SOHEIL
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2011
- Messages
- 15,796
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
New Recruit
It's Homa, another mythical Persian bird.
Huma bird - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And it's the best looking airline logo in the world.
if falcon 1 had the same thrust as simorgh you must have doubted their efficiency . falcon 1 uses rp1/lox for fuel its natural that it provide a lot more thrust .is this is rocket very inefficient?? is it because of the rocket engines??
it has a mass of 77 tonnes and can put a 100-200kg into low orbit
compared to Falcon 1
mass of 38 tonnes and 185kg
this rocket is based off Unha right??
if falcon 1 had the same thrust as simorgh you must have doubted their efficiency . falcon 1 uses rp1/lox for fuel its natural that it provide a lot more thrust .is this is rocket very inefficient?? is it because of the rocket engines??
it has a mass of 77 tonnes and can put a 100-200kg into low orbit
compared to Falcon 1
mass of 38 tonnes and 185kg
this rocket is based off Unha right??
is this is rocket very inefficient?? is it because of the rocket engines??
Its not really a question of "inefficiency". Its a trade off between starting somewhere wth low complexity and Isp (specific thrust).
Iran will then build up from there over the years.
Each Shahab 3 missile costs < 500,000 dollars . Simorgh uses 4 Shahab III upgraded engines and overall cost of the rocket is Only 5-6 Million dollars . Damn cheap for a orbital launcher . On the other hand Iran is retiring the old shahab 3 missiles . Considering that the engines of old Shahab III missiles are going to be reused in Simorgh , More cost reduction .so the rodong engine is inefficient for sending stuff into space
is this is rocket very inefficient?? is it because of the rocket engines??
it has a mass of 77 tonnes and can put a 100-200kg into low orbit
compared to Falcon 1
mass of 38 tonnes and 185kg
this rocket is based off Unha right??
this rocket is based off Unha right??
Each Shahab 3 missile costs < 500,000 dollars . Simorgh uses 4 Shahab III upgraded engines and overall cost of the rocket is Only 5-6 Million dollars . Damn cheap for a orbital launcher . On the other hand Iran is retiring the old shahab 3 missiles . Considering that the engines of old Shahab III missiles are going to be reused in Simorgh , More cost reduction .
It's actually efficient because of its low prices . Who cares if it's big or heavy in comparison to its throw weight ?
a é stage design is not stupid, the problem is low quality material and finishing job that unha have always have problems in separation stage I guess the material they use can't tolerate the launch stress too well and as result the separation mechanism get damaged during launch time or in first stage of the flight.Space Launch Vehicles of the United States: Delta, Delta-I, Delta-II, Delta-III, Delta-IV
Take a look ...
from Delta A to Delta III almost same core used in the rockets !
but look at the difference !
Joint project !
I can show you so many differences !
+ we helped NK to fix their unstable rocket (unha-3) ! ( still unstable because of its stupid 3 stage design ! )
We can't use old shahab-3 engines !
shahab-3A using a different propellant >>> UDMH / AK-27
a é stage design is not stupid, the problem is low quality material and finishing job that unha have always have problems in separation stage I guess the material they use can't tolerate the launch stress too well and as result the separation mechanism get damaged during launch time or in first stage of the flight.