tater Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 That is pretty Bad... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Current R2 production is about 5 per week. in 1-2 months, 7 per week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 10 hours ago, Rakaydos said: 8 hours until we get the latest official numbers. Quote Posted 10 hours ago 8 hours until we get the latest official numbers. Did I miss something 2 hours ago? I was thinking, they are going to launch, woke up, and run to PC to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizard Kerbal Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 3 hours ago, Minmus Taster said: It worked well for me when I did it, but I'd keep it subtle . . . Oh. It’s not subtle. No, not at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silavite Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 9 hours ago, mikegarrison said: The way it is done is to use PD design tools to basically create the design yourself. See how close you came to the data you know, and redo it in a loop until it converges. PD design tools are not really "back of the envelope", but in a sense they are a more sophisticated, calibrated version of "back of the envelope". They still are not a detailed design, which is the step you do once a PD design gets the go-ahead for further development. Sometimes you come up with the answer that the claimed performance is unlikely to be achieved, and that's also an educational outcome. It's different with a design that is actually in service, because in that case if you come up with the answer that the performance can't be achieved and yet it is clearly being achieved in service, then you know your tools need fixing. Real world data trumps all. Apologies for the slight derailment, but what is meant by the term, "PD design tools?" Google is not helpful here and I assume you're not talking about proportional-derivative controllers or physical design in the electronic context. Are they things like Roskam Class 1 / Class 2 methods? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Silavite said: Apologies for the slight derailment, but what is meant by the term, "PD design tools?" Google is not helpful here and I assume you're not talking about proportional-derivative controllers or physical design in the electronic context. Are they things like Roskam Class 1 / Class 2 methods? "preliminary design" I am not familiar with Roskam, but a quick Google suggests that yes, these are PD design methods. Edited February 11, 2022 by mikegarrison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elthy Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 I started watching the presentation an got to the questions. There is no new stuff there, right? Small details about Raptor 2, fancy animation, back to back refueling (which the change every year or so). I started watching the questions, but they seem boring, too. Any juciy bits there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 11 minutes ago, Elthy said: I started watching the presentation an got to the questions. There is no new stuff there, right? Small details about Raptor 2, fancy animation, back to back refueling (which the change every year or so). I started watching the questions, but they seem boring, too. Any juciy bits there? The presentation was definitely the better part, the most remarkable answers were to EDA, Berger, NSF and Brownsville Herald Here's the transcript: https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/sppj0m/rough_transcription_of_the_presentation/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Peak raptor thrust in testing of 247tf thus far is a truly ridiculous figure from an engine that size. R2 being significantly smaller than R1 won't hurt the TWR either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 21 minutes ago, RCgothic said: Peak raptor thrust in testing of 247tf thus far is a truly ridiculous figure from an engine that size. R2 being significantly smaller than R1 won't hurt the TWR either. R2 looked about the same size to me, they just cleaned up that rats' nest of plumbing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 (edited) Yeah, but the rats' nest on R1 was significant. I wouldn't be surprised if R2 were over 10% lighter overall. Edit: For comparison, if Blue Origin were to build a 10 diameter (approx outer diameter of Superheavy outer engine ring) vehicle, they could fit perhaps 12 fixed and 3 or 4 gimbaling engines with a total of 3914tf thrust. That'd barely more than half the mass of a Starship Superheavy stack at the same TWR, and because the ISP is lower and each engine is individually heavier than the equivalent raptor it would be even less capable than that. Raptor is an incredible engine. Edited February 11, 2022 by RCgothic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Good news on the Boca Chica enviromental assestment! Quoting a quite trustable insider: "Final PEA is likely to be released on anticipated date of March 12. Approval will be given based on several conditions, and milestone achievement and accedence of conditions." Looks like it's going to be a mitigated FONSI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Beccab said: Good news on the Boca Chica enviromental assestment! Quoting a quite trustable insider: "Final PEA is likely to be released on anticipated date of March 12. Approval will be given based on several conditions, and milestone achievement and accedence of conditions." Looks like it's going to be a mitigated FONSI Ayyyyy! Happy days. Edited February 11, 2022 by KSK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Just now, KSK said: Ayyyyy! Happy days. I definitely will not be fully convinced until either the FAA or SpaceX announce it, but if it is true then it's great indeed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 (edited) Cryo test for the full stack today! Edited February 11, 2022 by Beccab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 54 minutes ago, Beccab said: it's going to be a mitigated FONSI 31 minutes ago, KSK said: Ayyyyy! Happy days. I see what you did there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Size comparison of the full stack with other rockets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beamer Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 I wonder if Mr. Musk reads these forums. He stole my fluid exchange joke! You're welcome Mr. Musk, let's make this happen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 11 hours ago, tater said: Current R2 production is about 5 per week. in 1-2 months, 7 per week. How in the world do they go from 1 to 2 with such a change in plumbing/wiring? If we assume all of that was necessary for 1 to work, it just doesn't look like everything is there on 2. (Here's where I express my ignorance of rocket parts) - the streamlined thingy at the top of 2 looks like something that could be on 1, but under that giant manifold thing sitting at the top of 1. IF that manifold thing was necessary - doesn't it come with a lot of plumbing, and might all that be added back to a working 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 1 minute ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said: How in the world do they go from 1 to 2 with such a change in plumbing/wiring? If we assume all of that was necessary for 1 to work, it just doesn't look like everything is there on 2. (Here's where I express my ignorance of rocket parts) - the streamlined thingy at the top of 2 looks like something that could be on 1, but under that giant manifold thing sitting at the top of 1. IF that manifold thing was necessary - doesn't it come with a lot of plumbing, and might all that be added back to a working 2? A lot of the stuff on 1 was not exactly for making the rocket 'go', but for measuring what's going on inside. They needed to know if every part of the engine was working the way they wanted and expected it to, and once they verified that they no longer needed so many sensors on every part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 (edited) I’m guessing a lot of the rats nest was for engineering sensors, so that they could monitor what was happening *everywhere”. Not necessary with R2, now that they understand R1. Columbia had a lot more sensors than the other Shuttles on board, being the first. That data was invaluable in piecing together what happened. If it happened to another shuttle they may have never figured it out, or it would certainly have taken longer E. Ninja’d by my wordiness Edited February 11, 2022 by StrandedonEarth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 1 minute ago, cubinator said: A lot of the stuff on 1 was not exactly for making the rocket 'go', but for measuring what's going on inside. They needed to know if every part of the engine was working the way they wanted and expected it to, and once they verified that they no longer needed so many sensors on every part. Interesting; I did not know that. So - they'd have a pipe feeding a something, then another something to measure its work and wires to report on the findings? Hmm. Is that a normal part of rocket design -- or something SX did b/c R1 is effectively a prototype (a working prototype, but still a development article)? Just now, StrandedonEarth said: E. Ninja’d by my wordiness No - it adds, thanks. Did not know that about Columbia. Now I have a point of reference to try to google different Shuttle engines and see what I can learn. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 (edited) Edit - okay, googling is a mess. Most people just post "Shuttle Engine" or "Shuttle Rocket" and don't distinguish... and I don't know enough about what I'm seeing to differentiate. If someone stumbles across (or already knows) where to see the differences between Columbia's engines and later models, I'd love to see it! (I find text descriptions, but not many good pictures) The space shuttle main engine transitioned from its first manned orbital flight configuration to a phase II configuration in 1983. The phase II engine logged 231 engine flights and included improvements to the controller to increase memory, main injector improvements, turbine blade improvements within the turbopumps and additional nozzle insulation. The engine transitioned to Block I configuration in 1995 with significant changes including a two-duct powerhead, an alternate high-pressure oxidizer turbopump featuring ceramic ball bearings, a single tube heat exchanger and improved hot gas sensors. Edited February 11, 2022 by JoeSchmuckatelli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.