NASA & World Space Exploration...News, Views, Photos & videos
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
SpaceX Raptor is an engine under rapid and active development and iteration, years away -imo- from commercial deployment. Any guess on the high TRL end product resulting failure rate/reliability at this point is an exercise in futility.
What we do know, is that SpaceX is basing a lot on it going forward for the goal of rapid re-usability that Starship is (a priori) designed for. In other words, they are building the Raptor to be at least an order of magnitude more reliable and re-usable than Merlin, which is one of (if not the) most flown and reliable engines in active service already. And they are doing that, while having Raptor be a lot more complex and powerful at the same time.
Will they manage it? This is a conversation for the late 2020's in my honest opinion. We will have to see how this unfolds, I have to say though that I learned two things over the years.
1. Never bet against SpaceX
2. Never bet against SpaceX being late.
What we do know, is that SpaceX is basing a lot on it going forward for the goal of rapid re-usability that Starship is (a priori) designed for. In other words, they are building the Raptor to be at least an order of magnitude more reliable and re-usable than Merlin, which is one of (if not the) most flown and reliable engines in active service already. And they are doing that, while having Raptor be a lot more complex and powerful at the same time.
Will they manage it? This is a conversation for the late 2020's in my honest opinion. We will have to see how this unfolds, I have to say though that I learned two things over the years.
1. Never bet against SpaceX
2. Never bet against SpaceX being late.
Last edited:
Right. The designers of the N-1 claimed the exact same thing and the engines kept exploding.
At least SpaceX seems to have way more capital to waste on this than the Soviets had.
The idea this will be "rapid" reusable seems to me to be kind of a mirage as well.
I do not have any issue with the engine technology or the basic technologies used in this rocket. But the actual configuration they selected is just bananas. And they just had to repeat the same mistake the Soviets did and try to "save" money by not building a test stand. On the most complex rocket they ever made they are resorting to basically artillery testing.
At least SpaceX seems to have way more capital to waste on this than the Soviets had.
The idea this will be "rapid" reusable seems to me to be kind of a mirage as well.
I do not have any issue with the engine technology or the basic technologies used in this rocket. But the actual configuration they selected is just bananas. And they just had to repeat the same mistake the Soviets did and try to "save" money by not building a test stand. On the most complex rocket they ever made they are resorting to basically artillery testing.
Last edited:
I have to agree with your first point. But hard disagree with the 2nd. Elon time is a meme for a reason. SpaceX has been filled with delays after delays. Remember Red dragon? Or how the Falcon heavy was supposed to make it's maiden flight in 2013 but was delayed to 2018 instead? Or the numerous Starships delays that Elon Musk kept blaming on the FAA but still persisted even after they got their FAA license?
This is hardly unique to SpaceX of course, aerospace is famous for it's many delays and canceled projects.
Never bet against SpaceX and technological advancement in general. 200 years ago, the idea that we would be powering modern society with series of controlled explosions would be laughable. Early combustion engines took centuries to become what they are today. You could say that with most technology really. Just look at the safetly record of early aircraft compared to today.
People also said that reusing rockets couldn't be done and Spacex has the landings figured out to near perfection.
The DC-X had already proved you could do a reusable rocket long ago. The problem was always the same. Getting the funding to make a usable vehicle. I am not dissing SpaceX's achievements. But the way they went around implementing Starship is just wrong.
Last edited:
If you look at the stats, Merlin is definitely the most flown rocket engine by far and also the most reliable.
Not the most flown, RD-107 takes the throne easily. I mean, alone puts the number at 3,930 RD-107/8As flown. That is a crazy number.
Merlin doesn't really come close, adding all F1/F9/FH launches (M9+MVac) gets you to 3,257 engines.
And we are not even counting the rest of the R-7 family history.
Last edited:
Ah, didn't realise the RD-107 and R-108 are that closely related.
But if you look at the launch rate, SpaceX are targeting 144 launches this year.
That would mean at least 1440 Merlins