NASA testing vintage engine from Apollo 11 rocket

January 24, 2013 by Jay Reeves

Young NASA engineers are testing a vintage rocket engine that was meant to blast the first U.S. lunar mission into Earth's orbit more than 40 years ago.

The agency conducted the last of 11 test firings Thursday on the heart of the engine, which was once part of the Apollo program's massive Saturn V (five) rocket.

The device shot out a huge plume of orange flame at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville. The thundering roar could be heard for miles.

Officials hope to use technology from the for the next generation of U.S. missions into space by the 2020s.

NASA engineer Nick Case is 27 years old, and he's impressed with the work done by engineers using slide rules and pencils in the 1960s.

Explore further: NASA to begin developing Ares rockets

0 shares

Related Stories

NASA to begin developing Ares rockets

December 17, 2007

The U.S. space agency said it will begin testing core rocket engine components from the Apollo era this month to help build the Ares rocket.

Image: The shake, rattle and roar of the J-2X engine

May 17, 2012

(Phys.org) -- The shake, rattle and roar lasted just seven seconds, but the short J-2X test conducted May 16 at NASA's John C. Stennis Space Center in south Mississippi moved the space agency ever closer to a return to deep ...

J-2X nozzle extension goes the distance

July 16, 2012

(Phys.org) -- NASA engineers conducted a 550-second test of the new J-2X rocket engine at Stennis Space Center in Mississippi on July 13. The J-2X engine will power the upper-stage of a planned two-stage Space Launch System, ...

NASA performs first J-2X powerpack test of the year

February 16, 2012

(PhysOrg.com) -- Engineers at NASA's Stennis Space Center conducted an initial test of the J-2X engine powerpack Feb. 15, kicking off a series of key tests in development of the rocket engine that will carry humans deeper ...

NASA tests deep space J-2X rocket engine

September 29, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- NASA conducted a 40-second test of the J-2X rocket engine Sept. 28, the most recent in a series of tests of the next-generation engine selected as part of the Space Launch System architecture that will once ...

Recommended for you

Gaia turns its eyes to asteroid hunting

January 24, 2017

While best known for its surveys of the stars and mapping the Milky Way in three dimensions, ESA's Gaia has many more strings to its bow. Among them, its contribution to our understanding of the asteroids that litter the ...

Dwarf galaxies shed light on dark matter

January 23, 2017

The first sighting of clustered dwarf galaxies bolsters a leading theory about how big galaxies such as our Milky Way are formed, and how dark matter binds them, researchers said Monday.

One of the brightest distant galaxies known discovered

January 23, 2017

An international team led by researchers from the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias (IAC) and the University of La Laguna (ULL) has discovered one of the brightest "non-active" galaxies in the early universe. Finding ...

Image: Wavemaker moon Daphnis

January 20, 2017

The wavemaker moon, Daphnis, is featured in this view, taken as NASA's Cassini spacecraft made one of its ring-grazing passes over the outer edges of Saturn's rings on Jan. 16, 2017. This is the closest view of the small ...

7 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

JustChris
not rated yet Jan 25, 2013
Brevity is the soul of wit: this article is definitely an example.
VendicarD
5 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2013
It is funny that current NASA engineers really don't know how the Saturn 5's engines work, so they have to experiment on them to see how they were actually engineered.

This is what happens when you allow a technical program to go dead for a while. You lose the lineage of engineers who can tell the younger ones how things were done.
Eikka
5 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2013
You lose the lineage of engineers who can tell the younger ones how things were done.


The main problem is that NASA did not develop the Saturn V engines. Rocketdyne did.

NASA is a rubber stamp organization. They do not develop technology, they pay someone else to do it for them, and then adopt and adapt it.
Eikka
5 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2013
NASA engineer Nick Case is 27 years old, and he's impressed with the work done by engineers using slide rules and pencils in the 1960s.


What really happened:

For seven years of development F-1 tests revealed serious combustion instability problems which would sometimes cause catastrophic failure.[3] Progress on this problem was initially slow, as the problem onset was intermittent and unpredictable.

Eventually engineers developed a technique of detonating small explosive charges (which they called "bombs") outside the combustion chamber through a tangential tube (RDX, C4 or black powder were used) while the engine was firing, which allowed them to determine exactly how the running chamber responded to variations in pressure and to determine how to nullify these oscillations.

The designers could then quickly experiment with different co-axial fuel-injector designs to obtain the one most resistant to instability.


In other words: a lot of trial and error.
Eikka
5 / 5 (1) Jan 25, 2013
Although in the case of the Saturn V's F-1 engines, it wasn't NASA who commisioned the engine. It was the US Air Force who put up a wanted add for a really big engine, and Rocketdyne went on to develop one to sell it to the USAF, but then the Air Force decided they don't need one after all and the project was almost scrapped.

That's where NASA came in, saw that they already had a very large engine and said "I'd like 50 of those".
wiyosaya
not rated yet Jan 25, 2013
In other words: a lot of trial and error.

There is a great series on the Apollo program. In the series, it details this "main" problem with the F1 engine, which was an oscillation that caused them to explode. The series is called "Moon Machines" www.imdb.com/title/tt1203167
Shootist
1 / 5 (1) Jan 26, 2013
Although in the case of the Saturn V's F-1 engines, it wasn't NASA who commisioned the engine. It was the US Air Force who put up a wanted add for a really big engine, and Rocketdyne went on to develop one to sell it to the USAF, but then the Air Force decided they don't need one after all and the project was almost scrapped.

That's where NASA came in, saw that they already had a very large engine and said "I'd like 50 of those".


In every instance above replace NASA with Von Braun and you will be closer to the truth.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.