Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

So here's a thought on entering engine-end-first:  What if they just opted to sacrifice the bell, and retain the rest of the engine?  Could you design the engine so that even if the bell is damaged, the rest of it remains intact and re-usable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, zolotiyeruki said:

So here's a thought on entering engine-end-first:  What if they just opted to sacrifice the bell, and retain the rest of the engine?  Could you design the engine so that even if the bell is damaged, the rest of it remains intact and re-usable?

 

24 minutes ago, RCgothic said:

A cutting charge around the nozzle extension wouldn't weigh much, true. Not sure how difficult it would be to change the nozzle afterwards once it's back on earth.

That's certainly possible. A cutting charge would probably be unnecessary, actually.

An MVac engine bell probably couldn't handle more than one re-use anyway so it would likely be replaced as a matter of course.

However, even if you used a charge to cut the engine bell, it still has far too much thrust to be used for retropropulsive landing.

EDIT: Crazy idea...

The Merlin is a GG engine.

Could they use it for retropropulsive landing by simply not lighting the engine? If they could vent the gas generator straight into the combustion chamber, it should produce SOME degree of thrust.

Actually, now that I recall, the GG vent is outside of the engine, so that won't work. I was thinking of the preburners on Raptor. You could, in theory, run just a single preburner in Raptor (or both and not light it) and you'd have low engine thrust.

Merlin uses pintle injectors that cannot easily have their mixture ratios varied.

You'd have to use GG pressure to push propellant through without lighting it. Don't know what kind of pressure thrust that would give.

Edited by sevenperforce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, tater said:

legs-COPVS-041718-Aerial-Photos.jpg

Ok... what are we looking at here? Was this at McGregor or was it from TESS? In other words, is this... the new landing legs?

EDIT: NVM I'm very smart and definitely read the article.

Very exciting, though!

Edited by ThatGuyWithALongUsername
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/17/2018 at 10:05 AM, Nibb31 said:

Misland ? It doesn't have propulsion. If you switch runways while you're still high enough, you can glide there.

I could see a jet-engine upgrade similar to Buran if they get enough flights. That way it could fly from the landing site to KSC/Vandy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that ballute idea. Pretty neat.

6 hours ago, zolotiyeruki said:

So here's a thought on entering engine-end-first:  What if they just opted to sacrifice the bell, and retain the rest of the engine?  Could you design the engine so that even if the bell is damaged, the rest of it remains intact and re-usable?

Would the engine still have a lot of control on descent without the bell to help direct thrust in such a case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Josh IN SPACE said:

Would the engine still have a lot of control on descent without the bell to help direct thrust in such a case?

Not the entirety of the bells - just the vacuum extension. Basically cutting the MVac back into MAir.

Although, placing detonators next to extremely hot combustion doesn't sounds like the best of ideas...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, YNM said:

Although, placing detonators next to extremely hot combustion doesn't sounds like the best of ideas...

This. -_- Not to mention introduce high-speed shrapnel into the throat of an engine you need to fire in a few minutes...

 

Quote

We are getting ready for more Falcon Heavy launches, this time flying satellites, not cars.

They should launch one anyway, even if it’s a small one. That should be a thing, buy a Falcon Heavy launch, get a little car free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, _Augustus_ said:

I could see a jet-engine upgrade similar to Buran if they get enough flights. That way it could fly from the landing site to KSC/Vandy.

The jet engines were for ferry flights on one of the Buran prototypes. They were never intended to be present during reentry.

1 hour ago, Teilnehmer said:

To have more lift at low speeds during landing.

How would that work ? Folding back the stabilizers would provide less lift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

This. -_- Not to mention introduce high-speed shrapnel into the throat of an engine you need to fire in a few minutes...

 

They should launch one anyway, even if it’s a small one. That should be a thing, buy a Falcon Heavy launch, get a little car free.

A Reliant Robin. Reuseable of course.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

This. -_- Not to mention introduce high-speed shrapnel into the throat of an engine you need to fire in a few minutes...

So start the engine first, then detonate the explosives and hope the exhaust blows all the shrapnel clear. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...