But they have found out that it can fail at those levels, so they are dialing back so they don't get engine failures until they can improve the design.
Its in imperial tons not metric, when converted its like 260tf. 230tf in metric it wouldn't be able to leap V3 off the pad like that and dump a crapton of fuel after shutoff. Why tf doesn't he use meganewtons? No idea.
Eeh that was just 1% and that’s also based on the stated figure for Raptor 1, the actual achieved may have been slightly less and we had so much more testing and whatever for Raptor 2
I believe imperial tons which is really weird measurement to use I don't understand why the dude can't get metrics straight, what people see is 230tf by the metrics everyone else uses wouldn't even be able to lift that stack let alone that fast off the pad and dump that much fuel, for some reason he's using a metric that almost nobody uses which would translate to like 260 tf
it is usually t subscript f. When not option, sometimes styleguides\editors suggest t(f) or t-f or writing in full, so everyone is clear what tf it means
I don't think it requires assent to the lofy heights of being an engineer to know basic units, particularly when you claim to be around this day in day out.
The guy behind the dumpster at my local Waffle House says he designed one of those along with his free energy machine 10 years ago. Sounds like Musk has some serious competition!
This is the way. You don't need crazily power dense engines if you have enough surface area to mount those engines too. 9m design was always a mistake.
Not with current ship and booster version. They have plans (and are probably already building) further revisions of the design. V4 probably needs the first pad rebuilt first so it matches the new dimensions.
It's only 6 raptors per upper stage. The first stage can still be reusable, whereas removing all the recovery hardware (flaps, tiles, header tanks?) from the upper stage converts all that saved mass into usable payload at a 1:1 ratio.
no. no it doesent. thats very nearly a linear relationship. the total stack mass depends on the total s1 thrust, but you'll be scaling the ship based on the total stack mass. the ship you're sending to mars just becomes somewhat smaller and it evens out the refuellings.
No, actually, because Starship’s entire method of operations is being fueled in orbit to go somewhere else, even if you’re lifting less, you can just send more ships.
For normal rockets this is not useful because of costs, but hey, Starship is fully reusable, soo…
The pertinent question right now is "how many launches to fully fuel the lunar starship in orbit?" Elon said something like 8, Eric Berger said something like 22... Is the new answer going to be 50?
22 is based on the proven mass to orbit. So that would be worst case. I don't think it will hit 8 launches but they can still carry more mass to orbit even with 230tf of thrust
A lot of panicians are missing the point. 230tf reliably means reusable. If you want to launch an ass ton to space and not reuse anything it’s as advertised 280tf.
People are up in arms about this for no reason. The engine likely can hit 280, but in order for it to be reliable and re-usable, they only go at 230. R4 will be here soon enough that I am not too concerned.
No, because much more massive engines like F-1 and RD-170 and RS-68 and RD-180 and even BE-4 are more powerful (BE-4 sits nicely at 280tf in fact)
Raptor has the highest thrust per area (the area the engine would occupy looking at the rocket from the bottom) and has the second highest thrust to mass ratio (only behing SpaceX Merlin)
Edit: apparently RD-275M is also ahead in thrust to mass (but still behind in thrust per area)
No, but it's extremely effective for its size/mass, which is why they go with the "many engines" model rather than "few, super powerful engines". Reliability and better control systems has made that much more viable over time.
There's at least 5 more powerful production engines that I can think of, most notably the shuttle boosters (most powerful ever) and the RD171 and RD180.
The thrust to weight ratio on raptor 3 is still insane and its made to be a mass producible full flow stage combustion engine, oversold is doing a lot of lifting in that statement
159
u/TheProky 1d ago
good times...