Author Topic: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"  (Read 919 times)

Offline Everett

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 38
"Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« on: August 11, 2017, 11:06:03 AM »
There's the whole "the Saturn V needed to be 266 times bigger" argument, based on Von Buran's own design. Well, while reading astronautix, I happened to come across the page for his design. Turns out there's 3 reasons it so much bigger.

1. Used direct ascent, the most inefficient mission profile possible.
2. Used rocket breaking into earth orbit on return - Apollo skipped that step.
3. Was designed in 1952, a decade before the Saturn V, using early 50's technology and propellants with two thirds the performance.

4. The big reason: The mission would use three rockets for the exploration. Two of them would land a full 25 crew for 6 weeks. The third would land 10 crew and 259! tons of cargo. Total mass of the lander before landing on the moon would be 1109! tons.

So in short, if you use the most inefficient possible profile and early 50's technology, and send a lander that weights over 1100 tons instead of 15, and try to land 32 times as much on the lunar surface, then, well, actually Von Buran never actually designed a rocket 266 times bigger. It would be assembled in orbit via 360! shuttle flights, each carrying 33 tons. So the claims falls flat on its face even then. ::)

Useful counterargument, anyway.

Online QuietElite

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 30
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2017, 01:04:10 PM »
If you consider that the mass in rocketry scale exponentionally with increasing payload then it actually seems pretty lightweight  :o

Offline raven

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1230
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2017, 03:42:52 PM »
You know, if you wanted to launch something like that in one go, you'd need something like an Orion pulse rocket.

Offline Glom

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 950
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2017, 07:53:45 PM »
Who says this?

Offline Everett

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 38
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #4 on: August 13, 2017, 10:35:28 AM »
Who says this?

It's a relatively new one, not seen as much as the others, but I actually first encountered it on this very forum. It often goes along the lines of "Von Buran said it was impossible, since you couldn't build a rocket that big." This ignores, of course, that all of his 50's expedition designs involved a couple dozen people on 3-6 spacecraft, (to be fair, he was basing it on the Antarctic model, and nobody had ever done space exploration before), and that they always involved the craft being assembled in orbit by hundreds of flights by reusable (but usually 3-4 staged) shuttles, in perhaps the most extreme example of EOR ever seen.

Von Buran's lunar expedition design:
http://www.astronautix.com/v/vonbraunlunarlander.html

His 1952 Mars expedition, just for reference:
http://www.astronautix.com/v/vonbraunmarpedition-1952.html


Offline bknight

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 2145
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #5 on: August 13, 2017, 01:42:45 PM »
Who says this?

It's a relatively new one, not seen as much as the others, but I actually first encountered it on this very forum....

Just for the record.  What forum/thread are you referring?  I believe that is what Glom asked.
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline ineluki

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2017, 04:38:44 AM »

I thought this seemed familiar, it's on the old forum proboards forum. Prepare some desk padding...

http://apollohoax.proboards.com/thread/632/saturn-rocket-needed-times-bigger

Offline PUshift

  • Mercury
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • roger, we got pushift down here too
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #7 on: August 14, 2017, 09:27:55 AM »
I recognize a hilarious confusion of the names "von Braun" and "Buran". 

Offline bknight

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 2145
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #8 on: August 14, 2017, 10:06:09 AM »

I thought this seemed familiar, it's on the old forum proboards forum. Prepare some desk padding...

http://apollohoax.proboards.com/thread/632/saturn-rocket-needed-times-bigger

I read through that one, good stuff as always.  He indicated "It's a relatively new one" which implies a recent forum/thread.
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline nomuse

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 604
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #9 on: August 15, 2017, 10:36:01 AM »
I recognize a hilarious confusion of the names "von Braun" and "Buran".

I like that one, though not as much as my favorite surrealist singer, Dali Parton.

Offline Everett

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 38
Re: "Saturn V neeeded to be 266 times bigger"
« Reply #10 on: August 15, 2017, 10:50:33 AM »

I thought this seemed familiar, it's on the old forum proboards forum. Prepare some desk padding...

http://apollohoax.proboards.com/thread/632/saturn-rocket-needed-times-bigger

I read through that one, good stuff as always.  He indicated "It's a relatively new one" which implies a recent forum/thread.

"It's a relatively new one" - Honestly, I thought it was on the new forum. I've also been reading the old forum oldest-newest, and since it was one of the earlier things I read after reading through the new forum, I guess I got them mixed up. Oops.