SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-23-15, 07:29 AM   #31
Eichhörnchen
Starte das Auto
 
Eichhörnchen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: The Fens
Posts: 15,712
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
they say that the nickname of an aircraft tells a story, and the F-104 had a few

I always recall the nickname "missile with a man in it"

(Screenshot from Strike Fighters combat flight sim, click to enlarge)
__________________
Eichhörnchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-15, 11:15 AM   #32
Jimbuna
Chief of the Boat
 
Jimbuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 250 metres below the surface
Posts: 180,310
Downloads: 63
Uploads: 13


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
But, they say that the nickname of an aircraft tells a story, and the F-104 had a few, including the "Fliegender Sarg", "Witwenmacher" and (my favourite) "Erdnagel".
The Japan Air Self-Defense Force called it Eiko ("Glory"). The Pakistani AF name was Badmash ("Hooligan"). Italian pilots called it the nickname Spillone ("Hatpin"), along with Bara volante ("Flying coffin"). In the Canadian Forces, the aircraft were sometimes referred to, in jest, as the Lawn Dart, the Aluminium Death Tube, and the Flying Phallus.
__________________
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.
Oh my God, not again!!


GWX3.0 Download Page - Donation/instant access to GWX (Help SubSim)
Jimbuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-15, 03:03 PM   #33
mako88sb
XO
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 423
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve View Post
Well, we can start with the infamous downward ejection seat, which was replaced, but not before it had killed 21 pilots. Add to that the problem of a series of automatic engine shutdowns on takeoff. Then came more engine problems, along with the shimmy problem with the front wheel cause the plane to lose control on landing.

These are all problems that could affect any new aircraft, but the fact is that the F-104 had by far the highest accident rate of any Century-Series aircraft. Even with the problems solved the plane was difficult to fly and difficult to land. On the other hand several pilots have said it was their favorite.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockhe...04_Starfighter

I remember watching a interview with Kelly Johnson quite some time ago, late 70's perhaps, and he was asked about the widow maker reputation of the F-104. You could tell he was a bit miffed and he said a big part of the reason for it was the fact that this interceptor was pressed into roles it wasn't designed for. I found this site that lists all F-104 crashes but won't have time for awhile to look through it for awhile. Could be some truth to what he says but there's no denying it had design issues.
https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid...-104%20crashes
mako88sb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-15, 04:28 PM   #34
NeonSamurai
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Socialist Republic of Kanadia
Posts: 3,044
Downloads: 17
Uploads: 0


Default

Anyhow back on topic...

While landing the first stage is a huge technical achievement, there are some massive problems. Namely the extra mass required to do this feat.

In rocketry the fuel requirements for increased payload is exponential, because the more you gotta carry up the more fuel you need to cover the extra weight and you then need fuel to cover the mass of the extra fuel needed to carry the weight (and fuel to carry that fuel, etc).

So to land a rocket like that you need to carry extra fuel to slow the rocket down and land it, and carry more extra fuel to cover the weight of the extra fuel to land it. plus you also need more fuel for the parts that allow the rocket to land without damaging the engine and so on.

So it all gets to be a massive problem very quickly, particularly once you try to scale up the rocket and its payload capacity. So while this may be more economical for smaller rockets, that economy gets lost very quickly once you start scaling up.
NeonSamurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-16, 03:57 PM   #35
Oberon
Lucky Jack
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 25,976
Downloads: 61
Uploads: 20


Default

Space-X has managed to finally land the first stage back on a drone barge at sea in the Atlantic.

Oberon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-16, 04:24 PM   #36
Rockin Robbins
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DeLand, FL
Posts: 8,899
Downloads: 135
Uploads: 52


Default

And since they successfully landed on land first shot, then went back to failing to land on barges until now there must be a compelling reason they kept at the more difficult landings. Nobody's talked about why they needed that capability either.
Rockin Robbins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-16, 04:53 PM   #37
razark
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,723
Downloads: 393
Uploads: 12
Default

To get back to land, they need to stop and turn around. Having the barge means they don't have to go back so far, so they can use more fuel for lifting the payload. It might also give them a better choice in launch locations, since they're not bringing the booster back to land, they don't have to worry about hitting anything else on the way down.
__________________
"Never ask a World War II history buff for a 'final solution' to your problem!"
razark is online   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-16, 07:13 PM   #38
Oberon
Lucky Jack
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 25,976
Downloads: 61
Uploads: 20


Default

Better fuel consumption rates, if you launch at a ballistic arc from any US East coast launchpad then your arc will take you back down into the Atlantic.
Better fuel consumption rates mean cheaper launch costs, and more options as to what altitude your first stage will boost up to.
Oberon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-16, 08:50 AM   #39
Rockin Robbins
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DeLand, FL
Posts: 8,899
Downloads: 135
Uploads: 52


Default

I can't imagine sea conditions in mid-Atlantic being smooth enough to land a booster, and then bringing that barge all the way back through seas smooth enough to keep the missile from tipping over. If they were landing on an aircraft carrier, sure. That barge? It's a tough sell.

Where was the barge this time? From the video it looks like it was offshore, not in a protected inland waterway.
Rockin Robbins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-16, 11:38 AM   #40
Gargamel
Lucky Sailor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Rome
Posts: 4,272
Downloads: 81
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Quatro View Post
This will go down as one of the biggest space feats yet.

Someday this will be a normal as can be ...

Who will be the first man or woman to ride the rocket up and back?
Considering this is only a technique to recover the first stage booster of the rocket, nobody will probably ever ride one.

Of course rocket VTOL has been done before, even manned, but this system isn't designed to be manned, unless you get some stow away clinging to a fin.
__________________
Luck is a residue of Design.


Gargamel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-16, 11:43 AM   #41
Gargamel
Lucky Sailor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Rome
Posts: 4,272
Downloads: 81
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonSamurai View Post
Anyhow back on topic...

While landing the first stage is a huge technical achievement, there are some massive problems. Namely the extra mass required to do this feat.

In rocketry the fuel requirements for increased payload is exponential, because the more you gotta carry up the more fuel you need to cover the extra weight and you then need fuel to cover the mass of the extra fuel needed to carry the weight (and fuel to carry that fuel, etc).

So to land a rocket like that you need to carry extra fuel to slow the rocket down and land it, and carry more extra fuel to cover the weight of the extra fuel to land it. plus you also need more fuel for the parts that allow the rocket to land without damaging the engine and so on.

So it all gets to be a massive problem very quickly, particularly once you try to scale up the rocket and its payload capacity. So while this may be more economical for smaller rockets, that economy gets lost very quickly once you start scaling up.
From what I've been reading, the added mass to have this system work is "minimal". Minimal as in the cost of the extra mass is far less than the cost of a new first stage system. Also the extra fuel mass was already within the specs of the booster to start with, they just fire off the second stage a little sooner.

The first stage booster is coming down in the Atlantic regardless of how. They just found a way to safely recover the first stage, without exposing it to salt water, to greatly reduce re-usability costs.
__________________
Luck is a residue of Design.


Gargamel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-16, 02:10 PM   #42
Oberon
Lucky Jack
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 25,976
Downloads: 61
Uploads: 20


Default

Also, I think the platforms can be used as launch facilities as well as recovery locations, so in theory the rocket can launch from sea, perhaps in the Pacific, and land at Vandenburg.
Oberon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-16, 03:55 PM   #43
Onkel Neal
Born to Run Silent
 
Onkel Neal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Cougar Trap, Texas
Posts: 21,276
Downloads: 534
Uploads: 224


Default Rockets in West Texas

Man, that's pretty good tech, they can land the booster and make it look easy.
https://www.blueorigin.com/gallery

This is Jeff Bezos' baby.
__________________
SUBSIM - 26 Years on the Web
Onkel Neal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-16, 03:59 PM   #44
Buddahaid
Shark above Space Chicken
 
Buddahaid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,526
Downloads: 160
Uploads: 0


Default

Not even in the same class as SpaceX but still cool.
__________________
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/4962/oeBHq3.jpg
"However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light."
Stanley Kubrick

"Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming."
David Bowie
Buddahaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-16, 06:45 PM   #45
Onkel Neal
Born to Run Silent
 
Onkel Neal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Cougar Trap, Texas
Posts: 21,276
Downloads: 534
Uploads: 224


Default

No doubt. Space X is planning mission 1 to Mars in 2 years.
__________________
SUBSIM - 26 Years on the Web
Onkel Neal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
nasa, rockets, science, space x, spacex, starlink

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.