It Took 83 Engines to Get to the Moon

By Amy Shira Teitel | January 15, 2018 1:59 pm
The five F-1 engines of the Saturn V in Florida. My own selfie.

The five F-1 engines of the Saturn V in Florida. My own selfie.

The first time the Saturn V launched in November of 1967, ceiling tiles in the nearby studio where Walter Cronkite was reporting from live fell to the floor. The power of the five F-1 engines was astonishing, and their combined 7.5 million pounds of thrust hasn’t yet been matched. But there were more engines than just those five biggest ones. All told, it took 83 engines to get an Apollo mission to the Moon and safely back to Earth.

Engines and Motors

First, we have to make one very important distinction between rocket engines and motors, because I can hear groaning sounds over the claim of “83 engines.” Properly speaking, the Saturn V had a total of 83 engines and motors. The difference is in the kind of fuel each burns.

A rocket engine burns liquid fuel. Take the F-1 as an example; it burned a mix of rocket grade kerosene called RP-1 and liquid oxygen abbreviated LOX. The upper stages of the Saturn V also burn liquid fuels, liquid hydrogen or LH2 and LOX. Liquid fuels are tricky. In the case of the LOX, oxygen needs to be super cold to be in a liquid state, so even with insulation around the tank it inevitably warmed enough to boil off if left too long. To keep the most LOX in the tank it needed to be loaded in very close to launch. But the challenges of dealing with cryogenic liquids was offset by the benefits. Liquid engines can be throttled and restarted, two characteristics you really want when doing precision burns to adjust your trajectory on the way to the Moon.

Rocket motors, on the other hand, burn solid fuel. The best example of these we have is the SRB, the solid rocket boosters that helped launched Space Shuttle missions. The good thing about solid rocket motors is they take away some guesswork; they ignite and burn, simple as that. The downside is they can’t be throttled or relit.

The S-IVB firing to send the crew to the Moon, aka the translunar injection burn. NASA.

The S-IVB firing to send the crew to the Moon, aka the translunar injection burn. NASA.

The Flight of the Saturn V

So lets get back to the rocket at hand, the Saturn V, and the 83 rocket engines and motors — basically sources of propulsion — needed for a successful mission to the Moon.

It started with the first stage, the iconic F-1 engines that hold a special place in any space nerd’s heart. These five engines were the first to ignite in a 1-2-2 pattern. The centre engine lit first followed by opposing external pairs with a 300 millisecond delay. Arms held the massive rocket in place as the engines lit and developed full thrust. Then the arms released and the rocket rose off the launch pad.

The burn time for each stage varied slightly with each mission, but on average the first stage burned for about two and a half minutes before its fuel was spent and its usefulness finished. At that point, at an altitude of about 205,000 feet, the first stage would separate from the rest of the rocket. This separation triggered eight retrorockets on the stage, small solid fuel motors that fired with 88,600 pounds of thrust for 0.666 seconds. Though the stage did continue to rise with the velocity from launch, the retrorockets help put some distance between the first and second stages.

Hundreds of milliseconds later, eight ullage motors on the interstage, still attached to the S-II second stage, fired. These served to put more distance between the two rocket stages, but more importantly gave the second stage a small kick forward. Firing with 22,500 pounds of thrust for four seconds, it was enough to ensure the fuel in the tanks was flush against the feed lines so the five J-2 engines that powered the S-II could ignite cleanly.

Launch Escape System jettison. NASA.

Launch Escape System jettison. NASA.

While the S-II was burning, it was time to get rid of the Launch Escape System. The lattice-like structure at the very top of the Saturn V was armed with four rocket motors that could rip the Command Module away from the rest of the rocket during an emergency abort. But a little more than three minutes into the flight it wasn’t needed anymore. The Tower Jettison motor fired to pull the LES away, taking the boost protective cover on the Command Module with it.

The S-II’s five J-2 engines burned for about six minutes before running out of fuel at an altitude of about 114.5 miles. Again, the separation between the spent second stage and the third stage was aided by retrorockets. This time it was four that burned with 35,000 pounds of thrust for just 1.5 seconds to give the third stage, the S-IVB, room to burn.

The S-IVB’s active flight began with two ullage motors that kicked the stage forward before the single J-2 engine came to life. Also on the S-IVB were two Auxiliary Propulsion System engines that helped with ullage as well as attitude control. The stage burned for about two minutes and 45 seconds before shutting down. By this point the spacecraft was safely in Earth orbit.

To the Moon and Back Again

Getting to the Moon meant burning the S-IVB again, this time for a little over five minutes to give the spacecraft the velocity it needed to escape Earth orbit and head off for the Moon.

Now on the translunar coast, the crew started using the engines on the spacecraft, specifically on the Service Module, which was the powerhouse for the bulk of the mission. It had one main engine, the SPS or Service Propulsion System, as well as four blocks of four reaction control thrusters. These were the rockets that facilitated collecting the Lunar Module from its stored location in the S-IVB and adjusted the spacecraft trajectory during the flight.

SPS course correction burn with the two spacecraft docked. NASA.

SPS course correction burn with the two spacecraft docked. NASA.

The SPS engine was also the one that slowed the spacecraft into Lunar orbit where the crew separated the Command-Service and Lunar Modules. At that point the lunar landing crew relied on the LM’s own propulsion systems. Like the Service Module, it had four blocks of four reaction control thrusters, but they weren’t enough. To land on the Moon the crew needed the big Descent engine as well as the thrusters for fine control. Leaving the Moon demanded the Ascent engine, another one that worked in conjunction with the thrusters to get the crew off the Moon and into orbit where they docked with the waiting Command-Service Module.

The SPS engine fired to send the crew from Lunar orbit back towards the Earth, adjusting the course with smaller burns as needed along the way.

Finally facing reentry through the Earth’s atmosphere and splashdown, it was time to ditch the Service Module; the gumdrop shaped Command Module entered the atmosphere alone. But no one was going to leave it to chance and hope that it maintained the right attitude during this critical final mission phase. And so there were twelve reaction control thrusters embedded in the Command Module as well. They made sure the heat shield bore the brunt of the reentry heat, sparing the parachutes and complications so they could deploy safely at the end of a mission for a nice, soft splashdown.

The Missing Five

If you’re keeping track, that’s more than 83 engines and motors; you might have counted 87. There were actually 88 on the Saturn V, but five did nothing during an optimal mission. The four motors that powered the Launch Escape System were aided by a pitch motor that would direct the escaping Command Module safely away from the exploding rocket. Those never fired so I left them off my count.

Thanks to the Kansas Cosmosphere for sparking this one! A placard next to an APS rocket mentioned 83 engines total on the Saturn V and got me hunting down the breakdown. And thanks, too, to my buddy Lyle for helping me find number 83; I learned a lot about the LES writing this blog post. Sources: Saturn V New Reference First Stage Fact Sheet;  Saturn V New Reference Second Stage Fact Sheet; Saturn V New Reference Third Stage Fact Sheet; Technical Information Summary AS-501; Launch Escape Subsystem from Apollo news reference material.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Space & Physics, Uncategorized
MORE ABOUT: Apollo, History, NASA, Rockets, Space
ADVERTISEMENT
  • http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/EquivPrinFail.pdf Uncle Al

    oxygen needs to be super cold to be in a liquid state” Oxygen can be liquefied at any temperature below 154.6 kelvin. 450 picokelvin was achieved in 2003. A working laser pointer is at negative degrees kelvin.

    • Rich

      Yes, but the liquid oxygen needs to *stay* cold enough to remain liquid until the rocket is fired. The LOX tank needs to be insulated, and even with insulation, it will warm up unless fueling is delayed as long as possible.

      I was about to call for references on your claim that lasers operate at negative temperatures, but the “Negative temperature” article in Wikipedia actually discusses this rationally. “Negative” degrees K, however, does not mean “colder” than absolute zero; rather, in a way I confess I don’t really understand, a system with negative absolute temperature is actually *hotter* than anything with a positive temperature.

  • TC
  • John W. Thompson

    The vernier rockets that steered the CM during re-entry were fired to alter its course, not keep it upright.

  • dll ExamCom

    I am a little confused here and seeking clarification: my understanding
    was that the S-IVb-500 series of stages used two Auxiliary Propulsion
    Systems (APS)s, each of which included three liquid-fueled relightable
    engines (150 pounds thrust) and a single liquid-fueled ullage engine
    that was used exclusively during first burn cutoff and relight (70
    pounds thrust). The stage also appears to have contained two ullage
    solid rocket motors that were used during stage separation from the
    S-II/initial engine ignition.

    This would mean that the S-IVb-500 stage had a total of 10
    engines/motors on the sides collected into 2 APS units and two ullage
    motors, not 4 collected into two ullage and two “APS” engines, which
    would throw the count off a bit…

    The above is from the Saturn V Flight Manual SA-507 Section VI “S-IVB
    Stage”, especially “APS CONSTRUCTION” on page 6-19 (for the four engines
    in each APS), “PROPULSION” on page 6-4 for the use of APS ullage
    engines during initial burn cutoff and engine relight, and “ULLAGE
    ROCKET SYSTEM” on page 6-29, which (together with the rest of the
    ordnance section) seems to be the only mention of the ullage motors.
    Credit – I found the reference to this manual from Nasa’s online copy of
    SP-4206 “Stages to Saturn: A Technological History of the Apollo/Saturn
    Launch Vehicles”, which mentions the 8 APS engines, but not the
    potential 2 other ullage motors used during staging.

    As a side note, if you would like to go really crazy, one could try to
    catalog all of the explosive devices used in any way during the Apollo
    missions, including both rocket engines/motors and other ordnance, which
    would be a much higher number

    I would be very interested if anyone could clarify the design of the
    extra engines on the S-IVb-500 relightable stages, or more
    authoritative/clear sources about the design and major components of any
    Saturn stages.

    • Master Flash

      You’ve certainly researched this subject more thoroughly than I. Thanks for the offer but I t’m afraid my sanity is already waning. I’ll pass!

  • Master Flash

    I count 91 engines/motors on this diagram.
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Saturn_v_schematic.jpg
    Which ones did you not include?

NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Vintage Space

Vintage Space is all about digging into the minutia of the space age. Rather than retelling glossy stories of astronauts, Vintage Space peels back that veneer to look at the real stories -- the innovations that failed, the unrealized technologies, and the human elements that are less publicity-friendly so often remain buried. Gaining a clear picture of spaceflight's past ultimately helps us understand our present position in space and have a more realistic expectation of what the future might bring.
ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

Collapse bottom bar
+