CEV Makeover: NASA Overhauls Plans for New Spaceship

space.com ^ | 01/20/06 | Brian Berger

[KevinDavis]

[Steely Tom]

Ahhh... The Saturn V engines were called "F-1" or F-1A".

And I thought that I read right here at FR that they can never be reproduced because all the blueprints and tooling were destroyed.

[Darksheare]

The F-1 engines were the main first stage engines.
But I don't recall what the second and third stage engines were.

But the tooling was destroyed if memory serves, and the blueprints are all on mircofilm or such if they still exist.

[Steely Tom]

Well, I was being ironic in my comment about the destruction of the tooling and blueprints. That this was done has been stated here, but I always took it with a grain of salt.

The first stage had five F-1 engines. The second stage had five J-2 engines. The third stage had one J-2. I Shouldn't have been so cynical.

[Lancer_N3502A]

I've been keeping a close watch on all the latest developments. This is simply the Block 1 CEV and the deletions are to get it up and running by the 2010-2012 time frame. We'll probably see the everything, including oxygen/methane engines, rover, LEM, and the enlarged 5.5 meter CEV in the Block 3 and later CEVs...IMHO.

[Darksheare]

Okers.

Had something 'tickle' in the memory and went, "That sounds familiar.."

[Calvin Locke]

From past threads on the subject, if memory serves, it was Senator Walter Mondale that got the tooling destroyed.

[Darksheare]

Mondale, figures.

[KevinDavis]

That is what I'm thinking.. It is sad that we are going back to basics, but we have no choice..

[SunkenCiv]

an updated version of the J-2 engine

Ah, now that's a good idea. I'm very surprised. I think it was a J-2 powered booster used for sending the 'nauts to the Skylab, the Saturn IB? [Saturn 1B on Astronautix]

[SunkenCiv]

The tooling and the drawings and so forth were not destroyed. I wonder if that particular bit of lore grew out of the story about how Lyndon Johnson had the dies and tooling destroyed for the SR-71?

Saturn 5 Blueprints Safely in Storage

[Darksheare]

Good to hear, thanks!

[SunkenCiv]

---

---

The Saturn V F-1 Engine Revisited
B. W. Shelton and T. Murphy
David S. F. Portree

The authors are engineers at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and the Rocketdyne Division of Rockwell, respectively. Marshall designed the Saturn V rocket which propelled Americans to the moon, while Rocketdyne built the F-1 engine. Saturn V had five F-1 rocket engines in its first stage - together they developed 7.5 million pounds of thrust. Sixty-five F-1 engines launched thirteen Saturn Vs from 1967 to 1973 with "100% success." Shelton and Murphy point out that the SEI Synthesis Group recommended considering the F-1 for use on SEI heavy-lift rockets [read]. They propose changes in the F-1 design reflecting 20 years of manufacturing and materials advancements to produce an upgraded F-1A engine. Upgrades include strengthening the engine bell, thrust chambers, and turbine exhaust manifold, and replacing undesirable materials such as asbestos. Suppliers exist for all major parts, and Rocketdyne has 300 active personnel who participated in F-1 production, test, and flight operations in the Apollo era. Five spare F-1s in storage are available as "tooling aids" and "pathfinders" for test stand activation. The authors point out that the Atlas and Delta production lines were revived after shutdowns lasting about 20 years. Shelton and Murphy estimate that reviving the production line and test facilities will cost about $500 million, and each F-1A engine will cost $15 million if eight engines are manufactured per year.

[SunkenCiv]

My pleasure. See the kinda big message 14 also. :') I didn't ping anyone because of the size of the thing.

[Darksheare]

Thanks!

[Bender2]

Re: "...the agency recently approved CEV launcher plans calling for development of a new five-segment solid-rocket booster instead of the four-segment motor currently in production. "

Already done at http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0310/24srbtest/

On Oct. 23, 2003: The five-segment test motor, which ran for 128 seconds and generated more than 3.6 million pounds of thrust, appeared to perform flawlessly, in line with preliminary data, according to Jody Singer, manager of the Space Shuttle Reusable Solid Rocket Motor Project Office at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. Final results from the test are not immediately available.

"It was a great success. We are believers in the 'test before you fly -- fly it on the ground first' program," said Singer. "We look forward to getting the data because we want to make sure we understand all aspects of the safety and reliability of the Shuttle's motor."

[Lancer_N3502A]

I here you brother. We could have been back to the moon 50 times for what we've put into the STS. FIFTY! Well, it seems that they've finally got it through they're heads that the moon is a great resource to exploit; not only for here at home, but for future missions into the solar system.

[Lancer_N3502A]

I suspect that not only does the Marshall Space Flight Center have them, but there are probably copies somewhere in the Smithsonian and in the National Archives. Next to the Russian Energia, the Saturn V is the most powerful rocket ever built.

The S-1 booster highly refined kerosene and oxygen giving it roughly 2/3 the ISP of the STS's LH/O2. BUT...imagine rebuilding the S-1 booster using LH and O2? Would probably throw 500 tons into space...8-).

[Lancer_N3502A]

The F-1 booster USED....sorry