N1 had too many relatively tiny engines bundled imo and maybe so has
Musk's Starship. Detonation altitude anybody?
Consider a 747 upgrade with 20 engines, go figure :-(.
Spaceship size matters to go colonize the heavens of course.
What about designing/building a bigger "F6"= 6*F1 engine ? Next bundle
such Saturn- or honeycomb wise using only 5 F6 engines/stage or so.
Not hundreds of liquid engines in propellant pipes like that Germant
launched in the Lybian desert and Congo. Became a bank scandal in the
eighties.
He launched a bundle of max 8 only. Next he got kicked out of Africa
likely plucked like a chicken.
John Carmack had a chat with him in the US a decade ago. Forgot his
name.
John
Verzonden vanuit Proximus Mail
Van: James Fackert <jimfackert@xxxxxxxxx>
Verzonden: 20 april 2023 22:36:25 CEST
Aan: arocket list <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Onderwerp: [AR] starship abort?
It sure seems that flight termination was very clean and deliberate.
Two clean explosions a few seconds apart. Is it possible that the loss
of several engines meant that altitude and velocity was not adequate to
satisfy successful flight parameters, the safety system would not allow
separation, but instead, demanded explosive termination of the booster
and the second stage flights? I dont think it was a rapid unanticipated
dissasembly- it seemed clean and clearly deliberate.
If the second stage had inadequate velocety and was separated and
ignited, it might have ended up .... anywhere? and that would not be
good.
So success is impossible, get it over with with minimal threat to
others.