NASA Finding Old Ways to Keep Up with the New Space Race

[Duper]

So, someone figured out that we're missing out on a ton of money and spending that much more by letting someone else (like the French) having free reign of the rocket market share. That is to say, they're sending stuff into space and making money on it and we're not.

Hmm.. What to do? Why.. rework the old F-1 rocket engine! Of course! Yes, now THIS is Rocket Science!

HERE is a 3 page article on Arstechnica that explains the whole thing. VERY cool read.

Here's hoping....

[Krom]

The F-1 definitely has a lot of kick, 1,522,000 pounds of thrust (at least that is their best guess) per engine, that is like 3x more powerful than the space shuttle main engines were. Although the space shuttles main engines were considerably more efficient (they have upwards of 2x the specific impulse), but most of that higher efficiency came from them burning liquid hydrogen instead of kerosene that the F-1 ran on. And running on kerosene certainly makes fuel storage a lot less complicated than liquid hydrogen, which while more efficient is otherwise a giant pain because of its temperature requirements. Makes sense they are thinking about using revised F-1 engines for the booster stage, the lower specific impulse doesn't really matter when it doesn't have to reach orbit, all they want is power and the F-1 is pretty unrivaled when it comes to that. (They are actually aiming for 1.8 million pounds of thrust, based off an F-1 design that was built and tested but never flown.)

[Duper]

Actually, they're about the same. Apparently is depends on the trade-offs you're looking for.

There's another article along with that one HERE that goes into detail why they may be/most likely be going with kerosene on page 2. (it's only 2 pages long )

And if you're REALLY into rocket science, try this indie game out on Steam....the Kerbal Space program for $23! XD