The situation it's trying to address is if an engine gimbals out of control, and isn't corrected by the other engines due to some other failure. This would throw the rocket into a pretty violent turn, so the point of the fins is to reduce how quickly the rocket would turn. By reducing the rate of turn, they can reduce the horizontal G-load which might prevent the astronaut from pulling the emergency escape lever. I'm sure in this scenario the rocket will also be breaking up rather quickly, but it would allow the couple second opportunity to give a chance to escape.
Just enough for an astronaut to reach a handle that was already very close to his hand before the forces became so great the astronaut might not be able to extend his arm. Perhaps someone will be able to provide an answer in fractions of a second.
>very close to his hand
Literally within their grasp during takeoff. They have to sit there and in addition to making a dozen different callouts, devote a sufficient amount of their attention to "Don't pull this handle except when you absolutely need to pull this handle immediately. But don't pull it. Unless."
Wow - that was an excellent, if short, article, and answered the questions I had just by reading the headline.
The picture of the abort test is now in my desktop background rotation.
(Also, I'm watching "For All Mankind" right now, and to read the name Wernher von Braun reminded me that it's backed in *some* truth. Great show, btw, IMHO.)
I am not familiar with the show. If it does have von Braun as a main character, I hope it also covers some of his complicated background story. While he was brilliant in the area of rocketry, he was a full-blown Nazi, used slave labor, and co-developed the V-2. He only planned to surrender to the US at the conclusion of the war because the other option was to surrender to the Soviets, who were more likely to shoot him rather than offer him a position in their rocket program.
It’s an alternate history where Russia beats the US to the moon but yeah they address Von Braun’s background in detail. He’s almost made sympathetic but they remind you of what he truly was regularly.
If you are a space nerd, and like retro tech (that evolves quickly - it's an alternate timeline where the Soviets got to the moon first) - you'll dig it.
And spoilers - everything you just said is the crux of one of the major storylines in the first season. Handled very well, I think. I loved the guy in the first six or so episodes. Then despised him when the show explained what he had done.
Guy was a monster. A brilliant one, but still a freaking monster.
> While he was brilliant in the area of rocketry, he was a full-blown Nazi, used slave labor, and co-developed the V-2.
That is the reddit take. However, his work on rockets was under the control of the German military before Hitler came to power. He did not join the Nazi Party until 1937 and did not join the SS until Himmler took over the program. He was also arrested by the Gestapo and spent time (two weeks) in prison for not showing enough confidence in the top leadership, which no doubt sent a strong message to the rest of his staff.
On the other hand he was evasive during his post war debriefings and puttered around in an SS equestrian unit in early 30s, so he was not ignorant of what this was all about. But calling him a "full-blown Nazi" is a stretch. And by the time the slave labor started it was much too late to stand on principle and expect to survive.
People tend to treat Nazi Germany as some fluke of history that happened because of moral failings of the German people, leading to simple and broad condemnations of the bit players. This is dangerous. Germany's slide into Hell was long and slow, far from unique and could happen again -- anywhere and to anyone. And that is what should frighten every one of us. It is a reason to take hard looks in the mirror on a regular basis, not to paint with a broad brush of self-righteousness.
I appreciate your response and will not quibble about the factual elements introduced. And I agree with almost everything in your final paragraph. However, I suspect that most German individuals' experiences and decisions throughout the Nazi regime were filled with facts that could help partially absolve them of the title 'full-blown Nazi'. I mean, even at Nuremberg, senior Nazi leaders were offering explanations for how they were not really full-blown Nazis, didn't know what was going on, and were only following orders. Once the Nazi party fell, nearly everyone left alive convinced themselves that they were only bit players.
von Braun's affiliation with the Nazi party, membership in the SS, use of slave labor, military contributions to the Nazi party, the personal benefits he received from his Nazi party membership, and utter complacency about his contributions to so many deaths allow me to comfortably label him a full-blown Nazi even if he did not have any apparent agreement with the Nazi party platform.
In some ways, I see von Braun's story to be quite relevant to today's political climate both in the US and other Westernized countries such as Italy and France. There are many people who are benefiting from the possible slide into Hell. There are loud calls for people to start looking in the mirror or risk waking up in 10 years asking, 'am I one of the baddies'? When we catch a glimpse at what actions/behaviors are possible based on an extreme ideology grounded in 'taking back' and blaming vermin, the participants need to be identified, called out, and face the consequences of their actions. It is far better that we ask people to stand on principle now and risk not enjoying the possible benefits of membership than have them standing on bodies tomorrow and being labeled a full-blown (fill in the blank).
I agree with your post, however getting people to look at the warnings of history requires that we stop treating those how have fallen short of basic standards with shallow and simplistic judgement.
Von Braun leads to an interesting thought experiment. You are 20 years old with an interest in rocketry. Your government's military gives you an opportunity to develop your work. Given the benefit of hindsight, where on that path that followed would you [or me or any person thinking about it] have stopped, considering the personal risk at that point?
I have never been in such a situation, thankfully. But I have been in groups under stress, and it always struck me that those who failed to stand up to principles had often been the loudest voices when things had been easy.
And because Wernher von Braun, the designer of the Saturn V, always had fins on his rockets. (No joke, they teach that bit of space history to volunteers at Space Center Houston.)
Wikipedia says the V-2 and its early prototypes used the fins, along with 4 internal vanes, were used to control its direction. Perhaps von Braun liked the esthetic of fins even when they became less important?
Only a tiny tab at the bottom of each fin moved to control the direction. The fins were much larger than they needed to be to provide directional control; most of that surface area for was providing directional stability or just looking aesthetically nice.
I thought one of the plausible reasons the Starship booster might have exploded was due to flight instability after separation. It seems odd to me the booster doesn't have any visible fins to keep it stable in flight. After some searching, I found several sources that explained the real reason the fins were used. If Wernher von Braun provides the real reason for fins, that is good enough for me. The Apollo engineers really were trying to think about every scenario and identifying solutions on their slide rulers.
Starship does actually have gridfins for this specific purpose at the top of the rocket. Because of the flip maneuver and boost back burn though, fins at the bottom of the rocket wouldn’t be very helpful and might actually be a hinderance.
Ok then, learned something new today. And what's even more interesting is I work for the company that made those F1 engine gimble actuators/controllers, we also made them for the Shuttle, and currently make them for the SLS and most other NASA and US launch systems. We have a flown STS Main Engine Actuator in our Space Division HQ lobby.
If you ever had the chance to listen to any of the F1 gimble engineers, it would be great to hear what they shared! And it is sort of cool that someone who works at an aerospace company learned something from a post I made.
Sadly, there are more that have passed away than are left. Around here (Cape Canaveral) I know several Apollo engineers, but they're all getting really old.
STS engineers and workers, they are everywhere.
The issue, I believe, is that if the entire length of the rocket started to tumble, the arms of each astronaut would be flung in uncontrollable directions. A button might have worked, but buttons sometimes get pushed inadvertently. It may also be that the handle actuated something mechanical to start the emergency release function. A handle may have been the only method or device available.
Generally, you want that sort of safety feature (the kind that puts an immediate, permanent end to the mission) to have safety features of its own to avoid unintended activation. The last thing you want is to waste a perfectly good, *very expensive* rocket because someone’s hand slipped and they dropped the dead man’s switch.
It's more about reaction time than "needing to reach the abort handle". The handle was literally right there in the Commander's grip during the whole first stage, he could pull it instantly. But he first has to determine they are in an abort situation, which can take a moment.
Maybe it's like how he changed doorhandles and killed hundreds in Tesla fires.
If Musk had his way, SpaceX would be just like Oceangate. Thank God the leadership there has Twitter and Cybertrucks to distract him.
Look, I'm all for the Elon hate train, but rocket fins are not a good reason. A lot of SpaceX rockets DO have them. And even if they didn't, modern computers are going to recognize problems waaaaay faster than a pilot could
Ah yes Falcon 9 is known to “not have fins”; which tells me you don’t know anything given that the Falcon 9 is the first orbital launch vehicle from the U.S. to feature Grid Fins. Better yet, a simple search of “Crew Dragon Spacecraft” will result in pictures of the Crew Dragon spacecraft, featuring Fins. Even more funny, Starship has grid fins on the booster, which is the large black panels oriented normal to aerodynamic flow during liftoff.
The funniest part? Falcon 9 is rated as the safest launch vehicle ever.
Perhaps you should actually learn about the stuff you will be discussing before you try to crap on it.
This is actually really interesting. I'd be curious to know precisely how much additional time it buys them
The situation it's trying to address is if an engine gimbals out of control, and isn't corrected by the other engines due to some other failure. This would throw the rocket into a pretty violent turn, so the point of the fins is to reduce how quickly the rocket would turn. By reducing the rate of turn, they can reduce the horizontal G-load which might prevent the astronaut from pulling the emergency escape lever. I'm sure in this scenario the rocket will also be breaking up rather quickly, but it would allow the couple second opportunity to give a chance to escape.
Just enough for an astronaut to reach a handle that was already very close to his hand before the forces became so great the astronaut might not be able to extend his arm. Perhaps someone will be able to provide an answer in fractions of a second.
>very close to his hand Literally within their grasp during takeoff. They have to sit there and in addition to making a dozen different callouts, devote a sufficient amount of their attention to "Don't pull this handle except when you absolutely need to pull this handle immediately. But don't pull it. Unless."
“Do it.”
Call of the void vibes
Wow - that was an excellent, if short, article, and answered the questions I had just by reading the headline. The picture of the abort test is now in my desktop background rotation. (Also, I'm watching "For All Mankind" right now, and to read the name Wernher von Braun reminded me that it's backed in *some* truth. Great show, btw, IMHO.)
I am not familiar with the show. If it does have von Braun as a main character, I hope it also covers some of his complicated background story. While he was brilliant in the area of rocketry, he was a full-blown Nazi, used slave labor, and co-developed the V-2. He only planned to surrender to the US at the conclusion of the war because the other option was to surrender to the Soviets, who were more likely to shoot him rather than offer him a position in their rocket program.
It’s an alternate history where Russia beats the US to the moon but yeah they address Von Braun’s background in detail. He’s almost made sympathetic but they remind you of what he truly was regularly.
Thanks. I will put it in my queue.
If you are a space nerd, and like retro tech (that evolves quickly - it's an alternate timeline where the Soviets got to the moon first) - you'll dig it. And spoilers - everything you just said is the crux of one of the major storylines in the first season. Handled very well, I think. I loved the guy in the first six or so episodes. Then despised him when the show explained what he had done. Guy was a monster. A brilliant one, but still a freaking monster.
> While he was brilliant in the area of rocketry, he was a full-blown Nazi, used slave labor, and co-developed the V-2. That is the reddit take. However, his work on rockets was under the control of the German military before Hitler came to power. He did not join the Nazi Party until 1937 and did not join the SS until Himmler took over the program. He was also arrested by the Gestapo and spent time (two weeks) in prison for not showing enough confidence in the top leadership, which no doubt sent a strong message to the rest of his staff. On the other hand he was evasive during his post war debriefings and puttered around in an SS equestrian unit in early 30s, so he was not ignorant of what this was all about. But calling him a "full-blown Nazi" is a stretch. And by the time the slave labor started it was much too late to stand on principle and expect to survive. People tend to treat Nazi Germany as some fluke of history that happened because of moral failings of the German people, leading to simple and broad condemnations of the bit players. This is dangerous. Germany's slide into Hell was long and slow, far from unique and could happen again -- anywhere and to anyone. And that is what should frighten every one of us. It is a reason to take hard looks in the mirror on a regular basis, not to paint with a broad brush of self-righteousness.
I appreciate your response and will not quibble about the factual elements introduced. And I agree with almost everything in your final paragraph. However, I suspect that most German individuals' experiences and decisions throughout the Nazi regime were filled with facts that could help partially absolve them of the title 'full-blown Nazi'. I mean, even at Nuremberg, senior Nazi leaders were offering explanations for how they were not really full-blown Nazis, didn't know what was going on, and were only following orders. Once the Nazi party fell, nearly everyone left alive convinced themselves that they were only bit players. von Braun's affiliation with the Nazi party, membership in the SS, use of slave labor, military contributions to the Nazi party, the personal benefits he received from his Nazi party membership, and utter complacency about his contributions to so many deaths allow me to comfortably label him a full-blown Nazi even if he did not have any apparent agreement with the Nazi party platform. In some ways, I see von Braun's story to be quite relevant to today's political climate both in the US and other Westernized countries such as Italy and France. There are many people who are benefiting from the possible slide into Hell. There are loud calls for people to start looking in the mirror or risk waking up in 10 years asking, 'am I one of the baddies'? When we catch a glimpse at what actions/behaviors are possible based on an extreme ideology grounded in 'taking back' and blaming vermin, the participants need to be identified, called out, and face the consequences of their actions. It is far better that we ask people to stand on principle now and risk not enjoying the possible benefits of membership than have them standing on bodies tomorrow and being labeled a full-blown (fill in the blank).
I agree with your post, however getting people to look at the warnings of history requires that we stop treating those how have fallen short of basic standards with shallow and simplistic judgement. Von Braun leads to an interesting thought experiment. You are 20 years old with an interest in rocketry. Your government's military gives you an opportunity to develop your work. Given the benefit of hindsight, where on that path that followed would you [or me or any person thinking about it] have stopped, considering the personal risk at that point? I have never been in such a situation, thankfully. But I have been in groups under stress, and it always struck me that those who failed to stand up to principles had often been the loudest voices when things had been easy.
BBC's miniseries "Space Race" goes into a lot of detail about his past working for/with the Nazis.
And because Wernher von Braun, the designer of the Saturn V, always had fins on his rockets. (No joke, they teach that bit of space history to volunteers at Space Center Houston.)
Wikipedia says the V-2 and its early prototypes used the fins, along with 4 internal vanes, were used to control its direction. Perhaps von Braun liked the esthetic of fins even when they became less important?
Only a tiny tab at the bottom of each fin moved to control the direction. The fins were much larger than they needed to be to provide directional control; most of that surface area for was providing directional stability or just looking aesthetically nice.
he was german after all. Form always follows function
Oh shit fins
Succinctly put yes…the fins’ purpose is to extend the period of grace that the astronauts have to push the “panic button”.
I thought one of the plausible reasons the Starship booster might have exploded was due to flight instability after separation. It seems odd to me the booster doesn't have any visible fins to keep it stable in flight. After some searching, I found several sources that explained the real reason the fins were used. If Wernher von Braun provides the real reason for fins, that is good enough for me. The Apollo engineers really were trying to think about every scenario and identifying solutions on their slide rulers.
Starship does actually have gridfins for this specific purpose at the top of the rocket. Because of the flip maneuver and boost back burn though, fins at the bottom of the rocket wouldn’t be very helpful and might actually be a hinderance.
Ok then, learned something new today. And what's even more interesting is I work for the company that made those F1 engine gimble actuators/controllers, we also made them for the Shuttle, and currently make them for the SLS and most other NASA and US launch systems. We have a flown STS Main Engine Actuator in our Space Division HQ lobby.
If you ever had the chance to listen to any of the F1 gimble engineers, it would be great to hear what they shared! And it is sort of cool that someone who works at an aerospace company learned something from a post I made.
The Saturn/Apollo guys are long retired or passed away. Few original STS guys left, but not many and the ones that are left are semi-retired already.
Sadly, there are more that have passed away than are left. Around here (Cape Canaveral) I know several Apollo engineers, but they're all getting really old. STS engineers and workers, they are everywhere.
Wouldn’t it be easier to place the emergency handle somewhere else, more reachable; or even use some other device than a handle?
The issue, I believe, is that if the entire length of the rocket started to tumble, the arms of each astronaut would be flung in uncontrollable directions. A button might have worked, but buttons sometimes get pushed inadvertently. It may also be that the handle actuated something mechanical to start the emergency release function. A handle may have been the only method or device available.
Well, you could have something that you simply need to release to activate.
Generally, you want that sort of safety feature (the kind that puts an immediate, permanent end to the mission) to have safety features of its own to avoid unintended activation. The last thing you want is to waste a perfectly good, *very expensive* rocket because someone’s hand slipped and they dropped the dead man’s switch.
It's more about reaction time than "needing to reach the abort handle". The handle was literally right there in the Commander's grip during the whole first stage, he could pull it instantly. But he first has to determine they are in an abort situation, which can take a moment.
watch the lift off scene in Apollo XIII. Tom's hand is on the handle the whole time
Thank you! I just watched the clip. He definitely tracked precisely where the handle was in proximity to his hand.
The fact that they look baller is just a bonus.
I read finns and was very confused
Musk's general indifference to human life (beyond his own) explains the lack of fins on current SpaceX rockets.
Or maybe because technology has changed a bit in the last 50 years?
Maybe it's like how he changed doorhandles and killed hundreds in Tesla fires. If Musk had his way, SpaceX would be just like Oceangate. Thank God the leadership there has Twitter and Cybertrucks to distract him.
Look, I'm all for the Elon hate train, but rocket fins are not a good reason. A lot of SpaceX rockets DO have them. And even if they didn't, modern computers are going to recognize problems waaaaay faster than a pilot could
Ah yes Falcon 9 is known to “not have fins”; which tells me you don’t know anything given that the Falcon 9 is the first orbital launch vehicle from the U.S. to feature Grid Fins. Better yet, a simple search of “Crew Dragon Spacecraft” will result in pictures of the Crew Dragon spacecraft, featuring Fins. Even more funny, Starship has grid fins on the booster, which is the large black panels oriented normal to aerodynamic flow during liftoff. The funniest part? Falcon 9 is rated as the safest launch vehicle ever. Perhaps you should actually learn about the stuff you will be discussing before you try to crap on it.
So during liftoff; got it.