

(Gordon D. Pusch),
In a message on 16 Jan 2004 09:44:27 -0600, wrote :

GDP Joann Evans writes:
GDP
GDP Rajesh Khanna wrote:
GDP
GDP Who has the most powerfull rocket engine? In terms of Lifting capability?
GDP
GDP If I'm understanding you correctly, I think that would still be the
GDP Saturn-5 first stage F-1 engines:
GDP
GDP Uh, that would be the answer to: "Who _HAD_ the most powerful rocket?"
GDP The Saturn V is now a lawn ornament --- not a rocket.

Since the Saturn Vs were *never* reusable, each launch of a Saturn V
used a fresh, brand new rocket. There is no reason that NASA could not
just build another Saturn V, other than the fact that it really is a lot
of 'old' technology. Saturn Vs were not exactly mass produced, although
some of the components probably were (are?).

GDP
GDP
GDP -- Gordon D. Pusch
GDP
GDP perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'
GDP

\/
Robert Heller ||InterNet:
http://vis-www.cs.umass.edu/~heller ||
http://www.deepsoft.com /\FidoNet: 1:321/153

(Gordon D. Pusch) wrote in message ...
Joann Evans writes:

Rajesh Khanna wrote:

Who has the most powerfull rocket engine? In terms of Lifting capability?

If I'm understanding you correctly, I think that would still be the
Saturn-5 first stage F-1 engines:

Uh, that would be the answer to: "Who _HAD_ the most powerful rocket?"
The Saturn V is now a lawn ornament --- not a rocket.


The Glushko/Energomash RD-171 is more powerful than F-1
was. RD-171 produces 740 metric tons of sea-level, and
806 tons of vacuum, thrust. F-1 produced 789 tons of
vacuum thrust.

- Ed Kyle

(ed kyle) writes:

(Gordon D. Pusch) wrote in message ...
Joann Evans writes:

Rajesh Khanna wrote:

Who has the most powerfull rocket engine? In terms of Lifting capability?

If I'm understanding you correctly, I think that would still be the
Saturn-5 first stage F-1 engines:

Uh, that would be the answer to: "Who _HAD_ the most powerful rocket?"
The Saturn V is now a lawn ornament --- not a rocket.

The Glushko/Energomash RD-171 is more powerful than F-1
was. RD-171 produces 740 metric tons of sea-level, and
806 tons of vacuum, thrust. F-1 produced 789 tons of
vacuum thrust.

That does not change my correction to past tense of the poster's observation...


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'

Robert Heller writes:

(Gordon D. Pusch),
In a message on 16 Jan 2004 09:44:27 -0600, wrote :

GDP Joann Evans writes:
GDP
GDP Rajesh Khanna wrote:
GDP
GDP Who has the most powerfull rocket engine? In terms of Lifting capability?
GDP
GDP If I'm understanding you correctly, I think that would still be the
GDP Saturn-5 first stage F-1 engines:
GDP
GDP Uh, that would be the answer to: "Who _HAD_ the most powerful rocket?"
GDP The Saturn V is now a lawn ornament --- not a rocket.

Since the Saturn Vs were *never* reusable, each launch of a Saturn V
used a fresh, brand new rocket. There is no reason that NASA could not
just build another Saturn V, other than the fact that it really is a lot
of 'old' technology. Saturn Vs were not exactly mass produced, although
some of the components probably were (are?).

My point was that the F-1 is now a _NON-EXISTENT_ rocket engine.
It has ceased to be. It is an ex-parrot, er, rocket...


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'