SpaceX's New Raptor 3 Smashed The World Record!

Подписаться 1,1 млн

Просмотров 221 тыс.

50% 1

NOTE: In May of 2023 Elon Musk posted about an engine he referred to as "Raptor V3". In August 2024, SpaceX revealed a different engine referred to as "Raptor 3". It seems the internal naming convention may have changed, or Elon's post left out important context on the naming of Raptor engines. This video from 2023 discusses the V3 Elon posted about.
For details on the 2024 "Raptor 3" check out:
Raptor 3 Fires Up - This Week In Spaceflight • Raptor 3 Fires Up, New...
Raptor 3 Unveiled - Starbase Update • Raptor 3 Unveiled, Sta...
Raptor 3 just smashed the chamber pressure record hitting 350 Bar during a test firing at SpaceX's McGregor, Texas facility. This pressure allows the engine to be even more efficient during flight. Watch as Jack breaks down what happened and what this means for spaceflight!
🔗 NSF Store: www.nasaspacef...
⚡ Become a member of NASASpaceflight's channel for exclusive discord access, fast turnaround clips, and other exclusive benefits. Your support helps us continue our 24/7 coverage. Click JOIN above to get started.⚡
🤵 Hosted by Jack (@thejackbeyer)
🎥 Video from Adam (@AdamCuker),
Justin (@jswartzphoto),
Michael (@nextspaceflight),
Jack (@thejackbeyer)
, Starbase Live
, and McGregor Live.
✂️ Edited by Brady (@TheFavoritist).
🔍 All content copyright to NSF. Not to be used elsewhere without explicit permission from NSF.
L2 Boca Chica (more clips and photos) from BC's very early days to today.
🔗 forum.nasaspac...
(Join L2 and support NSF here: www.nasaspacef...)
#starship #spacex #booster7 #ship24 #starbase #raptor #raptorengine #rocket #rocketengine #rocketlaunch #launch #texas #nasa #saturnv

Наука

Опубликовано:

15 авг 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 461

@NASASpaceflight Год назад

You can watch these test stands 24/7 with the Cows here: nsf.live/mcgregor Rocket Merch here: shop.nasaspaceflight.com/

@themanwnoname3454 Год назад

2023(Gregorian) “Respect and dignity.” Furthermore:

@FranklyFarcical Год назад

Thanks for the amazing work you do. And awesome commentary too 🙂

@themanwnoname3454 Год назад

🍾🥂

@darknase Год назад

Well, you can of course measure in mPa (milli Pascal) ... but even 1 ATM (1 Atmosphere), which is ~1020 mBar (milli Bar) are already 1020 hPa (hecto [100] Pascal) or in 102 000 Pa (in words: one hundred thousand) or 0.102 MPa (Mega [Million, just like MegaByte] Pascal), 350 Bar would be 35 MPa or 35 000 000 000 mPa (35 BILLION [Milliard for proper maths] milli Pascal). Don't know why you would want to go that way, but sure. Just like the Brits, when the say Milliards say 1000 Million, though it would rather be 35 000 Kilo Pascal ... 🤔🤣

@productunited Год назад

0:57 COMBUSTION CHAMBEEER was super annoying.... Plz don't do that

@literallyshaking8019 Год назад

5000psi on top of dealing with all that heat is absolutely insane. The metallurgists at SpaceX deserve a raise.

@ToppledTurtle834 Год назад

Why? 1 out of 6 destroy themselves

@sawyerpost7314 Год назад

@@ToppledTurtle834still better then 6 out of 6!

@ConReese Год назад

@@ToppledTurtle834 because 1 out of 6 is as bad as itl ever be and it will only be improved from there

@carholic-sz3qv Год назад

Bullshit!!! Which metallurgist!? They aren't better than any others lol!!

@billcichoke2534 Год назад

@sawyer post No, it won't...because failure is NOT an option. You know, like the engines for Apollo V Stage 1? NONE of them failed, DURING ANY LAUNCH. Raptor is a mass-produced PROTOYPE, and is king of NOTHING except maybe FAILED launches.

@randytaylor4766 Год назад

One Raptor 3 is about 18 times more powerful than a B-1 Bomber jet engine at full afterburner. As a former crew chief on the B-1B, I find that absolutely insane!!

@lazarus2691 Год назад

And that's just in terms of thrust. In terms of actual energy output it's even higher, because the exhaust is being accelerated to a higher speed. I'm not sure exactly what the exhaust velocity of the F101 is, but somewhere in the ballpark of 800m/s seems reasonable. Raptor is about 3200m/s, or four times faster. Usually kinetic energy would be squared, but in this case that's cancelled out by the decrease in mass flow, so it ends up being linear. Still, that puts Raptor at around 75x more 'powerful' in terms of wattage/horsepower/etc. Raptor Vacuum would be closer to 100x. TL;DR: Rocket engines are insane.

@charlesrovira5707 Год назад

Now imagine 33 of these bad boys all bearing down on a steel plate. Holy [expletive]!!!

@Connection-Lost Год назад

Air breathing engines are going to have much less power than rocket engines. Obviously.

@lazarus2691 Год назад

@@Connection-Lost I don't see how that makes the insane power output of rocket engines any less insane.

@carholic-sz3qv Год назад

Unfortunately it's not a jet engine lol!!! Totally different thing to even compare! The jet will have an amazing range on longer duration and is significantly way more efficient than a fuel guzzling rocket engine

@tbjtbj7930 Год назад

"Rocket science" is actually quite simple. Rocket engineering is the tricky bit.

@tobiasjone 11 месяцев назад

I was thinking about how some branches of science are quite simple, but engineering those concepts into usable systems is another matter.

@user-kv5fw7xz9c 5 месяцев назад

It's simple but expensive.

@admincovenant6855 Год назад

I don't normally comment on these...enjoy them immensely and consider myself better educated after them. But this one. I swear I heard the crackle. Normally on testing at Mcgregor, you get the rumble. That thing wanted to take the stand with it! Awesome video, and as always, awesome commentary.

@mahalalijoon5310 Год назад

.....that thing wanted to take the stand with it....AWSOME!

@monkeybarmonkeyman Год назад

I'm sitting here pondering exactly that... how much force can that engine stand withstand? 🙂

@MichaelFiedeldey Год назад

You probably meant megapascals (MPa) and not millipascals (mPa). I mean sure, you could measure chamber pressure in either one but 350 bar is 35 MPa or 35000000000 mPa. Perhaps a more useful comparison would be 5076 psi, nearly double the pressure in your typical SCUBA tank. It's also roughly equivalent to the pressure 2.2 miles underwater. So yeah, it's a lot.

@NASASpaceflight Год назад

Ha, one of the first things the team noticed right after we shipped it. Can we go with "the larger number is more impressive" instead of "typo" heh. -Das

@apveening Год назад

@@NASASpaceflight It's been a while since I last heard that excuse, LOL.

@phil4826 Год назад

Or as they say in software qual testing: “it’s a feature, not a defect.”

@ericrawson2909 Год назад

Thanks for making this comment. I stopped concentrating on the video at that point, thinking one bar is about 100kPa, and it should be capital M. Had to rewind because I missed a bit because I was distracted.

@timcotton1782 8 месяцев назад

To be fair, chamber pressures ARE measured in mPa, when measuring vacuum.

@LeandroSilva08 Год назад

Speaking of progress, it's amazing how NSF videos keep getting better and better. Truly amazing content and it is highly appreciated. Thanks!

@matthewwiemken7293 Год назад

The Raptor engine is really looking impressive as SpaceX optimizes its design. This version 3 engine puts out more thrust than the RS-25 or BE4 engines while being less than half the size. Can't wait to see a fully optimized and operational version of the Raptor engine when development concludes:)

@davidforget6906 Год назад

Matthew. Yeah, heck yeah. But look what Raptor 2's did to the launch mount.😮. Flame trenches AND water deluge system necessary for Raptor 2's. Gotta love SpaceX.

@bman5988 Год назад

And it’s so clean looking too!

@iamaduckquack Год назад

@@davidforget6906 With so much more thrust headroom they could have the engines throttled down a bit to protect the ground infrastructure and then quickly throttle up a few seconds after. Maybe?

@davidforget6906 Год назад

@@iamaduckquack Yeah Duck, good idea they are probably planning already. And still more thrust to add a good landing legs system.

@mennovanlavieren3885 Год назад

@@iamaduckquack It will hover longer, so it is a trade-of.

@withoutstickers Год назад

mPa and MPa are very different units, be careful or you might end up with a few more zeros than you intended 😉

@xHomu Год назад

7:00 what an awesome visualization!

@tilmerkan3882 Год назад

Has anyone did this before? I have seen it that way. Absolutly crazy

@NASASpaceflight Год назад

We do it every month! It's actually a really slick script that queries our database of tests, pulls the footage, and assembles this layout automatically. We can even query by engine type or test stand.... -Das

@iamjadedhobo Год назад

@@NASASpaceflight You script kiddies :p

@palehorse1511 Год назад

Just seeing the plume itself, it really shows a vast improvement in thrust. Absolutely incredible to be able to watch this happen in my lifetime.

@Hippida Год назад

Yeah, that plume looked like 25% wider then the regular raptor 2 tests

@comet1062 Год назад

So true, I love how much wider it looks as the gas comes out underexpanded and puffs out much bigger than the normal Raptor II tests.

@ImNotOld_ImVintage Год назад

Weird how seeing a massive rocket flame hot enough to liquify metal gave me full body chills. The work SpaceX is doing is absolutely amazing. Thanks NSF for bringing us these high quality updates!

@carholic-sz3qv Год назад

Which other flame won't liquefy a metal plate!? Wtf!!!!

@Anon_Ymous Год назад

can spacex potentially achieve 420.69 bar?

@brettfinan7461 Год назад

😂

@iamjadedhobo Год назад

With infinite improbability :)

@iamaduckquack Год назад

Gotta harvest some of that unobtainium first.

@weaselronly1431 Год назад

One can only assume that is the goal

@stephenwhite1372 Год назад

🤣🤣🤣

@katelynrogers804 Год назад

Ok "engine rich combustion" is gold! Even better than "rapid disassembly"

@confusedrhino Год назад

I can generate at least 0.01 Bar of chamber pressure. Intake fuel can be varied, though cauliflower has a particularly high energy density in this regard.

@rogerthomas169 Год назад

You are destined to remain on earth, although, every function of life holds some delight

@davidforget6906 Год назад

😂

@01_SPACE_C0WB0Y Год назад

Underrated comment

@phil4826 Год назад

Ever tried an igniter for additional thrust?

@Clark-Mills Год назад

Just a thought... Have you guys considered installing a seismograph (a cheap one) at the engine test sight location? It could return some useful information. Thanks, great work as usual.

@francbryson8315 Год назад

Superb idea! I really hope they do this.

@NASASpaceflight Год назад

That was on the idea list for orbital, but just didn't have time to get to it. -Das

@CanOp3n3r Год назад

The thrust is impressive but isn’t raptor 3 also going to be the cleanest design so far too? Elon mentioned that the engine itself shouldn’t need any heat shielding since there will no longer be anything fragile exposed on the engine. As well as RUD containment built into each engine.

@dudermcdudeface3674 Год назад

Reach new performance, simplify the design, improve reliability, then economize the parts. Rinse, repeat. The path to the stars!

@dphuntsman Год назад

Outstanding! Gonna pass it around to my Space Cadet friends who aren’t ‘rocket scientists’ themselves; well done, team!

@Ryan_scott15 Год назад

The sn11 flashbacks 🥺

@corrinastanley125 Год назад

Great explanation thanks Jack and the NSF team. Throttling up after launch will be epic.

@owensparks5013 Год назад

Outstanding video, well done NSF 🫵👍

@johit103067 Год назад

Great Update, NSF! Thanks!

@sebastiennesp1978 Год назад

I think 'WOW!' is a suitable response..!

@mrbloodmuffins Год назад

I wonder how a miniature rocket with just 1 raptor V3 engine would perform.

@ale131296 Год назад

Would likely still be a big rocket. Medium lift launcher with a capability of 4-5 tonnes to LEO is my guess just based on rockets in the similar thrust capability range

@nirbhay_raghav Год назад

So, maybe feasible to ferry people to LEO for fun. The likes of what Virgin is doing. Maybe it can just be a scrapped dragon with essential supplies. Would be very much worth it if it could be commercialized.

@phil4826 Год назад

Miniature rockets are commercial losers. Musk immediately recognized this during Falcon 1 development. Those commercial rocket companies that don’t recognize that don’t last long (eg, Astra, Virgin Orbit, etc.)

@HNedel 6 дней назад

The market for such small to medium rockets is getting quite heated, many startups are working on those, but the money is apparently in bigger rockets, either for bigger payloads or shared rides.

@Meister1551 Год назад

That was a wonderful explanation of how a rocket engine works and the difference between V1, V2, and V3.

@TyDyck Год назад

wow that test looked so clean and stable! they must have gotten SO much beautiful delicious golden data from the recent orbital test flight. clearly enough to put together a new generation I’m excited to see the new Raptor 3 crushing world records and knocking it out of the park Next test can’t come soon enough :D

@Joe-mz6dc Год назад

Imagine strapping that to the back of my Honda Civic? Yeah baby!

@deeteenw Год назад

Yeah would make a nice ornament. The content of a civic fuel tank wouldn't even be enough to start it up 😂

@markhuebner7580 Год назад

2 types of chemical reaction, deflagration(slower than sound) and detonation(faster than sound). Same chemical reaction products. Detonation produces more pressure, more efficient, more destructive. Historic benefits, gunpowder to gun-cotton(nitrocellulose), 8" cannonballs 300 yards with gunpowder, 16" shells 20 miles with nitrocellulose.

@andrewbobb3170 Год назад

Waited around to the end to make sure V3 still has the honk. It would be a shame if design changes removed that.😆

@iamaduckquack Год назад

We need more goose in our engines!

@100SteveB Год назад

I think it will be more of a case of the developments being made making the Raptor a more reliable engine - if the chamber can survive 350 bar of pressure, like during this test, it will hopefully mean a slightly less powerful version having a greater safety margin. In theory if it survives 350 bar, it should be much more reliable at say 320 bar. Always good to have a large safety margin. Hopefully it will put an end to unexpected RUD's of Raptors.

@tilmerkan3882 Год назад

I would bet they get it up to 370 bar followed by a pretty spectactular RUD

@iamaduckquack Год назад

They gotta improve startup reliability too though. We still haven't actually seen a full 33 engines lit at once yet.

@paullangford8179 Год назад

I don't think RUD's are the problem: it's just the prevalence of engine-rich exhaust.

@tilmerkan3882 Год назад

@@javaman4584 and 42 engines finally, when Starship has 3 more

@dudlesstheking Год назад

Love the video, love the new format, love the commentary. Thx a lot!

@agsystems8220 Год назад

"Look at those Mach diamonds!"... Here I am gawking at the lack of Mach diamonds. They were running it so hard that the nozzle was not over expanded!

@Drlava_00 Год назад

There are shocks but they are so far away from the nozzle.. incredible test outcome. I can't wait to see a picture of what raptor 3 looks like.

@sg9414 Год назад

Thanks for the great explanation (for those of us non-rocket scientists). Great video. Love the sound ...WOWZA

@stephensfarms7165 Год назад

What great informational video, thanks guys. 👍👍

@TheMovieLoft Год назад

Awesome video thanks folks

@Farrellium Год назад

"there's a whole lotta more wiggles on that graph" LOL

@michaeldeierhoi4096 Год назад

That's a highly technical term. 🙄

@crazyhorsesass Год назад

The test looked really clean. I noticed that the flame looked straighter and wider than the other lower pressure test. Does a higher chamber pressure mean that the bell needs to get larger or longer now for V3? And would that cause a problem with fitting them all in on Starship and Heavy booster?

@DisorderedArray Год назад

I think if the increase in efficiency from increasing the chamber pressure outweighs the decrease from having a less optimal nozzle, I think SpaceX would accept the nozzle inefficiency for the overall increase in thrust or isp, especially for the booster engines.

@LaF0IRE Год назад

Exactly. Higher chamber pressure with a "stock" nozzle means that gases as they exit the nozzle are not at atmospheric pressure at sea level (which is ideal for a rocket engine). But, there is no such thing as an ideal nozzle. Say you dimension it for sea level P°, as soon as you fly some, it's not optimum anymore. Thats why starship has both vaccum and atmospheric engines. If I remember correctly, you do not have to suffer these trade-offs with aerospike engines.

@iamaduckquack Год назад

@@DisorderedArray what difference would changing the nozzle make? Better or worse or depends?

@thomasharper9087 Год назад

2:15 WOW ill have to watch the VOD of that after XD

@timjay1859 Год назад

That was fun. Nice one Jack!

@edmondthompson1523 Год назад

Outstanding briefing. Thanks!

@jdeveau6718 Год назад

For anyone wanting a much longer explanation of rocket engines, please see Mr. Tim Dodd, the Everyday Astronaut.

@frederikindigo3196 Год назад

Oh man. Awesome engine. Awesome vid!

@manueldiego8175 Год назад

I find it strange to say that chamber pressure is measured in millipascals. Technically correct, sure, but still; pascals ok, or kilopascals, even megapascals. But millipascals? Sounds weird (to me!)

@tctc0nsulting Год назад

That was a fun explaination!

@gildos2 Год назад

Great video! Thanks

@HylanderSB Год назад

That echo effect on 'combustion chamberjj' reminded me of @The Science Asylum (Nick Lucid) and his bit for the Law of Conservation of Energy.

@danielb5801 Год назад

Come join us as we listen to the birds and watch awesome engine tests.

@David-yo5ws Год назад

And watch cows running in the fields. 🐮

@baarni Год назад

If the chamber pressure is 350 bar just imagine what the inlet pressure for the propellant must be😮

@kazedcat 6 дней назад

Pre-burner pressure should be a lot higher but since the Raptor 3 engine is a much cleaner design. The pre burner pressure should be much closer to the combustion chamber. SpaceX should have designed out the parasitic pressure loss between the pre-burner and combustion chamber.

@dphuntsman Год назад

btw….on V3, I never heard the ‘whoop!…..” at the end. Did anyone else?

@keithparker7347 12 дней назад

Thanks!

@svenp6504 Год назад

Not 268 tons, not 270 tons...

@JGS123WRPTP Год назад

Man, that channel of fire.

@Derkenblosh2 Год назад

"I'm not a rocket scientist...." Proceeds to use the word "Anyways"

@thomascharlton8545 Год назад

Great content. Well done NSF.

@Rorschach. Год назад

You guys are just the best! 😎

@hitdrumhard Год назад

Beautiful engine fire

@paulwilson8367 Год назад

Some of you guys who are engineers, please educate us? It appeared that about 7 Raptor V2s failed in the recent launch. 7 out of 33 ain't bad for a new engine, but unfortunately that's enough that it was unable to make orbit or trajectory. So, were those failures fixable? Did they fail for varying causes? Elon says it wasn't FOD. Did the combustion chambers melt at full thrust? Of course I am simply wondering if another test flight using the same V2s has much of a chance of making orbit. I'm excited to hear (not surprised) that there's a V3 in the works, but that could be a long way away yet. Elon is saying next flight on June 15th? Oh please, there's no way they can fix that OLM and tune up the booster and SS in one month! I wish he would be more realistic. Mid July or mid August seem much more feasible.

@SyntheticSpy Год назад

The V2s that were on B7 were a bit mismatched and inconsistent due to their stages in development, the more recent ones are meant to be more consistent, so hopefully that means fewer issues. The main contributor to many of the engines failing is that the raptor shielding isn’t as thorough on B7 as the newer ones, and so when one engine blew it damaged surrounding ones. The same thing resulted in the HPUs losing pressure, so the booster couldn’t steer, but the newer boosters have already replaced the hydraulic system for an electrical one. Edit: forgot to mention that the computer chose not to ignite 3 engines from the start

@SyntheticSpy Год назад

@@williamtsmith9668 sorry I’m a little confused by your comment. Every rocket has an electrical system, so it’s to be assumed that it would be no different from anything else

@SyntheticSpy Год назад

@@Gauldoth06 not to undermine your fantastic argument, but SpaceX is a *private company* They don’t have public funding

@David-yo5ws Год назад

The onboard computer found 3 engines did not have the right parameters to be started at launch. This may not have been a failure of the Raptors themselves. It may have been a software issue being too overly cautious or not specific for that version of raptor. (And as the outside Raptors need to be on the OLM, they can not be started once the Starship System has lifted off. The raptor that failed in flight caused damage to the neighboring raptors and also there was some cause that related to the hydraulics which caused, at 85 seconds, a loss of control of the center engines. But at least it did not cause the rocket to RUD. So a big plus there. The thrust puck was really up to the task! If your producing a product and you haven't tested it, how the hell are you going to be able to 'improve' the next build? As for the 'time frame' you refer to, there is a lot of testing being (or has been done) already. And those that follow SpaceX know all about 'Elon time', so yes, more likely later. But it is looking like this year.

@paulwilson8367 Год назад

@@David-yo5ws yeah the 3 that didn't start at all. The same thing happened (different engines?) on the static fire test. It seems very puzzling that they had that happen and didn't do another static fire test. Did they write those engines off, figuring 30 would be adequate? It would have been had 4 more not failed on ascent. An additional failure could have taken out the adjacent engine, but all the failures were not next to each other. So one or 2 engines failed on the way up that were not due to inflicted damage. I would have more confidence in a quick fix except for the puzzlement of the static fire/no retest.

@OneBiasedOpinion Год назад

“The occasional engine-rich combustion…” Great humor. I love it! Also, WOW was that crackle loud during the peak of the test burn! That rocket wanted to fly something fierce!

@danthemanzizle Год назад

The comparison to a regular firing was crazy

@javant6993 Год назад

We all know that making the shock diamonds more beautiful is by far the most important thing

@phil4826 Год назад

In the engineering world, beauty often implies function. Probably is true in most other worlds.

@wheetcracker Год назад

"Just look at this difference in flame length!" *entire flame of 350bar test obscured by cloud for 95% of clip*

@NASASpaceflight Год назад

We actually did the math on that... it's only "fully obscured" for about 17 of the roughly ~70 seconds, or 24%. Was pretty hazy that day, though. - Das

@wheetcracker Год назад

@@NASASpaceflight I was referring to the short portion (clip) of the test that was presented as the line was spoken, also I did not do any math for hyperbole reasons

@iamaduckquack Год назад

I think you're both great.

@Flyingdinosaur69 Год назад

I am very worried about the upcoming watercooling/flame trench. I really do not think it will hold up again. Who knows can't wait to see though

@MrWolfstar8 Год назад

Awesome video

@UneedAname45 2 месяца назад

I am a hydraulic systems designer and will say 5000psi is crazy high pressure. Especially at the size and lbs per second of fuel those engines are running!

@PumpkinPie_The_Frenchie Год назад

V3?? What? Sweet!!!

@sYd6point7 Год назад

wow good for space X

@joshuakuehn Год назад

"engine rich combustion" Bruh LMAO

@KatWilton Год назад

I find it interesting - and maybe it's just me - that when the engine reached the plateau on the graph (end of the video), it just sounded "right." When that graph had a couple little wiggles in the plateau, I could hear (or thought I could) that it seemed just a little, wee bit "off," and then it evened out to "right" again. I wonder if that's an actual engineering/physic phenomenon - the "right" sound means it's working well....? Eh, I'm no rocket scientist, so maybe I'm just being silly... ;-)

@LaF0IRE Год назад

you do not need to be one: does your car engine runs smoothly if it coughs? These Raptor engine must be tuned for particular set of parameters (even if you can throttle them).

@KatWilton Год назад

@@LaF0IRE Ah! Well, cool - it's pretty neat that my "unscientific" thoughts actually have some basis in science ;-) Thanks

@h_cl Год назад

Is the iconic raptor engine stopping sound gone? What was producing this sound in the first place?

@kevinmcgovern5110 Год назад

Whew!! Hope they are rebuilding Stage 0 with Raptor 3 (or 4??) power in mind. If they want to launch Starships daily-or more frequently-the OLM and exhaust suppression are gonna have to be waaaay beyond “robust”…

@Chriss120 Год назад

2:55 you would not get far if you measure the pressure in millipascal (mPa), what you mean is megapascal (MPa). little difference in factor of 1billion (e+9)

@tubepkn Год назад

Truly impressive. But why is the exhaust orange? I thought it had to be blue(ish) because it burns methane.

@rednammoc Год назад

Rocket engines usually run fuel-rich (rather than stoichiometric) to keep combustion chamber temperatures from being too high (amongst other reasons), and Raptors are no exception. In addition, many (including Raptor) use film-cooling in the main chamber and/or throat where extra fuel is injected as a film to limit the temperature at the wall. When these engines are run at sea level, the ambient air pressure is dense enough that atmospheric oxygen interacts with the excess (not burnt in the main combustion chamber) methane in the exhaust plume, giving rise to additional combustion products and thus additional colours.

@dr.k.holley1531 Год назад

And it still honks!! Love it!!

@g.gordonwoody645 Год назад

Hey does “more efficient” Raptor 3 mean more thrust per ton of propellant, more thrust per mass or volume of engine, or just more power? Great video, many tanks.

@veteransniper6955 Год назад

All of that

@jeremyfarmer2502 7 дней назад

Watching in 2024 when serial#1 raptor V3 is revealed to the public.

@NASASpaceflight 6 дней назад

We added a note to address the old Elon tweet this was based on... -Das

@jeremyfarmer2502 6 дней назад

@NASASpaceflight you guys do an excellent job documenting all this.

@peterjwdennis 8 дней назад

Good stuff Jack

@garreth629 Год назад

Great video

@sdebeaubien 8 месяцев назад

Nice. Raptor V3 is simply amazing. "Going where no rocket engine has gone before" ...

@loafofbreadx Год назад

350 bars is absolutely insane that it was successful

@brianw612 Год назад

350 BAR, that's the weight of a 3/4 ton pickup on an area the size of a postage stamp. That's incredible!

@alamat9391 Год назад

Respect

@robabiera733 Год назад

Given what happened during the first launch, I have to ask: why is the McGregor test stand so tall and the Starship Launch Mount is not?

@steveaustin2686 Год назад

The bottom of the OLM is as far from the ground as the bottom of the pad at LC-39B is from the bottom of the flame trench. The OLM at Boca Chica IS tall.

@bobbreit5244 Год назад

Noticably thicker and robuster!

@stargot1 Год назад

In lab we can create 1.5 million bar pressure , I am sure today chamber pressure is 350 bar but in the future we could do much much more !!!

@Gregorach Год назад

Go McGregor !!!

@matthewwiemken7293 Год назад

That test Engine seems to smooth out after a little bit of deep static sound in the middle of test.

@gregsutton2400 Год назад

thanks

@jeroenk3570 Год назад

I was wondering, if SpaceX succeeds with the full re-usability and rapid turnaround what do other rocket companies have to offer in the form of competition?

@veteransniper6955 Год назад

Nothing yet. Rocket design cycle may be about 5-10 years so it will take some more time. Due to spacex pressure ULA retiring Delta IV and Atlas V rockets to be replaced with Vulcan rocket that is under development. European space agency has Ariane 6 rocket under development and previously had plans for it to be launched for several decades, but few years ago announced that the rocket that still under development need be replaced in like 10 years with new because current design can't compete with spacex. China announced several new designs that looks like SpaceX's rockets and also methane engines. But there is nothing close to falcon 9 and starship/superheavy yet.

@phil4826 Год назад

Yup-SpaceX is leaving all honest competitors in the dust. Only government interference can and will slow them down.

@MorrisDigitals Год назад

@NasaSpaceFlight if the relative increase in each engine can be assumed to have an 18% higher thrust at any given throttle, meaning that the safety margin is also higher, would that mean that starship could make it to orbit using less fuel in its upper stage which in turn would mean that starship would need less in orbit refuel mission AND each fuel tanker could be filled with more fuel? So over all less launches needed to get to the moon and Mars?

@phil4826 Год назад

Yes, that’s the idea.

@NonEuclideanTacoCannon Год назад

That engine explosion made a lot more debris than I was expecting.

@paulmoffat9306 Год назад

269 mT thrust beats the targeted thrust from Blue Origin's BE-4 !

@billmachi Год назад

Good update

@RovingPunster 7 дней назад

Raptor 3: more power, morw fuel efficient, less weight, simpler and easier to mass produce (read: cheaper). The result: more payload to orbit for less money. More compact also means more room to gimble (manuver), thus more control.

@Coyote27981 Год назад

I wonder if there will ever be a Raptor version of the Falcon. A Falcon with 5 Raptor 3 should be able to outperform a Falcon 9. And that could allow to put flight hours on Raptor independently from Starship. After all at one time Falcon 5 was a thing... Maybe Falcon 5R.

@KnightRanger38 Год назад

I personally don't think SpaceX is likely be making a "Raptor version of the Falcon". On the other hand, if they chose to make a direct replacement for the Falcon 9 using Raptor engines it likely would have five of them. The new launch vehicle might receive a different name though...

@steveaustin2686 Год назад

You would need to redo the thrust plate on which the engines are mounted, along with tanks as they are sized to RP-1 and not LCH4. So pretty much a complete redesign of the whole booster. With 9 Merlin engines, they can lose an engine at liftoff and still get to orbit with the other 8 engines. With 5 larger engines, if you lose one early in the flight, you are not going to space that day. Satellite operators and insurance companies REALLY like the the engine out capability of the 9 Merlin RP-1 engines. One Merlin engine at minimum thrust already has too much thrust for landing, so they have to time engine start precisely, so that the acceleration is near 0 at touchdown. Going with a much larger engine, would make that more difficult.

@datamatters8 Год назад

Hard to see them doing that. Second stage of Falcon 9 is not reusable so launch cost of Starship is expected to be lower.

@Dr_Mario2007 Год назад

That's some insane pressure, and like Elon, I am surprised that it stayed in one piece throughout tests at full pressure.

@Evan-ii7cv 10 дней назад

Just rolled out the first rapter 3

@comet1062 Год назад

When Jack says Milli, he really, really meant Mega (like 6 orders of magnitude meant that) . Not sure that needed said but, in case anyone was wondering.