Re: permanenza sulla Luna

Inviato da  black il 13/1/2014 17:23:51
red provo a venirti in aiuto ,mi sembra che stai facendo un po' di confusione forse per le tue scarse conoscenze in materia.
la tecnologia spaziale non è come il calcio,bisogna farsene una ragione quello che pensiamo noi non vale nulla.
in questo campo bisogna riportartare quello che dicono gli esperti.

Citazione:
Sei a conoscenza di qualche tecnologia perduta del 1969? C'è stato qualche regresso tecnologico forse, che tu sappia?


ti ho gia' detto quello che so io non conta un cazzo,quello che dice lui forse un po' di piu'

Citazione:
In 1983 Alexander Onoprienko graduated from the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, a leading Russian university, majoring in Aerodynamics. For some time he was a researcher at the Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute then at the Zhukovsky Air Force Engineering Academy – the world’s largest and oldest scientific school of aeronautics.
Since 1993, Alexander Onoprienko has been a company CEO and entrepreneur. The scope of his interests include social management, social evolution, and evolution.
Alexander has a blog on these topics. His key subjects are instruments of biological and social evolution; the meaning of evolution, and the meaning of life.



la tecnologia perduta è quella dei motori F1 motore ad una unica camera di combustione
ti aiuta anche wikipedia
Citazione:
The F-1 is a gas-generator cycle rocket engine developed by Rocketdyne in the late 1950s and used in the Saturn V rocket in the 1960s and early 1970s. Five F-1 engines were used in the S-IC first stage of each Saturn V, which served as the main launch vehicle in the Apollo program. The F-1 is still the most powerful single-chamber liquid-fueled rocket engine ever developed.[1] The RD-171 has around 20% more thrust, using a cluster of four smaller combustion chambers and nozzles.[2]


vedi,l'F1 e' ancora oggi il piu' potente motore a camera singola mai sviluppato,leggi qua cosi' capisci la differenza:

Citazione:
This situation pertains, despite the fact that Saturn V with its F1 technology was allegedly more advanced than the one used in RD-170. At comparable thrust, the F1 engine had one chamber and the RD-170 had four. All other things being equal, single-chamber engines have better weight characteristics, and they are smaller in size. But on the other hand, a larger combustion chamber makes it more difficult to ensure combustion stability. Soviet and later Russian engine specialists have been unable to design a single-chamber engine in any way comparable to the F1.


vediamo dove è finita questa fantastica tecnologia,che sviluppi ha avuto

ci aiuta sempre wikipedia:

Citazione:
During the 1960s, Rocketdyne undertook uprating development of the F-1 resulting in the new engine specification F-1A. While outwardly very similar to the F-1, the F-1A was more powerful, producing a thrust of about 8 MN in tests,[10] and would have been used on future Saturn V vehicles in the post-Apollo era. However, the Saturn V production line was closed prior to the end of Project Apollo and no F-1A engine flew on a launch vehicle.[11]

There were proposals to use eight F-1 engines on the first stage of the Nova rocket. Numerous proposals have been made from the 1970s on, from the Saturn-Shuttle concept to the present day, to develop new expendable boosters based around the F-1 engine design, including one in 2013,.[11] As of 2013, none has proceeded beyond the initial study phase.

The F-1 remained the most powerful liquid-fuel rocket engine at 6.7 MN of thrust at sea level until overshadowed by the RD-170 from the Soviet Union. The RD-170 uses a cluster of four separate combustion chambers and nozzles driven by a single turbopump. It visually appears to be a cluster of four engines, not a single engine. Viewed as a single engine it is the most powerful liquid-fuel rocket engine ever flown. The F-1 still holds the crown of largest single-chamber, single-nozzle liquid fuel engine flown. However among solid-fuel engines, more powerful engines exist, such as the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster, with a sea-level liftoff thrust of 12.45 MN.


come vedi c'è qualche tecnologia che ha avuto un regresso
spero di esserti stato di aiuto,saluti

Messaggio orinale: https://old.luogocomune.net/site/newbb/viewtopic.php?forum=13&topic_id=7534&post_id=249625