From: jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com   
      
   In article <4573609b-e195-459c-80dc-d3e8a4655198o@googlegroups.com>,   
   kozelsm@yahoo.com says...   
   >   
   > On Monday, September 7, 2020 at 1:36:16 AM UTC-4, JF Mezei wrote:   
   > >   
   > > For conventional shaped rockets, I have no explanation.  Accelerating   
   > > the light carbon fairing doesn't involve a lot of energy compared to   
   > > acceleratibg the fuel laden ET. So aerodynamic drag would by far be the   
   > > largest force acting on it so reducing acceleration would be a small   
   > > reduction on total force.   
   >   
   > According to this, the Saturn V did not throttle down for Max Q.   
   >   
   > 'The Saturn V's first-stage engines don't throttle, so there's no "throttle   
   bucket" and no "go at throttle-up" call. One of the first-stage engines is   
   shut down late in the burn, but that's to limit maximum g-force for crew   
   comfort, not for Q limiting.'   
   >   
   > https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/39768/did-the-saturn   
   v-have-the-status-check-go-at-throttle-up   
      
   Saturn V also didn't need to throttle down due to its max-Q happening at   
   a much higher altitude due to its lower initial acceleration.  A Saturn   
   V took quite a few number of seconds to clear the tower.  The space   
   shuttle, by comparison, with its SRBs seemed to jump off the pad and   
   cleared the tower much sooner.   
      
   Jeff   
   --   
   All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.   
   These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,   
   employer, or any organization that I am a member of.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)