Talk:Star (rocket stage)

Spaceflight Low‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rocketry Low‑importance

	Rocketry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rocketry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rocketry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RocketryWikipedia:WikiProject RocketryTemplate:WikiProject RocketryRocketry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Merger Proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Consensus to merge. PSR B1937+21 (talk) 14:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging all of the Star rocket pages (Star 27, Star 37, Star 48) into a single page. They are considered to be a single family of designs by the manufacturer, and they are very similar in design and application beyond their size. This will also allow a place for information on other stages within the Star family (Like the Star 5) that aren't necessarily significant enough to justify a whole article, but worth at least mentioning. Other similar families of solid rocket stages (Castor, Orion, Graphite-Epoxy Motor, etc) are listed in a single page as well, rather than individual pages for each variant.Brickmack Talk Contribs 18:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

assorted problems[edit]

Star 37 - such as the Star-40 and Star 48 - is there a - in Star-40 only?

Infobox gives Diameter of .66 m but table gives .93

In the table TE-M-714-6 & TE-M 714-8 are both designated Star-37XF; is that correct?

M = Magna, Utah for 37 but M = motor for 48; is that correct?

Star 48 - the additional stage was needed for the final leg of the journey - generally the PAM put the satellite into geosynchronous transfer orbit and a kick motor on the satellite itself did the final step of putting it into geosynchronous orbit (same problem in Star 48 entry)

Burner upper stages - is it Burner 2 or Burner II?

The text states that Star 37B produced about 4.59 tonnes of thrust for 42 seconds but that is not included in the table

Burner II was a launch vehicle upper stage developed by Boeing for the Air Force Space Systems Division... - duplicate text

Solid propellant rocket stage - data is for Star 37, not Star 37B

    71.163.180.156 (talk) 07:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Star 37 specific impulse isn't a specific impulse — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.164.246.15 (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No Star 63[edit]

A Star 63 was proposed as a kick stage for Europa Clipper launched on Falcon Heavy. Presumably wider and heavier than the Star 48. - Rod57 (talk) 17:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a Star family manual from Northrop Grumman https://cdn.prd.ngc.agencyq.site/-/media/wp-content/uploads/NG-Propulsion-Products-Catalog.pdf

As well as the 63D and 63F, a Star 75 is mentioned, and a Star 92 has been designed but never tested (presumably awaiting a customer). I'll try to remember to add these later ElectronicsForDogs (talk) 08:34, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this PDF is as linked on https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/propulsion-systems. it's already saved in the Internet Archive too ElectronicsForDogs (talk) 08:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]