If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   NASA engineers test a sweet ride from the '60's   (msnbc.msn.com) divider line 43
    More: Cool, NASA, NASA engineers, liquid oxygen, Space Agency, shuttle program, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, booster rockets, Neil Armstrong  
•       •       •

4368 clicks; posted to Geek » on 25 Jan 2013 at 3:30 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-25 12:51:06 AM
FTFA: "This wouldn't be your daddy's F-1," Coates said. "We'd use new materials and try to simplify it, update it."

Why don't they get Boeing to do it? Sure, it might have a few glitches when they get it done, but it would save them some money and create a whole bunch of jobs for foreign workers.
 
2013-01-25 03:58:49 AM

Fark Me To Tears: FTFA: "This wouldn't be your daddy's F-1," Coates said. "We'd use new materials and try to simplify it, update it."

Why don't they get Boeing to do it? Sure, it might have a few glitches when they get it done, but it would save them some money and create a whole bunch of jobs for foreign workers.


Nothing like riding a giant rocket made of the cheapest materials by the lowest bidding contractor. YEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAW!
 
2013-01-25 03:59:04 AM
Damn, and here I was hoping they had a spare Moon Buggy in a shed somewhere.

/still farking cool
 
2013-01-25 04:04:31 AM
It's the TARDIS, right?
 
2013-01-25 04:09:05 AM

Mega Steve: Nothing like riding a giant rocket made of the cheapest materials by the lowest bidding contractor. YEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAW!


All made in Taiwan!
 
2013-01-25 04:24:08 AM
They discovered it gets a shocking .0025 MPG.

Pretty good, for a '67 Mustang.
 
2013-01-25 05:38:55 AM
jalopnik.com
 
2013-01-25 05:49:51 AM
Interesting but how hard can this be? It is not like it is rocket sci... oh wait....
 
2013-01-25 05:59:00 AM
An acqua

rekraFlatoT: Interesting but how hard can this be? It is not like it is rocket sci... oh wait....


A friend writes bank transaction software. We make an analogous observation, "it's not like the software is running bank transactions or something ... oh wait".
 
2013-01-25 06:33:58 AM

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: Damn, and here I was hoping they had a spare Moon Buggy in a shed somewhere.

/still farking cool


Me too.  *kicks foot*

The F-1 engines are still probably the coolest things we ever built for space, even if the shuttle program built more technically difficult engines.
 
2013-01-25 06:40:28 AM

Fark Me To Tears: FTFA: "This wouldn't be your daddy's F-1," Coates said. "We'd use new materials and try to simplify it, update it."

Why don't they get Boeing to do it? Sure, it might have a few glitches when they get it done, but it would save them some money and create a whole bunch of jobs for foreign workers.


You could outsource it strait to china if that's the plan. Who needs Boeing?
The engine was already designed and proven reliable. Apollo failed on mass production.

Setup a factory and crank those biatches out.
/I've read estimates that Apollo cost somewhere between three hundred and five hundred million per flight.
/compared to the shuttle at around seven hundred million.
/going to the moon on ISS money certainly sounds like a better deal.
 
2013-01-25 06:46:01 AM
I like that part about the "starter motor" for the engine which produced 30,000 lbs of thrust all on its own.

Yo dawg, I heard you like rocket engines in your rocket engines....

/insert xzibit image here.
 
2013-01-25 07:45:17 AM
let me know when they fire this one up Link
 
2013-01-25 08:02:14 AM
Neil Armstrong and 2 other guys...

/really?
//really-really?
 
2013-01-25 08:14:12 AM
Coates said a total of 85 F-1 engines were used on 17 Apollo flights without a single failure...
"It is really an excellent booster," he said. "The guys in Apollo had it right."

I find that really impressive. Gives us I nice standard to try and live up to.
 
2013-01-25 08:19:41 AM

Cheron: let me know when they fire this one up Link


+1. We chickened out on having the star system explored by now and getting a city (a complete city) up to Mars in our lifetimes. Budget 5,000 life insurance policies and raffle 'em out to scaredy cats like a certain guy here on FARK, and let's get off this rock once and for all. We chickened out, all for the "sake" of 5,000 idiots who are all dead now anyway and who probably died of cancer anyway.

/medievalist arseholes
//I could be on Saturn
///My slashies could be on Uranus!
 
2013-01-25 08:23:38 AM
images.nationalgeographic.com

Let's light this candle!
 
2013-01-25 08:25:34 AM

Lsherm: Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: Damn, and here I was hoping they had a spare Moon Buggy in a shed somewhere.

/still farking cool

Me too.  *kicks foot*

The F-1 engines are still probably the coolest things we ever built for space, even if the shuttle program built more technically difficult engines.


I assure you that re-engineering these monsters to be throttle-controlled will be a far greater technical challenge then building the itty-bitty Shuttle engines.

The space shuttle's controllable engines have 1.3 million lbf. The Saturn V from the 60s had 7.65 million lbf - that's without modern optimization and fuel.
 
2013-01-25 09:03:11 AM
NASA also saved all of the working space shuttle main engines for future use. The orbiters in museums are sporting dummies made from scrap nozzles.
 
2013-01-25 09:06:41 AM
My almost 70 year old Uncle (who was fresh out of school during Apollo 11 and worked on Skylab, the original TDRS birds and what of SDI NASA actually started working on) returned to NASA after 25-some odd years in the private sector because they didn't have anyone to teach the new guard how to work with this technology.
 
2013-01-25 09:13:46 AM
I recall the center F-1 shut down early on the launch of Apollo13, so maybe the flawless operational record claim is a tad bit short. But still a very impressive engine, for all of that.
 
2013-01-25 09:17:32 AM
Ok, I just watched Iron Sky the other night, and, aside from the OBVIOUS inaccuracies, the scene where the Earth ships all gang up on the Nazis made me wonder - does anybody else actually have a space ship they could put in orbit right now, besides us and Russia?
 
2013-01-25 09:18:09 AM

8tReAsUrEz: Cheron: let me know when they fire this one up Link

+1. We chickened out on having the star system explored by now and getting a city (a complete city) up to Mars in our lifetimes. Budget 5,000 life insurance policies and raffle 'em out to scaredy cats like a certain guy here on FARK, and let's get off this rock once and for all. We chickened out, all for the "sake" of 5,000 idiots who are all dead now anyway and who probably died of cancer anyway.

/medievalist arseholes
//I could be on Saturn
///My slashies could be on Uranus!


And you'd be dead or dying from radiation related causes by the time you got to Uranus.
Manned exploration of the solar system beyond the moon is on permanent hold until we can find some way to combat or negate the rather extreme radioactive environment that is space. As is, NASA has put a hard one-year cap on any mission that would go beyond the shielding effect of earths magnetic field.
 
2013-01-25 09:37:30 AM

Any Pie Left: I recall the center F-1 shut down early on the launch of Apollo13, so maybe the flawless operational record claim is a tad bit short. But still a very impressive engine, for all of that.


It was the center J-2 on the second stage.
 
2013-01-25 09:38:42 AM
This isn't a test of the F-1 engine itself, just the F-1's gas generator; all it did was drive the pumps for the big engines.

...and it just happens to create 30,000 pounds of thrust as a by-product.
 
2013-01-25 09:57:57 AM

phyrkrakr: Ok, I just watched Iron Sky the other night, and, aside from the OBVIOUS inaccuracies, the scene where the Earth ships all gang up on the Nazis made me wonder - does anybody else actually have a space ship they could put in orbit right now, besides us and Russia?


china i believe could punt one up in short notice, they've got a nice soyuz-derivative.

willing to put money on the ESA being able to get something up there in a hurry if they had to, dust off some prototype or just bolt some seats into their cargo-carrier.
 
2013-01-25 10:22:50 AM
Now that the Shutle is retired, America can get back to the business of spaceflight.
 
2013-01-25 10:46:47 AM
What a F-1 engine may look like:
spacebison.com
 
2013-01-25 11:07:02 AM
What a NASA sweet ride from the '60s also looks like:

farm5.static.flickr.com
 
2013-01-25 11:07:32 AM

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: Damn, and here I was hoping they had a spare Moon Buggy in a shed somewhere.

/still farking cool


The smithsonian has one. Dont know if it's real or a mockup though.

Years ago I got to meet Charlie Duke from Apollo 16. That was awesome even got a sign lithograph from him.
 
2013-01-25 11:38:32 AM

groppet: Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: Damn, and here I was hoping they had a spare Moon Buggy in a shed somewhere.

/still farking cool

The smithsonian has one. Dont know if it's real or a mockup though.

Years ago I got to meet Charlie Duke from Apollo 16. That was awesome even got a sign lithograph from him.


as a young sailor i got to meet niel armstrong. i swear that man was CONVINCED that he had gone to the moon.

/was too nerded out to get an autograph.
 
2013-01-25 12:00:22 PM

phyrkrakr: Ok, I just watched Iron Sky the other night, and, aside from the OBVIOUS inaccuracies, the scene where the Earth ships all gang up on the Nazis made me wonder - does anybody else actually have a space ship they could put in orbit right now, besides us and Russia?


China? But that would be it, I think.
 
2013-01-25 12:35:56 PM

Archie Goodwin: phyrkrakr: Ok, I just watched Iron Sky the other night, and, aside from the OBVIOUS inaccuracies, the scene where the Earth ships all gang up on the Nazis made me wonder - does anybody else actually have a space ship they could put in orbit right now, besides us and Russia?

China? But that would be it, I think.


We don't have one, not counting spacex's dragon capsule.
Far as I understand the shuttle engines have been removed and the pad decommissioned. So its as easy to get an orbiter into orbit as it would be to launch a Saturn series rocket.
 
2013-01-25 12:43:49 PM
msupf: Manned exploration of the solar system beyond the moon is on permanent hold until we can find some way to combat or negate the rather extreme radioactive environment that is space.

3-5 ft of water around the living space would be enough. I'll leave it to others to figure out how to either drag that much water into orbit, or get it from another source (comets? excess LH2 and LOX combined non-explosively?).
 
2013-01-25 12:59:21 PM
Fuel cells take hydrogen and oxygen and piss out water and electric power.

If the astronauts can't use the water, it just gets blown overboard.
 
2013-01-25 01:51:52 PM

buttery_shame_cave: phyrkrakr: Ok, I just watched Iron Sky the other night, and, aside from the OBVIOUS inaccuracies, the scene where the Earth ships all gang up on the Nazis made me wonder - does anybody else actually have a space ship they could put in orbit right now, besides us and Russia?

china i believe could punt one up in short notice, they've got a nice soyuz-derivative.

willing to put money on the ESA being able to get something up there in a hurry if they had to, dust off some prototype or just bolt some seats into their cargo-carrier.


ESA did design the ATV with an eye to man-rating it, but whether or not the will do so, I don't know.
 
2013-01-25 02:00:43 PM
Insert Andy_Griffith_Salvage_1.jpg
 
2013-01-25 03:37:50 PM
I remember reading once that most of the tech for the Apollo rockets is lost because they were stored on outdated magnetic tapes that, even if they were still viable, didn't have reliable systems that could read them, so reverse engineering them is pretty much the only way to go. It kills me that so many millions of hours of work from the nation's best and brightest at the time have been lost. It's like someone discovering the wheel, but then forgetting to draw the basic shape so others could build it, too.
 
2013-01-25 04:31:15 PM
drake113

I remember reading once that most of the tech for the Apollo rockets is lost because they were stored on outdated magnetic tapes that, even if they were still viable, didn't have reliable systems that could read them, so reverse engineering them is pretty much the only way to go. It kills me that so many millions of hours of work from the nation's best and brightest at the time have been lost. It's like someone discovering the wheel, but then forgetting to draw the basic shape so others could build it, too.

NASA got rid of the plans when it was realized that with the FOIA, people would do analysis on the Saturn V that would prove beyond any doubt that the moon landings were a hoax. Look, we've got plans for the Write Flyer. We've got plans for the Titanic. Nobody loses that stuff. You're telling me we "lost the plans" for the *moon rocket*?

Sure we did.
 
2013-01-25 04:36:57 PM

Jim DiGriz: msupf: Manned exploration of the solar system beyond the moon is on permanent hold until we can find some way to combat or negate the rather extreme radioactive environment that is space.

3-5 ft of water around the living space would be enough. I'll leave it to others to figure out how to either drag that much water into orbit, or get it from another source (comets? excess LH2 and LOX combined non-explosively?).


Be nice to figger out how to get it into orbit as ice and not liquid water.

/just thinking out loud, and not too seriously
 
2013-01-25 05:11:30 PM
If you shade the water from the sun once in orbit, it will freeze as hard as rock.
 
2013-01-25 08:12:53 PM

Kittypie070: Jim DiGriz: msupf: Manned exploration of the solar system beyond the moon is on permanent hold until we can find some way to combat or negate the rather extreme radioactive environment that is space.

3-5 ft of water around the living space would be enough. I'll leave it to others to figure out how to either drag that much water into orbit, or get it from another source (comets? excess LH2 and LOX combined non-explosively?).

Be nice to figger out how to get it into orbit as ice and not liquid water.

/just thinking out loud, and not too seriously


send it up frozen and keep it shady till you need to use it.

no, you can't use ice to make a spaceship. not for inner-system work. you'd have to be out past mars for that to be viable.
 
2013-01-26 07:32:25 AM

studebaker hoch: If you shade the water from the sun once in orbit, it will freeze as hard as rock.


How do you get water from the sun? Wait...oh.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report