Author Topic: Dynetics partners with Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne for F1 Engine  (Read 213226 times)

Offline Halidon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 848
  • whereabouts unknown
  • Liked: 180
  • Likes Given: 533
« Last Edit: 04/19/2012 12:36 pm by Chris Bergin »

Offline fotoguzzi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
  • Phobos first!
  • PDX, Oregon, USA
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Dig me up when it's 2021.
My other rocket is a DIRECT Project 2

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
Intriguing! Maybe even Romantic. But I can't help thinking that clustered Aerojet AJ26-500 engines in boosters derived from Delta IV tooling might be more cost-effective.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline jtrame

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • W4FJT
  • Knoxville, TN
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 346
Just the possibility should send the Spacemodeling group out for Saturn 5 and Shuttle models to "kitbash." ;)

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
I mentioned this idea last year and bingo, here it is. The past is prologue…  ;) I’m a little worried about Mr. Cook though…
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Colds7ream

  • Tomorrow's Flight Surgeon
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 185
  • Scientia Dabit Alas
  • RAF Akrotiri, Cyprus
    • SalopianJames - en Wikipedia
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Will this use the original F-1 or the completed-but-never-flown F-1A as a baseline?

Offline Chris Bergin

F-1s lost at the SLS RAC. ATK are big favorites to win this, with Aerojet second favs.

Romantic, sure.
« Last Edit: 04/19/2012 12:48 pm by Chris Bergin »
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline ZANL188

  • Member
  • Member
  • Posts: 91
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 6
Just hoping the S-ICs in museums get to keep their F-1s.  Hmm, I wonder if Bezos is in on this...

Offline yamato

  • Member
  • Posts: 82
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1204/18dynetics/

so, NASA will pay 200mil. for reinventing a wheel. At the same time, NASA's budget for commercial space is reduced about 300mil. In other words, reinventing a wheel has about the same priority as america's ability to get to LEO.

I'm affraid one day you'll find your 100billion dollar ISS paited red ;)

Offline TomH

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2938
  • Vancouver, WA
  • Liked: 1868
  • Likes Given: 909
Will this use the original F-1 or the completed-but-never-flown F-1A as a baseline?

It says they will be using F-1 technology. In that the F-1A does use F-1 heritage technology, and was the most advanced version, I would fully expect F-1A to be the baseline.

Offline TomH

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2938
  • Vancouver, WA
  • Liked: 1868
  • Likes Given: 909
ATK are big favorites to win this, with Aerojet second favs.

Romantic, sure.

Could you give supporting details? Is this based on politics, design reviews, etc. Do you have info. you can, or will soon, share?

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Where is Integrator?
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline TomH

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2938
  • Vancouver, WA
  • Liked: 1868
  • Likes Given: 909
Just hoping the S-ICs in museums get to keep their F-1s.  Hmm, I wonder if Bezos is in on this...

Since PWR has F-1As crated and in storage, it would seem likely they will pull out those and the plans that go with them.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Just hoping the S-ICs in museums get to keep their F-1s. ...
I disagree. Flight hardware wants to fly, not sit in museums. Fly them and then use the Bezos Flight Hardware Recovery System (BFHRS) to send them back to the museums. ;)
« Last Edit: 04/19/2012 03:57 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7347
  • Likes Given: 3749
As I recall, we were all pretty excited about the F-1A's before the program ended. We had made some pretty significant advances over the base engine and were really excited about the new capabilities it would give the Saturn-V.

And I would prefer to see either this or a cluster of AJ26-500's over a solid any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Solids are so limited and limiting on the core vehicle they are suppose to help.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7347
  • Likes Given: 3749
Just hoping the S-ICs in museums get to keep their F-1s. ...
I disagree. Flight hardware wants to fly, not sit in museums. Fly them and then use the Bezos Flight Hardware Recovery System (BFHRS) to send them back to the museums. ;)

I disagree Chris. Those are F-1's. Leave them in the museums and set the F-1A as the baseline and go from there.
They're in crates and available.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Just hoping the S-ICs in museums get to keep their F-1s. ...
I disagree. Flight hardware wants to fly, not sit in museums. Fly them and then use the Bezos Flight Hardware Recovery System (BFHRS) to send them back to the museums. ;)

I disagree Chris. Those are F-1's. Leave them in the museums and set the F-1A as the baseline and go from there.
They're in crates and available.
Fine with me. I was mostly making a philosophical point, not a technical one. The hardware wasn't made so we could stare at it in a museum. Viking funeral is a better, more fitting end for aerospace hardware than to be embalmed and stared at by visitors, IMHO.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline kkattula

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3008
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 116
Looking at the F-1A spec, it's pretty respectable even by today's standards, particularly as a booster engine.

310 Isp
2,000,000 lbf
115:1 T/W

I can't recall if one was ever built and tested?

Offline TomH

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2938
  • Vancouver, WA
  • Liked: 1868
  • Likes Given: 909
The hardware wasn't made so we could stare at it in a museum. Viking funeral is a better, more fitting end for aerospace hardware than to be embalmed and stared at by visitors, IMHO.

Agreed to a point, but, if it's already left behind, that stuff does serve to inspire the people of tomorrow. And that is an important thing.
« Last Edit: 04/19/2012 04:28 pm by TomH »

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Just hoping the S-ICs in museums get to keep their F-1s. ...
I disagree. Flight hardware wants to fly, not sit in museums. Fly them and then use the Bezos Flight Hardware Recovery System (BFHRS) to send them back to the museums. ;)

I disagree Chris. Those are F-1's. Leave them in the museums and set the F-1A as the baseline and go from there.
They're in crates and available.
Fine with me. I was mostly making a philosophical point, not a technical one. The hardware wasn't made so we could stare at it in a museum. Viking funeral is a better, more fitting end for aerospace hardware than to be embalmed and stared at by visitors, IMHO.

No Viking funerals for first stage boosters please. I don't care if the second stage burns up on re-entry, but the only flames I want to see from the first stage are out the business end of the rocket, and those are mostly non-destructive.

I do agree that a burial at sea is a fitting end, although certain heroic engines like the F1s that first took us to the moon deserve some sort of shrine.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0