3 ms·
Is Starship really not following the exact step of N-1 && VentureStar?
by numpad0 2y ago
Is Starship really not following the exact step of N-1 && VentureStar?
- ceejayoz 2y agoComputers and materials came a long way since the N1, as Starship’s successful tests can attest to.
- numpad0 2y agoBut they're still losing roughly as many engines as Russians did in N1, so that sounds like a dubious claim. What about the latter? Are they really not tracing the footsteps of the X-33 program?
- ceejayoz 2y agoWhat? Flight five didn’t lose any engines. N1 kept blowing up. X-33 never got to a test flight, let alone a successful one.
- numpad0 2y agoN-1 only flew 4 times. Flight 5 of N-1 was supposed to use upgraded NK-33 engines. X-33 never got to test flight because the engineer minded NASA director kept pushing an unrealistic technical goal. Besides, SS still hasn't gotten its payload system working. Are those that dissimilar to how SS program is going?
- kataklasm 2y agoYes, they are. Starship has proven multiple novel engineering approaches and technologies. Examples: 1. catching the booster in the air to save on landing gear weight and complexity 2. firing 33 engines simultaneously in a tight cluster 3. the only large scale production and use of CH4-fuelled engines (all other CH4 engines have only been fired a handful of times at most)
- mmustapic 2y agoN-1 failed because of a lack of time/funding, not because the design was inherently flawed.
- kataklasm 2y agoBut that wasn't certain until Starship proved it technologically possible.