Does Saturn V rocket will return to service:-)

[Pawelk198604]

I recently read about NASA planing to send unnamed Orion capsule on free return trajectory to the Mun oh i mean Moon :-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_Mission_1

I think presided Obama scrubbed Orion program

Do you think Saturn V size rocket will ever return, I would do anything to be able to fly a Saturn V rocket, even as if it was the last thing in my life.

I wonder how many G Apollo astronaut experienced during launch phase.

[BossSquirrelz]

Your post has various contradictions and poor grammar.

Let me fix it:

Exploration Mission 2 is the first test flight of the Space Launch System and second uncrewed test flight of the Orion MPCV.

I assure you, the Saturn V will not be coming back, but it is an interesting concept.

Edited May 4, 2013 by BossSquirrelz

[Pursuedtank]

I recently read about NASA planing to send unnamed Orion capsule on free return trajectory to the Mun

2014 is the first launch of an orion capsule on a Delta IV heavy before the Launch to the Moon in 2017

Do you think Saturn V size rocket will ever return

The Saturn V rocket will never return. All the parts have been used and it is certain they will never make more as it is outdated technology. Besides they are supposed to be making the Space Launch System which will be around the same size in the proposed Block II configuration.

I wonder how many G Apollo astronaut experienced during launch phase.

They experienced a peak of 3.94 just before the separation of the first stage.

[Pawelk198604]

2014 is the first launch of an orion capsule on a Delta IV heavy before the Launch to the Moon in 2017

The Saturn V rocket will never return. All the parts have been used and it is certain they will never make more as it is outdated technology. Besides they are supposed to be making the Space Launch System which will be around the same size in the proposed Block II configuration.

They experienced a peak of 3.94 just before the separation of the first stage.

I thought that President Obama canceled the Orion Program

[Pursuedtank]

I thought that President Obama canceled the Orion Program

He canceled the Constellation program however the Orion capsule was kept for use on the Space Launch System. It was however renamed the Orion MPCV.

[Xeldrak]

No, the Saturn V will (sadly) not come back - it's just way to old. I had hoped that they would devolope an equivalent to the F1 engine....but nope, stupid SRBs....

I love SRBs, but the F1 engine is the part of the Saturn V, that awed me the most...

[Kryten]

NASA are considering boosters with F1A for SLS Block 1B.

[OdinYggd]

I heard NASA was examining the F1 engine to use as the basis for a modernized version of similar design and capabilities. They even pulled some of the gas generators out to the testing fields and actually let loose a cloud of fire from 40+ year old hardware.

However the Saturn V itself is from a bygone era. Although we might make a craft that behaves similarly, any modern recreation would not be the same. We'd use modern electronics- which would be lighter and more energy efficient, as well as a complete redesign of the craft using modern engineering methods to make hardware that is stronger and lighter than the originals.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

NASA are considering boosters with F1A for SLS Block 1B.

Why? Energomash will sell the far superior RD-170 for much less than the cost opening an new production line...

[Kryten]

Because Russia isn't a swing state.

[Pursuedtank]

Because Russia isn't a swing state.

NASA seems to be run for the benefit of the government these days.

[Canopus]

There is just one thing i don't understand. The SLS will use Space shuttle main engines but they are too week, so they need solid or liquid boosters. Couldn't they do it like the old Jarvis Concept and instead use F1 engines which are considered for the liquid boosters? I know that the SSME and F-1 use different fuels but what is advantage of sidemounted boosters?

[Pursuedtank]

what is advantage of sidemounted boosters?

Price is the main reason that they are used, with SRB being significantly cheaper than F1 engines.

[Canopus]

Price is the main reason that they are used, with SRB being significantly cheaper than F1 engines.

That is right but they consider to use liquid booster with two F1's per booster.So money can not be the reason.

[Kryten]

The configuration allows them to use shuttle ET tooling for the central core. Tooling is the major costs in the space business, it's the reason why most rockets stick to the same diameter all the way through.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

In a general case sidemount means you can burn the core engines all the way to orbit, which has a couple of advantages:

A) Your upper stage engines take some of the load a liftoff, so the 1st stage engines don't need to be as heavy (and expensive).

You don't have to deal with igniting an engine at altitude.

[Pawelk198604]

He canceled the Constellation program however the Orion capsule was kept for use on the Space Launch System. It was however renamed the Orion MPCV.

I glad that Orion spacecraft was intact in US budget cut.

I thought, "It's f.ing(in positive sense ) Apollo spacecraft, I'm big fan of Apollo program, i reading all about Apollo Program"

Yaeh, You can call me space nerd :-)

[Pawelk198604]

Because Russia isn't a swing state.

swing state?

[Specialist290]

swing state?

To clarify the original statement a little for the benefit of our non-American readership: "Because Russians don't vote in American presidential elections and thus can't be bribed with subsidies by the party in power."

[Kryten]

Of course there's also the issue of politicial fallout should a single penny of a government program end up leaving the nation.

[astropapi1]

That would be like bringing the Ford TT back as a family car. We have better technology nowadays.

[architeuthis]

I thought that President Obama canceled the Orion Program

The Augustine Comission in 2009 found that Constellation was not being funded adequately enough by Congress to be a viable (at the then current [2009] budget the Ares-V wouldn't be ready till the late 2020's, in other words a decade behind schedule). On the one hand, President Bush announced the ambitious Constellation Program in 2005, and then utterly failed to fund it. On the other hand, President Obama, a pragmatist, saw that the huge budget increase NASA needed to actually build Constellation wasn't in the cards, and canceled the program. In this case blaming Obama is simply blaming the messenger and denying reality. The 'flexible plan' of visiting a NEO (and maybe eventually Mars) is less sexy than revisiting the moon, but it is probably more achievable for NASA's ever diminishing budget. As various people have pointed out congress basically sees the replacement Space Launch System (and NASA generally) as a source of pork for their various districts, and so have taken an active hand in rocket's design with that in mind. It was Congress that mandated the building of SLS. As such the design and development of SLS, which may itself never fly, rather than proceeding from mission requirements, proceeds from the need to supply influential legislators pork. Which is a shame, but frankly space has always been a football for politicians. I hope that it works out though...

Speaking of the Saturn V, the SLS will use a J2-X in its cryogenic upper-stage. Originally the J2-X was based on the old J-2 that the Saturn V used, but the design has evolved quite during development and is essentially a new engine. Also I've heard that Dynetics-Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne want to revamp the mighty old F1 for use in the SLS instead of the RS-25 (the Space Shuttle main engine).

Edited May 5, 2013 by architeuthis

[tavert]

I don't think any modernized F-1 type engine would replace the RS-25's in the core. It would be cheaper in the long term to use RS-68 engines (from the Delta IV) for the core, since they also run on LH2-LOX which is what the shuttle ET-derived SLS core is designed to carry. Not sure why they're planning on painting over the insulation now, which they haven't done since the first couple shuttle launches. Using RS-25's (aka space shuttle main engine) for the core might be motivated more by short term cost of using the shuttle stockpile of a couple dozen engines rather than long term costs of performance/dollar for new engines.

From what I've read, the F1 could potentially be used as one candidate for "advanced boosters." The initial SLS will have shuttle-derived SRB's, but the long-term plan at the moment is to have a competition for alternate booster types, including kerosene liquid fuel boosters using a modernized F-1 as one of the possible entries to that competition. Who knows if it'll all happen though. I'm just waiting for SpaceX to spill the beans on technical details of their MCT plans, future methane engines, etc. Will be exciting to see what they plan on doing for a much smaller budget than SLS, which has no results to date. The next Falcon 9 launch (which is a nearly completely redesigned rocket relative to the first 5 launches) will be trying to propulsively land the first stage on water, for crying out loud. That'll be cool, and appears to be scheduled for just a couple months from now as opposed to years from now.

[Pawelk198604]

The Augustine Comission in 2009 found that Constellation was not being funded adequately enough by Congress to be a viable (at the then current [2009] budget the Ares-V wouldn't be ready till the late 2020's, in other words a decade behind schedule). On the one hand, President Bush announced the ambitious Constellation Program in 2005, and then utterly failed to fund it. On the other hand, President Obama, a pragmatist, saw that the huge budget increase NASA needed to actually build Constellation wasn't in the cards, and canceled the program. In this case blaming Obama is simply blaming the messenger and denying reality. The 'flexible plan' of visiting a NEO (and maybe eventually Mars) is less sexy than revisiting the moon, but it is probably more achievable for NASA's ever diminishing budget. As various people have pointed out congress basically sees the replacement Space Launch System (and NASA generally) as a source of pork for their various districts, and so have taken an active hand in rocket's design with that in mind. It was Congress that mandated the building of SLS. As such the design and development of SLS, which may itself never fly, rather than proceeding from mission requirements, proceeds from the need to supply influential legislators pork. Which is a shame, but frankly space has always been a football for politicians. I hope that it works out though...

Speaking of the Saturn V, the SLS will use a J2-X in its cryogenic upper-stage. Originally the J2-X was based on the old J-2 that the Saturn V used, but the design has evolved quite during development and is essentially a new engine. Also I've heard that Dynetics-Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne want to revamp the mighty old F1 for use in the SLS instead of the RS-25 (the Space Shuttle main engine).

The SLS even look Saturn V, i mean black and white painting:)

[Canopus]

The SLS even look Saturn V, i mean black and white painting:)

Many rockets are black and white even the old Aggregat 4. This is to determine if the rocket is rolling because otherwise you couldn't notice such movements from the Ground. But yes it do looks like similar to the Saturn V.