Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Shuttle era engines to be used in new Space Launch System
#1
NASA's Shuttle-Era Engines Have One Last Job


8-15-2015

If it isn't broken, don't fix it. That's the mentality at NASA, which is test-firing the RS-25 rocket engines that will serve as the main engines for the Space Launch System.

These are the same engines that powered the Space Shuttles — literally. The design has proved so reliable NASA has been refurbishing and reusing the same rockets for 34 years, 14 of them have already been to space.
Reply
#2
I never heard of this new Space Launch System until saw this article.
Reply
#3
An absolutely terrible idea given how shockingly bad those engines were.

They were NASA's first engines designed (mostly) without Werner Von Braun and it shows.

Constant fuel leaks and had to be rebuilt after every single flight (which is why it took so long to service shuttles between launches). They would take the engines from one shuttle and use them in another while its engines were being rebuilt.

Not to mention putting complex reusable engines into a single use rocket makes no sense (though the clip did say they want to do a modern redesign and cost reduction to produce a single use version of the engine).
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#4
(08-17-2015, 12:42 PM)gstanford Wrote: An absolutely terrible idea given how shockingly bad those engines were.

They were NASA's first engines designed (mostly) without Werner Von Braun and it shows.

Constant fuel leaks and had to be rebuilt after every single flight (which is why it took so long to service shuttles between launches).  They would take the engines from one shuttle and use them in another while its engines were being rebuilt.

Not to mention putting complex reusable engines into a single use rocket makes no sense (though the clip did say they want to do a modern redesign and cost reduction to produce a single use version of the engine).

Are you sure the engines were at fault? I thought the issue was the re-usable three section boosters that were the main problem.
Reply
#5
The boosters were criminal given that Thiokol knew before the first shuttle ever flew that the bottom O-ring joint could fail in the way it did with Challenger and yet pressured NASA to consider it a solved problem or non-issue right up until the challenger disaster happened.

The main engines were just as bad, it was a miracle none of them ever failed in flight.
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#6
(08-17-2015, 01:03 PM)gstanford Wrote: The main engines were just as bad, it was a miracle none of them ever failed in flight.
Given the amount of thrust they provide for the size and none failed in flight does not sound as terrible as you are making them out to be.

Have you built a better one?
Reply
#7
No, I'm not a rocket engineer. The SRB's produce 71% of liftoff/"first stage" thrust for shuttle flights. That's when they are over-rated to 104% of their maximum thrust.

Who in their right minds normally runs an engine over-rated?!
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)