Artemis SLS vs Apollo Saturn V Lift Off to Tower Clear
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 11. 2022
- Note - These approximate lift off times only. Each Saturn V had a different clear tower time (as will SLS) due to load weights, timing, etc.
However, we can see how the SLS with the two Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) and four RS-25's is significantly faster than the Saturn V with it's five F-1 engines.
Artemis SLS Footage is my own taken November 16th, 2022 at the 1:47AM launch from the Apollo/Saturn viewing facility at Banana Creek, Cape Canaveral, FL.
Apollo Saturn V footage taken from NASA archival footage.
#artemis
#apollo
#liftoff
#rocket - Zábava
The SRBs really give SLS, a small rocket too, an advantage over the Saturn V.
The Saturn V still has a much higher payload capacity.
@@gtaxmods saturn v could lift 140t to LEO. SLS block 1 can lift 95T, a fairly large difference but, block 1b will lift 105t and block 130t. 10t isn't much of a difference. The actual capabilities get a bit hazy as all these payload calculation include the upper stages needed for going to the moon. A good metric is payload to the moon, which saturn v could lift 50t to the moon and SLS block 2 will launch up 46t. It's very close although saturn v has the upper hand, but not just in lifting power, also cost. Saturn v cost ~1b per launch while sls is sitting at ~4b 💀
@@idontknowanygoodnames1498 don't forget inflation though
@@novembern939nn5 that was accounting for inflation, the saturn v was like 300m in those days
@@idontknowanygoodnames1498 Saturn V could lift 118T, the 140T figure includes the S-IVB and the propellants in it And SLS by itself will cost something around $800M once the production stablizes
no wonder Artemis ripped the launch tower a new A-hole!
Saturn V F-1 engines burned korsine they also produce much more vibration in turn shook the ground up to 20 miles away. Video shows the SRB's producing more flame in person the Saturn V was more impressive. The Saturn V produced a rumbling sound of low frequency that lasted for long time you would see the flame the sound of the rumbling then the ground would start to shake under your feet. I saw Apollo 16 and 17 go I was 12 years old.
Great info! I wish I could have been around for the Apollo days and seen a Saturn V in person!
@@ImrfilmsDon't miss out on the opportunity once in a lifetime experience of the SLS launch coming up less than a year away.
Fascinating
Dam, the SLS is super powerful look at how it takes off
It was incredible to see in person! And looking back at the footage, I can see the shock waves shooting out from the launch pad...Crazy power!
Many are jumping to conclusions about the advantage of SRBs. It's true most of the thrust comes from the SRBs, and that SRBs have a high thrust-to-weight ratio. However, this is a design tradeoff like any other. Liquids have much better ISP (efficiency), and are safer for crew because they can be turned off. When Starship launches, it will become obvious that high thrust-to-weight is achievable without solids.
Indeed the other problem is that liquid fuel stages, like a fuel tank + engines are really expensive to design, test, and produce compared to solid boosters. But space x said their raptors will be fine for something like 50 flights if i remember correct. So as long as they keep landing the lifting stages its a win win.
Starship's TWR at liftoff will be more than 1.5, while Falcon 9 has a TWR of 1.4, and Falcon Heavy is I think 1.6
I've seen people constantly bring this up but no one has been able to to substantiate how being able to turn off liquid engines makes them any safer
@@cyberdoom9666 common isnt that obvious?
if you have something really loud thats producing insane amounts of energy in form of thrust and heat, its a good thing to be able to shut it off in case of a failure.
for example the star ship super heavy booster will have 33 engines when completed. and if one of them has a problem they could potentially shut that one and the opposite one off. the center of thrust wont get affected and all thats lost is a bit of TWR, meaning the mission can almost go on as planned.
now imagine what happens if one of the 2 artemis solid boosters has a malfunction during max-q.
maybe the liquid engines could keep it straight whit their gimbal ability. however i wouldnt wana be whit in 100 miles of that event.
@@cyberdoom9666 Being able to turn them off means when the capsule ejects via the launch escape system, the rocket isn't chasing the capsule because the engines are still turn on. When the LES turns off, the rocket may deviate from it's flight path as well, and it may come dangerously close, and may even collide with the capsule
Para el saturno V fue una obra de arte de la ingeniera pues en esa época con las limitaciones y poder llevar acabo la misión Apollo 11 y las demás mis respetos
¡Apollo definitivamente era una máquina hermosa! ¡Ojalá pudiera volver a verla volar!
I cant wait to see all 3, side by side, SLS, Starship, Saturn V, full throttle.
That's a great idea! I'm hoping to see Starship in person within the next couple years (assuming they keep launching them.)
@@Imrfilms drag race them sons o bitches
Is this what a large difference in TWR looks like?
To a degree as the Saturn V payload was higher. This also shows the difference between SRBs and liquid fuels at lift off.
yes
Artemis is fast
Sure was!
There is a certified Saturn V in Houston. Meaning it was ready to launch. I would like to see a movie like Battleship where we need a rocket to save the earth but don’t have any. But then somebody says, hey, isn’t there a certified Saturn V in Houston?
I love that idea!
It’s definitely been deactivated beyond repair. Although that would be amazing.
yeah you might want a more robust launch tower, but for now, some duct tape should do the trick
SLS is a beast
SLS is more powerful than the Saturn V
Sure is! About 1.2 million pounds of thrust difference!
The other one had 3 people a fueled up lander spacecraft , air, water ,food and maybe a moon buggy?
Yes. The other rocket is Apollo 11, so it would have the three astronauts, a lander and supplies. No buggy on that one. Artemis had several dummies on it to simulate astronauts, but not the added supplies (to my knowledge!)
Ether way its a know thing solid propellant motors are more energetic than liquid engined. I've witness many SpaceX Falcon 9 launches and few ULA Atlas V launches and Atlas V gets to higher altitude faster due to its 4 solid motors.
The difference is SRBs.
@@BrocketMan Also something to note, Atlas V can run skinny, or any arrangement of boosters up to 5. It would be cool to see those launches side by side.
That is like 7% of the whole weight. Artemis is just better
Pretty good proof that the Saturn 5's didn't have the power to get twice the mass to the moon in half the time compared to the SLS. NASA busted themselves!!!
The Apollo launch has been slowed down slightly. First thing I noticed.
I don't believe so, it takes approximately 13 seconds for the Saturn V to clear its launch tower, and the video shows it about there, but idk, I could be wrong, but I'm fsrely sure this is correct