Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Gizmodo)   Now let us bask in the glory that is the RS-25 rocket engine's 512,000 pounds of thrust with this 360° video   ( sploid.gizmodo.com) divider line
    More: Cool, Stennis Space Center, Rocket, new RS-25 engines, Bay St. Louis, new Space Launch, immense blast, powerful rocket, 360-degree video  
•       •       •

1652 clicks; posted to Geek » on 15 Mar 2017 at 11:50 AM (31 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



31 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-03-15 10:09:51 AM  
Very cool.  I can't wait until this thing starts flying.
 
2017-03-15 10:27:36 AM  
That is bad ass.
 
2017-03-15 11:45:50 AM  
How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math
 
2017-03-15 12:00:38 PM  
Every rocket needs...

moar boosters!
 
2017-03-15 12:02:57 PM  
s3.amazonaws.com
"I'm betting I can beat that."
 
2017-03-15 12:13:23 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math


SLS has 4 RS-25s, shuttle only had 3
 
2017-03-15 12:14:23 PM  

IoSaturnalia: MaudlinMutantMollusk: How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math

SLS has 4 RS-25s, shuttle only had 3


I read it as suggesting the 512 wasn't full thrust
 
2017-03-15 12:17:04 PM  

Invincible: IoSaturnalia: MaudlinMutantMollusk: How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math

SLS has 4 RS-25s, shuttle only had 3

I read it as suggesting the 512 wasn't full thrust


That wasn't my take, obviously

/I could have missed something, though
//It's not rocket science
 
2017-03-15 12:18:02 PM  
Now I want to play Kerbal.
 
2017-03-15 12:21:24 PM  
Saw a few of these during the Shuttle program, heard a BUNCH of them.The coolest thing about a long burn test at Stennis?  It puts so much water vapor in the air that it rains about ten minutes after the tests.
 
2017-03-15 12:23:03 PM  

Invincible: IoSaturnalia: MaudlinMutantMollusk: How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math

SLS has 4 RS-25s, shuttle only had 3

I read it as suggesting the 512 wasn't full thrust


Also, according to Aerojet Rocketdyne the RS-25 pumps out 512,000 lbs of thrust at 109% of its rated capacity

/and TFA says they're going to use 3 on the SLS
//F*cking math... how does it work?
 
2017-03-15 12:25:21 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Invincible: IoSaturnalia: MaudlinMutantMollusk: How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math

SLS has 4 RS-25s, shuttle only had 3

I read it as suggesting the 512 wasn't full thrust

Also, according to Aerojet Rocketdyne the RS-25 pumps out 512,000 lbs of thrust at 109% of its rated capacity

/and TFA says they're going to use 3 on the SLS
//F*cking math... how does it work?


I see FOUR lights!

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/index.html

TFA is wrong, which is shocking.
 
2017-03-15 12:29:21 PM  

Tr0mBoNe: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Invincible: IoSaturnalia: MaudlinMutantMollusk: How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math

SLS has 4 RS-25s, shuttle only had 3

I read it as suggesting the 512 wasn't full thrust

Also, according to Aerojet Rocketdyne the RS-25 pumps out 512,000 lbs of thrust at 109% of its rated capacity

/and TFA says they're going to use 3 on the SLS
//F*cking math... how does it work?

I see FOUR lights!

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/index.html

TFA is wrong, which is shocking.


Thank you
 
2017-03-15 12:30:33 PM  
I'm better it's hotter than 360 degrees.
 
2017-03-15 12:33:05 PM  
trump to kill-off the program in T-minus 10...9....8...
 
2017-03-15 12:34:15 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math


Subby's mom will provide the remaining 464,000 pounds of thrust.
 
2017-03-15 12:41:03 PM  
Pffft. I'll be impressed when we start making F-1 engines again. Oh, thats right...we dont know how to anymore because we destroyed most of the blueprints and all the tool and die machines needed to make the various special parts for it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1
 
2017-03-15 12:54:57 PM  

Dick Gozinya: Pffft. I'll be impressed when we start making F-1 engines again. Oh, thats right...we dont know how to anymore because we destroyed most of the blueprints and all the tool and die machines needed to make the various special parts for it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1


Rocketdyne (or whoever owns them) proposed the F-1s (fittingly called the F-1B) younger brother for the block II SLS system. Replacing the SRBs on the side. Politically, it'll never happen, but it would be nice to have a little of the Saturn V on the SLS.

/This thing will never launch though, which is sad.
 
2017-03-15 01:01:25 PM  

Dick Gozinya: Pffft. I'll be impressed when we start making F-1 engines again. Oh, thats right...we dont know how to anymore because we destroyed most of the blueprints and all the tool and die machines needed to make the various special parts for it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1


SpaceX is currently 3D printing gas-generator rocket engines that are lighter and more reliable than the F-1.

If they were doing Apollo now, the first stage would have been deleted and they would have used solids on the first stage. Solid rockets have come a long way since the ex-collaborators designed their launch systems... It's much, much more efficient ... You can get the same specific impulse from one shuttle SRB as you did for the first stage of the Saturn. Basically, the space shuttle had the same capacity as Saturn to LEO, if you considered the orbiter itself as payload... (the mass was thrown in the end)

SLS will end up with similar capabilities to LEO, with fewer stages and engines, because we've come a long way.
 
2017-03-15 01:08:21 PM  

Dick Gozinya: Pffft. I'll be impressed when we start making F-1 engines again. Oh, thats right...we dont know how to anymore because we destroyed most of the blueprints and all the tool and die machines needed to make the various special parts for it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1


Which is not actually an issue. The fine folks in Huntsville have been working with universities around the country to take apart and scan F-1s, putting together extremely detailed models, and then building new parts based on them via additive manufacturing (folks might like to call it 3-D printing, but the techniques they're using aren't quite the same. Lasers and micro-scale powders are involved. It's awesome).

Source: I'm an aerospace/mechanical engineer, and got to tour the facilities a few years ago; the F-1 and the efforts to re-engineer it were one of the first things we got to see and review.

The biggest issue found when reverse engineering the engine isn't the lack of blueprints or dies, but that many of the parts were custom made with no documentation on how. For instance, one part of the nozzle is this little cylinder full of smaller cylinders all side by side, used to help streamline the exhaust and control the flow. When examined, it turns out that each of those little cylinders had somehow been hand placed and properly bonded in, and no one could figure out what technique was used to do it nor who exactly had done the work. Now, via additive manufacturing, that same part can be made simply and quickly as a single, sturdier piece.
 
2017-03-15 01:12:56 PM  
Where is the earth shattering kaboom?
 
2017-03-15 01:25:55 PM  

Fano: Where is the earth shattering kaboom?


Missed it by a few years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1_(rocket)
 
2017-03-15 01:33:44 PM  

Mongo No.5: trump to kill-off the program in T-minus 10...9....8...


Add a VIP launch viewing box with gilded throne to the program and he'll think it's a vitally important program.
 
2017-03-15 02:52:55 PM  
Question that will probably not get answered, but I've wondered.

What is the smallest object that can create a sonic boom? I know the tip of a bullwhip, and a bullet can, but at what point is the collection of particles that makes up these things no longer capable of a measurable wave? Thinking about all the particles coming out of the rocket engine got me wondering if each particle is creating a tiny "sonic boom" (if they are traveling faster than the SoS, which I'd assume they are), and that's the noise we perceive.

Sorry if this is a silly question.
 
2017-03-15 03:29:36 PM  

Tr0mBoNe: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Invincible: IoSaturnalia: MaudlinMutantMollusk: How does 3 x 512,000 equal 2,000,000?

/Evidently, there was no math

SLS has 4 RS-25s, shuttle only had 3

I read it as suggesting the 512 wasn't full thrust

Also, according to Aerojet Rocketdyne the RS-25 pumps out 512,000 lbs of thrust at 109% of its rated capacity

/and TFA says they're going to use 3 on the SLS
//F*cking math... how does it work?

I see FOUR lights!

https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/index.html

TFA is wrong, which is shocking.


Gizmodo is wrong!?

I am crushed.
 
2017-03-15 04:05:54 PM  

Rizhail: Dick Gozinya: Pffft. I'll be impressed when we start making F-1 engines again. Oh, thats right...we dont know how to anymore because we destroyed most of the blueprints and all the tool and die machines needed to make the various special parts for it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1

Which is not actually an issue. The fine folks in Huntsville have been working with universities around the country to take apart and scan F-1s, putting together extremely detailed models, and then building new parts based on them via additive manufacturing (folks might like to call it 3-D printing, but the techniques they're using aren't quite the same. Lasers and micro-scale powders are involved. It's awesome).

Source: I'm an aerospace/mechanical engineer, and got to tour the facilities a few years ago; the F-1 and the efforts to re-engineer it were one of the first things we got to see and review.

The biggest issue found when reverse engineering the engine isn't the lack of blueprints or dies, but that many of the parts were custom made with no documentation on how. For instance, one part of the nozzle is this little cylinder full of smaller cylinders all side by side, used to help streamline the exhaust and control the flow. When examined, it turns out that each of those little cylinders had somehow been hand placed and properly bonded in, and no one could figure out what technique was used to do it nor who exactly had done the work. Now, via additive manufacturing, that same part can be made simply and quickly as a single, sturdier piece.


I`m always amazed by the quality of the work that went into those engines. The exhaust bell chambers for example. Most people think of them as just a bell of sheet metal but they were a double skin of tubes that had most of the fuel for the engines run down the inside then back up the outside, all hand brazed with bifurcating joints.

Amazingly skilled work.
 
2017-03-15 04:19:52 PM  

HeFixesTheCable: What is the smallest object that can create a sonic boom?


Depends what material in which the particle is traveling, but an easy layman's approximation would be to use the mean free path of a particle as a ballpark estimate. For normal Earth atmosphere, this is about 70nm.

A sonic boom is much like any other sound wave in that particles need to have good interaction with neighboring particles in order for the wave to propagate in a preferred direction. So the question becomes: how small can a particle be and still interact strongly with it's immediate neighbors?

The mean free path of a particle can (loosely) be though of as the average distance between particles. The larger a moving object is from this value, the greater the probability will be of that object striking one or more nearby particles and causing them to move in the same direction the object is or was moving. The smaller an object that is, the higher the probability that it will be able to slip between particles, so to speak, and the likelyhood that it will be able to induce a directional flow in neighboring particles becomes low. There is no sharp cutoff, but MFP will give you a decent idea of where "sound" begins to lose meaning.

Rocket exhaust is a whole other beast. The bulk flow is supersonic, but the speed of sound within the exhaust is also many times faster than that in the surrounding atmosphere; and it's not easily modeled. Best just to remember that while sonic booms are sharp and discreet impulses, rocket exhaust usually makes long, droning noises; and thus thinking of it as a sequence of sonic booms is probably of little utility. Just sit back and enjoy the shock diamonds.
 
2017-03-15 06:20:36 PM  

Rizhail: Dick Gozinya: Pffft. I'll be impressed when we start making F-1 engines again. Oh, thats right...we dont know how to anymore because we destroyed most of the blueprints and all the tool and die machines needed to make the various special parts for it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1

Which is not actually an issue. The fine folks in Huntsville have been working with universities around the country to take apart and scan F-1s, putting together extremely detailed models, and then building new parts based on them via additive manufacturing (folks might like to call it 3-D printing, but the techniques they're using aren't quite the same. Lasers and micro-scale powders are involved. It's awesome).

Source: I'm an aerospace/mechanical engineer, and got to tour the facilities a few years ago; the F-1 and the efforts to re-engineer it were one of the first things we got to see and review.

The biggest issue found when reverse engineering the engine isn't the lack of blueprints or dies, but that many of the parts were custom made with no documentation on how. For instance, one part of the nozzle is this little cylinder full of smaller cylinders all side by side, used to help streamline the exhaust and control the flow. When examined, it turns out that each of those little cylinders had somehow been hand placed and properly bonded in, and no one could figure out what technique was used to do it nor who exactly had done the work. Now, via additive manufacturing, that same part can be made simply and quickly as a single, sturdier piece.


Definitely cool.  There's an entire Saturn 5 about 5 minutes from my house.  I think it is the only one made *completely* from flight components.  There's several engines around the "rocket park" including F1s.  The safety wiring is still on them.

If anyone reading is in the Houston area, the Rocket Park is free and you can go through the JSC main gate off of Saturn Dr. (you don't have to go to Space Center Houston and pay).  Just drive up and tell the guard in the guard shack that you're going to Rocket Park and he/she will point the way (the entrance being 30 yards away so it's not hard to miss...immediate left after the guard shack).
 
2017-03-15 10:04:42 PM  
Pretty sure astronauts don't dream of watching a test from the flame trench.
 
2017-03-15 10:14:51 PM  
img.fark.net

Werner Von Braun was insane.
 
2017-03-16 09:36:52 AM  

Flt209er: HeFixesTheCable: What is the smallest object that can create a sonic boom?

...Just sit back and enjoy the shock diamonds.


Thanks, no snark. That was helpful. Reading and trying to digest mean free path. I understand the concept easily, but am actually putting digital pen to paper to answer my own question.
 
Displayed 31 of 31 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report