21–30 of 137 posts
This is an excellent article. Just curious, how much more efficient is the full-flow engine? And, what exactly is the deal with the seals the article is talking about? Anyone have more info?
Raptor: Thrust 1900 KN / 330 specific impulse
Merlin 1D: 480KN / 275 s.i.
i can't find the weight of the Raptor. Merlin is 630Kg
Earlier quoted context omitted.
someone didn't read the article, or notice the quotes around the word "Impossible"
There wasn't quotes around 'impossible' in the article.
And they used other words next to the unquoted impossible in the article itself like "deemed by scientists to be next to impossible". Context matters.
This is an excellent article. Just curious, how much more efficient is the full-flow engine? And, what exactly is the deal with the seals the article is talking about? Anyone have more info?
Scott Manley has done a few videos (youtube) recently around rocket architecture; including several videos about the Raptor engine. Well-worth checking out. (I don't have a link at the moment, sorry.)
This guy has some simple short videos on rocketry. this one is on combustion cycles
Rocket lab's Rutherford engine uses a closed cycle with battery powered fuel pumps. They were actually to fly an engine like this in their "electron" rocket, as early as 2017. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutherford_(rocket_engine)
Closed cycle is not a new idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staged_combustion_cycle#Histor...
If you live in SoCal (or even if you're just visiting), definitely take a quick trip by the SpaceX facilities in Hawthorne [1] where they have a Falcon rocket sitting outside. From a distance it looks like and industrial chimney, but as you pull up, you can see it's an actual rocket. Standing next to it gives a great sense of scale the next time you're watching a SpaceX video. 1. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Spa…