"most powerful" is somewhat arguable. The 4-chambered RD-170 is the most powerful liquid fueled engine ever developed, slightly besting the F-1 single chambered engine on the Saturn V S-IC. Both are dwarfed by large solid motors such as the RSRM, however.
It comes down to how you define "best" and "engine". No doubt, though, the RD-170 is some fine engineering. I'm more intrigued by the RD-701 design, though. I wish someone would fund further development of it.
Americans should be credited for solving instability problems in the F-1 engine and achieving high-thrust with a single combustion chamber. Russians should be credit for the use of a single turbo-pump high-thrust engine, as the turbo-pump is the engine. Also the RD-170 uses the complicated closed cycle and gives higher chamber pressure, whereas the F-1 uses the simple gas generator power open cycle turbo pump. So stop fighting both of you and sell your engines to ISRO.
...as an engineer Korolyov never devised any interesting solutions to complex structural issues as many brilliant engineers did, as a scientist he didn't originate any new scientific theory nor study for any length of time complicated phenomenon however he delved into and grasped both well and was an excellent manager that got things done in fucked up society (kind of like your household).
My point is just because your cat shits into your mouth while you sleep doesn't mean he wants to date you.
@MightySaturn5 First of all, learn to push the reply button. I didnt receive any e-mails that you responded. If i havent entered this page just for fun i would never know that you responded. Second, whoever Korolev was doesnt matter, the important is that he was russian and he worked for his country and made it the leader in space. But as i said before, americans kissed nazi Von Brauns ass. You cannot change the facts my friend, no matter how hard you try.
Well, you can't directly compare american and russian rocketry because they had slightly differnt design phylosophy. Russians continued to perfect LOX/RP1 engines while americans went to LOX/LH2 and big solids for liftoff assist. They more or less abandoned large LOX/RP1 engine technology after Apollo.
@SkyyCaptainn Im not comparing them. I just commented that rd-170 is the most powerful engine and i like it but the user mightysaturn5 here is doing everything to make soviets look like shit. I will not let that happen after all they opened the gates to space they made it first there. I dont say that i hate americans, i like their space technology and i also like soviet/russian space technology. PEACE
Yeah RD 170 is the best in the world when it comes to large LOX/RP1 engines. For example If I were tasked to design a serious heavy lift rocket and use as much existing components as possible I would take best of both worlds. 5 - 7 RD170 on first stage assisted by several SRB's taken from shuttle and hydrogen fueled second stage powered by modified space shuttle main engines. That beast would have useful LEO payload in range of 300 - 400 metric tons.
@roboticmehdi You're a retard kid kid, you obviously don't like Americans and must be some european trash that can't accept that ONLY the United States had the technology to send men to the moon and back.
Like I told your ignorant ass -try reading The Soviet space race with Apollo (Siddiqi), its far better to obtain your information from a well researched book then for me to remark how its impossible for you to understand anything due to excess cat fecies clogging your ears, nose and throat.
@MightySaturn5 look my friend. i dont hate americans, i dont hate anyone. im saying facts that you just dont want to accept. soviets opened the gates to space, they made it first with thair own engineer with their own work and they have a great history in space technology. so please respect that. americans have great space technology also. they made great history by making it to the moon. i respect that. i expect you too to respect these facts and be more friendly here.
@vecaisvecis That would seem to be the case....additionally the 2 million lb. F-1 "A" engine (to be used if ever there had been a second production run of Saturn V's) was by 1971 'man rated' and ready for production if needed. Projected leo payloads with these engines would be in that neighborhood as well
Impressive ...piece of ingeneering (some numbers for those who are not familiar with Russian language) - thrust 86000kg - fuel - Kerosene , oxygen - can be used many times (reusable) - all 4 nozzles are one engine - fuel mixture is supplied from one turbopump for all nozzles - fuel pressure 250atm (burning chamber pressure) - total power 27 000 000 kW - Only turbopump power 180 000 kW - high fuel efficiency and very stable burnign process
@MightySaturn5 It is a single engine, it just has 4 combustion chambers. The most important part of a rocket engine is turbo-pump. RD-170 has one turbo-pump. The bigger the combustion chamber the more the combustion instability occurs. Soviets solved this problem in a very practical way, the just divided combustion chamber into 4 equal small chambers. But americans , lead by some nazi Von Braun, spent billion dollars to single chamber which exploded many times before it finally worked.
@roboticmehdi Just read "The soviet space race with Apollo" (Siddiqi), it seems you're pretty ignorant as to how far ahead the Americans were during the late 60's, the foolish russians had no high impulse hydrogen/oxygen upper stages nor did they have a chance in hell of creating a stable single chambered engine like the F-1, as far as your fucking comment about the F-1 exploding many times -your facts are completely wrong, of course your jealousy of the great Von Braun explains your stupidity
@MightySaturn5 jealous?! haha dude actually you are jealous on russians because they relied on their own engineer, Sergei Korolev. And they were right, he was a great engineer. He lauched the first satellite and put the first man into orbit . But americans were so stupid that they couldnt build their own rocket so Von Braun did that for them, and dont forget that Von Braun worked for SS for nazis. Americans say that they were against nazis but when they need it they lick the nazi ass.
It almost didn't they had a heck of a time getting it to work.
Where a combustion chamber failure on an engine like the F1 just causes it to split on a staged combustion engine like the RD-170 the materials would melt like wax.
This made figuring out what went wrong when a test failed difficult.
is it true or not true that,in the early 90`s through talkes some americans stripped and re - sealed some 20 yar old russian rocket engines,put them on a test bed and they out performed the up to date american engines ,
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The only way that Russia was able to build engines beyond the RD-107 was due to research provided to Russia...FROM THE USA, thanks to superior American R&D from the development of the F-1. Nice way to ride on our tailcoats, COMMRADE!
It is always pleasure to see the human creature with the brain white-woshed by domestic propaganda. In fact, comarade, there is no such thing as "USA superiority" in development of LOX/cerosine rocket engines. Especially, F-1 that you have mentioned, had low specific impulse and high mass-to-power ratio due to utilisation of the open schema. Its design was conservative and obsolete even in time of its creation and so it is not in any way peak of enginering, neither american nor (moreover) world.
If I am correct, the Russians are the experts when it comes to kerosene/L.O2 engines, whereas the Americans mastered L.H2/L.O2 technology. What happened was that the US military began to rely on solid fuel technology for their missiles, whereas the Russian have dedicated their entire lives to perfect liquid-fuelled missiles. You are right about the F-1 engine. The only thing remarkable about it is its size and power.
And there were no equivalents of soviet closed schema rocket engines of new generation in USA up to 199x, when they were just imported from the collapsed Soviet Union.
Just a point. You do realise that it was a german that was the father of modern rocketry and he (von braun) that was one of the major keys in the development of the F!.
This engine is more powerful than the F-1 used on the Saturn V moon rocket, it is the worlds most powerful rocket engine ever, except for solid fuel rockets.
Yep, this is not about politics. F-1 did it's job ok but RD-170 is much more powerful and efficient.
Here the essentials:
RD-170:
Thrust (SL) 7.550 MN, (Vac.) 7.887 MN
Isp (SL) 309 s, Isp (Vac.) 338 s
F-1
Thrust 6.77 MN
Isp (SL) 263 s, (I didn't find the Vac. info)
MrJPI 2 months ago
"most powerful" is somewhat arguable. The 4-chambered RD-170 is the most powerful liquid fueled engine ever developed, slightly besting the F-1 single chambered engine on the Saturn V S-IC. Both are dwarfed by large solid motors such as the RSRM, however.
It comes down to how you define "best" and "engine". No doubt, though, the RD-170 is some fine engineering. I'm more intrigued by the RD-701 design, though. I wish someone would fund further development of it.
disorganizedorg 6 months ago
Americans should be credited for solving instability problems in the F-1 engine and achieving high-thrust with a single combustion chamber. Russians should be credit for the use of a single turbo-pump high-thrust engine, as the turbo-pump is the engine. Also the RD-170 uses the complicated closed cycle and gives higher chamber pressure, whereas the F-1 uses the simple gas generator power open cycle turbo pump. So stop fighting both of you and sell your engines to ISRO.
harishkumar09 7 months ago
...as an engineer Korolyov never devised any interesting solutions to complex structural issues as many brilliant engineers did, as a scientist he didn't originate any new scientific theory nor study for any length of time complicated phenomenon however he delved into and grasped both well and was an excellent manager that got things done in fucked up society (kind of like your household).
My point is just because your cat shits into your mouth while you sleep doesn't mean he wants to date you.
MightySaturn5 1 year ago
@MightySaturn5 First of all, learn to push the reply button. I didnt receive any e-mails that you responded. If i havent entered this page just for fun i would never know that you responded. Second, whoever Korolev was doesnt matter, the important is that he was russian and he worked for his country and made it the leader in space. But as i said before, americans kissed nazi Von Brauns ass. You cannot change the facts my friend, no matter how hard you try.
roboticmehdi 1 year ago
@roboticmehdi
Well, you can't directly compare american and russian rocketry because they had slightly differnt design phylosophy. Russians continued to perfect LOX/RP1 engines while americans went to LOX/LH2 and big solids for liftoff assist. They more or less abandoned large LOX/RP1 engine technology after Apollo.
SkyyCaptainn 1 year ago
@SkyyCaptainn Im not comparing them. I just commented that rd-170 is the most powerful engine and i like it but the user mightysaturn5 here is doing everything to make soviets look like shit. I will not let that happen after all they opened the gates to space they made it first there. I dont say that i hate americans, i like their space technology and i also like soviet/russian space technology. PEACE
roboticmehdi 1 year ago
@roboticmehdi
Yeah RD 170 is the best in the world when it comes to large LOX/RP1 engines. For example If I were tasked to design a serious heavy lift rocket and use as much existing components as possible I would take best of both worlds. 5 - 7 RD170 on first stage assisted by several SRB's taken from shuttle and hydrogen fueled second stage powered by modified space shuttle main engines. That beast would have useful LEO payload in range of 300 - 400 metric tons.
SkyyCaptainn 1 year ago
@SkyyCaptainn that would be cool :D
roboticmehdi 1 year ago
@roboticmehdi You're a retard kid kid, you obviously don't like Americans and must be some european trash that can't accept that ONLY the United States had the technology to send men to the moon and back.
Like I told your ignorant ass -try reading The Soviet space race with Apollo (Siddiqi), its far better to obtain your information from a well researched book then for me to remark how its impossible for you to understand anything due to excess cat fecies clogging your ears, nose and throat.
MightySaturn5 1 year ago
@MightySaturn5 look my friend. i dont hate americans, i dont hate anyone. im saying facts that you just dont want to accept. soviets opened the gates to space, they made it first with thair own engineer with their own work and they have a great history in space technology. so please respect that. americans have great space technology also. they made great history by making it to the moon. i respect that. i expect you too to respect these facts and be more friendly here.
roboticmehdi 1 year ago
@vecaisvecis That would seem to be the case....additionally the 2 million lb. F-1 "A" engine (to be used if ever there had been a second production run of Saturn V's) was by 1971 'man rated' and ready for production if needed. Projected leo payloads with these engines would be in that neighborhood as well
MightySaturn5 1 year ago
Thank you for the fantastic video.
vollencb 1 year ago
I'd like to build the exact same engines but on a smaller scale and put them on a model rocket :)
TonyFirelli 1 year ago
mickivanov 1 year ago
@mickivanov
Thank you for your translation.
vollencb 1 year ago
@vecaisvecis there's RD-180 on Atlas. RD-180 is about half power than that one.
itchyscrapp 1 year ago
The most powerful rocket engine ever built. I would like to have one. nice job USSR scientists.
roboticmehdi 2 years ago 19
@roboticmehdi ...yeah,although a 4 chambered engine has the footprint of 4 engines
MightySaturn5 1 year ago
@MightySaturn5 It is a single engine, it just has 4 combustion chambers. The most important part of a rocket engine is turbo-pump. RD-170 has one turbo-pump. The bigger the combustion chamber the more the combustion instability occurs. Soviets solved this problem in a very practical way, the just divided combustion chamber into 4 equal small chambers. But americans , lead by some nazi Von Braun, spent billion dollars to single chamber which exploded many times before it finally worked.
roboticmehdi 1 year ago
@roboticmehdi Just read "The soviet space race with Apollo" (Siddiqi), it seems you're pretty ignorant as to how far ahead the Americans were during the late 60's, the foolish russians had no high impulse hydrogen/oxygen upper stages nor did they have a chance in hell of creating a stable single chambered engine like the F-1, as far as your fucking comment about the F-1 exploding many times -your facts are completely wrong, of course your jealousy of the great Von Braun explains your stupidity
MightySaturn5 1 year ago
@MightySaturn5 jealous?! haha dude actually you are jealous on russians because they relied on their own engineer, Sergei Korolev. And they were right, he was a great engineer. He lauched the first satellite and put the first man into orbit . But americans were so stupid that they couldnt build their own rocket so Von Braun did that for them, and dont forget that Von Braun worked for SS for nazis. Americans say that they were against nazis but when they need it they lick the nazi ass.
roboticmehdi 1 year ago
americans were very impressed when they saw this engine and it brilliant construction that by all mean shouldn't work. nice job russians
saff3356 2 years ago 2
@saff3356
It almost didn't they had a heck of a time getting it to work.
Where a combustion chamber failure on an engine like the F1 just causes it to split on a staged combustion engine like the RD-170 the materials would melt like wax.
This made figuring out what went wrong when a test failed difficult.
This engine exists because of the Buran program.
Membrane556 2 years ago
any know the soundtrack, especially song that starts at 4:50?
Takeital 2 years ago
0:00 to 0:20 Jean Michel Jarre - Magnetic Fields Part 1
0:36 to 1:45 Jean Michel Jarre - Equinoxe Part 4
1:47 to 2:10 I don't kown
2:17 to 2:45 I don't kown
2:46 to 3:31 I don't kown
3:32 to 3:56 Jean Michel Jarre - Magnetic Fields Part 1
3:56 to 4:42 Jean Michel Jarre - Magnetic Fields Part 4
4:43 to 5:07 Jean Michel Jarre - Equinoxe Part 6
5:21 to 6:12 Jean Michel Jarre - Equinoxe Part 7
alaldugo 2 years ago 9
Thanks Squarkino
cezarmadness 2 years ago
is it true or not true that,in the early 90`s through talkes some americans stripped and re - sealed some 20 yar old russian rocket engines,put them on a test bed and they out performed the up to date american engines ,
fredbcj 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The only way that Russia was able to build engines beyond the RD-107 was due to research provided to Russia...FROM THE USA, thanks to superior American R&D from the development of the F-1. Nice way to ride on our tailcoats, COMMRADE!
ScottKin 2 years ago
when you say "our" you don't mean including yourself, right? because you're one useless slob. you couldn't have contributed in any way.
RuskiMafijas 2 years ago
It is always pleasure to see the human creature with the brain white-woshed by domestic propaganda. In fact, comarade, there is no such thing as "USA superiority" in development of LOX/cerosine rocket engines. Especially, F-1 that you have mentioned, had low specific impulse and high mass-to-power ratio due to utilisation of the open schema. Its design was conservative and obsolete even in time of its creation and so it is not in any way peak of enginering, neither american nor (moreover) world.
perlghost 2 years ago
If I am correct, the Russians are the experts when it comes to kerosene/L.O2 engines, whereas the Americans mastered L.H2/L.O2 technology. What happened was that the US military began to rely on solid fuel technology for their missiles, whereas the Russian have dedicated their entire lives to perfect liquid-fuelled missiles. You are right about the F-1 engine. The only thing remarkable about it is its size and power.
apollosaturn5 2 years ago
And there were no equivalents of soviet closed schema rocket engines of new generation in USA up to 199x, when they were just imported from the collapsed Soviet Union.
perlghost 2 years ago
Just a point. You do realise that it was a german that was the father of modern rocketry and he (von braun) that was one of the major keys in the development of the F!.
Riding coat tails indeed.
Patriotism is good provided it is not blind.
blyndrotor 2 years ago
riipper666, he there is not present.
Автору, спасибо за видео! 5,5 лет учился на этой специальности! ;)
llleeeooonnniiiddd 2 years ago
nice video, too bad its only in russia. Does anyone know is Glushko one of the men shown at 4:58 ?
riipper666 2 years ago
@riipper666 No, none of those men are V.P. Glushko.
DonPMitchell 1 year ago
Only Russia can build engines with very advanced technology. The fuelpump power is 250,000 hp.
Nizze23 2 years ago 2
This engine is more powerful than the F-1 used on the Saturn V moon rocket, it is the worlds most powerful rocket engine ever, except for solid fuel rockets.
bombarderoazul 2 years ago 2